CeO E WI
Vu wwia A We
“yey evu very” “k
no
VENT AA? AL ae
vVevY
or ~ ey YF
fe pe
bo rato sch nd Net ENA Aah a
ener OTN GG
Vow : ew
3 ou. Was Ww Ny, 4 ay ae . } ; ‘ “Vy 7
PO’ v ~ Re awh) ore, z MA Ge) 4 idiidiaits th 5 ie Ne Sed
j too) DY DH NG RE SIG ERY BRIN 7 So i Sel ad igh: hae tee et Nae, SES Pe BOS
i) hy Ww \ Nd | Ah Ne! fiNAL A; gY thé) Lf , ii ry Ne ie FSo1 1) Neg ke we fy ae "J re. <
My LW \/ V v WS Ned Nd ; 2 q 4 we } GANS: SY jah \\~ ¥ \ Be BN W ft ie AeA se ~ hye re BS ae &
yu Seywg aS ACN Se vas PAA Ly Se Wi a PCO rath” ACFE,
wv Jv w i aan Ihe 5 : MWY aa” wid iv : ila OY MR \/
REL VANS Ve Gna aN POA) bh Tig VS dal PRR
wee J Me oy ist we: ' OP ws ti TW vd - vhs is) OW WW) vw
4 jae ww AO ARO bd Ye wy se Dd) te. \/ ww
rw? | ~ ; e Z :
4
oe
€
3
“i “aguvaalvd Weel eH VvyyvviNwv iy
Vs )}
vl
VV w
ed or j
, ww
a 1 SN,
R wm.
VS we
v vvVy LAA Aad
v
Mo Mi
OLp SERIES, CONTINUATION OF THE NEw SERIES,
NVOT-L XLT: BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB VoL. IV
‘The Auk’
4 Quarterly Journal of Ornithology
EDITOR,
SEVEN
ASSOCIATE EDITORS,
ELLIOTT COUES, ROBERT RIDGWAY, WILLIAM BREWSTER,
AND MONTAGUE CHAMBERLAIN
VOLUME IV
PUBLISHED FOR
The American Ornithologists’ Union
NEW YORK
L. Ss. FOSTER
y 1887
CONTENTS OF VOLUME IV.
NUMBER. I.
PAGE
Notes oF A Bird CATCHER. wy Frederic A. Lucas 5 Mee cy er
A New Vireo FROM GRAND CaAyMAN, WEsT INDIES. By Charles
B. Cory ee
Rae. TO THE “CATALOGUE ¢ OF THE BIRDS OF "KANSAS. By
NV. S. Goss :
List oF THE MipsumMeER Birps OF THE " Kowak RIVER, Nortu-
ERN ALASKA. By Charles H. Townsend : :
SUMMER BIRDS OF THE BRAS D’OR REGION OF Cape BRETON
IsLaAnp, Nova Scotia. By Fonathan Dwight, Fr.
ON THE AVI-FAUNA OF PINAL CouUNTY, WiTH REMARKS ON Some
BIRDS OF PIMA AND GILA COUNTIES, ARIZONA. By W. £. D.
Scott 3
Some UNDESCRIBED PLuMAGES oF NortTH AMERICAN BIRDS. ‘By
George B. Sennett
DESCRIPTIONS OF TWO New SUBSPECIES OF Trrmice FROM 1 Texas.
By George B. Sennett .
FurTHER NOTES ON THE GENUS yore By Leonhard Stej-
neger
THE REDISCOVERY ¢ or BACHMAN’S ; WARBLER, Helminthophila bach-
manne (Aud. )s IN THE UNITED STATES. ee George N. Law-
rence
THE BIRDS OF THE West Inpres, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA IsLANDs,
THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE
IsLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. By Charles B. Cory
THE SENSE OF SMELL IN CATHARTES AuRA. By /ra Sayles
FourTH MEETING OF THE AMERICAN O © *HOLOGISTS’ UNION
RECENT LITERATURE.
Pleska on the Birds of the Kola Peninsula, 61; W. E. Brooks on
the Genus Acanthis, 63; Stejneger on Japanese Woodpeckers, 63 ;
Stejneger on the British Marsh-Tit, 64; Stejneger on a Lost Spe-
cies’ of Murrelet, 65; Ferrari-Perez on the Birds of Mexico, 65;
Ridgway on a Melanistic Phase of the Broad-winged Hawk, 66;
Ridgway on the Species of the Genus Emfzdonax, 66; Cory on
Birds from several little-known Islands of the West Indies, 66;
Minor Ornithological Publications, 66; Publications Received, 69.
GENERAL NOTES.
Occurrence of Cory’s She -w 2r (Puffinus borealis) and Several Spe-
cies of Jaegers in Large Nu bers in the Vicinity of Gayhead,
Mass., during the Autumn of 1886. 71; Phenicopterus ruber asa
South Carolina Bird, 72; Occurrence of the Florida Gallinule at
iv Contents of Volume IV.
Springfield, Mass., 72; Wilson’s Phalarope (Steganopus tricolor)
in Rhode Island, 73; Occurrence of Phalaropus lobatus at Syra-
cuse, N. Y., 73; A Fern-eating Woodcock, 73; A Further Note on
Colinus ridgwayt, 74; A Black Gryfalcon (Falco rusticolus obso-
Zetus from Maine, 75; The Golden Eagle in Massachusetts, 75; A
Singularly marked Specimenof Sphyrafpicus thyrotdeus, 75 ; Occur-
rence of Calcartus ornatus in Maine, 76; An Addition to the Or-
nithology of South Carolina, 76; Thé Object of the Shrike in Im-
paling its Prey, 77; Additional Occurrences of the Connecticut
Warbler in Maine, 77; The Brown Thrush laying in the Nest of
the Wood Thrush, 78; Capture of three Rare Birds near Hartford,
Conn., 78; Piranga rubriceps and Tringa fuscicollis in Califor-
nia, 79.
CORRESPONDENCE.
Scarcity of Adult Birds in Autumn, 79; Classification of the Macrochi-
res, 8o.
NOTES AND NEWS.
Ornithologists and Taxidermists, 82; The Ridgway Ornithological
Club, 83; The A. O. U. Committee on Bird Protection, 84; Orni-
thological Explorations, 84.
NUMBER II.
PAGE.
ADDITIONS TO THE BIRDS OF VENTURA CouNTY, CALIFORNIA. By
FonGe Cooper ie | ae.
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF RHAMPHOCINCLUS FROM Sr.
Lucia, West INpies. Sy Charles B. Cory :
A List oF THE Birps CoLLECTED BY Mr. B. W. RicHARDSON, IN
THE ISLAND OF MARTINIQUE, WeEsT INDIES. By Charles B.
Cory |: 5 5 aie ee te orth
THe NEw ENGLAND GLossy IBISES OF » 1850. By F. C. Browne
A List oF THE SUMMER BIRDS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RANGE OF
THE WHITE Mountains, N.H. By Arthur P. Chadbourne
THE BirDs OF THE WEsT INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS,
THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE
ISLANDs OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. By Charles B. Cory .«
ADDITIONAL NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF PUEBLO CouNTY, COLORADO.
By Charles Wickliffe Beckham :
AucGust BIRDS OF THE CHILHOWEE Mounrarys, “TENNESSEE. “By
F. W. Langdon :
SomE RaRE FLORIDA Biens. “By W. E. ‘D. Sroz
Tue PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF
THE GuLF Coast oF FLoripA. By W. EZ. D. Scott .
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ON THE GeNus ACANTHIS. By Leonhard
Stejneger :
Turrr New Forms or Nortu AMERICAN. Birbs. By William
DY CUSED eee SEONG! ale cle ts a area rie
85
94
95
97
100
144
145
eS a
Contents of Volume IV.
RECENT LITERATURE.
Sclater’s Catalogue of the Ceerebide, Tanagride, and Icteride, 149;
Conclusion of the Great Work on the Nests and Eggs of the Birds
of Ohio, 150; Ridgway’s Nomenclature of Colors and Ornitholo-
gist’s Compendium, 152; Bryant on the Ornithology of Gauda-
lupe Island, 154; Ralph and Bagg on the Birds of Oneida County,
N. Y., 154; Platt on the Birds of Meriden, Conn., 154; Maynard
on ‘Five New Species of Birds from the Bahamas,’ 155; Shufeldt’s
Contributions to Science, 155; Stejneger ‘On the Status of Syxth-
liborhamphus wumizusume as a North American Bird,’ 155; Ridg-
way on New Species of American Birds, etc., 156; Publications
Received, 156.
GENERAL NOTES.
The Common Murre (Uréa frozlle) and the Razor-billed Auk (Alca
torda) on the New England Coast, 158; Capture of the Razor-
billed Auk in Norfolk, Virginia, 158; Megalestris skua, 158; More
News of Ardea wuerdemanni, 159; Ardea egretta in Niagara
County, N. Y., 159; Further Notes on the Masked Bob-white
(Colinus ridgwayt), 159; Capture of a Third Specimen of the
Short-tailed Hawk (Buteo brachyurus) in Florida, 160; A Third
New England Specimen of Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swatnsonz),
160; A Migration of Hawks at Germantown, Pa., 161; The Saw-
whet Owl in the District of Columbia, 161; The Imperial Wood-
pecker (Campephilus imperialis) in Northern Sonora, 161; The
Coppery-tailed Trogon (Trogon ambiguus) breeding in Southern
Arizona, 161; Capture of a Fish Crow (Corvus osstfragus) at
Wareham, Mass., 162; Occurrence of Agelatus phaniceus on the
West Coast of England, 162; The Redpolls of Massachusetts, 143 ;
Vireo solitarius alticola in Tennessee, 164; Another Specimen of
the Prothonotary Warbler in Massachusetts, 164; An overlooked
Speciinen of Bachman’s Warbler, 165; Remarks on Four Exam-
ples of the Yellow-throated Warbler from Chester County, S. C.,
165; Discovery of the Nest and Eggs of the Western Warbler
(Dendroica occidentalis), 166; What Constitutes a Full Set of
Eggs? 167.
CORRESPONDENCE.
The Camera and Field Ornithology, 168; Classification of the Mac-
rochires, 170; The Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura, 172.
NOTES AND NEWS.
Obituary—Dr. John M. Wheaton, 174; Economic Ornithology and
Mammalogy, 174; American Museum of Natural History, 175 ; Or-
nithological Publications, 175; Antedated works on Natural His-
tory, 176; Colorado Ornithology, 176; McIlwraith’s ‘Birds of On-
tario,’ 176.
vi Contents of Volume IV.
NUMBER III.
PAGE
DESCRIPTIONS OF SIx SUPPOSED NEW SPECIES OF BIRDS FROM THE
ISLANDS OF OLD PROVIDENCE AND ST. ANDREWS, CARIBBEAN
SEA. By Charles B. Cory . . athe
A List oF THE BIRDS TAKEN BY Mr. Roserr HENDERSON, IN
THE ISLANDS OF OLD PROVIDENCE AND ST. ANDREWS, CARIB-
BEAN SEA. By Charles B. Cory. 3 shes eA
Brrps oF Tom GREEN AND CoNCcHO Counties, Texas. By Wil-
liam Lloyd : Sigel wat
THE RED-HEADED WoopreckER A HoARDER. “By OP. flay .
ON THE AVI-FAUNA OF PINAL COUNTY, WITH REMARKS ON SOME
Birps oF PIMA AND GILA Counties, ARIZONA. By W. £. D.
Scott. With Annotations by ¥. A. Allen. TU AUN wale ts har caae
Rare Birps oF NORTHEASTERN NEW BRUNSWICK. By Philip aoe
Fin,
THE PRESENT ConprIrion OF ‘Some OF THE Birp ROOKERIES OF
THE GuLF CoAsT oF FLoripa. By W. £. D. Scott
Tue BirpDs OF THE WEST INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS,
THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE
ISLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. By Charles B. Cory.
A New RAcE OF THE SHARP-TAILED SPARROW (Ammodramus cau-
dacutus). By Fohnathan Dwight, Fr. Be ed Se GA
OBSERVATIONS IN WESTERN Nortu CAROLINA MounrTAINS IN
1886. By George B. Sennett : :
DESCRIPTION OF A “NEw Fuethta FROM OLD PROVIDENCE ISLAND.
By Charles B. Cory
RECENT LITERATURE.
The New Canadian Ornithology, 245; MclIlwraith’s Birds of Ontario,
246; Stejneger on the Species of Pardalotus, 249; Stejneger on
two European Thrushes, 249; Stejneger on Japanese Birds, 249;
Blakiston on the Water-Birds of Japan, 250; Wells and Law-
rence on the Birds of Grenada, W. I., 250; Ridgway Ornithologi-
cal Club, 251; Publications Received, 251.
GENERAL NOTES.
The Double-crested Cormorant near Springfield, Mass., 253; The
Florida Gallinule in Nova Scotia, 253; The Middletown, Conn.,
Glossy Ibis of 1850, 253; Geococcyx californianus—A Correction
2543 Hummingbirds feeding their Young on Insects, 255; Otoco-
vis alpestris praticola in Chester County, 5S. Cay 255 (Clankers
Nutcracker (Picicorvus columbianus) in the Bristol Bay Region,
Alaska, 255; Clarke’s Nutcracker from the Kowak River, Alaska,
256; The Canada Jay in Southern Vermontin Summer, 256; Yan-
thocephalus xanthocephalus in Connecticut, 256; Yellow-headed
Blackbird (Xazthocephalus xanthocephalus) in Maine, 256; The
Baltimore Oriole (/cferus galéula) in Nova Scotia, 256; Occur-
rence of the Evening Grosbeak (Coccothraustes vespertina) at To-
ronto, Canada, 256; Occurrence of the Evening Grosbeak in
Fulton County, Ky., 257; Winter Plumage of Leucosticte austra-
Zs, 257; Note on Spizella monticola ochracea Brewst., 258; Sfz-
zella pussilla wintering near Hartford, Conn., 259; Change of
Contents of Volume IV.
Winter Habitat in the Grass Finch, 259; A Song Sparrow winter-
ing in Eastern Maine, 260; The Song Sparrow in New Brunswick
in Winter, 260; Unusual Nesting-site of the Song Sparrow, 260;
The Sharp-tailed Sparrow (Ammodramus caudacutus) in a Fresh-
water Marsh, 261; Nesting of the Hudsonian Chickadee (Parus
hudsonicus), 261; Another Addition to the Avi-fanna of South
Carolina, 261; Another Specimen of Bachman’s Warbler (Helmin-
thophila bachmant), 262; Additional Specimens of Bachman’s
and Swainson’s Warblers, obtained by Mr. Chas. S. Galbraith, in
the Spring of 1887, 262; Birds laying their Eggs in the Nests of
other birds, 263; New Species of Winter Birds in New Brunswick,
264; Additions to Mr. Drew’s List of the Birds of Colorado, 264.
CORRESPONDENCE.
Individual Variation in the Skeletons of Birds, and other Matters, 265 ;
Scarcity of Adult Birds in Autumn, 268; The ‘Proceedings’ of the
U. S. National Museum, 270.
NOTES AND NEWS.
American Museum of Natural History, 270; The late Dr. Wheaton’s
Collection of Birds, 272; Ornithological Publications, 272; De-
struction of Herons in Florida, 272.
vil
NUMBER IV.
PAGE
Tue PresENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF
THE GuLF Coast oF FLoripa. By W. £.D. Scott . Pedy fe)
Tue Pine Fincu (Sfinus Pinus) BREEDING AT CORNWALL-ON-
Besos We M-. By: GAs Alvene | s., jell n/p pee lop Sten a 204:
THe AMERICAN CROSSBILL (Loxia curvirostra minor) IN LARGE
NUMBERS NEAR CHARLESTON, S. C. By Arthur T. Wayne 287
Birps ofr Tom GREEN AND ConcHo Counties, Texas. By Wul-
Ret aen Teysai ee 5 6 SO ae aap eciet ae oe ohn 208
ADDITIONS TO THE AVI-FAUNA OF Bayou SarA, La. By Charles
Wieebife Beckham 9 <2 0. el eh ie cana es Ue 299
Tur SIGNIFICANCE OF CERTAIN PHASES IN THE GENUS Helmin-
thophila. By Spencer Trotter, M.D... +. ++. .+ + + 308
Tue Brrps oF THE West INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS,
THE GREATER AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE
IsLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. By Charles B. Cory . 311
SumMEeR Birps oF SANTA Cruz ISLAND, CALIFORNIA. By Elz
Re rrmeye lao prek ce ay mee eR eis allel 2h ee gee Gee
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SUBSPECIES OF JuNCO. By Henry K. Coale. 330
ORNITHOLOGICAL CurRrosITIES.—A HAWK WITH NINE TOES, AND A
BoBoLINK WITH Spurs ON Irs WINGS. By Heury K. Coale . 337
RECENT LITERATURE.
Ridgway’s ‘Manual of North American Birds,’ 333; Olphe-Galliard’s
Ornithology of Western Europe, 336; Minor Ornithological Pub-
lications, 337; Publications Received, 342.
vill Contents of Volnme TV.
GENERAL NOTES.
Merganser americanus breeding in New Mexico, 344; The Clapper
Rail again in Massachusetts, 344; Jctinta misstssippiensis and
Hgialitis ntvosa nesting in Southern Central Kansas, 344; The
Merlin (Falco @salon) in Greenland, 345; Notes on Melanerpes
Sormicivorus batrdi in New Mexico, 345; Egg-laying extraor-
dinary in Colaptes auratus, 346; The Range of Quzscalus major,
346; The Lapland Longspur about Washington, D. C., 347;
Descriptions of Two New Races of Pyrrhuloxia sinuata Bonap.,
347; Helinata swainsonii near Chester C. H., S. C., 347; Another
Bachman’s Warbler in Florida, 348; Additional Captures of Hed-
minthophila leucobronchialis, 348; Helminthophila leucobronchilis
in New Jersey, 349; The Canadian Warbler breeding in Pike
County, Pa., 349; On the Correct Subspecific Title of Baird’s
Wren (No. 7194, A. O. U. Check List), 349; Central New York
Notes, 350; On the Western Trend of Certain Fall Migrants in
Eastern Maine, 351; A Bird Scare, 351.
CORRESPONDENCE.
The Dermo-Tensor Patagii Muscle, 353; A Protest, 357; The Metric
System, 357-
NOTES AND NEWS.
Obituary — Spencer Fullerton Baird, 358; A. O. U. and ‘Auk’
announcements, 359; Proposed Monument to Audubon, 359;
Ornithological Work, in Progress. 359; Annual Report of the
Ornithologist to the Department of Agriculture for 1886, 360.
INDEX : : 3 : : : é : : ; 5 2 361
CONTENTS OF VoLUME IV : : , ; : ; : ; iii
THEY AAI :
Aw OAR THRE OU RNAL. OF
ORNDEROLOGY.
VOL. IV. JANUARY, 1887. No. I.
NOTES OF .A BIRD CATCHER.
BY FREDERIC A. LUCAS.
Amonc the few pastimes of those who ‘‘go down to the sea
in ships” and ‘‘do business in [the] great waters” of the south-
ern hemisphere is that of fishing for the sea birds that abound in
the vicinity of Cape Horn and the Cape of Good Hope. The
birds that will take a hook are limited to a few species of Alba-
trosses and Petrels, some, like the Whale Bird (Prox turtur),
which are extremely abundant, keeping at a respectful distance,
while others, like the Giant Skua, steadily refuse to take a bait
under any circumstances. First and foremost is the Wandering
Albatross (Diomedea exulans), whose great size and cautious
behavior makes his capture the crowning triumph of the avian
angler. It is commonly stated that the Albatross takes a bait
readily, but although this may have formerly been true, it is now
a very misleading statement. The Albatross has undoubtedly
learned wisdom by experience, and just as the grizzly bear is
said by Mr. Roosevelt to have become more timid since the in-
troduction of improved rifles, so, year by year, the Albatross has
grown more and more distrustful of anything with a line attached
to it. During four voyages I found that only the younger birds
could be caught easily, those of the first year the most readily,
those of the second less so, the difficulty increasing regularly with
age. Like all other sea birds, Albatrosses can be most easily en-
ticed into biting during tempestous weather when, having been
2 Lucas, Notes of a Bird Catcher. [ January
prevented for days from procuring their regular amount of food,
the pangs of hunger overcome their natural distrust.
The Albatross has a deliberate way that accords well with his
ample proportions and grave countenance, and when a bait is
spied does not hasten to plant himself beside it like a greedy
little Cape Pigeon, but usually takes a contemplative turn before
settling down for a thorough inspection of the tempting dainty.
If the investigation proves satisfactory he may condescend to bite,
but it not infrequently happens that by the time this conclusion
is arrived at the end of the line is reached also, and the morsel of
fat pork is suddenly snatched away leaving the bird looking
about him with a much aggrieved and puzzled expression.
There the Albatross will often sit for five minutes before rising
to follow the departing vessel, possibly to go through with pre-
cisely the same performance. Should he, however, be hooked,
the spirit of opposition is aroused within him, and sitting upright,
with big webbed feet thrust firmly forward, the Albatross beats
the water vigorously with his wings, or holds them stiffly ex-
tended in an effort to free himself from the hook by mere dead
weight.
The strain of such a bird pulling at the end of a hundred and
fifty feet of line is considerable ; but so long as he pursues these
tactics his capture is pretty well assured. For the Albatross is
not ‘hooked’ in the ordinary sense of the word, but is simply
held by the hook catching in the curved bill. So long, therefore,
as the strain on the line is steady, so long will the hook hold;
once slackened, it drops by its own weight, and if, as sometimes
happens, the bird flies towards the ship he is soon free.
Like the majority of sea birds, the Albatross cannot rise from
a vessel’s deck, but waddles about as helpless as if wing-clipped.
As regards size, the largest of four measured by me
a two year
old bird—was to! 4" in extent and weighed about fourteen pounds.
I have known one to weigh eighteen pounds, and have been told
of specimens which actually measured 12, 13, and 15 feet from
tip to tip. Is it not possible that it requires as many years for
this bird to attain its full size as to put on the adult plumage?
Certain it is that the largest specimens are the whitest and most
wary. And I would suggest that melanistic examples of Dzome-
dea exulans may not be infrequent, for twice on one voyage
large, dark colored birds were observed which, from their size,
1887. | Lucas, Notes of a Bird Catcher. 3
could have been no other than this species. These were not
young of the year but sooty colored, like a vastly exaggerated
Giant Fulmar. Unfortunately I did not improve my opportu-
nities to observe the food of the Albatross, but the stomachs of
two that were opened contained partially digested fragments of
cuttlefish (?) and a small quantity of feathers.
They have been seen to devour the castaway body of a com-
panion that had been caught and skinned, and to tear up and eat
a large ling (Haloporphyrus). Doubtless anything that can be
eaten does not come amiss.
The farthest north I have any personal record of seeing the
Wandering Albatross is 30° S., 24° W.
The Molly-Hawk, or Molly-Mawk (Diéomedea melanophrys),
and the Goney (2. calminata) are more easily taken than their
larger relative, but the Sooty Albatross (Phebetria fuliginosa)
—in the ordinary track of vessels at least—is wary in the ex-
treme, and, although it will approach so near that the eye is dis-
tinctly visible, steadily refuses to even look at a bait. Déo-
medea melanophrys was seen occasionally in the harbor of
Valparaiso.
Most knowing of all Petrels is the Cape Hen, or Giant Fulmar
(Osstfraga gigantea). Ifa loose piece of fat pork was thrown
out, it was immediately snatched up, but even during heavy gales
it was quite impossible for me to coax one to touch a piece with
hook and line attached. Where the tempting morsel was large the
Cape Hen would indeed swoop towards it as if about to alight,
but caution invariably got the better of appetite, and I am ready
to take oath that these birds actually winked as they sailed by.
In its movements, and especially when alighting, the Giant Ful-
mar has an uncouth, angular look about it that is very amusing.
The species not uncommonly ranges as far north as 12° south
latitude, for several were seen and two shot at the Chincha Islands
during the month of November. One perfect albino was seen.
presenting a strange contrast to the others by which it was
accompanied.
Majaqueus eqguinoctialis is apparently not common off Cape
Horn and of the few seen fewer still could be induced to take a
hook. Those that did so invariably escaped by reversing the
tactics of the Albatross and flying towards the ship instead of in-
dulging in worse than useless opposition, It being simply
4 Lucas, Wotes of a Bird Catcher. [ January
impossible to pull in line as fast as a bird could fly, the hook
always dropped from the bird’s beak.
The Southern Fulmar (/admarus glactalotdes) is not un-
common off Cape Horn, and is readily taken. It bites freely, and
fights well when captured, scratching, flapping, and biting ina
very vigorous manner. The quarrelsome disposition of this bird
at times becomes a drawback to his capture, for a Fulmar will
frequently devote his time and energies to driving away the Cape
Pigeons sooner than to take the bait himself.
Thalassotca antarctica is about as common, or uncommon,
as the preceding species, and is also comparatively easy to cap-
ture. As arule both these species keep farther from ships than
the abundant and tame Cape Pigeon (Daption capensis). Of
the species herein noted, 7halassotca antarctica appears to be
the most exclusively southern in its range. Going southwards
Daption made its appearance May 16, /almarus May 20, and
Thalassoica not until June 21.
The well known Cape Pigeon (Dafption capensts) is usually
met with in the Atlantic near latitude 35° %S., or ‘‘off the
River ‘Plate,’” as it is termed in the vernacular. On the Paci-
fic coast it seems to range much farther north, for in July we
left them outside the harbor of Valparaiso, and in September they
were common in latitude rr° south. Captain Carey, of the ship
‘Calhoun,’ informed me that a few followed that vessel nearly to
Acapulco, 16° N.
The Cape Pigeons are always hungry and it is an easy matter
to take any desired number of them. Ordinarily they are set free
after a short detention, but occasionally they are killed, and after
parboiling made into a pot pie. Concerning the flavor thereof I
cannot now speak positively, as it has been many years since my
last taste of Cape Pigeon pie. This species has an extremely dis-
agreeable habit, shared by many of its relatives, of vomiting up
when captured a thick, oily, and ill-smelling liquid, so that it is
necessary to handle this bird with some caution.
The Cape Pigeon caz dive although it very rarely does so,
usually gathering its food from the surface of the water. Once
or twice I have noticed them dipping up the water as if drinking,
but this may not have been the case.
Like the other Petrels, but to a still greater extent, the Cape
Pigeons delight in assembling around the contents of the cook’s
swill pail. Ifthere be nothing but dish-water, sufficient only to
'1887.] = + Lucas, Notes of a Brrd Catcher. 5
make a smooth, oily spot, down will go every bird near, and
there they will sit for five, or even ten minutes gazing at one
another and apparently waiting, like Micawber, for something to
turn up. My note book says that in February, going east, we
saw no Cape Pigeons, the Petrels seen then being probably
G?tstrelata, which, although following in our wake, kept ata
considerable distance.
Last and least (in size at all events) is the busy Mother Carey’s
Chicken, never at rest but perpetually fluttering over the water,
ever and anon pattering over the surface yet not even alighting
to feed.
Once, and only once, did I observe these little birds take a
bait, and that was when a heavy gale of several days’ duration had
apparently rendered them perfectly ravenous. *
The following method can be vouched for as very successful in
capturing the Stormy Petrels. To one end of a spool of stout,
black thread fasten a bit of wood just large enough to make a
drag that will keep the thread taut when towed behind a vessel.
To this attach at intervals of from four to six feet threads with
a small hook or bent pin at the end, graduating the length accord-
ing to the distance they will be from the drag. These will hang
from the main thread like droppers from a leader and the little
Petrels flying to and fro in the vessel’s wake will sooner or later
strike some of the threads and become entangled.
A few words in conclusion on the question as to whether or
not the birds seen in a ship’s wake are the same day after day. It
seems to me that Capt. Hutton is correct in his opinion that
while they may be it is doubtful if they are. In exceptional
cases, as, for example, the birds which followed the ship ‘Cal-
houn’ nearly to Acapulco, it would appear that the birds were
undoubtedly a small flock enticed beyond their usual range.
Personally, I can see no objection to the theory that the Albatross
and other birds can fly for several days in succession without
rest, the more that their easy sailing flight requires the minimum
of exertion. Moreover, I have on moonlight nights occasionally
observed birds circling around the ship, and on two occasions
birds were picked up on deck between 4 and 8 a.m. One of
these was a small Puffinws, the other an Oceanodroma(?). I
* This has been my own experience with these little birds, but Col. Goss tells me
that on the Grand Banks they will bite eagerly at a hook baited with a bit of cod liver.
6 Cory ox a New Vireo from Grand Cayman, W. I. [January
do see serious objections to the theory that sea birds regu-
larly rest upon the water at night, in the long and heavy gales so
prevalent off Cape Horn, which would seem to make such a pro-
ceeding a physical impossibility. And how is it with the little
Stormy Petrels which have apparently a constitutional aversion
to sitting in the water?
It is doubtful ifthe Albatross habitually follows any one vessel
for a considerable length of time, while the reverse is probably
true of the Cape Pigeon. While the amount of ‘pickings’ from
a single ship would make quite an item in the daily fare of several
Cape Pigeons, they would count for little with one Albatross. This
latter bird is much given to making vast stretches back and forth
over the ocean, and even while near a ship continually circles
round about in search of food. That an Albatross caz seea
vessel distinctly from an elevation of a thousand feet is doubtless
true, but judging from my own experience this bird rarely
ascends to such a height, for I zever observed it more than two
or three hundred feet above the ocean. Is it not more probable
that the bird meets with vessels while quartering over the ground
as just described and stays by them until drawn off in search of
food? Contrary to what might be supposed, it is during calms
that birds become detached from the ship they may have been
following. At such times the Albatross is especially given to
resting upon the water, from which it cannot then rise without
much flapping of wings and splashing of water as it runs along
the surface until it has acquired the necessary momentum to
start upon its customary graceful flight. The smaller birds
follow the example of their larger relatives, and, scattered here
and there by twos and threes, alternately quarrel and preen
their plumage until the breeze springs up, and with it everything
once more starts into renewed activity.
A NEW VIREO FROM GRAND CAYMAN, WEST
INDIES.
BY CHARLES B. CORY.
THE box of birds lately received from Grand Cayman, or
Great Cayman, contained still another new bird from that most
interesting island, which I propose to call
se
1887.] Goss, Additions to the Birds of Kansas.
“wT
Vireo caymanensis, sp. nov.
Sp. CHar.—(g Coll. C. B. Cory, No. 6273.) Upper parts dull olive,
brightest on the rump and upper tail-coverts ; crown darker than the
back, showing a slight brownish tinge; underparts dull yellowish-
white, faintly tinged with olive on the sides and flanks ; upper throat
dull white ; a dull white superciliary stripe from the upper mandible;
a stripe of slaty brown from the upper mandible passing through
and back of the eye; quills dark brown, narrowly edged with dull
green on the outer webs, most of the inner feathers showing a white
edging on the basal portion of the inner webs; tail dull olive brown,
the feathers showing green on the edges; upper mandible dark;
lower mandible pale; feet slaty brown.
Length, 5.40; wing, 2.75; tail, 2.25; tarsus, .75; bill, .52.
Hasitat. Island of Grand Cayman, West Indies.
Several specimens of Sezurus noveboracensis were received
from Grand Cayman, having been taken there in August. A few
birds were also sent from Little Cayman; they were Polzopiti/a
cerulea (Linn.), Dezxdroica dominica (Linn.), Vireo calidris
barbatulus (Cab.), Huetheta olivacea (Gmel.), Hlatinea marti-
nica? (Linn.), Zyrannus dominicensis (Gmel.),anda Zeniada.
The latter appears to be somewhat different from Z. sfadicea,
but a larger series is necessary to determine if the comparatively
slight differences are constant. It is of a somewhat paler brown,
and shows a decided slaty tinge on the flanks; the metallic re-
flections on the feathers of the neck appear different in color,
being paler and less in extent. It is possible that the two birds
are not separable specifically, but in case future investigation
should prove them to be distinct I would propose the name of
Zenaida richardson for the Little Cayman bird.
DOPITIONS LO THE CATALOGUE OF THE BIRDS
OF KANSAS.
BY N. S. GOSS.
THE following observations have been made, and notes gathered,
since the publication, May 1, 1886, of my ‘Revised Catalogue of
the Birds of Kansas’:
8 Goss, Additions to the Birds of Kansas. [ January
Podilymbus podiceps (Z/zz.). Pirp-BiLLED Grespe.—June
5, 1886, I found these birds breeding in a pond in Meade County.
I shot a young bird about two-thirds grown and saw several others,
and caught a glimpse, in the rushes, of an old bird followed by
little chicks, not more than a day or two old.
Phalaropus tricolor ( Vze¢//.). Witson’s PHALAROPE.—- June
8, 1886, I found three pairs of these birds breeding on marshy
ground, bordering a slough or pond of Crooked Creek, Meade
County, and I therefore enter the species as an occasional summer
resident in Western Kansas ; quite common throughout the State
during migration. Nest on the ground, usually on hummocks, quite
deeply excavated, and lined with leaves from the old dead grasses ;
eggs, three or four—usually four; ground color, cream to ashy
drab, rather thickly but irregularly blotched with varying shades
of brown to black. The female is larger and brighter in color
than the male, but from limited observations of the birds Iam led
to think certain writers are mistaken in reporting that the females
arrive first and do all the courting, but leave the work of nest-
making, incubation, and the rearing of the young tothe males. I
have never been so fortunate as to find either of the birds upon the
nest; but certainly, both appear equally watchful and solicitous,
circling around and croaking as one approaches their nests, or
near their young (grayish little fellows that leave the nest as soon
as hatched). The earliest arrival noticed in the State was at
Neosho Falls, April 29, 1879. In this flock, as in all others seen
at or about the time of their arrival, the sexes appeared to be
about equally divided, and I am inclined to think further examin-
ation will prove the birds to be joint workers in the hatching and
rearing of their young. With a view to removing all doubts, I
trust all naturalists who are so fortunate as to be upon their breed-
ing grounds during the breeding season will carefully note and
report their observations.
fEgialitis nivosa (Cass.). Snowy PLover.—Summer res-
ident on the salt plains along the Cimarron River, in the Indian
Territory, the northern limits of which extend across the line
into southwestern Comanche County, Kansas. Quite common ;
arrives about the first of May ; begins laying the last of May.
Nest, a depression worked out in the sand; evos, three, 1.20%
-90, pale olive drab, approaching a light clay color, with a green-
ish tint, rather evenly and thickly marked with irregularly-shaped
1887. Goss, Additions to the Birds of Kansas. 9
ragged-edged splashes and dots of dark or blackish brown. (See
Auk, IIT, 1886, p. 409.)
Colinus virginianus texanus (Zawr.). TEXAN BoB-wuHiTe.
—This bird is entered inthe A. O. U. ‘Check-List’ as ‘*Hab.
Southern and Western Texas, north to Western Kansas.” On
receipt of the ‘List’, I wrote to Mr. Robert Ridgway, a member
of the committee that prepared the list, to know when and where
in the western part of the State the birds had been taken. In
reply he says: ‘‘Colinus virginianus texanus, as a bird of
Kansas, rests on two specimens, adult females, in the National
Museum, labelled, respectively, No. 34425, Republican Fork,
May 27, 1864, Dr. Elliott Coues, U.S. A.; and No. 34425, same
locality, date, and collector. (See Hist. N. Am. B., III, p. 474.)
These specimens agree exactly with typical examples of ¢exanus
3°
as compared with vzrg7nzzanus proper.” Since the early settle-
ment of the State I have known through report of military men
and hunters that Bob-whites were occasionally seen on the Cim-
arron River. I never met with them there, and had taken it for
granted that they were C. vzrgznzanus; but as the birds were
found in Western Kansas long before our Bob-whites, in follow-
ing up the settlements, reached the central portion of the State,
I am now inclined to think further examination may prove the
western bird of the plains to be variety ¢exanws, and that they
reached that portion of the country by following north on the old
military trails. I have written to several persons in that region
for specimens, but as yet have no reply.
Empidonax pusillus traillii (Awd.). Tratii’s Ftry-
CATCHER.—Mr. George F. Brenninger, Beattie, Marshall Coun-
ty, has kindly sent me for examination a nest containing three
eggs, taken July 17, 1886, in a thick second growth of timber,
on the bank of a small creek at Beattie, and writes that he found
in the same vicinity quite a number of nests. The earliest found,
with a full set of eggs, was June 14. In the Goss Ornithological
Collection is a female which I shot at Neosho Falls, July 26,
1881, and I have occasionally noticed the birds during thg sum-
mer months, and have no doubt but they will prove to be quite a
common summer resident. I congratulate Mr. Brenninger on
the find, and thank him for calling my attention to it. The nests
are usually placed in upright forks of the small limbs of trees and
bushes, from four to ten feet from the ground. 68 52 7.2 10
III. Acanthis holbellit from Japan.
(a) MALEs.
96374 Blak.1148. gad. WHakodadi, Yesso. March. re 5S) 68.5) OF
91543 “2910. gad. Sapporo, es June. "2 55 9 8*
96372 ‘© y147. Gad. Hakodadi. ‘* March. Pana 1S o*
96373 LOW vty tan SS MNES cs sg < Poe SG Oh een
95370 US wretss Gy) EXalé fs gb February. Gey ais te) ey
91439 Jouy, 798. gad. Tate Yama, Hondo. Nov. 21, 1822. 75 Soyo) unt
Average dimensions of six males. ..+-.+-++-> Beaune ged aad 74-8 STA OO LOT
(6) FEMALES.
107039 Blak. 1144. ad. Hakodadi, Yesso. March. ya) Sh 8 9
91544 es) 298k. ad. Sapporo, Oh June. ==) 55, oe b=
96341 ‘“ arar. Q ad. MHakodadi, “ March. Tie te ly 9
THE REDISCOVERY OF BACHMAN’S WARBLER,
HELMINTHOPHILA BACHMANI (AUD.),
IN THE UNITED STATES.
BY GEORGE N. LAWRENCE.
Mr. Cuarces S. Garsraitu, of West Hoboken, N. J., an
experienced taxidermist and collector, made a collection of birds
last spring (1886) in Louisiana, near Lake Pontchartrain. I did
not see him after his return until October. Any specimens he
obtains, which he is not familiar with, he always thoughtfully
* With red on throat and breast. + Without red on throat and breast.
36 LAWRENCE on Bachman’s Warbler. [January
retains until he can submit them to me for identification. This
time, among others, were two species of especial interest. The
most important one, which Mr. Galbraith kindly presented to
me, proves to be an example of the rare Bachman’s Warbler,
which for many years has been most assiduously and vainly
searched for.
No specimen of it has been obtained in the United States since
the types discovered by Dr. Bachman in 1833, near Charleston,
S. C., and described by Mr. Audubon. These are now.in the
National Museum at Washington. A search in the proper locality
would probably result in finding more of this rare species, as
was the case in Mr. Brewster’s persistent pursuit of Swainson’s
Warbler.
The specimen differs from Audubon’s plate and description of
the male (octavo edition) in having the face light yellow, and
the under plumage pale yellow, with a greenish shade, instead
of deep gamboge yellow, as in the plate; the black patch on the
neck in front and upper part of the breast is just as represented
in the plate; the crown, occiput, and hind-neck are bluish ash,
with a black band on the anterior part of the crown, about one-
quarter of an inch in width; in Audubon’s plate of the male,
the entire crown is black. In the colors of all the other parts of
its plumage, and in its measurements, it agrees with the descrip-
tion given by Mr. Audubon.
Mr. Audubon describes the female as ‘‘considerably smaller
than the male, and differs only in having the tints faiyter, the
forehead yellowish-green, and the fore-neck dusky.”
In the plate the coloring of the under plumage of the female
is of nearly as bright a yellow as in the male.
As the coloring of this specimen was somewhat different from
Mr. Audubon’s plate, I wrote to Mr. Ridgway, pointing out
wherein they differed, and requesting him to let me know
whether the male (type) was accurately represented in the plate.
He replied as follows: ‘‘Your announcement of a specimen of
Bachman’s Warbler from Louisiana is a great surprise to me, as
it doubtless will be to ornithologists in general. Your bird cor-
responds in every particular with the male described and figured
by Audubon, which is in our collection. The top of the head
is dull ash gray, bordered anteriorly by a black band next to the
yellow of the forehead, and the yellow of the face and under-
1887. ] Cory on the Birds of the West Indtes. 37
parts are of a dull yellow shade (oil yellow I would call it), ex-
actly as you describe the specimen in your possession. Audubon’s
plate is very faulty in several particulars.”
Mr. Galbraith obtained only this specimen, and has no recollec-
tion of seeing another, but if he had—not knowing its desirability
—he said, if a more highly plumaged bird had been in sight, it
would have been shot in preference.
The other specimen referred to above is Swainson’s Warbler
(Helinata swainsont), of which he procured about three dozen
examples, but he had parted with all for millinery purposes, ex-
cept the one retained for me. The others are probably by this
time adorning the hats of some of the better part of creation—the
fair wearers not being aware of their great rarity.
It would seem as if this species was not at all uncommon in the
locality in which Mr. Galbraith collected, since he got so many
specimens of it. He knew nothing of their value, and they were
collected indiscriminately with other birds suited to his business
as a taxidermist.
According to Mr. Brewster, in South Carolina it required to
be very carefully searched for in special localities. With a great
variety of birds, Mr. Galbraith obtained a large number of Pro-
thonotary Warblers, as weil as Orange-crowned and Worm-eat-
ing, showing the locality to be a favorite resort of Swamp Warblers.
THE BIRDS OF THE WEST INDIES, INCLUDING
THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER AND
THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING
THE ISLANDS OF TOBAGO
AND TRINIDAD.
BY CHARLES B. CORY.
[Continued from Vol. III, p. 472.)
Famity FALCONID.
Genus Pandion Sav.
Pandion Savicny, ‘‘Descr. de ’Egypt, Ois. p. 95, 1809.”
38 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [ January
Pandion haliaétus carolinensis (GMEL.). a
Falco carolinensis ‘‘GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 263 (1788).”
Falco cayennensis ‘‘GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 263 (1788).”
Pandion carolinensis Gosst, Bds. Jam. p. 19 (1847).—BRYANT, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VI, p. 105 (1859) (Bahamas).—BREWER, 2d. p. 306
(1860) (Cuba).—AtsrecutT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 204 (Jamaica).—
Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863, p. 152 (Jamaica).—GuNDL.
Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 222 (1865); 2b. J. f. O. 1871, p. 364
(Cuba); 7b. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 158 (1878) (Porto
Rico); 7b. J. f. O. 1878, p. 158 (Porto Rico).
Pandion haliaétus Lemp. Aves Cuba, p. 12 (1850).—Lawre. Pr. U. S.
Nat. Mus. I, p. 65 (1878) (Dominica) ; 2b. p. 194 (St. Vincent); 2d.
p. 236 (Antigua); 7d. p. 273 (Grenada).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p.
131 (1881).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 110 (1881).—
Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 125 (1885).—WELLsS, List
Bds. Grenada, p. 6 (1886).
Pandion haliaétus carolinensis Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Common throughout the Bahamas and Antilles.
Genus Circus LAcEP.
Circus LACKPEDE, Mém. de I’ Inst. III, p. 506, 1801.
Circus hudsonius (LInNN.). ¥
Falco hudsonius LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 128 (1766).
Circus cyaneus D’Ors. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 19 (1840).
Circus hudsonicus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860)
(Cuba).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Circus hudsonius GUNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p, 224 (1865).—Bry-
ANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 65 (1867) (Bahamas).—GuNDL.
J. f. O. 1871, p. 369 (Cuba).
Circus cyaneus var. hudsonius Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 128 (1880).
Cuba and Bahamas.
Genus Rupornis Kavp.
Rupornis Kavp, Classif. Siug. u. Vog. 1844.
Rupornis ridgwayi Cory.
Rupornis ridywayt Cory, Journ. Bost. Zool. Soc. II, p. 46 (1883); 2b.
Auk, I. p. 4 (1884); 2b. Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 121 (1885) ;
_ 1b. List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Sp. CHar. Male:—Above slaty brown; shafts of the feathers of the head
and upper back dark brown; underparts slaty, faintly touched with
1887. |
Cory ox the Birds of the West Indes. ' 39
rufous on the belly and abdomen; chin dull white; shoulders and
thighs rufous, the latter much the brighter, and faintly pencilled
with indistinct pale lines; wings and tail dark brown, imperfectly
banded with dull white, and showing various shadings of a rufous
tinge, all the outer primaries imperfectly banded with white, grad-
ually becoming fainter on the outer webs, until just perceptible on
the sixth, the rest of the primaries and secondaries with the outer
web dark brown, and the inner webs thickly banded with white,
showing traces of rufous.
Bencth, 13°75; wink, 9.05, tall, G2) tarsus, 2.755, bill; 5.20.
Female:—Yop of the head and neck brownish ash, becoming
darker on the back; the feathers of the back and tertiaries edged
with rufous; underparts dark rufous, the feathers narrowly banded
with white; thighs showing the rufous much brighter, the feathers
banded with very fine pale lines; crissum white, with rufous bands
near the tips; under part of breast slaty, shading into dull white on
the throat; the shafts of the feathers on the throat and breast dark
brown, showing in hair-like lines; the rest as in the male.
Length, 14.50; wing 10. ; tail, 6.45; tarsus, 2.65; bill, 1.25.
Immature Male:—I\n general appearance much like Buteo penn-
sylvanicus. Underparts dull white, the feathers slightly tinged with
rufous, the centre of the surface feathers showing a stripe of brown,
giving the body a striped appearance; thighs rufous, but paler
than in the adult; above much resembling the adult; the white wing-
and tail-bands replaced by rufous bands on the terminal half of the
feathers.
Hasirat. San Domingo.
Mr. Gurney mentions Rupornis magnirostri’s from the Island
of Martinique (Ibis, 1876, p. 482), but says that it might have pos-
sibly belonged to one or the other of the two Central American
forms, which at that time had not been separated from it.
GENus Buteo Cuvier.
Buteo ‘‘Cuv. Leg. d’Anat. Comp. I, tabl. ii, Ois. 1799-1880.”
Buteo borealis (GMEL.). uf
Falco borealis GMEL. Syst. Nat. II, p. 226 (1788).
Buteo borealis Gosse, Bds. Jam. p. 11 (1847).—Lems. Aves Cuba, p. 18
(1850).—BkEWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860)
(Cuba).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 203 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr.
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863, p. 151 (Jamaica).—Gunpt. Repert. Fisi-
co-Nat. Cuba I, p. 223 (1865).—BRyYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist.
XI, p. 64 (1867) (Bahamas).—GunDt. J. f. O. 1871, p. 365 (Cuba);
7b. 1878, p. 158 (Porto Rico); 2b. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p-
40 Cory on the Birds of the West Indtes. [January
159 (1878) (Porto Rico).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 131 (1880).—
A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 110 (1881).—Cory, List Bds.
W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Recorded from Cuba, Jamaica, Porto Rico, and Bahamas.
Mr. J. H. Gurney writes me he has an example of this species
from Haiti.
Buteo latissimus (WIts.). *
Falco latissimus Wits. Am. Orn. I, p. 92 (1812).
Buteo latissimus LemB. Aves Cuba, p. 19 (1850).—Cory, Ibis, 1886, p.
473 (St. Vincent).
Buteo pennsylvanicus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860)
(Cuba).—GunDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 223 (1865); zd.
J. f. O. 1871, p. 366 (Cuba).—Lawre. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 194
(1878) (St. Vincent) ; 2b. p. 236 (Antigua); 7d. p. 273 (Grenada).—
GuNDL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 160 (1878) (Porto Rico) ;
zb. J. f. O. 1878, p. 158 (Porto Rico).—ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn.
Club, V, p. 169 (1880) (Santa Lucia).—LisTeEr, Ibis, 1880, p. 43
(St. Vincent).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).—WELLs, List
Bds. Grenada, p. 6 (1886).
Common winter visitant, and possible resident in the Lesser
Antilles.
Recorded from Cuba, Porto Rico, and Lesser Antilles.
Genus Accipiter Briss.
Accipiter Brisson, Orn. I, p. 310, 1760.
Accipiter gundlachi Lawr. '
Astur coopert Lems. Aves Cuba, p. 17 (1850).—Cas. J. f. O. 1854.
Nisus pileatus LEMB. Aves Cuba, Suppl. p. 125 (1850).
Accipiter cooper? BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860).
Accipiter pileatus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860) (?)
Accipiter mexicanus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860).
Accipiter gundlacht LAwr. Ann. Lyc. N. Y. 1862, p. 252.—GuUNDL.
Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 224 (1865).—Sci. & Satv. Nom
Avium Neotr. p. 120 (1873).—SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p
137 (1874).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Cooperastur gundlachi Gray, Handl. Bds. I, p. 33 (1869).
Nisus cooperi var. gundlachi Bp. Bwr. & RipGw. Hist. N. Am. Bds. III,
p- 22 (1874).
Nisus gundlachi RipGw. Studies Am. Falc. p. 104 (1876).
“Adult male:—Front, crown, and occiput sooty-black; upper
plumage dull bluish ash, the feathers of the back with brownish
1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 41
margins: tail of the same coloras the back, partly tinged with dull ru-
fous and crossed with four brown bars, three of which are imperfect,
being but little developed on the outer webs, the outer bar, however,
crosses both webs, and is narrowly tipped with white; quill feath-
ers brown, having the shafts, as are also those of the tail-feathers,
reddish brown; cheeks dusky ash; space forward of the eye pale
dull rufous; a line of whitish feathers runs along the edge of the
crown and extends over the eye; throat ashy white tinged with
rufous; sides of the neck, upper part of the breast and a band run-
ning to the hind neck, grayish ash; lower portion of the breast and
upper part of the abdomen rufous, the feathers very narrowly edged
with dull white, lower part of abdomen of a paler rufous, with trans-
verse bars of dull white; long feathers of the sides grayish ash
tinged with rufous and destitute of bars or spots; sides just above
the junction of the tail plain rufous; thighs of a bright but rather
pale rufous, the feathers having darker sub-marginal ends, termi-
nating with very narrow edgings of dull white; under wing-coverts
and axillars bright rufous barred with white; the feathers of the
throat, breast and sides have their shafts dark brown; upper tail-
coverts grayish ash, lower white; bill horn color, with a whitish
mark on the tooth and also on the edge of the lower mandible near
its base; legs greenish yellow.
‘‘Length about 18 inches; wing from flexure 9%; tail 7%; tarsus 29.”
(Lawkr., orig. descr., 1. c.)
HasitatT. Cuba.
Accipiter fringilloides Vic. “
Accipiter fringilloides Vic. Zool. Journ. III, p. 434 (1828).—DeEnny,
P. Z. S. 1847, p. 38.—BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p.
306 (1860).—Gray, Handl. Bds. I, p. 32 (1869).—GuNDL. J. f. O.
1871, p. 368.—Sci. & Satv. Nom. Avium Neotr. p. 120 (1873).—
SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p. 135 (1874).—Cory, Bds. Haiti
& San Domingo, p. 120 (1885) ; 2b. List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Nisus fringillotides D’OrB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 18
(1840).—LrEmB. Aves Cuba, p. 128 (1850).—RipGw. Studies Am.
Falc. p. 117 (1876).
Nisus fuscus Lems. Aves Cuba, p. 128 (1850).—GuNDL. J. f. O. 1854.—
Cory, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, p. 154 (1881).
Accipiter fuscus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860).
Nisus fuscus var fringillotdes Bp. Bwr. & Ripew. Hist. N. Am. Bds. III,
p- 223 (1874).
Sp. CHar. Female:—Resembles Accipiter fuscus, but plumage much paler;
above brown, the concealed portions of the feathers showing much
white ; concealed feathers of the back regularly marked with broad
spots of white; tail pale brown, showing five somewhat indistinct
42 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [ January
bands of darker brown; under surface of tail dull white, regularly
banded with brown; breast and belly white, the shafts of the feath-
ers dark brown, showing hair-like lines over the whole surface ; these
lines are in many cases bordered with pale brown, giving the appear-
ance of arrow-shaped markings; under tail-coverts white; quills
brown, barred with white on the inner webs; under surface of wings
white, barred with brown.
Length, 11.50; wing 7.; tail, 5.50; tarsus, 1.75.
Hasirat. Cuba, Haiti, and San Domingo.
Dr. Gundlach has a fine adult male of this species in his col-
lection. It is smaller than the female, as would be expected, and
has the cheeks and sides of the throat tinged a beautiful orange
brown, the color also showing in the breast marking.
The female described was killed a few miles from Port au
Prince, Haiti, during March, 1881. It was the only one seen.
Accipiter velox (Wiu1s.).
Falco velox ‘*Wiis. Am. Orn. V, p. 116 (1812).”
Accipiter fuscus BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 105 (1859)
(Bahamas).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 128 (1880); 2. List Bds.
W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Accidental in the Bahamas.
Genus Urubitinga Less. -
Urubitinga Lesson, Rev. Zool. 1839, p- 132.
Urubitinga anthracina (Licur.). v
Falco anthracinus Licut. in Mus. Berol. unde Nitzsch. Pteryl. p. 83
(1840). :
Morphnus urubitinga Lems. Aves Cuba, p. 14 (1850).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 204 (Jamaica).
Hypomorphus gundlachi BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VI, p. 306
(1860) (Cuba).
Hypomorphnus gundlachi GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 223
(1865) ; 2b. J. f. O. 1871, p. 365 (Cuba).
Urubitinga anthracina SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p. 215 (1874)
(Cuba).—Lawr. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 194 (1878) (St. Vincent).
—LisTER, Ibis, 1880, p 43 (St. Vincent).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p.
22 (1885).—WELLs, List Bds. Grenada, p. 6 (1886) (?) —Cory,
Ibis, 1886, p. 473 (St. Vincent).
Records from Cuba, Jamaica, St. Vincent, and Grenada (?)
1887. ] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 43
Genus Falco LINN.
Falco LInNNvs, Syst. Nat. I, p. 124, 1766.
Falco peregrinus anatum (Bonap.). ~
Falco anatum Br. Geog. & Comp. List, p. 4 (1834).—Gosse, Bds. Jam.
p- 16 (1847).—BryYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 105 (1859)
(Bahamas) ; 76. BREWER, p. 306 (1860) (Cuba).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 204 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863,
pp: 152, 304 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p.
225 (1865); 2b. J. f. O. 1871, p. 371 (Cuba); zd. 1878, p. 158 (Porto
Rico) ; 6. Anal. Soc. Esp. fist. Nat. VII, p. 161 (1878) (Porto Rico).
Falco peregrinus Lems. Aves Cuba, p. II (1850).—Bryant, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 64 (1867) (Bahamas).—A. & E. NEwron,
Handb. Jamaica, p. 110 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Falco communts SUNDEV. Oefv. Af. K. Vet. Akad. F6r. 1869, p. 586 (St.
Bartholomew).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 129 (1880).
Falco communis var. anatum LAawre. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 487 (1878)
(Antigua) ; 7b. p. 240 (Barbuda).
Many records from the Antilles ; specimens have been taken in
the Bahamas, Cuba, Jamaica, Antigua, Barbuda, Porto Rico, and
St. Bartholomew.
: ya
Falco columbarius LINN.
Falco columbartus LINN. Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. go (1758); 25. 12th ed.
p- 128 (1766).—D’Ors. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 23
(1840).—GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 17 (1847).—SuNDEV. Oefv. Af. K.
Vet. Akad. Foér. 1869, p. 601 (Porto Rico).—A. & E. Newron,
Handb. Jamaica, p. 110 (1881).—Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo,
p- 123 (1885) ; zd. List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Hypotriorchis columbartus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306
(1860) (Cuba).—Scr. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 79 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT,
J. f. O. 1862, p. 203 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.
1863, p- 152 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p.
225 (1865); zd. J. f. O. 1871, p. 372 (Cuba); 2b. 1878, p. 158 (Porto
Rico) ; zd. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 162 (1878) (Porto Rico).
salon columbarius WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 6 (1886).
Recorded from San Domingo, Porto Rico, Cuba, Jamaica,
Grenada, and St. Thomas.
Falco sparverius Linn.
Falco sparvertus LINN. Syst. Nat. I, 1oth ed. p. 90 (1758) ; zd. 12th ed. p.
128 (1766).—GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 284 (1788).—Latu. Ind. Orn.
44 Cory ox the Birds of the West Indies. [ January
p- 42 (1790).—VIEILL. Enc. Méth. HI, p. 1234 (1820).—Wact. Isis,
1831, p. 517-—Aup. Bds. Am. I, p. 94 (1839).—CassIn, in Baird’s
Bds. N. Am. p. 13 (1860).—Satv. P. Z. S. 1867, p. 158.—SUNDEV.
Oefv. Af. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869. p. 586.—ScHLEG. Rev. Accipitr.
p- 45 (1873)-—CoveEs, Key N. Am. Bds. p. 537 (1884).—Cory, Bds.
Bahama I. p. 103 (1880) ; 76. List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Falco noveboracensis GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 284 (1788).
Tinnunculus sparverius ViEILL. Ois. Am. Sept. pls. XII, XI (1807 ).—
Be. Consp. I, p. 27 (1850).—Cassin, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1855,
p- 278.—STrickL. Orn. Syn. I. p. 99 (1855).—BRYANT, Pro Bost:
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 105 (1859) ; 2. BREWER, p. 306 (1860).—ScL.
& SaLv. Nom. Avium Neotr. p. 121(1873).—GuNDL. J. f. O. 1878, p.
158 (?).—GuRNEY, List Bds. Prey, p. 98 (1884).—WELLs, List Bds.
Grenada, p. 6 (1886).
Cerchnets sparverius Br. List Eur. & N. Am. Bds. p. 5 (1838).
Falco tsabellinus Swans. An. Menag. p. 281 (1838).
Tinnunculus phalena Less. Mam. et Ois. p. 178 (1547).
Pecilornis sparverius Kaur, Mon. Fale. Cont. Orn. p. 53 (1850).—GRAY.
Handl. Bds. I. p. 23 (1869).
Tinnunculus sparverius var. tsabellinus RipGw. Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.
1870, p- 149:-—Bp. Bwr. & Ripew. Hist. N. Am. Bds. II, p. 171
(1874).
Cerchneis sparveria SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p. 437 (1874).
Cerchnets tsabellina SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p. 441 (1874).
Falco (Tinnunculus) sparverius Bp. Bwr. & Ripew. Hist. N. Am, Bds.
III, p. 169 (1874).
Tinnunculus isabellinus GURNEY, Ibis, 1881, p. 561; 7b. List Bds. Prey,
p- 99 (1884).
Falco sparverius isabellinus Cougs, Key N. Am. Bads. p. 538 (1884).
Several forms of this species occur in the West Indies. but vary
much in different localities. I have a specimen in my cabinet
from San Domingo which is apparently true 7. sparvercus.
Falco dominicensis GMEL. f
Falco dominicensis GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 288 (1788).—BryYAnT, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. go (1866).
Falco sparverius D’OrB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 25 (1840).
—Satte, P. Z. S. 1857, p. 231—SuNpDEv. Oefv. Af. K. Vet. Akad.
For. 1869, p. 586.
Tinnunculus dominicensis STRICKL. Orn. Syn. p. 100 (1855).—BREWER,
Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-
Nat. Cuba, I, p. 225 (1865).—Gray, Handl. Bds. I, p. 24 (1869).—
Gunpt. J. f. O. 1871, p. 373; #6. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p.
163 (1878).—GurneEy, List Bds. Prey, p. 99 (1884).
Tinnunculus sparverius Cassin, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1860, p. 374-
1887-] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 45
Falco leucophrys Ripew. Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1870, p. 147.
Tinnunculus leucophrys Ripew. Pr. Acad. Nat Sci. Phila. 1870, p. 149.—
Sct. & Satv. Nom. Avium Neotr. p. 121 (1873).— Bp. Bwr. &
Ripew. Hist. N. Am. Bds. III, p. 161 (1874).
Tinnunculus sparverius var. dominicensis RipGw. Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci.
Phila. 1870, p. 149.
Cerchnets leucophrys SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus I, p. 442 (1874).
Falco sparverius var. domtnicensis Bp. Bwr. & Rirpew. Hist. N. Am. Bds.
III, p. 167 (1874).
Tinnunculus sparvertus (2?) Cory, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI,-p. 154 (1881).
Falco sparvertius tsabellinus Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 124
(1875).
Faico sparverius dominicensts Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1884).
Sp. CHAar. Male:—Top of head slate color; forehead whitish; throat
white; a maxillary and auricular black stripe; breast rufous; back
dark rufous brown; tail rufous brown, tipped with white, and hav-
ing a sub-terminal band of black; outer web of outer tail-feather
white; wing-coverts slate color; abdomen and belly white; a patch
of black on the side of the neck.
Female:—Top of head slate color, showing a patch of rufous; en-
tire upper parts rufous brown, banded with dull black; underparts
very pale rufous, delicately streaked and spotted with brown; throat
white.
Length, 10.; wing, 7.; tail, 5. tarsus, 1.20.
Hapirat. Cuba? Haiti, San Domingo, and Porto Rico.
Falco sparverioides Vic. “
Falco sparveriotdes Vic. Zool. Journ. III, p. 436 (1828).—D’Ors. in La
Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p, 30 (1840).—RipGw. Pr. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila. 1870, p. 149.—CougEs, Key N. Am. Bds. p. 538 (1884).
Tinnunculus sparvertoides GRAY, Gen. Bds. I, p. 21 (1844).—Bp. Consp.
I, p. 27 (1850).—StTRICKL. Orn. Syn. p. 100 (1855).—LaAwre. Ann.
Lyc. N. Y. 1860, p. 247.—BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VIII,
p- 306 (1860).—Scri. & Satv. Nom. Avium Neotr. p. 121 (1873).—
GuRNEY, Ibis, 1881, p, 565; zd. List Bds. Prey, p. 100 (1884).
Pecilornis sparvertioides Kaur, Contr. Orn. p. 53 (1850).—Bp. Rev. Mag.
Zool. 1854, p. 537-—Gray, Handl. Bds. I, p. 24 (1869.)
Cerchneis sparverioides SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p. 443 (1874).
Falco (Tinnunculus) sparverioides Bp. Bwr. & Ripew. Hist. N. Am.
Bds. III, p. 162 (1874).
Falco sparverius sparverioides Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Sp. CHar. Male:—Above entirely slate blue in the adult bird ; most spec-
imens seen have the back chestnut brown mixed with slaty; rump,
upper tail-coverts, and tail chestnut brown; tail with a sub-terminal
46 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [ January
band of black; inner secondaries gray; sides of the face and throat
white; a streak of black on sides of throat; slight mark on the nape
and a patch near the ear-coverts black: breast pale chestnut, and
becoming whitish, tinged with chestnut on the belly and vent;
flanks showing a grayish tinge, and a few faint black spots.
Length (skin), about 10; wing, 6.50; tail, 4.70; tarsus, 1.50;
bill, .60.
HasitatT. Cuba.
Falco caribbzearum GMEL.
Falco caribbe@arum GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 284 (1788).
Falco esalon, var. B. LAtuH. Ind. Orn. I, p. 49 (17g0).
Cerchnets carrtbearum (?) SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p. 442 (1874).
Tinnunculus sparvertus var. antillarum LAwr. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p.
487 (1878).— ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V, p. 169 (1880).
Tinnunculus antillarum GURNEY, Ibis, 1881, p. 547.
Tinnunculus cartbbe@arum GRISDALE, Ibis, 1882, p. 491.— GuRNEY, List
Bds. Prey, p. 99 (1884).— RipeGw. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. VII, p. 172
(1884).
Falco sparverius cartbbearum Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885); 2b.
Ibis, 1886, p. 474.
Sp. CHar. Male:—General plumage above chestnut brown, heavily banded
with black; forehead grayish; top of head chestnut brown, show-
ing faint lines of black; underparts dull white, tinged with rufous
on the breast, and spotted and streaked with black, heaviest on the
sides of the body; primaries heavily blotched with white on the
inner webs; under surface of tail brown, showing numerous bands
of black, a wide subterminal band of black, and narrowly tipped
with grayish white.
Length (skin) 9.50; wing, 6; tail, 4.50; tarsus, 1; bill .55.
HasitatT. Lesser Antilles.
Genus Elanoides VIEILL.
Elanoides ‘*ViEILLOT, Nouv. Dict. XXIV, p. 101, 1818. Type falco furca-
tus = F. forficatus LINN.”
Elanoides forficatus (Linn.).
Falco forficatus LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 89 (1758).
Nauclerus furcatus Gossk, Bds. Jam. p. 19 (1847).— BREwe_r, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860) (Cuba).— ALBREcHrT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 204 (Jamaica).— Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863,
p- 153 (Jamaica).— GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 225
(1865); 2b. J. f. O. 1871, p. 370 (Cuba).—A. & E. Newron, Handb.
Jamaica, p. 110 (1881).
Elanoides forficatus Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Recorded from Cuba and Jamaica.
= ee
1887. ] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. — 447
GrENus Rostrhamus LEss.
Rostrhamus Lesson, Traité d’Orn. p. 55, 1831.
Rostrhamus sociabilis (VIEFILL.). ”
Herpetotherus soctabilis ViEILL. Nouv. Dict. XVIII, p. 318 (1818).
Rostrhamus soctabil’s D’ORB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 15
(1840).— BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860)
(Cuba).— GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 222 (1865); 2d.
JatnOn 187i p. 362 (Cuba):
Rostrhamus hamatus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860)
(Cuba).
Rosthramus soctabtlis Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 22 (1885).
Accidental in Cuba.
Genus Regerhinus Kaup.
Regerhinus Kaur, Mus. Senck. III, p. 262, 1845.
Regerhinus wilsonii (Cass.). ”
Cymindis wilsonit CAssin, Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. new ser. I, p. 21,
pl. vii (1847).— Br. Consp. I, p. 21 (1850).— Lawr. Ann. Lyc. N.
Y. VII, p. 257 (1860).— Sci. & Satv. Nom. Avium Neotr. p. 122
(1873).
Regerhinus wilsontt Kaur, Arch. f. Naturg. 1850, p. 40.— Brewer, Pr.
Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860).— GuNnDL. J. f. O. 1871, p.
360.— Ripew. Studies Am. Fale. p. 159 (1876).— Cory, List Bds.
W. I. p. 23 (1885).
Cymindis unctnatus LEMB. Aves Cuba, Suppl. (1850).—BREWER, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860).
Regerhinus uncinatus Cas. J. f. O. 1854, p. 8o.
Regerhinus wilsont Gray, Handl. Bds. I, p. 28 (1869).
Leptodon wilsont SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p. 333 (1874).
‘‘Male:— Body above entirely dark brown, paler on the head;
beneath white, every feather from the chin to the under tail-coverts
crossed by several bars of bright rufous, and these colours extend-
ing upwards into a collar around the neck; 4th, 5th, and 6th pri-
maries longest and nearly equal, external webs nearly black, internal
webs of outer primaries white at base, and for nearly half their
length, remaining part reddish inclining to chestnut, every primary
(on its inner web) having two irregularly shaped black marks, and
tipped with black. ‘Tail of the same colour as the back, but paler,
white at base, and crossed by about four broad bars, which are
nearly black, the second bar from the tip accompanied by a narrow
rather indistinct bar of rufous; tip of tail narrowly edged with
white. Bill very large, larger than that of any other species of
48 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [ January
this genus, yellowish white, inclining to bluish horn-colour at
base. Total length 17 inches.
‘‘Female:— Body above entirely light bluish ash-colour, paler on
the head, beneath barred with the same, the bars having a ferrugi-
nous tinge” (CAsSIN, l. c.).
HasitatT. Cuba.
Regerhinus uncinatus (TEmm.).
Falco uncinatus TEM. Pl. Col. 103, 104, 105 (1824).
Cymindis unctnatus Less. Man. d’Orn. I, p. 91 (1828).— Gray, Gen. Bds.
I, p. 25 (1844).— Br. Consp. I, p. 21 (1850).— Burm. Th. Bras. II,
p. 108 (1856).—Leror. Ois. Trinid. p. 36 (1866).—-Gray, Handl.
Bds. I, p. 136 (1869).—PeExLz. Orn. Bras. pp. 5, 398 (1871).—SCHLEG.
Rev. Accipitr. p. 136 (1873).— SHARPE, P. Z. S. 1873, p. 419.— SCL.
& Satv. Nom. Avium Neotr. p. 122 (1873).— WELLs, List Bds.
Grenada, p. 6 (1886).
Falco vitticaudus Max. Beitr. III, p. 178 (1830).
Cymindis cuculotdes Swans. Classif. Bds. II, p. 209 (1837).
Regerhinus uncinatus Kaup, Mus. Senckenb. III, p. 262 (1845).— Cas. in
Schomb. Reis. Guian. III, p. 736 (1848).—GuNDL. J. f. O. 1871, p.
284.— Cory, List Bds. W.-I. p. 23 (1885).
Rostrhamus uncitnatus STRICKL. Orn. Syn. p. 136 (1855).
Cymindis pucherani L&or. Ois. Trinid. p. 40 (1866).— Gray, Handl. Bds.
I, p. 25 (1869).—Finscu, P. Z. S. 1870, p. 557-
Cymindis boliviensis BurM. P. Z. S. 1868, p. 635.— Gray, Handl. Bds. I,
p- 28 (1869).
Cymindis vitticaudus PELZz. Orn. Bras. pp. 6, 398 (1871).
Leptodon unctnatus SHARPE, Cat. Bds. Brit. Mus. I, p. 330 (1874).
‘* Young:— Above brown, the dorsal feathers and wing-coverts
margined with pale rufous, the upper tail-coverts broadly barred
and tipped with buff; quills dark brown, with rufous-buff tips, the
primaries barred with dark brown above, the secondaries more or
less distinctly barred with rufous or rufous buff; the under surface
of the wing ashy brown, barred with darker brown, the bases of the
feathers creamy buff, washed with rufous near the tips; ‘tail ashy
brown, tipped with whitish, barred across with dark brown bars,
the interspaces on the inner web creamy buff, more or less mottled
with brown above, at the base barred above and below with creamy
buff, like the upper tail-coverts; crown of the head dark brown,
with no pale margins; sides of the face anda collar around the
neck white, slightly spotted with pale brown, the ear-coverts inclin-
ing to bluish grey; under surface of body white, the throat indis-
tinctly spotted, and the breast narrowly barred with pale brown,
the bars almost linear on the under tail-coverts, those on the
1887. ]
Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 49
thigh-feathers broader and more rufous; under wing-coverts and
axillaries white, barred with pale rufous. Total length 17 inches,
culmen 1-65, wing 10-4, tail 8-6, tarsus 1-45.
“Another specimen still quite young, agrees with the foregoing
in the coloration of the wings and tail, but has the edgings to the
feathers of the upper surface very much broader, and a broad white
tip to the tail; the sides of the face and collar round the neck are
creamy white, without any brown spots; the under surface of the
body is also more free from spots, with here and there a feather
appearing broadly barred with tawny rufous, indicative of the next
change in the plumage.
‘*‘ Wature:—Altogether different from the preceding stage. Above
leaden brown, the head more slaty, the sides of the face and chin
clear slaty blue; around the neck a rufous collar; quills brown,
with narrow apical margins of pale rufous or buffy white, the outer
secondaries rufous for nearly their whole extent, the under surface
of the wing greyish, creamy white near the base, all the quills
barred above and below with blackish brown; tail ashy grey,
crossed by two very broad bars of black, tipped with creamy white,
before which an indistinct subterminal line of ashy grey is visible,
some of the outer upper tail-coverts and base of tail slightly mottled
with whitish; under surface of body tawny rufous, crossed with
broad bars of ochraceous buff, the under wing-coverts similarly
marked, the lower ones ochraceous buff, with greyish black cross-
bars.
“The next change seems to be in the undersurface, where the
ochre-coloured become quite white, and whitish bars appear on the
grey throat. From this stage (to judge by our specimens) it
changes by a partial moult, and by a gradual change of feather at
the same time; for the bars on the breast lose by degrees their
rufous tint and become grey, while the back also becomes slaty
grey instead of brown; the nuchal collar gradually disappears.
This gradual development seems to be satisfactorily traced, with
the exception of the tail, which, instead of agreeing with that of
the rufous or ‘‘mature” stage, has four rather narrow black bars,
like the young specimen first described. This can only be ac-
counted for by the fact that Hawks have really no fixed laws of
change in plumage, and that it is impossible for anyone to define
exactly the regular sequence of the variations. No two birds are ex-
actly alike; for one has the head more advanced, another the tail,
vice versa. Thus the bird last noticed as donning his grey dress
is very far advanced as regards his body-plumage, but has not
moulted his tail, whereas those in the rufous dress are not so
forward in their body-plumage, but have already the tail of the
adult (one being in the act cf moulting).
“Adult female:—Slaty blue above and below; no trace of a nuchal
collar; under surface narrowly but irregularly barred with white,
50 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [ January
the under tail-coverts clear buff; under wing-coverts grey, thickly
barred with buffy white; quills blackish, shaded with slaty grey
above, the secondaries entirely of this colour, the under surface
greyish white, with black bars and tips, less conspicuous on the
upper surface; tail alternately crossed with two bands of black
above, with a broad intermediate band of ashy grey between, nar-
rowly tipped with ashy grey, barred with ochraceous buff and black
below, the bars very broad. Total length 17 inches, culmen 1-6,
wing 11-7, tail 7-5, tarsus 1-4.
“Adult Male:—A \ittle smaller than the female. Total length 16
inches, culmen 1-55, wing 11, tail 7-5, tarsus 1-4.” (SHARPE, I. c.)
I have quoted Mr. Sharpe’s admirable description of this
species in full; as the series of specimens at my command is
totally inadequate to enable me to properly describe the various
stages of plumage.
The bird is recorded from Grenada, and is probably accidental
in the Antilles.
Genus Polyborus VIEILL.
Polyborus Vie1LLot, Analyse, p. 22, 1816.
Polyborus cheriway (JAcQ@.). i
Falco cheriway JAcq. Beitr. p. 17, tab. 4 (1784).
Polyborus vulgaris D’OrB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 9 (1840).
—BrEwWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 306 (1860) (Cuba).
Polyborus tharus Brewer, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VIII, p. 306 (1860)
(Cuba).—GunbL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 221 (1865).
Polyborus cheritway BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VIII, p. 306 (1860)
(Cuba).— GunpL. J. f. O. 1871, p. 284 (Cuba).— Cory, List Bds.
W. I. p. 23 (1885).
Polyborus brasiliensis BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VI, p. 306 (1860)
(Cuba).
Polyborus audubont GuNDL. J. f. O. 1871, p. 357 (Cuba) (?).
Accidental in Cuba.
Famity CATHARTID.
Genus Cathartes ILLIGER.
Cathartes ILLIGER, Prodr. p. 236, 1811.
; Cathartes aura (Linwn.).
Vultur aura LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 86 (1758).
Cathartes aura D’OrB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 4 (1840).—
=.
1887. ] SAYLES on the Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura. SI
Gosse, Bds. Jam. p. 1 (1847).—BryantT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist.
VII, p. 104 (1859) (Bahamas); zd. BREWER, p. 306 (1860) (Cuba).
— ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 203 (Jamaica).— MArcu, Pr. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863, p. 150 ( Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat.
Cuba, I, p. 221 (1865); 26. J. f. O. 1871, p. 253 (Cuba).— Cory,
Bds. Bahama I. p. 134 (1880).— A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica,
p. 111 (1881).— Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 23 (1885).
Recorded from the Bahamas, Cuba, and Jamaica.
Genus Catharista VIEILL.
Catharista ViEILLOT, Analyse, p. 21, 1816.
Catharista atrata (BarTr.).
Vultur atratus BARTR. Tray. Car. p. 285 (1792).
Cathartes atratus Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863, p. 151 (Ja-
maica).—A. & E. NewrTon, Handb. Jamaica, p. 111 (1881).
Catharista atrata Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 23 (1885).
This species is claimed to have occurred in Jamaica. No
other West Indian record.
THE SENSE OF SMELL IN CATHARTES AURA.
BY IRA SAYLES.
In the ‘Standard Natural History,’ edited by John Sterling
Kingsley, published by S. E. Cassin & Co., Boston, Vol. IV, p.
271, in an article written by Walter B. Barrows, I read as
follows:
‘*The name condor, Humboldt says, is from a word in the
language of the Incas, signifying to smell,” and adds: ‘There
is nothing more astonishing than the almost inconceivable sagac-
ity with which the condor distinguishes the odor of flesh from an
immense distance.’”
Mr. Barrows then adds: ‘‘This belief in the extraordinary
power of smell possessed by carrion vultures is largely an inher-
ited or traditional one, and was long ago shown to be without
foundation. That they have some smell is well known, and Owen
has even shown that in the turkey buzzard the olfactory nerves
52 SAYLES on the Sense of Smell tn Cathartes aura. [January
are highly developed. Recognizing this fact in the anatomy of
the bird, there is yet very little evidence that the power is ever
used in the detection of food.”
He proceeds by referring to experiments made by Audubon,
Bachman, and Darwin.
Audubon’s experiments :—‘‘The perfectly dry, stuffed skin ofa
common deer, placed in the attitude of death, attracted a vulture
[ Cathartes atratus| within a few moments, though there was
nothing eatable about it; after satisfying itself of which, by walk-
ing over it and tugging at it, the bird circled about over the field
until it espied a small snake, not thicker than a man’s finger, upon
which it at once pounced. Moreover, a large and putrid carcass
of a hog carefully covered by canes and brush so as to be invisi-
ble, remained undiscovered by the vultures in spite of the intol-
erable stench it sent out, though they frequently passed by accident
quite near it, and the dogs at once discovered it. Yet a small,
freshly-killed pig hidden near the same place was at once traced
out by the vultures, by the blood which was allowed to run from
it as it was carried to its hiding place.”
‘‘Bachman tried these tests, and added some new and perfectly
convincing ones. The rough painting of a sheep, skinned and
cut open, soon brought vultures to examine and tug at it, and
though the experiment was repeated scores of times, it never
failed, on each fresh exposure, to attract the hungry birds. A
wheelbarrow-load of tempting carrion was next covered by a
single sheet of thin canvas, above which bits of fresh meat were
strewn. ‘The fresh meat was soon eaten, but, though the vul-
tures must have frequently had their bills within an eighth of an
inch of the carrion beneath, they did not discover it.
‘While at Valparaiso in 1834, Darwin experimented on
twenty or thirty condors which were kept in a garden at that
place. They were tied in a long row at the foot of the wall, each
bird by a single rope, and Darwin walked backward and forward
before them, at a distance of about ten feet, with a piece of fresh
meat in his hand, wrapped securely in a piece of white paper.
No notice whatever was taken of it by the birds. He then threw
it on the ground within a yard of an old male condor, who looked
at it carefully for a moment and paid no further attention. With
a stick it was pushed closer and closer, until he touched it at last
with his beak, when instantly the paper was torn off, while every
bird in the long row began struggling and flapping its wings.”
1887. | SAYLES on the Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura. 53
Critictsms.—I have made these quotations in full for the pur-
pose of offering a few criticisms, and adding my own obseryations.
First point. Mr. Owen, as a comparative anatomist, declares
that the olfactories are largely developed. Mr. Owen’s testimony
on this point I take as entirely satisfactory. Now I boldly chal-
lence the world to produce an instance ofa large, well-developed
nerve of sense, in any species, which was not so developed by
use, and which is not used. This, I think, is pretty good Dar-
winism.
For what, however, does the Turkey Buzzard need a large and
well-developed organ of smell? Animals with any large sense-
organ need that organ for one of two purposes—ezther to guard
against danger, or to aid in finding food. MWunters, in their
search for deer, know well that they must calculate on keeping
their quarry at the windward. The deer’s sense of smell is keen,
and he flies from the tainted breeze at his highest speed.
The Buzzard does not need the sense of smell for protection
against danger. Zo acd tu its search for food ts, therefore,
tts only use in this bird. I might rest my argument right here,
and leave it for others to overthrow my position.
I premise here that I do not call in question the Buzzard’s keen-
ness of vision. That is granted; but any experiment that goes
only to prove the Buzzard’s keenness of vision, by no means
proves its sense of smell dull.
Now, what are the conditions on which the sense of smell is
available? First, there must be something to taint the medium,
whether water or air. Anglers sometimes put some strong odor
on their bait. The water dissolves this, and the fish, under cer-
tain conditions, smell it, and rush for it. Something which the
air can dissolve is exposed in the air, which the air takes up and
diffuses, and animals with a keen sense of smell for this thing
speedily find their way to it. Kill any animal by bleeding, dur-
ing the warm weather, and that animal will scarcely breathe its
last before swarms of the green meat-fly will be humming around
it.
But this is not all. The fish can never smell the tainted
water up stream. It must be in the water below the tainted bait.
Moreover, the tainted current takes a peculiar form, gradually
spreading laterally and up and down, giving to the tainted tract
approximately the shape of a cone.
54 SAYLES on the Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura. [ January
In precisely the same manner, any odor spreads through the
air. Ifthe air is very calm, the odor rises in the shape of an in-
verted cone. If now a bird passes above it, and the odor is one
springing from the customary food of such birds, it will descend
in search of its scented food. If the wind has a gentle movement,
the odor rises obliquely ; and the bird, in hunting its food, will
descend obliquely along the scented tract.
If the wind is high, the odor is born off horizontally ; and the
bird, when it crosses the tract of scented air, will follow it hori-
zontally.
One word further. The Buzzard is not formed for digging the
earth, or for tearing away any obstacles, in order to reach a
tainted carcass.
Now, let us proceed with the experiments tried, and relied on
as proofs that Buzzards do not use their sense of smell in search
of food. First, Mr. Audubon’s perfectly dry, stuffed deer skin.
Admit that the Buzzards came, because they saw what appeared
to be a deer. Does that prove that the Buzzard does not search
by smell? It is a mere negative, utterly devoid of the slightest
relevancy in the argument.
Second, the Buzzard caught a little snake. That only shows
that the Buzzard can see.
Third, the big dead hog thoroughly concealed. The author
says the Buzzards passed near it dy acctdent. Is he sure that
they flew near it by accident? I affirm that they passed near it
in search of it, but it being thoroughly concealed they failed to
find it; and had they thought it in the brush-heap they could
not have reached it. Dogs found it, of course, and removed the
brush.
Fourth, they did find a pig—a @zttle pig—by tracking its
blood.
Now these experiments determine nothing whatever concern-
ing the sense of smell—the object of the experiments.
Bachman’s painted sheep simply and only shows that the
Buzzards can see, and can be imposed on. I remember that a
certain ancient Greek painter so cunningly imitated grapes, that
the poor little birds came and pecked at his pictures. Poor things,
they were deceived; so were Bachman’s Buzzards. But, really,
does this prove anything concerning the sense of smell? Not in
the least.
—
1887.] SayLes on the Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura. 55
Secondly, he takes ‘‘a wheelbarrow-load of temft¢ng carrion,”
completely covers it from view with canvas and scatters fresh
meat above the canvas. The Buzzards come and eat the fresh
meat, picking it piece by piece from the canvas covering; but
did not tear off the covering and get at the carrion. Very well.
Now he leaves us with the impression that he concludes that
the Buzzards did not smell that carrion at all. Undoubtedly,
however, the Buzzards thought themselves eating the very carrion
itself; and, when they had eaten all they saw, they supposed that
no more remained. This was only their usual experience. When
they eat carrion from the ground, there always remains a great
deal of stench in the ground, but they have no appetite for fetid
ground, so they do not tear it up and fill their craws with it;
no more did their stomachs have a craving for stinking canvas.
Mr. Darwin walked before the Condors with fresh meat se-
curely wrapped in white paper, and the Condors took not the
least notice of it; but so soon as the old male Condor got his nose
down so he could take the air, he seized it, and tore off the paper
in aninstant. Now, Mr. Darwin forgot to tell us which way the
wind blew, or whether or not there was any wind at all. His ex-
periment proves absolutely nothing.
I have now some observations that are poszt/ve, relative to the
keenness of the smelling power of the Turkey Buzzard.
In Christmas week, 1874, my folks in’ Virginia killed their
hogs. As country women usually do, they saved the coarsest
offal, put it in a pot, and set it away in the corner of the meat-
house, intending to add the ley, of wood-ashes, cut the grease, and
make soap of it. The pot was forgotten. I was at the North at
that time, and returned in February, knowing nothing of the pot.
In April, that pot revealed itself by serving a writ of eject-
ment on any one that ventured into the meat-house. It was
discovered, and itself was ejected from the meat-house to the
woodshed one evening, of which proceedings I knew nothing.
Iam an early riser. Next morning, as soon as light, I was
up and about the chores of the plantation. I had occasion to
pass through the wood-house ; and I went out faster than I went
in. The dogs had found that pot full of stench and had eaten all
their stomachs could endure.
The wind was blowing a furious gale from the east. It was
alla man could do to keep his feet. About sunrise I chanced
56 Fourth Meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union. [January
to look to the west, and saw a large number of Buzzards, more
than two miles away, crossing a line back and forth, from north
to south; and I soon discovered that they were coming eastward.
It did not occur to me that they were tracing the tract of tainted
air from that pot full of putrescence. I kept quietly about my
business and the Buzzards kept about theirs; and in less than
twenty minutes from the time I first discovered them, they were
on hand, wheeling about that woodshed. They were fifty or
sixty strong. They staid around during an hour or two, when
they gave up the search and left for other parts. Here was,
therefore, a cone of tainted air, with its apex in that pot. It was
drifted rapidly to the west, rising at an exceedingly low angle.
The Buzzards crossed that cone back and forth so accurately
that I could mark its limits almost exactly. Now there is no
possible hypothesis applicable to the solution of these Buzzards’
actions, but that they smelt that stench more than two miles.
I might give many other notes on this matter, but I deem this
perfectly apropos and convincing.
I have great regard for Mr. Audubon, Mr. Bachman, and Mr.
Darwin, for what they have well done; but, in a series of exper-
iments for ascertaining a great scientific fact, that these men
should so blunder, and so falsely reason, is to me certainly
astonishing. In attacking their conclusion, in this case, I feel
that they are merely human,
FOURTH MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNI-
THOLOGISTS’ UNION.
Tue fourth meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union was
held at the National Museum in Washington, November 16, 17,
and 18, 1886. The number of members in attendance was about
the same as at previous meetings, namely, about twenty Active
Members and thirteen Associates. The official report of the
Secretary stated that but a single death had occurred among the
members during the past year,—that of Mr. Snowdon Howland,
of Newport, R_ I., an Associate Member, well known as an
— KR.
1887.] Fourth Meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union. 57
odlogist of note.* There is at present no vacancy in the class
of Foreign Members (limited to 25), and there are only four
vacancies in the class of Active Members (limited to 50). The
Corresponding Members (limited to 100) number 69, and the
Associate Members (unlimited as to number), 112.
The Treasurer’s report made known the fact of a considerable
deficit, partly on account of ‘The Auk,’ and partly on account of
the publication of the ‘Code and Check-List.’ While the assets
of the Union, consisting of its unsold publications, much more
than offset this deficiency, it was deemed desirable to take meas-
ures to at once relieve the treasury of debt. It was therefore
voted to open a paper for voluntary subscriptions to meet the
present indebtedness, the subscribers being allowed to receive, at
their option, back volumes of ‘The Auk,’ or copies of the ‘Code
and Check-List,’ to the amount of their subscriptions.+ In refer-
ence to the future, it was stated that there seemed to be little
danger of any deficit on account of ‘The Auk,’ or from any other
source, and that the financial prospects of the Union gave no
cause for uneasiness.
The report from the Council included the following nomina-
tions for membership, namely, to the class of Active Members,
Messrs. William Dutcher and Jonathan Dwight, Jr., of New
York City, and W. E. D. Scott, of Tarpon Springs, Florida
(formerly of Arizona) ; to the class of Corresponding Members,
Messrs. T. Biittikofer, Leyden, Holland; M. Mameye, Tokio,
Japan; Robert MacFarlane, Winnipeg, Manitoba; W. E. Brooks,
Milton, Ontario. To the class of Associate Members there were
44 nominations. All the nominees were later duly elected.
The Council also recommended that the Union take measures
to become an incorporated society, and that a committee be
appointed to draw up a new Constitution, accompanied by
appropriate By-Laws, for adoption under the Act of Incorpora-
tion. Later in the session the Union voted to become incorpor-
ated, and instructed the Council to take the necessary steps to
secure its incorporation, and also to draft a new Constitution and
By-Laws, for adoption at the next annual meeting.
*See Auk, III, p. 144,
+ The prompt responses to this appeal, it may be stated, have satisfactorily met the
emergency.
{The Council appointed as a committee on incorporation the President and
Professor Baird, and as a committee to draft the new Constitution and By-Laws the
President, Professor Baird, Dr. Coues, Mr, Henshaw, and Dr. Stejneger.
58 Fourth Meeting of the American Ornithologists Union. | January
The reports of Committees proved of special interest, and
showed commendable activity on the part of their members. The
chairman of the Committee on the Protection of North American
Birds, Mr. George B. Sennett, gave a detailed and carefully pre-
pared report on the work of this committee, which has held,
during the year, twenty meetings at which a quorum was pres-
ent for the transaction of business, besides several informal ses-
sions. The committee had endeavored to awaken public interest
in behalf of the birds, by giving information as to the extent of
their destruction for millinery and other needless purposes ; be-
lieving that a proper public presentation of these facts would go
far toward checking this great evil. It has also drafted what
it deems a suitable law for the protection of song and non-game
birds, the enactment of which in the various States it not only
recommends, but which it is taking measures to secure. The
proposed law has been practically adopted by the State of New
York, and seems likely to meet with favor among legislators in
other States. They have published two ‘Bulletins,’ one of sixteen
quarto pages, the other of eight, large editions of which have
been gratuitously circulated, and of which copies may be obtained
on application to members of the committee. Notwithstanding
the considerable outlay of money involved, the committee, by the
aid of a few outside contributions, had met all the expenses
incurred, and had no indebtedness to report to the Union. It
has been greatly aided in its work by the ‘Science’ and ‘For-
est and Stream’ Publishing Companies, these journals having
been, respectively, the mediums of the original publication of
the ‘Bulletins,’ which were later issued in pamphlet form in
large editions.
The Audubon Society, an outgrowth of the Committee’s
work, proves a most efficient co-worker. Under the fostering
care of the ‘Forest and Stream,’ this society already numbers
some 16,000 members, with over 300 local secretaries, scattered
throughout the United States and in various foreign countries. A
special report of the work of the Audubon Society, from Dr.
George B. Grinnell, to whose efforts the Society owes its exist-
ence and success, was included in the report of the committee.
The committee also acknowledged the important aid it had re-
ceived from the American Humane Association which, through
its President, the Rev. G. E. Gordon, had given it very valuable
et
a en
1887. ] Fourth Meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union. 59
assistance. The public press had also warmly seconded its efforts,
and it felt justified in claiming that its labors had yielded most
encouraging results, and that the future was full of promise of
further successes. The public was thoroughly aroused to the
importance of enforcing strenuous measures for the better pro-
tection of our birds, and the sympathy and assistance received
by the committee in its work was full of encouragement to fur-
ther effort.*
The report of the committee was accepted as a report of pro-
gress, and the committee continued.
The chairman of the Committee on the Geographical Distri-
bution and Migration of North American Birds, Dr. C. Hart
Merriam, gave a very satisfactory account of the work of his
committee, dealing particularly with the economical aspects of
its work. As already stated in the pages of ‘The Auk,’f the
work undertaken by this committee has practically been assumed
by the U. S. Department of Agriculture, and has now reached
the status ofa distinct Division of this Bureau of the Government,
under the title ‘Division of Economic Ornithology and Mam-
malogy,’ the scope of the work under Government auspices having
been broadened to include the economic relations of mammals
to agriculture as well as those of birds. Last June, through the
influence of Senator Warner Miller, of New York, not only was
this important change secured, but also an appropriation of
$10,000 for carrying on the work for the present year. This
appropriation was for the ‘‘promotion of Economic Ornithology
and Mammalogy ; an investigation of the food-habits, distribution,
and migration of birds and mammals in relation to agriculture,
horticulture, and forestry ; for publishing reports thereon; and
for drawings, and travelling and other expenses in the practical
work of the division.” Dr. Merriam has associated with him as
scientific assistants Dr. A. K. Fisher and Prof. W. B. Barrows.
Dr. Merriam, in his report, referred especially to his investiga-
tions in relation to the Bobolink—the ‘Rice Bird’ of the South—
* For notices of the work of this committee, its organization and membership, see
Auk III, pp. 143 and 287, and its ‘Bulletins,’ entitled as follows: American Ornitholo-
gists’ Union. Bulletin No. I. of the Committee on Protection of Birds. Destruction
of our Native Birds, pp. 1-16. Published originally in ‘Science,’ No. 160, Feb. 26,
1886.
Bulletin No. 2. Protection of Birds by Legislation, pp. 1-8. Published originally in
‘Forest and Stream,’ Noy. 11, 1886,
t See Auk, III, pp. 117, 416.
60 Fourth Meeting of the American Ornithologists Union. {January
and the English Sparrow, and in less detail to the investigations
of the food habits of our birds in general. He gave a very inter-
esting and detailed account of his observations in the rice fields
of South Carolina and Georgia, and Dr. Fisher related his obser-
vations in the rice fields of Louisiana.
The work of collecting data respecting bird migration is still
continued, the number of observers to whom schedules have
been sent during the last year being fully up to the average of
past years.
As yet none of the reports prepared by the division super-
intendents have been published but several are nearly ready for
the press, as is also a special report on the English Sparrow ; the
publication of some these reports has been unexpectedly and
unavoidably delayed, but their early appearance may now be
anticipated.
The reports of the two committees elicited interesting remarks
bearing mainly on the subject of the economic relations of birds
to man, and on their protection, the work of the two committees
being more or less inter-related at many points.
The reading of scientific papers occupied the third day’s
session. Col. N. S. Goss, of Kansas, presented a paper entitled
‘Additions to the Catalogue of the Birds of Kansas’ (published
in this number of ‘The Auk,’ pp. 7-11), and another on ‘The
Number of Eggs constituting a Normal Set.’
Mr. George B. Sennett gave a paper on ‘The Snowy Plover of
Texas,’ with an exhibition of specimens.
A paper from Dr. Ira Sayles was read on the ‘Sense of Smell
in the Turkey Buzzard’ (see this number of ‘The Auk,’ p. 5).
Mr. Frederick A. Lucas presented interesting notes of his ex-
perience in capturing sea birds(Procellariidz) (see azféa, pp.1-7).
Dr. L. Stejneger gave a short résumé of the methods of the
celebrated German ornithologist, Chr. L. Brehm, illustrated by
a good series of a South European Ring Thrush ( Zurdus alpes-
tris Brehm), which prejudice and want of material have pre-
vented the European ornithologists from recognizing as distinct
from the northern typical Zurdus torguatus. Dr. Stejneger in
rediscovering this interesting and strongly marked species was
able to substantiate the observations made by Brehm, and he pre-
dicted that if European ornithology be studied on a plan similar,
and with similar means, to that applied here in America, still
1887. ] Recent Literature. 61
more important disclosures would result. For such a study the
Brehm collection, which since his death has been inaccessible,
would be indispensable.
Other papers presented by title were ‘The Summer Birds of
the Bras d@’Or Region of Cape Breton Island,’ by Jonathan
Dwight, Jr. (see azféa, pp. 13-16) ; ‘The Summer Birds of the
Presidential Range of the White Mountains, N. H.,’ by Mr.
Arthur P. Chadbourne; and ‘Notes on the Night Migration of
Birds at Cleveland, Ohio,’ by Mr. Wm. F. Dertenbach.
A committee on Avian Anatomy was appointed, consisting of
Drs. Coues and Shufeldt.
Resolutions of thanks were tendered Professor Baird for his
kindness in securing the lecture room of the U. S. National Mu-
seum as a place of meeting for the Fourth Congress of the Union ;
to Mr. George T. Angell, President of the Massachusetts Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, for securing protection
during the past year tothe Gulls and Terns breeding on Muskeget
Island, Mass., by placing an agent there, deputized as a game
constable, to prevent the destruction of these birds; to the Rev.
G. E. Gordon, President of the American Humane Association,
for assistance and co-operation rendered the Committee on Pro-
tection of North American Birds; also to the ‘Science’ Publishing
Company, and to the ‘Forest and Stream’ Publishing Company,
for valuable assistance rendered the same committee, and espec-
ially to the latter Company for its invaluable services in behalf of
the Audubon Society.
The election of officers resulted in the re-election of the officers
of 1886. Atthe close of a highly satisfactory three days’ session
the Union adjourned to meet in Boston, October 10, 1887.
RECENT LITERATURE.
Pleske on the Birds of the Kola Peninsula.—The second part of Mr.
Theodor Pleske’s valuable work* has just come to hand, and treats of
* Uebersicht | der | Sdugethiere und Vd6gel | der | Kola-Halbinsel.| Von Theo-
dor Pleske, | Cand. d. Naturwissenschaften. | —Theil II. V6gel und Nachtrage. | —
(Der Akademie vorgelegt am 5. Marz 1885.) | —Aus den ‘‘Beitraégen zur Kenntniss
des Russischen Reiches und der angren-|zenden Lander Asiens, zweite Folge,”
besonders abgedruckt, | —St. Petersburg, 1886. | Buchdruckerei der Kaiserlichen Aka-
demie der Wissenschaften. | Wass. Ostr., 9 Lin., No. 12.—8 vo. pp. iv + 515.
62 Recent Literature. [ January
the birds of that very interesting region, which embraces the so-called
‘Russian Lapland.’ Very properly, however, the author has ignored
the political borders and includes part of Norwegian East-Finmark west to
the Tana-fjord and Tana-elv. Towards the north and east the region is
bordered by the Arctic Ocean and the White Sea.
The work, in the first place, is intended to be a report on the author’s
own explorations in that region during the summer of 1880, but ornitholo-
gists will be thankful that he intended it to include the observations of
his many predecessors, for he has succeeded in producing a very valuable
faunistic monograph of one of the most interesting parts of the Palearctic
Region. It will be seen, from the map, that the province in question
connects the Scandinavian Peninsula with the Eurasian Continent. Scan-
dinavia during the Glacial Period was probably uninhabited by any birds
except, perhaps, the most Arctic species, covered, as it was, with enormous
glaciers, and separated from the rest of the Western Palearctic Region
by a wide sea covering the German and Russian lowlands and uniting the
Arctic and the Atlantic Oceans to the east of the peninsula. When the
ice receded and the land rose, an immigration of animal life commenced
from two different directions—from the south over the Danish Islands, and
from the east over Finland, the broad neck of land which now separates
the Baltic and the White Sea. This is not only a hypothesis invented to
explain the constitution of the present fauna, but it is an observed fact, for
the immigration both ways continues to-day,, and the regular additions
to the Scandinavian fauna during this century can be distinctly and posi-
tively traced. Thus it happens that a Central European, a Siberian, and
a truly Arctic avifauna meet just in the region which Mr. Pleske has
chosen for his monograph. The complexity of the migrating routes which
pass along or cross this same section is well shown on the map accompa-
nying Palmén’s ‘Zugstrassen der Vogel,’ giving additional interest to the
region, and explaining the fact that the author treats of over 200 species of
birds, notwithstanding that the chief part of the country included is sit-
uated to the north of the Arctic Circle.
Mr. Pleske has had one great disadvantage: he has not had the opportu-
nity of verifying his predecessors’ statements and identifications by exam-
ining their specimens. In fact, most of the older records and many of
the recent ones are not at all based on specimens, and those which have
been collected are scattered all over the world. In many cases, therefore,
there is a lack of absolute identification, which is felt more especially in
the case of species, the subspecies or nearest allies of which, are very
difficult to discriminate. Thus we are ignorant of the true status of ‘Pcus
minor’ and of ‘Pica rustica’ from that region, whether they are the Cen-
tral European forms, or the Siberian subspecies, or both, or intermediate
ones between the two. On the other hand, it is evident that the author,
when having access to specimens, knows how to discriminate. Thus we
note with satisfaction that for the first time in a work of that scope the
Redpolls (Acanthis) are correctly understood, for Mr. Pleske clearly dis-
tinguishes, discusses, and describes three forms as occurring in the region,
viz: A. linaria, A. holbelli, and A. extlipes.
7
1887. ] Recent Literature. 63
The faunal synopsis is preceded by an introduction which treats of the
distribution of the species in the region in general, and in the different
botanical zones of the country. Then follows a bibliography of the orni-
thological literature relating to Lapland, apparently very full, sufficient-
ly detailed, and embracing 113 separate titles. This large material is
admirably handled when treating each individual species, which is pre-
ceded by a complete synonymy ofall the published records of its occur-
rence within the region. It is only to be regretted that he should have
paid any attention at all (cf. p. 210 in regard to Falco candicans) to Rev.
Bowden’s miserable ‘The Naturalist in Norway,’ for a worse fraud and
humbug, as faras the ornithology at least is concerned, has never been
published.
In the synopsis the author follows Dresser’s arrangement and nomen-
clature; a course to be specially commended.
Altogether Mr. Pleske’s book makes a most welcome addition to orni-
thological literature, and we most heartily congratulate him upon its
completion.—L. S.
W. E. Brooks on the Genus Acanthis.—Mr. Brooks, the well-known
Indian Ornithologist, now living in Milton, Ontario, has recently contrib-
uted to ‘The Ibis’ two papers* on the Redpolls, especially the American
species. The final result to which Mr. Brooks has: arrived, he gives as
follows: ‘‘We have, then, five very well-marked species of Acanthis, viz.
A. hornemanni, A. exilipes, A. rostrata, A. linaria,and A. rufescens; also
one doubtful bird, A. démarda holball.” Of this latter he says: ‘‘To me it
is not a thoroughly satisfactory species, like the others, but at present its
long bill is not easily accounted for. I am not partial to the trinomial
system, but for convenience’ sake this bird might stand as Acanthis linaria
holbelli, It is a variation not yet thoroughly worked out.” The present
reviewer, who, on an earlier page of this number of ‘The Auk,’ has attempt-
ed to put this form on a satisfactory footing, feels quite satisfied with this
admission of Mr. Brooks, who, it must be remembered, is an opponent of
the theory of evolution, and to whom a form must be a ‘full’ species or
nothing. On the other hand it is very gratifying to find one’s views in
regard to so difficult a group as the Redpolls shared and sustained by an
ornithologist of so great power of discrimination as Mr. Brooks, whose
statements the present writer is glad to indorse in most cases. The dif-
ferences of opinion between Mr. Brooks and myself relate directly to the
question of ‘species or subspecies,’ or perhaps ‘binomials or trinomials,’
differences which, in fact, are quite unessential.—L. S.
Stejneger on Japanese Woodpeckers.—The first of a series of papers
on Japanese birds, published in the ‘Proceedings’ of the United States
* Stray Ornithological Notes. Ibis, 1885, pp: 380-389; the portion relating to
Acanthis on pp. 381-385. Additional Notes on the Genus Acanthis, Ibis, 1886, pp.
359-364,
64 Recent Literature. [ January
National Museum, treats of the Woodpeckers,* of which ten species are
recognized, and also one subspecies, the latter and two of the species being
described as new. Questions of synonymy are treated in detail. and the
references to previous writers on the species appear to be given with ful-
ness. The paper is accompanied by a colored plate.
As Dr. Stejneger points out in his introductory remarks, the ornithol-
ogy of Japan offers an inviting field, in which very little discriminating
work has yet been done. ‘‘Formerly,” says Dr. Stejneger, ‘‘it was suffi-
cient to know that a bird was from ‘Japan.’ If the description of a
Japanese species was found to fit a Japanese specimen approximately, the
latter was identified as that species without further comparison. If the
original specimen was described from Nagasaki, and the second one, be-
lieved to be the same, came from North Yesso, the habitat of the species
was given as embracing the whole of Japan.” Our knowledge of Japanese
ornithology is at present only fragmentary, large portions of this great
country being as yet almost unexplored, while some of it ‘‘is a complete
terra incognita, ornithologically speaking.” ‘‘American ornithologists,”
Dr. Stejneger well observes, ‘‘will not wonder at hearing that species apt to
break up into local forms have done so ina group of islands which in ex-
tent corresponds to the coast from the Gulf of California to Vancouver
Island, or from the southern extremity of Florida to Nova Scotia, with a
variation of climate fully as great as that of the two last mentioned locali-
ties: with high mountain ranges, and studded with volcanoes eight thou-
sand to twelve thousand feet high; with a vegetation . . . . characterized in
the south by the bamboo, the rice, the mulberry tree, and the tea-plant,
while in the north the firs form extensive forests, and with ‘a temperature
ranging from the almost Siberian winters of Yesso, to the tropical heats
of Kiu-Shin,’ it would indeed be an extraordinary phenomenon, and quite
reverse to what takes place in other countries of similarly varying condi-
tions, were the birds of Japan uniform all through that empire.”
The present paper is announced as the first of a series of ‘‘preliminary
reviews of some of the most perplexing groups in order to solicit speci-
mens and advice from fellow ornithologists, and to induce those who have
the opportunity to attempt the solution of some of the questions, if possi-
ble, in the field.” As already stated (Auk, III, p. 495), the author has the
‘intention to write a comprehensive and reliable guide to Japanese orni-
thology, with,ample descriptions of all the known forms, from original
Japanese specimens,” and he appeals for aid in the way of material for
carrying out his purpose.—J. A. A.
Stejneger on the British Marsh-Tit.—Dr. Stejneger has separatedt the
British Marsh-Tit, under the name Parus palustris dresserz, from the
European form, from which it differs in being darker in color, with a shorter
* Review of Japanese Birds. By Leonhard Stejneger. 1. The Woodpeckers.
Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., Vol. VIII, pp. 99-124, pl. ii. Published Sept., 1886.
+ The British Marsh-Tit. By Leonhard Stejneger. Proc, U.S. Nat, Mus., 1866, pp.
200, 201.
1887. ] Recent Literature. 65
tail, etc. Although British ornithologists have long been aware of these
differencés, Dr. Stejneger thinks it curious that they have not had ‘‘the
courage to describe this [ British] bird under a distinctive name, not even
those who recognize Parus britannicus as a distinct species.”—J. A. A.
Stejneger on a ‘Lost Species’ of Murrelet.—According to Dr. Stejneger,*
Pallas’s Cepphus ferdix must be removed from the list of synonyms and
rank as a good species, which ‘‘takes the place of B. marmoratus in Asiatic
waters,” the latter being apparently confined to the American side. A
Kamtschatkan specimen (@ ad., Aug. 27, 1884) of B. ferd7x is described
in detail and figured, and the synonymy and distinguishing characters
of this species, L. brevirostris, and B. marmoratus are presented at
length.—J. A. A.
Ferrari-Perez on the Birds of Mexico.—In 1877 the Geographical and
Exploring Commission of the Republic of Mexico was established by an
act of Congress, and became finally organized in 1878. In 1879 Mr. Fer-
nando Ferrari-Perez was appointed to the scientific corps of the general
staff as Naturalist of the Commission. During the years that have since
elapsed considerable collections have been brought together in different
departments of natural history, ‘Catalogues’ of which are to appear in the
‘Proceedings’ of the U. S. National Museum. The first instalment of
these has now appearedf; it includes Mammals, Birds, Reptiles, and Batra-
chians, the report on the birds occupying 52 pages, and embracing 265
species. The annotations generally include merely citations of the works
where the species were first described, or in which the nomenclature
adopted was established, the vernacular names, and list of the specimens,
with date and locality of capture. The specimens have been determined
by aid of the collections at the U. S. National Museum, and assistance by
Mr. Ridgway and Dr. Stejneger in their identification is also acknowledged.
Besides this, there are remarks by Mr. Ridgway on many of the more in-
teresting species, duly bracketed and signed ‘‘R. R.,” these annotations,
of course, adding greatly to the value of the ‘Catalogue.’ The new species,
which were briefly diagnosed by Mr. Ridgway ina recent number of the
‘Auk’ (III, p. 331), are here described at length.
The paper forms not only an important contribution to our knowledge
of Mexican ornithology, but also throws much light upon the southward
range of many North American species. Sprague’s Lark (Axzthus sprague?z)
is reported from Puebla, a point 1000 miles further south than any previous
mecord.——|- Az A.
* On Brachyramphus perdix (Pall.) and its nearest Allies. By Leonhard Stejneger.
Zeitschr. f. ges. Orn., 1866, pp. 20-219, pl. vii. s
+ Catalogue of Animals collected by the Geographical and Exploring Commission
of the Republic of Mexico. By Fernando Ferrari-Perez, Chief of the Natural History
Section. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 125-199. Published Sept. 1886. (Birds,
PPp- 130-182.)
66 Recent Literature. [ January
Ridgway on a Melanistic Phase of the Broad-winged Hawk.— Mr.
Ridgway has recently described* ‘‘the melanistic plumage of Buteo latzs-
simus,” as exhibited in a specimen taken at Baxter, Iowa, by Mr. J. W.
Preston. This is the only specimen thus far seen by Mr. Ridgway, but
Mr. Preston reports having seen two others, one of which was nearly
secured.— J. A. A.
Ridgway on the Species of the Genus Empidonax.—In the last number
of ‘The Ibis’ (Oct., 1886), Mr. Ridgway has three papers on the Emprdo-
naces. ‘The firstt describes a new species (Empzdonax salvint) from Gua-
temala; the secondt{ treats of the distinctness of 2. dbrunneus Ridgw. trom
Empidochanes furcatus (Max.), the two species being found to be not only
specifically but generically different. although some authorities have con-
sidered them identical. The third§ gives an elaborate synopsis of the
species of the genus Amfédonax, of which 15 species and 3 subspecies are
recognized; and also diagnoses of the genera Me/rephanes and Empr-
dochanes.—]. A. A :
Cory on Birds from several little-known Islands of the West Indies.-—
Mr. Cory having recently received collections of birds from several of the
lesser known West Indian islands has given,|| in the last number of ‘The
Ibis,’ nominal lists of the material obtained, as follows: Barbadoes, 12
species; St. Vincent, 23 species; Marie Galante, 13 species; La Desirade,
11 species; Grand Terre, 15 species; also 10 species from Santa Lucia —
AoA
Minor Ornithological Publications.—The ‘Forest and Stream,’ Vols.
XXIV and XXV, 1885, contains the following notes and papers (Nos.
1069-1126) :—
1069. The Birds of Michigan. By Dr. Morris Gibbs. Forest and
Stream, Vol. XXIV, Jan. 29, 1885, pp. 5,6; Feb. 5, pp. 26, 27; Feb. 12,
pp: 44, 45; Feb. 19, p. 65; Feb. 26, p. ne Mch. 5, p. 104; Mch. 12, pp.
ae 125; Mch. 19, p.144; Apr. 2, p. 184; Apr. ea p.. 224.5 Apr: 20; pp:
67, 268; May 7, oe 288, 289; May 14, p. 307; May 28, p. 347; June 11,
p- 387; June 25, p. 427; Vol. XV, July 30, pp. 4,53; Nov. 12, p. 304; Dec.
3, p. 365.—An run annotated list, containing copious notes on
the eta of many of the species mentioned.
1070. Golden-winged Sita Wintering in Maine. By Everett
Smith. Wozd...Peb. 5, p- 27
* Description of a ae Specimen of Buteo latissimus (Wils.). By Robert
Ridgway. Proc, U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 248, 249. Published Oct. 1886.
+ Description of a new Species of the Genus Empidonax from Gautemala. Ibis,
1886, pp. 459, 460.
+ On Empidochanes furcatus (Max.) and Empidonax brunneus Ridgw. /bid., pp. 360,
461.
§ On the Species of the Genus Empidonax. Jbid., pp. 461-468.
|| On a Collection of Birds from several little-known Islands of the West Indies.
By Charles B. Cory. /d7d., 1886, pp. 471-475.
|
ee eT
may al
;
'
1857. ] Recent Literature. 67
loth tre. bards uf, Lone Island. By J. .B-.B. Lbid:, Feb. 12; p.
46.—Notice of J. P. Giraud’s well-known work, with extracts from it.
1072. How to Identify Birds. By Everett Smith. J/bddd., Feb. 12, p.
44.—The writer repeats his offer to identify specimens, and gives directions
how to send them in the flesh.
1073. The Song of the White-throated Sparrow. By Dr. M. L. Leach.
Lez. Heb: 19; Pp. 65.
1074. Virginia Rail Wintering on Long Island. By Paul Geipel, Jr.
Lbid., Mch. 5, p. 105.
1075. Winter Range of the Robin. By W. W. Cooke. J/brd., Mch-
Tie Det L 215s
1076. Southern New York Winter Birds. By W.T. E. Jbid., Mch.
I2, pp. 125, 126.—Notes on 23 species.
1077. Snow Buntings [at Perth Amboy, N. F.|. By J. L. K. TLbrd.,
Mch. 12, p. 126.—The first seen in several vears.
Toys. Acadian Owl. By O..W. RR. Léid., Mch. 19, p. 145-
1079. A Screech Owl Attacks a Plymouth Rock Rooster. By S. L.
Davison. J/dbid., Mch. 19, p. 145.
1080. Migratory Quail. By W. Hapgood. Jbéd., Mch. 26, p. 166.—
The recent attempt to stock the country with these birds declared to bea
failure. :
1081. White Egrets tn Orleans County, N. Y. By S. L. Davison.
Tbid., April 9, p. 204.—Three killed in Carlton, ‘‘on Thanksgiving Day,
1883.”
1082. Where Did It Come From? By Robert Ridgway. Jdzd., Apr.
g. p. 204.—Records the killing of a Prairie Chicken (Cupédonia cupido)
on the Virginia side of the Potomac near Washington, March 17, 1885.
(See below, No. 1086.)
Toss. Masplaced. Conjdence, By KM. Park, Jr. Jé¢d., “Apr. 16; ‘p:
225.—A Great Horned Owl eats a Screech Owl confined with it in the
same cage.
1084. The Winter and Spring Birds at St. Louis, Mo. By W.W.
Cooke, based.on notes by Otto Widmann. J/éz¢d., Apr. 23, p. 248.
1085. Maine Birds. By Everett Smith. /d¢d., p. 248.--Note on Turdus
mustelinus.
1086. The Washington Pratrie Chickex. By Homo. J/é¢d.. Apr. 23,
p- 248.—May have been the descendant of birds liberated at Snow Hill,
Md., some years before. (See above, No. 1082.)
1087. Zhe Woodcock’s Song. By J.H.D. Jb¢d.,; Apr. 30, p. 268.
1088. Birds in Queer Places. By X. Y.Z. Ibid., May 7, p. 288.—
Relates mainly to various species of Grallz and Rails.
1089. Fox Sparrows in Spring Migration. By J. L. Davison. Jbid.,
May 7, p. 289.
1090. White Pelican on Long Island. Editorial. Jb¢d., May 21, p.
328.—One killed at Roslyn, L. I., May 11, 1885.
togi. Zhe Lessonofa Market. By Geo. B. Sennett. J/b¢d., June 4, pp.
366, 367.—On the small birds, killed as game, in the market of Norfolk, Va.
68 Recent Literature. [ January
1092. Arizona Bird Notes. By Herbert Brown. Jézd., June 4, p.
367.—Notes on the nesting of Palmer’s and Bendire’s Thrashers, and several
species of Owls.
1093. The Jvory-billed Woodpecker in Florida. By S. C. Clarke.
Tbid., June 4, p. 367.
1094. The Big [Ivory-billed | Woodpeckers. By Geo. A. Boardman
and J. M.H. Jb¢d., June 11, p. 388.
1095. The Big [Ivory-billed| Woodpecker [in Arkansas}. By Yell.
Ibid., June 18, p. 407.
1096. The Great [TIvory-billed| Woodpeckers [tn Florida). By
NAV 1D acer \fbhol erie jay eel
1097. A ‘‘Brood” of [Golden-winged | Woodpeckers. Editorial.
Tbid., June 25, p. 427-—‘‘ Nineteen young ones, alive and in good condi-
tion,” in one nest.
1098. The Nest and Eggs of Swainson’s Warbler. (Helinaia swain-
sont.) By William Brewster. Jé7d., July 9, p. 468.— Detailed account
of the breeding of this rare species, with descriptions of nests and eggs,
based on notes and specimens received from Mr. Arthur T. Wayne.
1099. fare Florida Birds. By Red-Wing. Jbid., July 16, p. 487.—
Relates to Ivory-billed Woodpeckers and Parakeets.
1100. Might Hawks Nesting [on Roofs of Buildings|. By Dr. E.
Sterling. Jdbzd., Vol. XXV. July 30, 1882, p. 4.
trot. The English Sparrow. Verdict of the American Ornithologists
Onion. Tbid., July 6. pp. 24, 25.—Report of the Committee on the Eng-
lish Sparrow.
1102. Quail in Confinement. By W. and Jno. H. Osborne. Jézd.,
Aug. 6, p. 25:
1103. Water Birds of Nova Scotia. By J. Matthew Jones. Jdzd.,
Aug. 13, pp. 43, 44; Aug. 27, p. 83; Sept. 10, p. 123.—An annotated list of
to5 species. Includes several obvious malidentifications. The account
given of ‘‘ Wiison’s Petrel” doubtless relates to Leach’s Petrel, to which
latter there is no reference. The list includes the ‘‘Crested Grebe (P.
cristatus)”’!
1104. The Pileated Woodpecker. By Dr. E. Sterling. Jdzd., Aug.
Teg] OF ge ee
1105. Ornithological Inqutries. By Dr. C. Hart Merriam. Jddd.,
Aug. 20, p. 63.-—Circular issued by the Department of Economic Orni-
thology, Dr. Merriam, Ornithological Agent.
1106. Weaponsin Game. By Dr.E. Sterling. Jbzd., Aug. 29, p. 84.—
A Wild Swan, with an Eskimo arrow through the right wing, killed near
Cleveland, O., on its northward migration. Figure of the bird, and of the
wing-bones and the arrow. (See further note on the same, in issue of
Dec. 10, p. 384.) Under this title are also two notes on encysted bullets
found in Ducks and Geese, respectively by D. H. MacGowan and C. T.
Richardson. :
1107. Foreign Game Birds tn America. By X. Tbid., Sept. 3, pp.
103, 104.—An important historical paper on the subject.
1887.] Recent Literature. 69
1108. The Colored Patch in the Crown of the Kingbird. By C. Hart
Merriam, M.D. Jé/d., Sept 14, p. 144.
1109. How Many Nests? By A. H.G. (of Scarborough,N. Y.). /é/d.,
Sept. 24, pp. 163, 164.—On the number of broods per year, etc., of some
of our common birds. (See also below, No. 1112.)
1110. Zhe Colored Patch in the Crown of the Kingbird. By J. L.
Davison. Jbzd., Sept. 24, p. 164.
1rt1.. Weld Fowl tn Domestication. By Junius P. Leach. /é/d., Oct.
I, pp. 183, 184.
1112. How Many Nests? By A. H.G. Jbzd., Oct. 1, p. 184.
1113. The Colored Crown of the Kingbird. By J.G.R[ich]. /d¢d.,
Octpiep tose
1114. The Crown of the Kingbird. By C. W. Beckham. Jd/d., Oct.
8, p- 204.
1115. Kiéngbirds and Bees. By G. L. Barnes. J/b¢d., Oct. 8, p. 205.
1116. Purple Grackle Near Philadelphia. By Ellwood C. Erdis.
ibid. OCtsos ps 2C5-
1117. Destructive Electric Light Towers. By G. Noble. Jé/d., Nov.
12, p. 305.— During a rainy night in October, 105 birds were picked up
under one light tower in Savannah, Ga.
1118. Aunual Meeting of the A. O. U. Editorial. Jbéd., Nov. 26, p.
342.—Short account of the third annual meeting, held in New York City,
Nov. 17 and 18, 1885.
1119. Anser Hutchinst. By Dr. E. Sterling. /é¢d., Dec. 10, p. 384.—
Specimens found in the market of Cleveland, O.
1120. Eider Duck in Michigan. By R. B. Lawrence. Jécéd.. Dec. 10
p- 384.—A female shot at Munroe, on Lake Erie, Nov. 12, 1885.
Ti2r. Lhe A. O. U. Check List. Editorial. 7bid., Dec. 24, p. 429.—
Notice of the work.
1122. Protection of North American Birds. Editorial. /6¢d., Dec. 24,
p- 429.— Notice of the organization of the A. O. U. Committee on this
subject, in New York City, on Dec. 12, 1885.
1123. Arizona Quail Notes. By Herbert Brown. J/bd¢d., Dec. 31. p.
445.—Relates chiefly to Colinus ridgway?, and is an important contribu-
tion to the history of this species.
1124. The Batley Collection of Egys. Editorial. /b/d., Dec. 31, p.
446.—Its sale and transference to the American Museum of Natural Ilis-
tory in New York City.
2G ‘A Swan in Massachusetts. By T. Jbed., Jan. 7, 1886, p. 466.—
’
Record of a specimen shot at Middleboro, about Dec. 27, 1885. ‘The name
of the species is not given.
1126. Arizona Quail. By Robert Ridgway. J/drd.. Jan. 14, p. 484.—
An important paper, in reply to that of Mr. Brown. (See above, No.
1123.)
Publications Received.— Cordeaux, John, and others. Report of the
Committee on the Migration of Birds at Lighthouses and Light-vessels,
for 1885 (abstract). John Cordeaux, secretary.
70 Recent Literature. [January
Dubois, Alph. Liste des Oiseaux recueillis par M. le Capitaine Em.
Storms dans la région du Lac Tanganyka (1882-84). (Bull. du Mus. roy.
d’Hist. Nat. de Belgique, IV, 1866, pp. 147-150.)
Dury, Charles. Catalogue of Birds, Animals, Fishes, etc., in the
Museum of the Cuvier Club, Cincinnati, O. 8vo., pp. 32, 1886.
Dury, Charles, Wm. Hubbeli Fisher, R. H. Warden, F. W. Langdon,
and Jos. F. James. Papers on the Destruction of Native Birds, read be-
fore the Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist. ete. (Journ. Cincinnati Soc. Nat.
Hist., IX, 1866.)
Dutcher, William. Bird Notes from Long Island. (Auk, III, Oct.,
1886. )
Finsch, Otto. Ueber Vogel der Siidsee. Wien, 1884, 8vo., pp. 56.
Hartlaub, G. Description de trois nouvelles espéces d’Oiseaux rap-
portées des environs du Lac Tanganyka (Afrique Centrale) par M. le
Capitaine Em. Storms. (Bull du Mus. roy. d’Hist. Nat. de Belgique, IV,
1886, pp. 143-146, pll. iii. iv.)
Lucas, F. A. The Affinities of Chetura. (Auk, III, Oct., 1886.)
Rhoads, S. N. Crow Roosts and Roosting Crows. (Am. Nat., 1886,
pp. 691-701. 777-787.)
Richenow, Ant. Bericht iiber die Listungen in der Naturgeschicte der
Vogel wahrend des Jahres 1884. (Arch. f. Naturg. LI, ii, Heft 2.)
Shufeldt, R. W. (1) On Injuries of the Beaks in Birds, and the method
of repair. (Journ. Comp. Med & Surg., Oct. 1886.) (2) Osteological
Notes upon the Young of Geococcyx californianus. (Journ. Anat. &
Phys., XXI, 1886, pp. ror, 102.) (3) On An Old Portrait of Audubon,
Painted by Himself, etc. (Auk, III, Oct., 1886.)
Stejneger, L. (1) On Brachyramphus perdix (Pall.) and its nearest
allies. (Zeitsch. f. ges. Orn. 1886, pp. 210-219, pl. vii.) (2) Review of
Japanese Birds. I, The Woodpeckers. (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp.
gg-124. pl. il.)
Stolzmann, Jean. Quelques remarques sur le Dimorphisme Sexuel.
(Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., 1885, pp. 421-432.)
Tschusi zu Schmidhoffen, Vict. Ritter v. Beitrige zur Geschichte der
Ornithologie in Oesterreich-Ungarn. (Mitth. des Orn. Ver. in Wien,
1886. )
Tschusi zu Schmidhoffen, V. Ritter v., und K. v. Dalla-Torre. Zweiter
Jahresbericht (1883) des Comité’s fiir ornithologische Beobachtungssta-
tionen in Oesterreich-Ungarn. (Ornis, 1885.)
American Field, XX VI, Nos. 13-26, 1886.
American Naturalist, XX, Oct.-Dec., 1886.
American Journal of Science, XXXII, Oct.-Dec., 1886.
Anzeiger, Zoologischer, Nos. 233-239, 1886.
Bulletin Essex Institute, XVIII, Nos. 1-6, 1886.
Forest and Stream, XXVII. Nos. g-22, 1886.
Golden State Scientist. I, No. 1, Oct., 1886.
Hoosier Naturalist, II, No. 3, Oct., 1886.
_ Journal Cincinnati Soc, Nat. Hist., IX, No. 3, Oct. 1886,
:
:
;
r]
:
:
?
3
ea
———e
1887.] General Notes. Fil
Milwaukee Naturalist. I, No. 9, Sept., 1886.
Museum Bulletin, 1, Nos. 5, 6. Sept., Oct., 1886.
Naturalist, The, A Month. Journ. Nat. Hist. for the North of England,
Nos. 135-137, Oct.-Dec., 1886.
Naturalist’s Companion, II, No. 2, Sept., 1886.
Ornithologist and Odlogist, XI, Nos. 9-10. Sept.-Nov., 1886.
Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, pt. 2, 1886.
Proceedings U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 161-288.
Random Notes on Nat. Hist. III, Nos. 9-11, 1886.
Smihtsonian Report, 1884, pt. Il.
Zoologist. X, Nos. 118-120, Oct.-Dec., 1886.
GENERAL NOTES.
Occurrence of Cory’s Shearwater ( Pujfinus borealis) and Several Species
of Jaegers in Large Numbers in the Vicinity of Gayhead, Mass., during
the Autumn of 1886.—In the early part of the summer of 1886, both mack-
erel and bluefish were very scarce near the coast of the Middle States,
and it was ascertained that they were busily engaged in feeding on a small
white fish, three or four inches long, occurring in immense numbers, 150
to 200 miles off the coast. This fish proves to be young sea_ herring
(Clupea vulgaris). Towards the end of September this herring came in-
shore in large numbers, from Point Judith to Buzzard’s Bay and Vineyard
Sound, where they remained until the end of October, and perhaps still
later. They were accompanied by mackerel of unusually large size and
fatness, which furnished for many weeks an ample supply to fishing crafts
of various kinds, and they were captured, for the most part, with the hook
and line.
With the herring came also enormous numbers of Puffimus and Ster-
corartus, the former proving to be almost exclusivly the Pufinus borealis
Cory, with a few Puffinus stricklandz. None of the P. major were
seen.
The Stercorarius consisted principally of S. parasiticus and S. pom-
arinus; these in every imaginable stage of coloration: some being entirely
dusky and others in various grades of immaturity; very few, if any
specimens in full plumage being seen.
The Shearwaters occurred in flocks of perhaps from fifty to two or three
hundred, the bunches being generally found quietly resting on the water
and feeding, while swimming, upon the herrings that were so abundant
in the vicinity. They were very tame, but approach to them could be best
made by a steam launch, which would almost run over them before they
would start to fly. A dozen birds were killed by the discharge of two guns
from alaunch. About a hundred specimens were secured, and thousands
could easily have been killed if necessary.
72 General Notes. { January
When last heard from, towards the beginning of November, the birds
were still with the herrings, and were found very abundantly off Gay
Head, Menemsha Bight, Cuttyhunk, and elsewhere, both in Vineyard
Sound and Buzzard’s Bay.
The Jaegers were shyer, and were generally killed singly as they flew
past. They did not seem to associate closely with the Shearwaters.—
S. F. Batrp. Washington, D. C.
Pheenicopterus ruber asa South Carolina Bird.—In ‘ The Auk’ for July,
1886, Mr. Loomis gave a short account of the capture of this species near
Georgetown. Aslam able to give a full account of its capture, I trust that
the following will prove acceptable. Learning from my friend Dr. G. E.
Manigault, that W. St. Julien Mazyck, Esq., captured the bird, I wrote to
him fora full account of its capture. Mr. Mazyck very kindly wrote me,
under date of November 22, as follows :—*‘ The fall of the year 1876 was
stormy, with much rain. Somewhere between the toth and 16th of Sep-
tember there was a gale of wind. A day or so after the gale, Mr. B. H.
Ward observed a large, strange bird on De Bardien Island, which he deter-
mined to watch and make an effort to capture. Inadvertently mention-
ing what he had seen, one of his neighbors the next day kilied the bird,
and brought it to Pawley Island, when I identified it as the Flamingo.
“That nigit, several hours after it was killed, I skinned such parts as I
judged would be acceptable to Dr. Manigault. The legs and other long
bones were badly shattered by the turkey shot, and with no experience I
made a poor job of the bird. The heat and moisture of the weather soft-
ened it so much, Dr. Manigault wrote, that he could do nothing with it.
He, however, identified it as a young male.
‘©The bird was evidently lost in the storm and driven to this shore,
where he remained four or five days before being killed..—ArtuHur T.
Wayne, Charleston, S. C.
Occurrence of the Florida Gallinule at Springfield, Mass.—A Florida
Gallinule (Gallénula galeata) was taken October 1, 1884, at a point on the
Connecticut River about five miles below Springfield. The bird was first
noticed in the water close to the bank, in the act of diving. J immediately
went to the spot with a dog, who dashed in where the bird disappeared,
when it immediately came to the surface and instantly took to wing and
was shot. A companion then informed me that it was similar to a bird
that he had recently taken. Early in September, 1886, I was told thata
strange bird, ‘‘ like a very large Rail,” had been seen in the reeds in a set-
back, near the mouth of the Agawam River, which enters into the Con-
necticut directly opposite this city. On the 14th of September, upon going
to this place, I at once succeeded in getting this bird up, but in shooting
missed it. It alighted about a hundred yards up the set-back, where, after
some search, it arose from some tall grass within a few feet of where i
stood and was killed.
Four days later (September 18th), at very néarly the same place where
~
.
:
!
A
a
1887. ] General Notes. 73
the first mentioned Gallinule was shot in 1884, the dogs drove out from the
reeds another, which was shot; and on the same day, a little farther down
the river, and about a mile north of the Connecticut State line, I saw what
at first seemed to be a Grebe swimming rapidly out into the river; upon
pursuing it with a boat it arose, flying slowly and near the water, and was
also killed. This made the fourth time I had been present at the capture
of a Florida Gallinule in this vicinity within two years. I also think I
have seen birds of this kind on other occasions when they have not been
taken, and have very little doubt but that my companion was correct in
his statement in 1884, that he had shot one, although there is a possibility
he had mistaken a Coot fora Gallinule. They very closely resemble each
other in every respect, except the feet. Atall other places where these
birds were first found, the bottom was very soft and there was a rank
growth of wild rice, upon the seeds of which plant the birds were feeding.
—Rosert O. Morris, Springfield, Mass.
Wilson’s Phalarope (Sfegunopus tricolor) in Rhode Island.— On Sep-
tember 13, 1886, one of these Phalaropes, in immature plumage, was
brought to me by J. Glynn, Jr., who had noticed it among some birds shot
by one of the local sportsmen, and seeing that it belonged to an uncom-
mon species had obtained it from him. I understand that when shot it
was in company with two ‘Creakers’ (Zrimga maculata). This is the
second record of the bird’s occurrence in this State.—WILLIAM C. RIVEs,
Jr., M. D., Mewfort, FP. /.
Occurrence of Phalaropus lobatus at Syracuse, N. Y.—September 3,
1886, an adult male Northern Phalarope was shown to me by Mr. Charles
Noxon of this city, who procured it September 2 on Onondaga Lake, on
the outskirts of Syracuse.
The bird, in company with another (female), which was also secured,
was discovered swimming gracefully about in the middle of the lake, and
both were so tame as to be shot without trouble. Two days after (Septem-
ber 4) another specimen, a male, was shot in the same locality by Mr.
E. M. Hasbrouk; on September 25, following, another was seen, but not
procured. Previous to this the Northern Phalarope has been recorded
but once in this County.—Morris M. GREEN, Syracuse, N. Y.
A Fern-eating Woodcock.—One of the most singular departures of
birds from their ordinary food-habits that I have ever observed is the fol-
lowing: In examining the digestive organs of more than one hundred
Woodcocks, I think I have never found in them anything but the common
earth-worm, either entire or in various stages of digestion, excepting in
one or two instances, a leech (//¢rudo medicinalis).
The Woodcock in question was brought to me to be mounted by Mr.
W. C. Alvord, of Washington, D. C., who shot it while Woodcock shoot-
ing at Martha’s Vineyard. This bird was one of several killed on the 17th
of October, 1885. When skinning it my attention was called to its very
74 Fecent Literature. { January
singularly distended crop. Upon making a cut into the membrane with
a pair of scissors, out rolled, or rather jumped, the contents, which being
released from confinement increased to three times its former size. At
the same moment I was astonished to observe the character of the con-
tents, which proved to be leaves of the common fern (Plerds aguilina),
rolled up in so curious a manner, and in such quantity, as to plainly in-
dicate that it was the result of a deliberate meal, and not an accident.
The crop was so full as to be incapable of holding any additional
material. No other substance was mixed with the leaves, the entire wad
or ball being free from dirt of any character. Every leaflet of the fronds was
intact, and after being soaked in warm water and spread out side by side
they covered a space twelve inches square. The stomach and intestines
appeared to contain parts of partly digested leaves, but nothing else,
though this was not carefully determined.
A ‘Fern-eating Woodcock’ is a novelty in my experience. Drs. Mer-
riam and Fisher have desired me to send this record for publication to
‘The Auk.’ This is one of the most singular instances noted, not ex-
cepting even the record of the presence of an entire Song Sparrow in the
crop of a Chuck-wills-widow.
It may be mentioned that the locality where this Woodcock was shot
was an open marsh, with bushes here and there, while springs and small
streams afforded in abundance the usual food of this very fastidious bird.
The specimen was in fine condition—a plump and fat old female.—
FREDERIC S. WEBSTER, Washington, D. C.
A Further Note on Colinus ridgwayi.—I have recently received a letter
from Mr. Herbert Brown, calling my attention to an error in my recent
paper on this species (Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., I, No. 7, 1886, pp. 273
and 275, footnotes), in which the pair of Quails referred to as seen by Mr.
Stephens are said to be the fragments sent to Mr. Ridgway and now in
the National Museum. It proves they were not these specimens, but a
‘‘fairly good pair,” which was later sent by Mr. Brown to Mr. Henshaw,
and through the latter’s kindness now before me. This adds two to the
list of specimens known to be extant, raising the number to 21. The male
presents the average characters shown by the series previously examined;
the female is darker than the average for that sex, being in fact much the
darkest of the series thus far seen, the bars, both the black and the
white ones, being much stronger both above and below, and the tones of
color much brighter and stronger throughout. It is thus an almost exact
counterpart of the more strongly colored females of Colznus graysoné.
This proves to be the pair of birds referred to by Mr. Brown in one of
his ‘Forest and Stream’ articles (Vol. XXV, No. 25, Jan. 14, 1886, p. 445),
as having been seen by Mr. F. Stephens, W. E. D. Scott, E. W. Nelson,
and H. W. Henshaw. Mr. Henshaw informs me that he had entirely for-
gotten having these birds in his possession until I spoke to him of them
after receiving Mr. Brown’s letter, as mentioned above. Had he recalled the
fact of his having them at the time he heard I was at work on a paper on
188>,] General Notes. ral
this species, he says he should have certainly sent them to me then for
examination.
Mr. Brown has also sent to me, since the publication of my paper, the
head and neck of an adult male, killed July 19, 1886, in the Barboquivari
Mountains. The specimen, when received by Mr. Brown, was too far
gone to make a good skin, but being remarkable for its whiteness he saved
the head, which is now before me. A broad white superciliary stripe
runs from the nostrils on each side of the head to the nape, meeting on
the forehead. There is a conspicuous white maxillary patch, and the an-
terior part of the throat is white, with more or less white mixed with the
black over the remainder of the throat. The superciliary stripes are as
broad and as well defined asin C. graysonz, and on the throat there is nearly
as much white as black. The specimen, therefore, very nearly agrees with
the form known as C. graysont—-much more nearly than any other pre-
viously examined, or than with typical C. r7dgway:—and goes far toward
bridging the slight gap between these two forms. This is particularly
interesting, from the fact that this specimen is not only from Arizona, but
from the same locality as the others obtained by Mr. Brown.
Mr. Brown writes to me that he will soon renew his investigation of the
habits of this species, in the hope of securing its nest and eggs. One of
his collectors found a nest last year, containing eight eggs, but his col-
lector delayed taking them, in the expectation that more would be laid;
but on visiting the nest again he found that the eggs had hatched, and the
prize was thus lost.—J. A. ALLEN, Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., New York City.
The Golden Eagle in Eastern Massachusetts.—Two Massachusetts
specimens of the Golden Eagle (Agucla chrysaétos) have recently come
into my possession. The first, a female, was killed in Paxton (Worcester
Co.), Oct. 22, 1883; the second, a male, in Lynnfield, Nov. 23, 1886.—
WILLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass.
The Black Gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus obsoletus) in Eastern Maine.—
Mr. F. B. Webster has just sold mea typical example (@ ) of this fine Fal-
con which came to him in the flesh from a gunner at Rockland, Maine.
It was received Noy. 26, 1866, and judging from appearances. had been
killed about a week or ten days previous to this date.—WILLIAM BRew-
STER, Cambridge, Mass.
A Singularly Marked Specimen of Sphyrapicus thyroideus.— A very
singularly marked adult male of this species was sometime since kindly
sent to me for examination by Mr. C. A. Allen, of Nicasio, California. It
was shot in Blue Cafion, California, Oct. 9, 1878, and another like it was
said to have been seenin the same locality. This specimen differs from the
ordinary adult male of this species in having a large patch of crimson-
scarlet on the crown, about half an inch broad, and commencing about
-15 of an inch from the base of the culmen; anteriorly, this red patch has
a quite regular transverse outline, but posteriorly the red feathers become
76 General Notes. { January
scattered so that on that portion the patch is broken and irregular... This
red crown-patch is very similar to that adorning the adult male of Cen-
turus uropygialis, but is rather larger, extends further forward on the
crown, and is more scarlet in color. On the throat, the usual red stripe
is extended posteriorly very nearly to the yellow of the abdomen; back of
its usual limits, however, the red becomes gradually duller, until it finally
changes toa dull brownish hue. This red throat-patch also gradually
widens posteriorly to near its extremity, being at the widest part more
than half an inch broad. In all other respects the plumage of the bird is
quite normal. The interscapulars are largely white centrally, each feather
having a conspicuous longitudinal, broad, white stripe, but these white
markings are almost entirely concealed when the feathers occupy their
natural position; sometimes these white markings are, however, observable
in specimens having the red of normal development. The belly is rather
pale for Californian examples of this species, which are usually much
brighter colored beneath than those from the interior. There is, how-
ever, much variation in this respect. The measurements are as follows:
wing, 5.50; tail 3.80; culmen, 1.05; tarsus, .85.—R. RipGway, Washing-
ton, D. C:
On an Addition to the Ornithology of South Carolina.—Toward the
close of the afternoon of Dec. 9, 1886, a small flock of over a dozen Black-
birds, accompanied by a straggling company of Meadowlarks, was noticed
on a barren field in the suburbs of Chester. At the distance, they appeared
to be Purple Grackles. Hoping to find an example of @veus among them,
I went in pursuit, but, as the ‘Larks’ were inctined to linger behind, I had
considerable difficulty in getting within shooting distance. After a time,
however, I succeeded in temporarily separating them, driving the Black-
birds into a tree. Three specimens were secured, but of a kind wholly
unexpected—not Bronzed, but Brewer’s Blackbirds (Scolecophagus cyano-
cephalus). On the following morning two additional examples were cap-
tured, making a total of three males and two females. That these birds
were waifs and strays, mere accidentals, seems improbable. Their num-
bers and condition (those taken were very fat), considered in connection
with the demonstrated tendency of certain species of the West to extend
their migrations to the South Atlantic States, appear to indicate that they
were irregular migrants, borne eastward on the cold wave which struck
Chester on the night of December 3, covering the ground for a week with
snow.
To what extent the list of South Carolinian birds is capable of expansion
can only be conjectured. The experiences of the past few years have
taught us to expect almost any migratory bird inhabiting the Mississippi
Valley. If we are ever to arrive at a ‘Complete Catalogue,’ if such a thing
be attainable, it will only be through persistent use of the gun, and by
careful and systematic examination of many specimens of every species
having a western sub-specific representative. —LEvERETT M. Loomis,
Chester, S. C.
;
i
—
1887. ] General Notes. fiers
Occurrence of Calcarius ornatus in Maine.— Early on the morning of
August 13, 1886, while sitting in a blind on the Little River marshes, near
Pine Point, Me., I noticed a small bird flying restlessly about overhead.
From its peculiar flight and notes I took it to be a Titlark. Rather surprised
to see one so early in the season, I watched it carefully, and, when it finally
alighted not far away, I went after it. My attempt to secure it was un-
successful, however, owing to my gun missing fire, and it flew off to the
other side of the river, where I lost sight of it. Several hours later, while
returning by the same place, I saw what was presuinably the same bird,
flying about from one place to another. Finally I fired at it, as it rose
from the grass before me, and had the pleasure of seeing it fall. I must
confess that on: picking it up I was completely at a loss to know what it
was. I did not feel sure regarding it till several months later, when
looking over one day, in company with Mr. Chadbourne, the large series
ot Calcartus ornatus in the Agassiz Museum at Cambridge, we discovered
one specimen which matched my bird in every particular. Mr. Brewster,
to whom I showed it later, identified it as oruzafus without doubt. The
bird is of very small size, and, as far as plumage goes, lacks, with the
exception of the tail-markings, every sign of belonging to this species.
It is apparently a young male, though the sex could not positively be
determined.—JoserH L. GoopaLe, Cambridge, Mass.
Object of the Shrike in Impaling its Prey.—I see that in Coues’s ‘Key
to North American Birds’ it is said to be still a puzzle to know what the
Shrike intends by sticking insects and small animals on thorns. The
explanation seems easy enough to me, and I give it for what it is worth.
The Shrike, like many other birds and animals of prey, seems inélined
to kill as long as there is opportunity, regardless of being able to use.
The Shrike, not being fitted in claws or beak for tearing, as Hawks are,
I think fixes its prey on thorns for the purpose of giving ita greater pur-
chase in tearing it to pieces. I have been watching them often lately
along the line of the railroad where they make use of the barbs on the
wire fences for impaling the large grasshoppers they seem mostly to feed
on. I often see them catch three or four in succession, but I think they
rarely use more than one, and grasshoppers being so plentiful at this
season I do not think that Shrikes ever come back to them, though they
may do so in winter.—JAMES WuyTE, Houston, Texas.
Additional Occurrences of the Connecticut Warbler in Maine.—On
seeing Mr. Merrill’s note in the July number of ‘The Auk’(Vol. III, p. 413)
last summer, on the status of the Connecticut Warbler in Maine, I was
reminded of a bird which I had taken in September, 1885, at Saco, which
I had supposed to be of this species. At the time of reading thé note I
was away from Cambridge, and, being unwilling to send any communica-
tion regarding my bird until I had examined it again, was obliged to
wait until October. Before that time, however, I had the pleasure of
taking two more specimens at Saco. The first was taken September 8,
“8 General Notes. [ January
in a maple swamp, not more than twenty yards from where the, specimen
of the previous year was secured. The other was shot September 15,
in a dry blueberry heath, on a pine tree, where it seemed to be feeding.
To make certain in regard to their identity I have just shown the three
skins to Mr. Brewster, who pronounces them undoubted Ofororn?s agilis.
—JosrePpu L. GoopDALe, Cambridge, Mass.
The Brown Thrush laying in the Nest of the Wood Thrush. — As
the present season has proved to be prolific in birds laying large sets of
eggs, I was induced to look into a nest of a Wood Thrush, from which
the female was with difficulty driven off, when, in addition to her own
clutch of four eggs I was very much surprised to see two typical eggs of
the Brown Thrush, which, I believe, is the first record of the kind. The
nest was placed in a maple, about three feet from the ground, in a quite
thick ravine very seldom frequented; so this occurrence cannot be placed
to the pranks of some boy. Again, the Brown Thrush is not common in
this vicinity, and its nest is quite a rarity, so that any boy of ‘birds-eggs-
collecting proclivities’ would have been more apt to keep the eggs than
to place them in another nest, which might not have been the case had
the ‘species been a Robin, Catbird, or some common bird. Near the
spot where this nest was found a Brown Thrush was heard singing, but
all efforts to find its nest were fruitless. The eggs of the Wood Thrush
proved to have been incubated about seven days; those of the Brown
Thrush not over two or three days. This unique set was taken June 5,
1886, and is now in the collection of the American Museum of Natural
History, New York.—H. B. BAtLey, South Orange, N. Ff.
Capture of Three Rare Birds near Hartford, Conn. — Ardea egretta.
AMERICAN EGrRET.—A bird (sex unknown) of this species was shot in
this vicinity Aug. 14, 1883. Two or three more were reported seen near
here in the same month, but I can vouch for the authenticity of only the
one mentioned above.
Charadrius dominicus. AMERICAN GOLDEN PLover.—I have a young
male of this species in my collection which was shot Oct. 24, 1885, as it
was flushed from a stubble field in this locality. The bird was alone, and
in skinning it I found that it was in good condition.
Phalaropus lobatus. NoRTHERN PHALAROPE.—I shot a female about a
mile below Hartford, Sept. 27, 1886. It appeared quite tame and was flushed
from the water with considerable difficulty. The plumage was perfect
but on dissection it proved to be in very lean condition. — WILLARD E.
Treat, East Hartford, Conn.
Piranga rubriceps and Tringa fuscicollis in California. —I have just re-
ceived a specimen of Péranga rubriceps from Mr. W. G. Blunt, of San
Francisco, which he shot at Dos Pueblos, Santa Barbara Co., Cal., and
mounted at the time, which was about 1871, he thinks. The bird has
not since been out of his possession. It was alone when shot.
Mr. Blunt assures me that there is positively no doubt of the fact.
1877. ] Correspondence. 79
In looking at a case of his birds this specimen at once attracted my
attention as a strange looking Tanager, different from any I remembered
to have seen, and on inquiry I learned its history, as above given.
As far as I can learn this is a bird new to California, and also to the
United States. If soit seems worthy of record. (No. 2697, g, Coll. of W.
Blew)
In 1884 I took east with me a specimen of Zynga fuscicollis; it was so
named by some good authority, Mr. Ridgway I think. By the A. O. U.
Check List it appears that it has not been found in California. It was a
solitary individual, shot by myself on the marsh near Oakland, Cal. No.
1080, 9, Oct. 8, 1883. Iris dark brown, feet and legs yellow. Coll. of
W. E. B.— WaALrTER E. Bryant, Oakland, Cal.
CORRESPONDENCE.
[Correspondents are requested to write briefly and to the point. No attention will
be paid to anonymous communications.|
Scarcity of Adult Birds in Autumn.
To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK :—
Sirs: Between the first of September and the twenty-second of Novem-
ber of this vear I collected 367 bird skins; 258 during the month of
October in Colorado, and the remainder in Kentucky. Of this aggregate
of 367, 348 were birds of the year. The question at once presents itself,
whence this glaring discrepancy? Where were the adult birds? I made
no effort to secure young birds (in nine cases out of ten the young fall
bird is indistinguishable from the adults by external characters), but
‘took them as they came.’ It may be asked how I determined the birds
in question to be ‘birds of the year.’ For several years I have noted that
nearly all the birds shot by me in the fall had skulls that were more or
_less incompletely ossified, and in 1885 I began to systematically examine
the skulls and other skeletal parts with the view of determining the
relative age of the birds, assuming that those individuals exhibiting a
soft or incompletely ossified skull, must have been hatched during the
immediately preceding breeding season.
Of the nineteen adult birds collected between the dates above given,
eleven of them were species resident where collected.
Apparently the only legitimate inference from the aboye facts is, assum-
ing my method of determining the relative age of birds correct, that
the adults migrate as soon as they are relieved of the care of the young
birds, and that the latter form the great bulk of the autumnal migration
stream. Opposed to this theory we have the negative evidence that. ex-
80 Correspondence. [January
tremely few adult ‘transients’ are recorded as observed in July and
August. Are there not some members of the A. O. U. who can throw
light upon the subject?
Respectfully yours,
; CHARLES WICKLIFFE BECKHAM.
Bardstown, Ky., Nov. 23, 1886.
Classification of the Macrochires.
To THE Epirors or THE AUK :—
Sérs:—Once more I must ask your indulgence in the matter of a little
space, as I have a word or two to say in regard to Mr. Lucas’s paper on
‘The Affinities of Chetura’ which appeared in the last number of this
journal (Oct., 1886), and from the reading of which I find that I have on
my hands another ornithologist who takes exception to the further
separation of the Cypseli and Trochili, more'than is now generally agreed
to by the majority, perhaps, of systematists in their schemes of classifica-
tion,
It is not my intention on the present occasion either to add or subtract
anything to what I have already contributed to the morphology of the
Macrochires, for by so doing I would forestall the conclusions of my
further researches in this matter that I now have in hand.
Mr. Lucas says, *‘Nevertheless, until still more evidence to the contrary
is adduced, I will hold fast to Huxley’s union of Hummingbirds and Swifts”
(P- 444)-
Now at the present writing I have been over two years in a position
where I have not been able to avail myself of either the libraries or the
museums, and have at my command but a limited working field library ;
so that it is quite possible that Professor Huxley may have recently changed
his views in regard to the taxonomy of the Macrochires, and I not have
known of it. But, I do know that in 1867 he wrote the following sentences,
to wit: ‘‘In their cranial characters, the Swifts are far more closely allied
with the Swallows than with any of the Desmognathous birds, the Swift
presenting but a very slight modification of the true Passerine type ex-
‘hibited by the Swallow. No distinction can’ be based upon the propor-
tions of the regions of the fore limb; since in all the Swallows which I have
examined [H. pacifica, H. riparia, H. rustica, and H. urbica), the manus
and antibrachium respectively, greatly exceed the humerus in length,
though the excess is not so great as in Cyfselus” (P. Z. S., Apr. 1867, p.
456). And again in the same paper he says “‘The Cyfselid@ are very
‘closely related to the Swallows among the Coracomorphe” (p. 469).
Mark you, Professor Huxley here says ‘‘very closely related.” In other
words. at the time that this eminent biologist formulated his ‘Classification
of Birds’ in the memoir in question, he evidently believed that Swifts were
‘but profoundly modified Swallows. Believing this as he did, ] am the more
1887. ] Correspondence. S81
surprised that he, in the same paper, said, ‘‘This group [Cypselomorphe |
contains three very distinct families—the Tvochzlide, the Cyfselide,
and the Caprimulgide” (p. 469). Itis hard to say what Professor Huxley’s
views in the premises would be now. as I am inclined to think he has in
no way modified them in print since 1867, and that is quite a long time
ago.
For one, I do not place the reliance upon the structure of the bony
palate in birds as a taxonomic character that Huxley did then, and a number
of classifiers have done since. It rather dilutes its importance to find
such a bird as Capfrimulgus eurofpeus with its maxillo-palatines well
separated in the median line, while another Caprimulgine bird, as Chor-
detles acutipennis texensis, for example, has these processes meet each
other for a considerable distance in this locality, where they may even in
old individuals fuse together (compare Huxley’s figure of the former type
and mine of the latter).
Some of the most interesting parts of Mr. Lucas’s article are to be found
in the foot-notes. For instance, in one of these (p. 446) he says, ‘‘In Dr.
Shufeldt’s figures of Panyptila and Tuchycineta the maxillo-palatines are
imperfect.” From a reading of the article, 1am rather inclined to think
that Mr. Lucas, at the time he penned this opinion, had skeletons of neither
of these birds before him; indeed, I do not think there was a single alco-
holic of either of these forms in the Collection of the Smithsonian
Institution at the time, and there are just a few of these birds about me
here in New Mexico! At any rate, these two figures are exactly double
the size of life; are based upon careful comparisons of abundant material
of the kind in question; and are absolutely correct in every particular.
Still keeping clear of some dubious anatomical deductions in my critic’s
paper we find another foot-note at the bottom of page 447, wherein he says:
‘‘Among birds the characters afforded by the sternum are so important
that I must confess myselfa little surprised that Dr. Shufeldt should so
readily reject them.’ Let me say here, in explanation of this, that my
studies of the skeletons of the Auks shook my faith a little in the value
of the character of the xiphoidal extremity of the sternum, and the
‘notching’ it may assume.
The Smithsonian Institution has had in its hands for two years now, for
publication, an extensive work of mine, treating largely of the osteology
of American birds, and illustrated by over 400 figures. When this work
appears Mr. Lucas will find that I describe two sterna there, from two
individuals of the same sfeczes of Auk, wherein one is extensively notched
on either side of its posterior end, while the other is absolutely entire,
and no evidence of a notch there at all. In the same place I have en-
deavored to show how this may come about, but no more of it here, for
I hope the volume I have just referred to will be published, and then my
views on this question will be better understood. As it stands now the
work has proved too extensive for the slender means of the National
Museum to handle at one effort.
Of course, in recording what I have just done in the preceding para-
82 Notes and News. [ January
graph, I by no means wish it to be understood that I in any way under-
rate the significance of the ‘notching’ of the xiphoidal end of the sternum,
in the vast majority of the class Aves.
One is both surprised and refreshed at the information conveyed in the
last foot-note of Mr. Lucas’s paper (p. 451) ;—surprised from the fact that
the osteologist-in-chief of our great Government Museum at Washington
should be, up to the time of his writing the article he contributed to ‘The
Auk,’ ignorant of the opinions Dr: Parker has so ably presented us with in
his matchless ‘‘treatise on the Skull of 4&githognathous Birds”; and re-
freshed to think that that institution can lay claim to a mind among its
admirable staff of workers, in which it is evidently possible for opinions
to evolve, de vove, which compare so favorably with those held by living
masters in morphology.
Very respectfully,
R. W. SHUFELDT:
Fort Wingate, N. Mex., 16th November, 1886. ‘
|
NOTES AND NEWS.
Ar the recent meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union in
Washington. during the discussion of the subject of bird protection,
Mr. F. S. Webster spoke of the attitude of the members of the Union
toward taxidermists, which seemed, he thought,°one of enmity rather
than of friendship. Mr. Brewster, in replying, said he was glad the
matter had been brought up, as it was evident that there was a serious
misapprehension of this subject on the part of taxidermists. He stated
that honest taxidermists as a class were respected by ornithologists, who
looked upon them as efficient and indispensable allies, and that the preva-
lent impression to the contrary was the outgrowth of malicious remarks
by certain enemies of the Union. Mr. Brewster believed in encouraging
true taxidermy, and in granting collecting permits to all honest taxider-
mists. What ornithologists wished to prevent was the wholesale traffic
in birds for commercial purposes by’ men who had no claim to be
ranked as taxidermists, though they so styled themselves. It was only
the abuse of the privilege of collecting that ornithologists were striving
to prevent.
Mr. Webster replied that the reason taxidermists felt aggrieved was the
wording of the law proposed by the A. O. U. Committee on Bird Pro-
tection, which was such as to practically prohibit even legitimate taxi-
dermy. He would be glad to see the Union take a stand in the matter
that would remove the existing feeling of antagonism between ornitholo-
gists and taxidermists.
The Peesident being then called upon to express his views on the matter
in question, stated that the proposed law was not intended to cripple
tm
1897. | Notes and News. 83
legitimate taxidermy, but mainly and primarily to prevent destruction of
birds for millinery purposes. Conscientious, honest taxidermists, would
have no difficulty in obtaining permits to collect birds for scientific or
other legitimate purposes under the proposed law. It was certainly not
the intention of the committee to in any way impede or prohibit the
legitimate work of the taxidermist. He spoke in high praise of. their
services to ornithology. He was sure no feeling of antagonism on the
part of the Union toward taxidermists as a class existed, but only against
certain obnoxious persons, who had rendered themselves so by their
wholesale slaughter of birds for gain, and who were not taxidermists in
any true sense. He had found taxidermists, as a rule, to have too much
of the spirit of the naturalist to be willing to become caterers to the
milliner.
AT the meeting of the Ridgway Ornithological Club held August 12,
1886, the following papers were read: ‘Spring Notes from Cook and Lake
Counties, ILl., and Lake Co., Ind.,’ by Geo. L. Toppan; ‘The Future of
American Ornithology,’ by R. W. Shufeldt. A number of donations of bird
skins, and eggs, and of ornithological literature, fron: Resident and Cor-
responding members were announced. At the meeting held September 9,
1886, Mr. J. G. Parker, Jr., read a paper on the ‘Ornithology of Sauk and
Columbia Counties, Wis.,’ which he illustrated with skins of the rarer
species observed. At the meeting of October 14, 1886, Mr. H. K. Coale
read a paper by Mr. Robert Ridgway entitled, ‘List of the Birds found
breeding within the corporate limits of Mount Carmel, Ill.’ The subject
of publishing the proceedings of the Club was discussed and favorably
considered, and will be definitely decided at the next meeting.
Ata meeting of the California Academy of Sciences, held November
1, 1886, a paper was read by Mr. Walter Bryant on the ‘Ornithology of
Guadalupe Island,’ embodying the results of Mr. Bryant’s ornithological
work during several months spent at this interesting locality. The paper
will soon be published in the Society’s ‘Bulletin.’
Tue A. O. U. Committee on Bird Protection published its second
‘Bulletin’ on November 11, 1886, in ‘Forest and Stream.’ It was immedi-
ately issued separately as an eight-page pamphlet, uniform in size and
style with its ‘Bulletin No. 1.” The present ‘Bulletir’ is devoted to ‘Bird
Protection by Legislation,’ and is especially intended for distribution
among the legislators of the different States, in the interest of securing
better and more nearly uniform legislation for the protection of birds. It
contains the recently enacted New York State law on this subject—essen-
tially the same as the law drafted by the A. O. U. Committee and pub-
lished in its first ‘Bulletin’—with extended explanatory comment respecting
the intent and scope of its leading provisions, some of which, owing to
obscure phraseology, had been fallaciously interpreted. This is followed
by a new draft by the Committee, amending in a few particulars their
former one, with which, however, it agrees in all essential features. The
age qualification of the former draft, and of the New York law, in refer-
84 Notes and News. [ January
ence to applicants for collecting permits is omitted, the other restrictions
being deemed sufficient to prevent the granting of permits to persons not
properly entitled to receive them. The penalties for the infringement of
the law are increased, and one-half of the fines imposed for infringement
of the act are awarded to the informant or prosecutor. Accompanying
the draft are suggestions in relation to the manner of securing the en-
forcement of such laws. The ‘Bulletin’ also contains an abstract of the
report of the Committee to the American Ornithologists’ Union, some
account of the work of the Audubon Society, and other matter relating to
the general subject of the Committee’s work.
The Committee having been continued by vote of the Union, and its re-
port for last year accepted with thanks, its work will be carried on with
vigor through the coming year, to facilitate which the Committee will
probably increase its membership.
Mr. M. AssotT FRAZAR is on his way to Lower California where he
will spend an indefinite period collecting birds and eggs of the region for
Mr. William Brewster. It is Mr. Brewster’s jntention to have the entire
peninsula, with its neighboring islands, thoroughly explored by Mr. Frazar.
Mr. Hersert H. Smitru has recently returned from Brazil with large
collections of natural history specimens, accumulated during five and a
half years devoted to collecting in the interior of Brazil. Although Mr.
Smith gave his attention especially to insects, of which he brought home
some 400,000 specimens, he made collections of much importance in other
departments of natural history. His collection of birds, numbering about
450 species and 7000 specimens, was made chiefly in the Province of Matto
Grosso, on the headwaters of the Paraguay River, a region hitherto little
explored. It is doubtless the largest collection ever brought by one person
from so limited an area in South America; and besides throwing much
light on the ornithology of this particular district. it must contain some
novelties. Mr. Smith’s collections are now at the American Museum of
Natural History, New York, where, it is to be hoped, a large ‘part of them
will permanently remain. The birds have been placed in the hands of
Mr. J. A. Allen for study and determination, who will in due time publish
an annotated list of the species.
Mr. WILLIAM BREWSTER is about to build a small private inuseum on
his place at Cambridge. It will be of brick and thoroughly fire-proof. It.
will be arranged to accommodate a large collection of bird skins, nests
and eggs, with limited case room, also, for mounted specimens.
Mr. Cuarves H. Townsenp has just sailed for Yucatan and, under the
auspices of the U. S. Fish Commission, will spent several months in
natural history work in that country and some of its neighboring islands,”
devoting a considerable portion of his time to ornithology.
HE AUK:
Aj Ou ART Pete OU RN AL: OF
ORNITHOLOGY.
VOL. IV. APRIL, 1887. Now-2.
ADDITIONS (“RO* THE “BIRDS. ~ OF » VENTURA
COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.
BY J. G. COOPER, M. D.
Tue ‘List of Birds observed in Ventura County,’ by Professor
B. W. Evermann, in ‘The Auk’ for January and April, 1886,
compiled from the observations of two years, is very full and
probably nearly exhaustive for a short period of observation,
comprising, as it does, 202 species, only one of which is consid-
ered doubtful by the author, and that one (mpzdonax ob-
scurus) was obtained by myself. It is, however, doubtful
whether such a county list could ever be made complete with-
out including ninety per cent of the birds known to inhabit Cali-
fornia, or about 325 species. This doubt arises from the fact that
Ventura County is situated within the winter range of most of
the southward migrants, and also the range northward of most of
the southern group of summer visitors, while it extends upward
from the ocean level to S500 feet altitude on Mount Pinos, near
its extreme northeast corner.
The chief utility of such a list is, therefore, not to show what
species occur in the whole county, but their modes of occurrence
‘and other habits within a limited portion where the author lived.
While he worked diligently and made several additions to the
known range of certain species, as well as to their known habits,
he probably did not observe two-thirds of the species to be found
in the county limits, and yet it is one of the smaller counties of
86 Cooper on Birds of Ventura County, California. {April
California, with much less variety of surface than several others
present.
The following species of his list were not observed by me
during my residence of fourteen months at Saticoy, in 1872-73,
V1Z. :
Phalenoptilus nuttalli, Dendroica nigrescens,
Trochilus alexandri, Dendroica occidentalis,
Trochilus coste, Geothlypis macgillivrayi,
Empidonax hammondi, Cinclus mexicanus,
Cyanocitta stelleri frontalis, Oroscoptes montanus,
(Corvus americanus), Parus atricapillus occidentalis,
Poocetes gramineus confinis, Regulus satrapa olivaceus,
Phainopepla nitens, Myadestes townsendii,
Dendroica gracie, Hesperocichla nevia ;
in all 18 species, and chiefly those frequenting the hills.
The Professor calls the first part of his article ‘tbirds observed”
and the second part ‘‘birds obtained” but does not positively state
that he preserved all the species, and a doubt therefore exists as
to the specific identity of a few, viz. :
Uria troile californica, Corvus caurinus,
Larus cachinnans, Dendroica nigrescens,
Grus mexicana, Dendroica occidentalis,
Chordeiles virginianus henryi, Parus atricapillus occidentalis.
Corvus americanus,
He has also admitted at least two species which he did not
obtain within the county—Ptycorhamphus aleuticus and Cepphus
columba, stated to be ‘‘rather common about the Santa Barbara
Islands,” some of which belong to other counties. -In a late de-
scription of Ventura County, only the nearest island, Anacapa,
and the most distant, San Nicolas, are said to belong to it, so that
specimens from the other four islands would not be within its
political limits.
The fact of their occurrence on the islands is, however, in
itself, almost positive proof of occurrence in Ventura County,
since they wander throughout the channel between the mainland
and the islands, and if not coming ashore voluntarily, are washed
ashore after winter storms which kill many of the old or diseased
sea-birds. But the same cause will also bring ashore, at times,
all the species known to inhabit the islands, and we may, there-
fore, safely add
1887.] Cooper on Birds of Ventura County, California. 87
Brachyramphus marmoratus,
Brachyramphus hypoleucus,
Fulmarus glacialis glupischa,
Puffinus creatopus,
? Puffinus stricklandi,
Oceanodroma melania,
Fulmarus glacialoides, ?Oceanites oceanicus,
found by myself and others, two species of which are a little
doubtful, though representing species observed.
Following the same reasoning we may safely assume that all
the species found in Santa Barbara County occur also in Ventura,
as the former county lies entirely west of Ventura, and extends
north of it only a few miles, thus being within the same degrees
of latitude and bordering on the ‘‘Santa Barbara channel” also,
which runs there east and west. We thus find the following to
be added from my own collections at Santa Barbara:
Urinator lumme, Botaurus exilis,
Himantopus mexicanus,
Macrorhamphus scolopaceus,
Pelecanus californicus,
Oidemia americana,
Oidemia perspicillata,
Branta nigricans,
Heteractitis incanus,
Arenaria interpres ;
and from Mr. Henshaw’s Report,
Phalacrocorax pelagicus resplen- Rallus obsoletus,
dens, Porzana jamaicensis,
Merganser americanus, Ammodramus savannarum per-
Clangula hyemalis, pallidus ;
all swimmers or waders except the last: total, 24 to be added
from the westward.
Mr. Henshaw traversed Ventura County from west to east,
but his report does not specify the localities within its limits
where any species were collected additional to the list, and trav-
elling in the driest months he saw very few of interest between
the coast and the ‘‘Tejon Mountains,” which lie partly within the
the northeast corner of the county. There a different group
of birds was met with, between 4000 and 8500 feet, at Mount
Pinos.
As Fort Tejon is only about ten miles from the boundary of
the county, and in the mountain region, its birds must fairly rep-
resent the group inhabiting that region. I have therefore quoted
from the collection made there by John Xantus in 1857-58, pub-
lished in the ‘Proceedings’ of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural
Sciences by Professor Baird. He obtained in all 144 species, of
88 ; CoopPeR ox Birds of Ventura County, California. [ April
which ten or fifteen were probably obtained at the lakes in Tulare
Valley, being waders and swimmers, only one of which, Dez-
drocygna fulva, has not been found on the coast. Omitting
this, the land birds are,
Syrnium occidentale, Spinus pinus,
Nyctalaacadica, Vireo solitarius cassini,
Trochilus calliope, Helminthophila ruficapilla gut-
Contopus borealis, turalis,
Picicorvus columbianus, Certhia familiaris americana,
Carpodacus cassini, Parus gambeli.
To these we may add Henshaw’s Tejon Mountain birds, Dezx-
dragapus obscurus, Nenopicus albolarvatus, Vireo solitarius
plumbeus, and Sttta pygmaea—making fifteen not found in the
lower western tracts, though some of them are reported from
Santa Barbara by Streator, as rare winter visitors.
I may here refer to the list of birds lately published by C. P.
Streator in the ‘Ornithologist and Odlogist’ for April, May, and
June, 1886. He may be in error in a few cases in identifying the
species, suchas 7rzxga canutus, Piranga rubra coopert, Po-
lioptila plumbea, and Turdus ustulatus swainsont, and longer
observation will probably change his opinions as to the habits
of some species, but still the list adds one water and one land
bird to those before known in theregion. I could add several to
the birds from migratory species found in counties farther south,
which must pass through Ventura County, but will leave them
out at present.
Though not admissible as birds of Ventura County, those ob-
tained at Santa Barbara, especially the land species, are almost
certain to be found in the former county.
The collectors on the Pacific R. R. Surveys in 1853-55 trav-
ersed the east and west ends of the county, which was not then
separated from Santa Barbara County, but I have not found
any additions to the list in their reports, nor does Dr. Heermann’s
account of collections at Fort Tejon contain any.
The absence of lakes and deserts in Ventura County deprives it
of the species found only in such localities In Kern County on
the north and Los Angeles County on the east, except as strag-
glers, so that we cannot assume that any of them are found in it
until actually recorded. The 24 seashore birds, and 15 of the
mountain fauna are, however, without doubt, to be included in
the list.
1887. | CoopPer on Birds of Ventura County, California. 89
My own additions to the Ventura County avifauna have nearly
all been published as from Southern California. Some refer-
ences will be given to the various works in which they are men-
tioned when not of easy access.
I collected chiefly near the village of Saticoy, eight miles east
of San Buenaventura, and six or seven from the nearest part of
the seashore. The Santa Clara River runs half a mile distant,
but is dry in summer for seven or eight miles along that part of
its course, leaving a wide, sandy and gravelly bed, destitute of
vegetation except on a few higher patches where small poplar
and willow trees grow, with low shrubbery, and which become
islands in the high water of winter. Some sandhills along this
portion also sustain thickets of low shrubbery, much like that of
the desert regions east of the county. At Saticoy, however,
about 30 feet above the river-bed, springs issue from the edge of
the ‘mesa’ or terrace for halfa mile, constant in summer, and form-
ing a considerable marsh, about half of which was then covered
by willow groves, thirty or forty feet high, and uniting, the waters
form a brook large enough to run a mill at all seasons, discharg-
ing within a mile, into the bed of the river. From the river
bed the valley slopes gently upward to the hills of the ‘Sulphur
Range’ on the north, rising about 200 feet in three miles, and is
naturally prairie land, producing no trees. At that time about a
third of the valley was cultivated in grain and young orchards ;
but these were still too small to bear fruit or to have any influ-
ence on the birds. The hills northward were also grassy, with
scattered oaks and other trees in the canons between. The Sati-
coy springs furnished the only water in summer, and the only
tree shelter for a circuit of three or four miles, the brooks run-
ning fromthe hills drying up nearly to their sources. About
three miles east of Saticoy the Santa Clara River runs perma-
nently and a grove of poplars and willows lines its marshy shores
for several miles. Near this grove was the oldest orchard in the
valley, the trees quite large and productive, forming an attrac-
tion to many birds that eat the fruit and build in the trees. In
my notes on birds I call the orchard and grove referred to East
Grove.
most common Junco I met with. I secured a large series, which exhibits
considerable variation in size and coloration.
103. Pipilo fuscus mesoleucus. Although not observed at all in 1883,
I found them quite common here in October, 1886, in suitable stony
places. One was shot within the city limits, and I saw another in the
yard of a hotel, but they prefer the rocky a@rroyos that are to be found
along the Arkansas River and other streams. At a quarrymen’s camp,
eleven miles west of Pueblo, they were particularly abundant, and so tame
that they came and went about the shanties with as much fearlessness as
domestic fowls. Their alarm or call-note seemed to me very much like
that of the Song Sparrow. All of those collected were very difficult to
preserve in good form on account of the loose way in which the feathers
were attached to the skin.
104. Petrochelidon lunifrons. The bird itself was not observed, but a
‘colony’ of their nests was seen attached to some limestone cliffs near the
same camp above referred to.
105. Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides. Through an oversight this
bird was not mentioned in any former paper. It was rather common in the
spring of 1883, but during my last visit only two were seen.
106. Helminthophila celata. But one specimen of this Warbler was
obtained. It was shot October 8, out of a party of three or four which
were flitting about the top of a large cottonwood just within the city limits.
It was a ‘bird of the year,’ with the orange crown showing quite distinctly.
No others were observed.
107. Sylvania pusilla pileolata. Two of these birds were taken; one on
October 5, ina clump of willows, and another on the 20th, in the same place.
I was much surprised to find the Black-cap here as late as the 20th; for we
had had several severe frosts prior to that date, enough to have totally de-
stroyed the food of this insect-eating species. It was in fine plumage, and
there was no external indication that it had been incapacitated for migra-
tion by wounds, moult, etc,
108. Salpinctes obsoletus. First seen October 6 in some rocky arroyos,
eight or ten miles from Pueblo, where one was collected and six or eight
more were seen. I again saw one at the same place on October 27. One
of the shyest birds I have ever met with.
tog. Certhia familiaris americana. One was captured and another seen
on October 24.
110. Parus atricapillus septentrionalis. This Chickadee was encoun-
tered but twice; on October 12, when two were shot out of a flock of eight
or ten P. gambelz, with which they seemed to be on the best of terms, and
again on November 2, when three were found together in a thicket. The
note is rather faint, and not much like that of the eastern bird.
t11. Regulus calendula. Observed upon two or three occasions. Two
were shot, a male and a female, both ‘birds of the year,’ and the former, as
124 BreckHam on Birds observed at Pueblo. Colorado. {April
I expected (see Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. 1885, pp. 625-628), had a fully devel-
oped red crown-patch.
112. Turdus aonalaschkze auduboni. Three representatives of this
species were collected, October 5,6, and15. No others were seen.
Additional Notes on Species mentioned in the former paper.
Rallus virginianus. Only one individual seen—in a marsh, November 3.
ZEgialitis vocifera. Rather uncommon,
Falco sparverius. But three or four were seen.
Colaptes cafer. Common.
Dryobates pubescens gairdneri. Not common.
Otocoris alpestris arenicola. Very abundant. In my former paper on
the birds of Pueblo, the Shore Lark found here was provisionally referred
to the form /eucolema, but upon a re-examination of the skins collected,
the bird turns out to be arentcola.
Pica pica hudsonica. Abundant.
Cyanocitta stelleri macrolopha. A single individual was seen on Octo-
ber 6. They were reported to be very abundant at this time in the Green
horn Mountains, thirty miles from Pueblo.
Agelaius pheeniceus. Common up to the date of my departure.
Sturnella neglecta. Only four or five of these birds were noted during
my stay.
Icterus bullocki. On October 24, long after the time when nearly all of
the summer residents had migrated, I shot one of these birds in a dense
thicket of willow bushes. It was a young female in very dark, soiled plu-
mage, and quite immature, but apparently able to fly very well. It was in
company with another which I failed to secure.
Scolecophagus cyanocephalus. Ten ora dozen seen about a slaughter
house near town.
Carpodacus frontalis. Not as abundant as in 1883.
Spinus tristis. Very abundant.
Spinus psaltria. Abundant. Generally seen in pairs. All of those I
shot were young birds, and several of the males had almost attained the
full ‘spring plumage.’
Spinus pinus. Not seen until October 31, when several small flocks
were observed.
Zonotrichia intermedia. Exceedingly abundant. Barely one-fourth of
the males collected had attained the white crown; all of them, both males
and females, were birds of the year. They sang a good deal in that sput-
tering sort of a way familiar to all who have studied the habits of Z.
albicolls and other Sparrows in the fall. This ‘practising’ song proceeds,
I am sure, from young birds just beginning to exercise their vocal powers,
and is doubtless quite disconnected with any sexual excitation. The call-
note of this Sparrow is very similar to that of Z. albicollis.
Spizella socialis arizone. Common in small flocks during the first half
of the month; but few were seen towards the last.
1887. ] Lancpon on Birds of the Chilhowee Mountarus, Tenn. I 25
Junco hyemalis oregonus. Rather common.
Melospiza fasciata montanus. Not very common.
_Melospiza lincolni. In the same places as the last, and about equally
numerous during first part of the month.
Pipilo maculatus arcticus. Not common.
Dendroica auduboni. About a dozen individuals altogether were seen,
and one was captured as late as October 24.
Parus gambeli. Abundant during the whole time of my stay. Exceed-
ingly tame and, like other Paride, partially gregarious. Not seen at all at
Pueblo in 1883.
Myadestes townsendi. But one was seen—October 31. The bird was
common here in the spring of 1883.
Turdus ustulatus swainsoni. On October 30, I shot a belated Olive-
backed Thrush in a willow thicket. It was very emaciated, one leg had
been broken, and but one feather was left to ‘adorn’ its tail—or, perhaps,
‘point a moral.’ Its presence here at this date is thus easily accounted
for.
Merula migratoria propinqua. I saw but four or five individuals during
my stay.
Sialia arctica. Rather uncommon. The only one shot was a young
male with the blue feathers edged with brown.
Sialia mexicana. Observed only upon two or three occasions, when
they appeared to be migrating; coming from the north and disappearing
towards the south.
AUGUST BIRDS OF THE CHILHOWEE MOUN-
TAINS, TENNESSEE.
BY F. W. LANGDON.
THE observations herein recorded were made chiefly in Blount
County, East Tennessee, between August 11 and 21, 1886, in-
clusive. The elevations known as the ‘Chilhowee Mountains,’
are a group of spurs or offshoots from the Great Smoky Range
of the East Tennessee and North Carolina border; and extend,
nearly at right angles to the ‘Smokies,’ as a series of more or less
parallel ridges, 1500 to 4ooo feet in height, for fifteen or twenty
miles in a general northwesterly direction. There are three
main ranges answering the above description and these are lim-
ited or cut off, so to speak, at their northwestern extremities, by
the Chilhowee range proper (called on some maps Chilhowee
126 LanGpon on Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. [April
‘Mountain’). This latter range, about twenty miles in length,
and nearly parallel with the ‘Smokies,’ is pierced (about twenty-
five miles south-east of Knoxville) by Little River. A mile west
of the ‘gap’ so formed is Mount Nebo, one of the sub-divisions
of the Chilhowee range, and an objective point of the expedition,
where are located some chalybeate springs anda hotel. From
this locality excursions were made in various directions, notably
one to the Great Smoky Mountains, about twenty miles south-
east.
The altitudes of the higher peaks of the region range from
2452 feet at Nebo, to 6701—Clingman’s Dome in the ‘Smokies.”*
The whole Chilhowee group, including the principal range of
that name, is situated in Blount and Sevier Counties, and is
drained by the Little Pigeon, a tributary of the French Broad;
and by Little and Little Tennessee Rivers, flowing into the Ten-
nessee. The drainage of the entire region is thus eventually
Ohioan.
The Chilhowee Mountains are not unknown to zodlogical
science, Dr. James Lewis having described a species of land-
shell, .Aeléx chilhoweensts, from that region, about ten years
ago.
The topography of the region is alternately mountain and
‘cove’—as the little ‘pockets’ of tillable land, walled in by moun-
tains except where they border the rivers, are called. Generally
speaking a road following the river is the only outlet for these
‘coves’ that can be traversed by wagon.
The ‘coves’ passed through by the expedition were Miller’s
and Tuckaleechee,—said to be from six to eight miles in length
and about a third as wide; Tuckaleechee being the larger of the
two. Both are drained by Little River.
The entire mountain region is well wooded, and towards the
‘Smokies’ heavily timbered.
At Mt. Nebo the principal trees are poplar, oak, chestnut,
chinquapin, hickory, beech, sweet and black gums}; a few wal-
nut, butternut, and birch; with a sprinkling of pines throughout
and of small spruce along ravines and small streams. The under-
growth is chiefly of poplars, gums, dogwood, chinquapin, and,
* Vide Guyot, in Am. Jour. Sci. and Arts., 2nd ser., Vol. XXIV, p. 277; and Saf-
ford, ‘Geology of Tennessee,’ Nashville, 1869.
2 water ake mp
mee oy
1887. | LANGDON oz Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. I 27
occasionally along streams, witch-hazel; in many places the
‘mountain laurel’ forms impenetrable thickets for miles.
‘Pine Mountain,’ adjoining Nebo on the east, and separated
from it only bya shallow ravine, is clothed on its upper two-
thirds with a mantle almost exclusively of pine, while its basal
third corresponds closely with Nebo,
The foot-hills surrounding Nebo are mostly cleared of timber
and under cultivation, corn, wheat and sorghum being the prin-
cipal crops, with some cotton and tobacco. This is the case also
in the ‘coves’ traversed on the way to the ‘Smokies.’ As the
‘coves’ are left behind, however, and the Great Smoky Range is
approached the scenery becomes bolder in character, the route
lying over mountainous ridges and the horizon shut in on all
sides by range after range of mountains from three to six
thousand feet in height. Along Little River the scenery in many
places might fairly be called grand.
Night overtakes us on Scott Mountain at the home of Mr.
A. J. Dorsey and his estimable family, whose hospitalities much
enhance the enjoyment of the trip. Here we leave our team,
and another day finds our party, ten in number, on foot for the
‘Smokies,’ seven miles distant, loaded down with guns, orni-
thological material, fishing tackle, photographic apparatus, cook-
ing utensils, and provisions. Our headquarters on Defeat
Mountain, a spur of the Smoky Range, was at a cattle-herder’s
camp, a small log cabin, situated at an altitude of perhaps 4000
feet, in the heart of a giant spruce and poplar forest; many trees
of both species measuring six feet in diameter and fifty feet or
more toa limb. Here, on a gentle slope covered with a velvety
carpet of moss, partridge-berry vine, and spruce needles, we were
lulled to rest by the babbling of the waters over the rocky bed
of a neighboring trout brook (middle fork of Little River) ;
this, with the oof-to-toot of the Great Horned Owl and the
notes of a full orchestra of katydids, furnished a symphony emi-
nently appropriate to its surroundings. The ‘patter of the rain
on the roof,’ however, which ensued later, was a musical event
not so highly appreciated, since it necessitated the crowding of
ten men into a cabin ten feet square.
As the sunbeams tip the crest of the ‘Smokies’ and struggle
in splinters through the dark evergreen canopy about the camp,
our ornithological eyes are greeted with the sight of such species
128 LANGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. [April
as the Hooded, the Worm-eating, Black-throated Blue, Cerulean,
Blackburnian, Chestnut-sided, Black-throated Green, Black-and-
white Creeping, and Canada Warblers (all taken within a few
hours) ; whilst an occasional Pileated Woodpecker, or a party of
Titmice or Blue Jays, add variety to the scene and sounds. Even
the herpetologist might find food for conternplation in the huge
rattlesnake with nine rattles and a button, killed by one of our
photographic artists within a stone’s throw of the camp; and the
epicure sees food of a more substantial character in the speckled
beauties supplied to our table from the neighboring stream.
Such localities as the one just described, at the junction of the
poplar and spruce belts (altitude 4000 to 4500 feet) seemed a
very paradise for the Mniotiltide and they were here found in
greater numbers, both of species and of individuals, than else-
where. Here, also, blackberries were in the height of their
season ; the deciduous foliage was as bright and fresh as in Ohio
in May and June, and insect life correspondingly abundant.
With respect to the above-mentioned Warblers, it may be ob-
served that their habits were not indicative of any migratory
movement; on the contrary they appeared to be ‘at home’ ina
summer resident sense; and the fact that the dates of observation
are from two to four weeks ahead of their fall migration at
Cincinnati may be considered as confirmatory of this view.
Mr. Brewster’s * observations in the adjoining portion of North
Carolina, during May and June, 1885, are also to be considered in
this connection.
Incomplete as it necessarily is, owing to lack of time and the
unfavorable season for collecting, the present list fills several
gaps in Mr. Brewster’s paper just referred to, viz: TZotanus
solitarius, Eegialitis vocifera, Falco sparvertus, Megascops
asto, Bubo virginianus, Helmitherus vermivorus, Dendroica
cerulea, and D. vigorstz; and adds five species and two sub-
species to the list of birds heretofore recorded from the State f ;
namely: Ampelis cedrorum, Dendroica pensylvanica, D. ca-
rulea, D. cerulescens, Sylvania canadensis, Dryobates villo-
sus, and Vireo flavifrons alticola.
* An Ornithological Reconnaissance in Western North Carolina.—The Auk, 1886,
Vol. III, pp. 94-112 and 173-179. :
+ Vide Fox, List of Birds found in Roane County, Tennessee, during April, 1884,
and March and April, 1885.—The Auk, III, 1886, pp. 315-320.
1887.] LANGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. 129
For valuable assistance in making the collection, as well as in
saving skins that would otherwise have been lost, the writer is
indebted to his colleague, Dr. G. M. Allen, of Cincinnati; and
for an enjoyable time in other respects to the members of the
party in general, not forgetting our two guides, Mr. A. J.
Dorsey and son ‘Jake.’
As regards the residents of the region in general, we found
them intelligent, hospitable and obliging.
The altitudes mentioned are estimated, and based on informa-
tion derived from various sources.*
The nomenclature is that of the A. O. U. Code and Check-
List of North American Birds, 1886.
Total number of species and sub-species noted, 63.
201. Ardea virescens. GREEN HERoN.—Little River, near Mt. Nebo;
two specimens.
256. Totanus solitarius. SoLITARY SANDPIPER.—One individual ob-
served August 21, at a roadside pond near Maryville, in the valley.
263. Actitis macularia. SporrepD SANDPIPER.—Three specimens seen
along Little River in the ‘coves’; others at Henry’s Mill.
273. A®gialitis vocifera. KimLLpEER.—One heard in the suburbs of
Knoxville.
289. Colinus virginianus. Bos-wHire.—Abundant in the ‘coves.’
Large flock of young barely able to fly, observed August 16, in Tuckalee-
chee; doubtless a second brood.
300. Bonasa umbellus. Rurrep GrRousE.—One individual observed
on Mt. Nebo.
310. Meleagris gallopavo. WiLp TurKry.—Although no specimens
were secured by us, our guide had flushed a flock of half-grown young a
week previous. Dr. T. H. Kearney, of Knoxville, also informed us that
he was with a party that killed one out of a flock a few days previous,
within a mile or two of our camp. ‘They are said to feed largely on ‘huck-
elberries, three species of which are found in abundance on the ‘ridges.’
316. Zenaidura macroura. MourNING Dove.—Common in wheat-
stubble in the ‘coves.’
325. Cathartes aura. TuRKEY VULTURE.—Common.
360. Falco sparverius. AMERICAN SPARROW HAWK.—Several observed
in the ‘coves.’ Other species of Hawks, large and small, were noted, but
at too great a distance for identification. Those most satisfactorily recog-
nized were the Red-tailed and Red-shouldered.
373. Magascops asio. SCREECH Ow L.—Identified by note: one indi-
vidual only; altitude 2000 feet.
375. Bubo virginianus. GREAT HorNED OwL.—One heard at 4000
feet.
* Vide Safford, Geology of Tennessee, 1869; and Guyot, various papers in Am.
Journ. Sci. and Arts, 1857 e¢. seg.
130 LANGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. {April
390. Ceryle alcyon. BELTED KINGFISHER.—Two or three specimens
observed on Little River in the ‘coves.’
393. Dryobates villosus. Hatry WooppEcKER.—Several specimens
taken, ranging from the valleys up to 2000 feet, do not differ appreciably
from Ohio examples, and are referred to this form by Mr. Ridgway.
394. Dryobates pubescens. Downy WoopPECKER.—The same remarks
are applicable to the present species.
405. Ceophlceus pileatus. PILEATED WoopPECKER.—-Not common,
even in heavy timber, and everywhere very shy. Of the six or eight indi-
viduals observed, two, male and female, were secured with some difficulty.
Ranging from the valleys up to 4000 feet or more, their favorite foraging
field seemed to be on the larger spruce and poplar trunks, within twenty
feet of the ground, and such places were studded with bill-holes, in regu-
ular rows, resembling those of the ‘Sapsuckers.’ Their notes resemble the
rapid, oft-repeated chuck-up-chuck-up-chuck-up of the Common Flicker,
but are lower-pitched and repeated more slowly.
Of the specimens taken, one had its stomach filled with fourteen poke-
berries, and the intestines deeply stained thereby a few hours after death.
The peritoneal cavity of this bird contained a slender tape-worm, about 15
inches long and 1-32 inch wide; and in the sub-cutaneous tissue of the
neck were two thread-like, round worms, of a pale pinkish tint and about
three-fourths of an inch in length. Irides of adult male, pale yellow, finely
speckled and mottled with red.
406. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. RED-HEADED WCODPECKER.—Com-
mon about clearings in the foot-hills and ‘coves... Not observed above
about 1500 feet.
420. Chordeiles virginianus. NIGHT-HAWK.—Five observed flying
about at midday, in Tuckaleechee Cove; others at dusk on Scott Moun-
tain.
423. Cheetura pelagica. CHIMNEY SwirtT.—Common as high as 5000
feet and throughout the ‘coves.’ The scarcity of houses and suitable
chimneys for breeding purposes probably necessitates the resort of this
species to its original homes in hollow trees. (See Brewster, of. czt.)
428. Trochilus colubris. RuBy-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD.—Common
up to 3000 feet.
444. Tyrannus tyrannus. KINGBIRD.—Observed in parties of six or
eight about ‘deadenings’ in the ‘coves.’ None seen in the mountains.
461. Contopus virens. Woop PEWEE.—The common Flycatcher of
the region; apparently even more abundant than in Ohio. Noted every-
where up to 4000 feet or more.
The scarcity or absence of the Hmfzdonaces was a noteworthy feature
of the region; no member of the genus being detected, though closely
looked for in apparently favorable localities.
477. Cyanocitta cristata. BLure JAy.—An ornithological tramp through-
out the region, in straggling parties of from three to six individuals;
ranging as high as 4000 feet.
488. Corvus americanus. AMERICAN Crow.—Common in the valleys
and observed up to about 3000 feet.
1887.] LANGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. 131
? 5114. Quiscalus quiscula. BRONZED GRACKLE.—Observed only in
the suburbs of Knoxville. As no specimens were obtained, the subspecies
can only be decided by inference—hence the (?).
For evidence that this is the prevailing form in Tennessee, vzde Ridg-
way, Auk, 1886, III, p. 318, footnote.
529. Spinus tristis. AMERICAN GOLDFINCH.—Common in the ‘coves,’
and ranging up to 2500 feet.
560. Spizella socialis. CHIPPING SPARROW.—The common Sparrow.
Abundant throughout the ‘coves’ in cornfields, etc., anda few observed
on a piney ridge at an altitude of about 4000 feet.
563. Spizella pusilla. FIELD SPARROw.—Identified by note, and in one
instance only, in a little ‘cove’ at an elevation of 3000 feet.
587. Pipilo erythrophthalmus. TowHeEE.-—One specimen taken at an
altitude of 2000 feet; others heard in full song.
593. Cardinalis cardinalis. CARDINAL.—Common about clearings,
and observed up to 3000 feet.
Though in full song, their notes were quite sibilant in character rather
than full and rounded as in Ohio.
598. Passerina cyanea. INpIGO BuNrinc.— Very common in the
‘coves’ and lowlands; not observed above 1000-1200 feet.
(—). Passer domesticus. EvuroPpEAN House SPARROW. — A few ob-
served at Knoxville and Maryville.
608. Piranga erythomelas. ScARLET TANAGER.—One specimen, a
male in immature plumage, taken at 2500 feet.
610. Piranga rubra. SumMER TANAGER.— One taken at 2000 feet;
others heard.
611. Progne subis. PurrpLeE Martin.—Noted only at Knoxville and
Maryville.
619. Ampelis cedrorum. CEDAR WAxwinc. — One specimen in im-
mature plumage, taken at 3000 feet.
624. Vireo olivaceus. RED-EYED VIREO.—Very common everywhere
up to 4000 feet. The many specimens examined failed to show the pe-
culiarities in plumage noted by Mr. Brewster* in a single specimen from
the Black Mountain in North Carolina.
628. Vireo flavifrons. YELLOW-THROATED VIREO. — Two specimens;
Pine Mountain, at 1500 feet. One of these is a ‘first plumage’ bird, just
acquiring fall dress.
629c. Vireo solitarius alticola.t MouNnTAIN SoLirary VirREO.—Three
specimens taken ; one at 1500 feet, on Pine Mountain (Chilhowee Range),
and two at 4000 feet, on Defeat Mountain (Smoky Range).
Mr. Brewster has kindly compared these for me with the types in his
collection and writes: ‘‘I am satisfied that the two are identical. In fact
I find no differences of importance except such as would be expected in
view of the fact that my birds are all in perfect nuptial plumage, yours in
ragged, moulting summer plumage.”
* Auk, III, 1886, p. 173.
¢ Vide Brewster, Auk, III, 1886, p. 111.
132 LaNGDON ox Birds of the Chilhowee Mountains, Tenn. {April
On comparison with Ohio specimens of V. soltarcus, the larger size,
especially of bill and wing, and the generally darker color of the upper
parts in the Tennessee birds are very noticeable
631. Vireo noveboracensis. WHITE-EYED VIREO. — One specimen
taken; heard several times in the ‘coves.’
636. Mniotilta varia. BLACK-AND-WHITE WARBLER.—Very common,
ranging from the valleys up to 3000 feet.
639. Helmitherus vermivorus. WorM-EATING WARBLER.—Taken in
dense laurel and blackberry thickets on Smoky Range, up to 4000 feet;
and about ravines at Mt. Nebo, 2000 feet. Note a feeble ch7f.
654. Dendroica czrulescens. BLACK-rHROATED BLUE WARBLER.—
Rather common in dark spruce forest about the head of Little River,
frequenting laurel thickets and undergrowth of poplar, beech, and sweet
gum. Altitude about 4000 feet.
658. Dendroica cerulea. CERULEAN WARBLER.— Common in same
localities as the last, but frequenting the higher trees.
659. Dendroica pensylvanica. CHESTNUT-SIDED WARBLER. —Two
specimens; 2000 to 2500 feet, in oak woods.
662. Dendroica blackburnie. BLACKBURNIAN WARBLER.—The most
abundant species of the family; ranging from 2000 to 4oco feet, and keep-
ing mostly in the higher tree tops. Adults of both sexes and young of the
year taken together.
667. Dendroica virens. BLACK-THROATED GREEN WARBLER.—Several
specimens taken at 4000 feet, in spruce woods.
671. Dendroica vigorsii. Pine WARBLER.—One specimen only; Pine
Mountain, 1500 feet. A young in first plumage just acquiring autumnal
dress.
674. Seiurus aurocapillus. Oven-Birp.—Taken at altitudes ranging
from 1000 to 2000 feet.
681. Geothlypis trichas. MAryLAND YELLOW-THROAT.—Common in
the valleys, in the weeds bordering streams.
683. Icteria virens. YELLOW-BREASTED CHAT.—One taken at base of
Mt. Nebo; others heard.
684. Sylvania mitrata. HoopED WaARBLER.—-Common in little weed
patches near the springs at Mt. Nebo (2000 feet) ; and one pair observed
apparently ‘at home’ ina shady ravine near our camp on Defeat Moun-
tain (4000 feet), keeping chiefly on or near the ground and moss-covered
rocks. Note a single clear ¢schkif, resembling that of the Cardinal but
much more resonant and musical in tone. This note was repeated at
short intervals (one to two minutes) for hours at a time, as the birds
foraged for insects, the dark, green carpet of moss and partridge-berry
vine forming an effective contrast with their bright, yellow plumage.
686. Sylvania canadensis. CANADIAN WARBLER.—A pair taken at
2000 feet, on young poplars in a laurel thicket, August 19.
687. Setophaga ruticilla. AMERICAN REDSTART.—Several observed
about shady ravines, ranging from 1000 to 2500 feet.
704. Galeoscoptes carolinensis. CaTBIRD.—A few only observed,
ranging from the lowlands to 2000 feet,
1887. | Scott ox Rare Florida Birds. 133
718. Thryothorus ludovicianus. CAROLINA WrEN.—Common every-
where up to 3000 feet.
727. Sitta carolinensis. WHITE-BREASTED NuTHATCH.—Common,
ranging from 1000 to 3000 feet.
731. Parus bicolor. Turrep Tirmousr.—Very common in the valleys
and observed as high as 3000 feet.
736. Parus carolinensis. CAROLINA CHICKADEE.—Common with the
preceding species, of which it was an almost constant companion, as in
Ohio. No P. atricapillus observed, although carefully looked for.
751. Polioptilacerulea. BLUE-GRAY GNATCATCHER.—Common, rang-
ing from the lowlands up to 3000 feet.
755. Turdus mustelinus. Woop THRusSH.—Specimens taken at 2000
and 4000 feet.
761. Merula migratoria. AMERICAN Rospin.—While standing in the
cupola of the University at Knoxville, a small Hawk, resembling the
Pigeon Hawk, passed close by. Following it with the eye across an ad-
joining pasture, it was observed to flush a bird from a fence corner and,
after a stern chase of thirty or forty yards, to seize it. A lively tussel
ensued, after which the Hawk rose, heavily weighted, and took refuge in
some neighboring trees. A few feathers secured at the site of the
struggle have been kindly identified by Mr. Ridgway as those of a young
Robin, and on these rests the admission of the species to our list, as no
other specimens were observed.
766. Sialia sialis. BLursirp.—A few noted about ‘deadenings,’ in the
"COVES:
SOME RARE FLORIDA BIRDS.
BY W. Eu D. SCOTT.
Gelochelidon nilotica. GuLL-BILLED TERN.—This species
appears to be rare on the Gulf Coast. The only record I have
of its occurrence is a male taken at John’s Pass, Hillsboro’ Coun-
ty, December 17, 1886.
Chondestes grammacus. Lark Fincu.—On September
19, 1886, I saw a single individual of this species in my garden
at Tarpon Springs, Hillsboro’ County. Later, my friend, Mr.
J. W. Atkins, took an adult female at Punta Rossa. Mr. Atkins
has kindly sent me the bird for identification. It was taken Sep-
tember 26, 1886.
Vireo altiloguus barbatulus. BLacK-WHISKERED VIREO.—
134 Scott ox Rare Florida Birds. [April
On my trip South during May, 1886, I heard at a number of
points, but particularly near Punta Rossa, the song of a Vireo
that was not familiar to me. The birds always kept in the deep-
est mangrove thickets, so that I was never able to procure one.
But at Punta Rossa, where I met Mr. Atkins, who was at that time
connected with the telegraph service at that point, we discussed
the bird, and I called his attention to what I took to be one sing-
ing in a mangrove swamp not far away. I was, at the time, on
my way home, and being somewhat pressed for time I could not
well stay to investigate the matter. Shortly after my return Mr.
Atkins wrote me of the capture of four of the birds in question,
ud later sent me two skins which were, as we had surmised,
of this species.
Both of those he sent to me were males taken on the 22d of
May, 1886, near Punta Rossa.
During the summer, about the middle of July, I thought I de-
tected the species on a single occasion near Tarpon Springs, and
I feel quite sure of this now, though unable to capture the bird
at that time.
I visited Tampa, in October, and on looking at some skins ob-
tained by Mr. Stuart, in June, 1886, in the immediate vicinity
of the city of Tampa, a single representative of this species at
once attracted my attention. It was not labelled, but Mr. Stuart
remembered its capture and thought it an adult male. It is now
in my collection. I believe this bird to be a common summer
resident on the Southern Gulf Coast of Florida.
Dendroica discolor. Prairie WarBLER.—While at Punta
Rossa last spring, Mr. Atkins showed me a Warbler which,
though in exceptional plumage, must be referred to this species.
Mr. Allen has very kindly examined it and compared it with a
large series of Prairie Warblers, and the above conclusion is
largely due to his careful examination. The appended descrip-
tion will show the main differences in coloration between this
and the typical bird.
No. 129, collection of J. A. Atkins. ‘‘Punta Rossa, 16th April, 1886.
Q 2” (The sex mark on the label is followed by an interrogation mark;
the size of the bird, however, would seem to indicate that it is a female, if
it be the species in question.) Similar to female D. dzscolor. Above obscure
olive green, brighter onthe crown andrump. Sides of nape and upper tail_
coverts strongly suffused with ashy; interscapulars faintly tinged with
brownish. Tail and wings about as in typical déscelor. Lores dusky; a
, toe
1837.] Scotr on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida: 135
supraloral stripe of orange, from base of bill to eye, including upper eye-
lid; a patch of orange below the eye, more intense on the right side than
on the left, extending back over the upper part of the ear-coverts, and
forward narrowly (on the left side only) to the rictus. Chin and part of
the throat intense cadmium yellow. There is also a very appreciable
tinge of this color on the yellow of the breast. The maxillary stripe is
ash mixed with black. The streaks on the sides are nearly, obsolete.
“Length, 4.50; extent, 6.37; wing, 2.00; tail, 1.75” (collector’s measure-
ments from the fresh bird).*
Mr. Atkins says that at the time he took this bird he saw
another which appeared to him to be identical with it, but a
careful search later in the season has failed to bring to light any
other specimens.
THE PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE
BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GULF COAST
OF FLORIDA.
BY W. EB. Di SCOTT.
first Paper.
On Friday, April 30, 1886, I started from the town of Tarpon
Springs in Hillsboro’ County, Florida, to make a cruise of a few
weeks along. the west coast, to investigate matters ornithological.
It was a journey without any objective point. I had in mind only
to go as far south as possible, in the time at my disposal, passing
over some ground that had been familiar to me six years before.
* [The specimen in question is remarkable for its small size, it being considerably
smaller even than average West Indian examples of females of D. discolor; one (of
several kindly loaned me by Mr. Ridgway for comparison), however, proves to be
fully as small, while others are somewhat larger. Ina large series from Florida in the
Cambridge Museum of Comparative Zodlogy, with which I haye compared Mr. At-
kins’s specimen, none are quite so small, but the ashy coloring of the maxillary stripe,
the auriculars, and sides of the nape is met with in other specimens, and one or two
show traces of the peculiar ‘hyperchromatism’ displayed by the specimen from Mr.
Atkins. No single specimen, however, has all of these ashy markings combined, they
being found separately in different specimens. The asymetry in respect to the height-
ened color on the two sides of the head suggests that the specimen in question is not
only exceptionally small, but abnormal in coloration. The general effect is unique,
and at first sight suggests probable specific distinctness from D, discolor.—J. A. A.]
136 Scort on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [April
The boat chartered for the trip was a small sloop of about five
tons measurement, called the ‘Tantalus.’ I was accompanied
only by the captain of the boat, and Mr. Dickinson, my assistant.
The somewhat detailed account of this journey presented in the
following pages is given in the form of a diary, having as its
basis the notes registered in my log of each day’s events.
April 30. Left Tarpon Springs at 10 A. M., and going out of
the Anclote River, our boat was headed southward. As we
passed out of the mouth of the river, the buoys, beacons, and
stakes that mark the channel were made very conspicuous by the
numbers of Florida Cormorants (Phalacrocorax dilophus flort-
danus) that were alighted on every part of the structures that
afforded a roosting place. These birds have a ‘rookery’ or breed-
ing and night roosting place on Lake Butler, about three miles
inland from the mouth of the river, and every morning and even-
ing are to be seen passing to and from the salt water of the Gulf,
which is their principal fishing ground. They fly in flocks of
from six to forty, and now and then a single bird or pair is to be
seen passing over. At the rookery breeding fairly begins by the
roth of May, though a few birds may lay their eggs a little earlier.
The birds are among the very few still found in Florida that are
unsuspicious, being fairly tame and familiar, passing close over
the tops of the cottages and houses making up the town of Tarpon
Springs in their daily flights over the land between the fresh and
salt water.
The two islands in the Gulf of Mexico, three miles off the
mouth of the Anclote River, are known as the Anclote Keys, and
are the headquarters of the fleet of Key West vessels employed
in the sponge fishing. Six years ago the smaller of these two
keys was a ‘rookery,’ both for breeding and roosting, for count-
less pairs of birds. There were literally thousands of them. The
several acres of breeding ground are closely wooded with man-
grove and other trees and bushes, and each tree or bush of any
size contained several nests. There were also the several kinds
of Herons to be found here (I have records of Ardea herodias,
A. egretta, A. candidissima, A. tricolor ruficollis, A. cerulea,
A. virescens, Nycticorax nycticorax nevius, and N. violaceus
as all occurring and probably breeding on this island), Cormo-
rants in great numbers, and Brown Pelicans (Pelecanus fuscus).
Besides, during May and June, hundreds of pairs of Frigate
_
1887.] Scotr on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. be
Birds (/regata aguzla) roosted here each night, though these.
so far as I am aware, did not breed here. This was the state of
affairs existing on the northern of the two Anclote Keys six years
ago, according to my own observations, and those of Mr. Dever-
eaux, who was then my assistant. This morning in passing
these islands I saw but four Pelicans (they were flying by), two
or three frightened Herons, and a few Gulls and Terns. It is safe
to say that not a dozen pairs of Herons breed at present on the
island, and that the other birds spoken of have all been driven
away or killed. Once, at this time of the year, a perfect cloud
of birds were to be seen hovering all day over the islands, so tame
and unsuspicious that they had little or no fear of man; but now
the place is almost deserted by birds and the few that are left have
become, by being hunted, as wary as the traditional deer.
We sailed to-day as far as Little Clearwater Pass, where we
anchored and spent part of the afternoon and night. On the way
down to Clearwater Harbor we passed inside of Hog Island, sit-
uated to the east of it. Here another deserted heronry,
mangrove island, which, when I passed it in 1880, had many
Herons breeding on it,—stood a silent witness of wanton destruc-
tion. At Little Clearwater Pass the birds noted were numbers
of Royal Terns (Sternza maxima), Laughing Gulls and Black
Skimmers, a few Brown Pelicans and Willets, and Wilson’s
Plover. Westaid here all night.
Saturday, May 1. The wind, which was blowing hard till
late yesterday, died out in the night, but at sunrise there was
almost a gale from the northwest, and we did not get away until
12.30 Pp. M., John’s Pass, fourteen miles below, being the point
where we intended to harbor for the night. With a beam wind
this place was soon reached, and at 3.30 p. M. the sloop was
again at anchor in the little harbor inside of the Keys.
It was important to reach here early, as I particularly wished
to observe a rookery which has been ever present in my mind since
visits to the samé point in April, 1880.
At that time I made two visits of a day and night each to this
same rookery, and among the myriads of birds that were breeding
and roosting, the particular abundance of the Roseate Spoonbill,
the Reddish Egret, and all of the common Herons, as well as the
White Ibis, will never be forgotten. It is enough to state with-
out going into great detail, that in one flock at that time were at
a small
138 Scotr on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [April
least two hundred wonderfully colored Spoonbills, and that the
numbers of the other species were many times greater.
The numerous islands inside of the outer keys at this point are
mostly wooded with one or more of the several kinds of man-
grove, and vary in area from one to several hundred acres.. The
two nearest the mouth of the pass are small; the larger one may
have an area of seven and the smaller of not more than two acres.
They formed the site of the rookery. Looking carefully over both
I could see no birds when we anchored, but as the sun began to get
low in the west, a few, possibly fifty in all, shy and suspicious
Herons straggled in to roost on the smaller of the two Keys, and
a flock of Fish Crows ( Corvus osstfragus) were the only visitors
at the larger. Most of the Herons were A. rujficollts tricolor,
but there were several A. egretta, A. candidisstma, and A.
cerulea, and perhaps a dozen A. rufa, and three of the so-called
A. pealez. No Spoonbills, not a single White Ibis—in fact an
utter transformation from the happy and populous community of
only a few years before.
Of other birds seen here my log only speaks of some Royal and
Least Terns, a flock of Willets, and a single Kingfisher.
Sunday, May 2. We were up and away early, with a pleasant
northeast wind, and instead of going out of the pass again our
route threaded in and out among the inner islands, passing through
Boya Sieya into Tampa Bay proper. In Boya Sieya is an enor-
mous mangrove island, known throughout the region as the
Maximo Rookery, and also intimately associated in my mind with
the name of A. Lechvallier, a Frenchman, who, when I was
last at this point, had his home in a little house on the mainland
of Point Pinallas, about half a mile from this rookery.
Being anxious to get south as rapidly as possible I did not ex-
amine Maximo Rookery carefully, but passing it only half a mile
away I could see no birds. On my return, however, I made an
extended search through the hundreds of acres of mangrove, and
will leave the subject till then. But it may be as well to state
distinctly here that I am very credibly informed that during his
several years’ residence at this point, the old Frenchman and his
gunners killed many thousands of the several species of birds there
so abundant. These were particularly the several species of
White Herons and countless numbers of the Brown Pelican.
Passing on we crossed Tampa Bay to the mouth of the Manatee
1887. ] Scott on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. 139
River, thence following the bay coast down to the mouth of Sara-
sota Bay, and that night at six anchored at the town of Sarasota.
To-day we had sailed over some sixty miles, in a region once
famous for its teeming bird life, but now the birds were only con-
spicuous by their scarcity. During the entire day I only noticed
a few scattering Herons, one or two Man-o’-War Birds, four or
five Brown Pelicans, and a few Gulls.
Monday, May 3. Left Sarasota at 6.25 a.m. Day clear; wind
in morning east to northeast, moderate. We sailed out through
Big Sarasota Pass and were soon in the Gulf, running down the
coast with a fair wind. About five miles off shore were many
Brown Pelicans fishing among great schools of mullet, and a few
Man-o’-War Birds sailing about in graceful evolutions. Here,
too, were some Laughing Gulls, and now and then a few Royal
or Forster’s Terns, in small flocks of may be a dozen individuals.
This was about a fair sample of the bird life 2ll the forty miles
down to Boca Grande, the principal entrance to Charlotte Har-
bor.
Here we entered, and going, after getting fairly inside, about
two miles to the northward along the shore of Gasparilla Island,
at 5.25 p.M. we anchored for the night. We were not more than
a hundred yards from the shore of the island and almost at once
I went ashore in quest of birds.
The island is a long, low strip of sand, wooded with a heavy
growth of cabbage palms and some kinds of low palmetto.
Beside these were two kinds of mangrove growing profusely, as
well as a perfect tangle of low undergrowth of shrubs and vines.
All of the commoner small species that one would expect were
represented, and I saw a single pair of Reddish Egrets, two
White Ibises, and three Louisiana Herons. The bird that par-
ticularly attracted my attention was a single male Bobolink, in
full spring plumage. This seemed to me unusual, but I have
seen large numbers of the same species in early fall, about Tar-
pon Springs. They appeared on the 26th of August, 1886, at
the point indicated. The first flock was small, not over twenty
birds, but ina week they were abundant and in very large flocks.
About the middle of October they began to disappear, and by
November first all had left the region about Tarpon Springs.
Tuesday, May 4. Charlotte Harbor! How many wonderful
tales of the great heronries, with the myriads of birds every-
140 Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [April
where conspicuous, have been told of this region. Indeed, only
a few years ago bird life was so abundant about the many islands
dotting the harbor, that it would be difficult to exaggerate in
regard to their numbers.
We were up early, for I had determined to explore every island
and bay about the harbor, and knew that at least a week or ten
days would be a short time for the work in hand. An al/ day’s
sail along the northern shore of the bay, passing mangrove
islands which seemed to have been created for the home of many
species of Heron, Ibis, and other water birds which once congre-
gated here in vast numbers.
Captain Baker, who sailed the sloop, an old sponger and fish-
erman who had been familiar with all of this country for twenty-
five years or more, pointed out to me among these islands four, at
different points, where he assured me vast rookeries had existed.
One of perhaps sixty acres he said he had seen so covered with
‘White Curlew’ that, to use his own words, ‘tit looked from a
distance as if a big white sheet had been thrown over the man-
groves.” And though we passed by, as I have said before, islands
that plainly showed, by excrement still on the ground, that once
countless numbers of birds had lived there, sailing probably
over about forty miles in all, I did not see a rookery that was
occupied even by a few birds, andI only saw a few stray Gulls,
Pelicans, and two Herons in the whole day’s cruise. About four
o’clock, p.M., we reached a little settlement at the mouth of
Pease Creek, called Hickory Bluff, and I went ashore to get what
information I could regarding birds.
The postmaster and several other citizens with whom I talked
all agreed that five or six years before birds had been plenty at
the rookeries, and that it was no trouble to get hundreds of eggs
to eat or to kill as many birds as one cared to. But that for the
past two years birds had been so persecuted, to get their ‘Alames’
for the Northern market, that they were practically exterminated,
or at least driven away from all their old haunts. I further
learned that all of the gunners and hunters in the country round
had up to this year reaped a very considerable income from this
source. Birds were killed, and the plumes taken from the back,
head, and breast, and the carcass thrown to the Buzzards. Fort
Myers, on the Caloosahatchie, was the central local market for
this traffic, where several buyers were always ready to pay a high
sive
1887.] Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. I4I
cash price for all plumes and fancy feathers. The force of resi-
dent buyers was increased during the winter of each year by
taxidermists (?), and buyers from the north, who came, in some
cases at least, provided to equip hunters with breech-loaders,
ammunition, and the most approved and latest devices for carry-
ing on the warfare. One man, who had come down in this way
for the past four years, was down south now, and regularly em-
ployed from forty to sixty gunners, furnishing them with all
supplies and giving so much a plume or ffa¢ skzxz, for all the
birds most desirable. The prices, I was told, ranged from twenty
cents to two dollars and a half a skin, the average being about
forty cents apiece.
All this I afterward fully corroborated, and met, personally,
the gentleman in question, to whom I shall have occasion later
to refer more at length.
We staid at Hickory Bluff all night, as I had determined to ex-
plore the Myiakka River, which, I had always heard, was a bird
paradise, and I was told at Hickory Bluff that birds were still to
be found there in large numbers.
Wednesday, May 5. Left Hickory Bluff early, but the wind
being very light and ahead, we were till nearly night reaching a
point about ten miles up the Myiakka River, which is near the
head of navigation for boats drawing two feet of water. The
rookeries described to us as being near the mouth of the river,
and where I was told birds had abounded the season before, I
found to be deserted; only here and there did I see anything of
bird life, and in such cases only scattering individuals of the Flor-
ida Cormorant, White Ibis, and the commoner species of Herons.
Along the bank of the river, where we camped in the late after-
noon, were many Gray Kingbirds ( Zyrannus dominicensis) , the
first I had seen on the cruise, and the first I bad noted this
season. Going up the river we sailed close to three Ducks
which, as they rose out of the water, I determined were Aythya
marila nearcttca. Near where we anchored were a number of
Sandhill Cranes (Gras mexicana) feeding and now and then
uttering their peculiar cry. A few Brown Pelicans and a single
Man-o’-War Bird complete the list of birds observed this day.
It may be well to remark that the river is still salt at the high-
est point we reached, and that it is said to be brackish forty miles
from its mouth.
142 Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. | April
Tuesday, May 6. AsI had been told at Hickory Bluff that
the largest of the rookeries was still further up the river, we took
the small boat serving as our tender, and early in the morning
started to explore. About a mile and a half from where we had
anchored, on passing a sharp bend in the river, we saw a small
mangrove island fairly white with birds, most of which I present-
ly discovered to be the small White Egret (Ardea candidissi-
ma), and with them a number of Ardea rujicollis tricolor, and
a few Ardea egretta and Ardea caerulea. The birds were in
some cases still building, though some had finished their nests
and had laid from one to three eggs. The Ardea cerulea, of
which there were perhaps half a dozen pairs, were mainly in the
blue plumage, though I saw a number in the white and parti-
colored phases, and a female in this last condition, taken later in
the day, proved on dissection to be breeding, having a fully de-
veloped egg with hard shell in the oviduct.
Up to the present time, though I had been away on the trip
for a week, not a single bird had been collected. So after dinner
I went to the neighborhood of the rookery, where about two
hundred birds in all were congregated, and in the course of the
afternoon I took some twenty birds of the several kinds above
enumerated, a pair or so of each. The rookery had evidently
often been disturbed before, and the birds were very shy and
only to be taken at long range, flying. The whole island was
wooded with mangrove and was perhaps half an acre in extent.
Friday, May 7. Spent most of the morning in making the
birds I had killed the afternoon before into skins, and later in
the day explored the river further up for about four miles. This
search was unrewarded, and so we came back to the sloop, de-
termining to go out of the river and continue the exploration of
Charlotte Harbor in the morning.
While anchored at this point I was visited by two plume
hunters, each separately, who wished to dispose of numbers of
plumes of Little White Egrets and other birds they had collected.
They seemed much surprised to find that I did not wish to buy
the material in question, and told me that I was the only dzrd
man they had met who was not eager to obtain plumes. The
name of one of these men I did not ascertain, but the other was
Mr. Abe Wilkerson, of whom I shall have more to say later. The
prices they asked for plumes of Herons were about as follows:
aos
1887.] Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. 143
Ardea egretta, 40 cents (the only part of the bird used being
the long feathers of the back) ; Ardea candidisstma, 55 cents
(in addition to the back plumes, those of the throat or breast and
head are utilized); Ardea rufa, 40 cents (simply the back
plumes) ; Ardea ruficollis tricolor, 10 to 15 cents (only the
plumes of the back are utilized) ; Ardea wardz (plumes of breast
and back), 75 cents to one dollar; Ajaja ajaja (flat skin) $2.00
to $5.00. A flat sk7x is the bird skin split underneath from the
bill to the vent and skinned so that the whole is perfectly flat
when dry. Generally the legs are cut off, and sometimes the
wings, and even the head.
These two hunters both told me of the man of whom I had heard
at Hickory Bluff, and gave me much interesting information re-
garding the trafic in plumes. Wilkerson told me of the birds
which once inhabited the rookeries of this river in great abun-
dance. He had made, he said, many a dollar from plumes ob-
tained here, and spoke of the little rookery I have described
above as too small to be hardly worthy of the name. He was on
his way to some lakes far up the river, in the interior, where he
hoped to find large rookeries of the Little White Egret, which
is regarded as the best paying species. His method of obtaining
birds was with a 22-calibre Winchester rifle. With this he could
go into a rookery and secrete himself, and by using the lightest
kind of cartridge get many more birds than with a shot-gun, as
the report is hardly greater than the snapping of a branch, and is
scarcely noticed by the birds. In this way he said he had been
able in a large rookery down south to get over four hundred
‘plume birds’ in less than four days.
On asking him about Reddish Egrets, I found he was full of
information. He told me ofa rookery he had recently visited at
the entrance of Matlacha Pass, where there were many of these
birds, and some in the white phase. He also said he had hunted
the entire coast, and that below Marko Pass, the colored phase
of the Reddish Egret became uncommon, while the white phase
began to be more numerous, and that the form found in the rook-
eries of the Thousand Islands was the white phase, which is
there quite plenty; he had never seen a colored bird there or
south of there. I have this same information from a number of
independent sources and consider it reliable. A word further as
to the range to the northward on the Gulf Coast of the Reddish
144 STEJNEGER on the genus Acanthts. [April
Egret (A. rufa). Ihave not met with it at all north of the mouth
of the Anclote River, at which point it is rare. In all the rook-
eries about Tampa, Old Tampa, and Hillsboro’ Bays, it is more
or less common, but its representatives are almost entirely in the
colored phase, and only now and then, at rare intervals, is a
white bird (A. fealez) met with.
(To be continued.)
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ON THE GENUS
ACANTHIS.
BY LEONHARD STEJNEGER.
Tue well-known Austrian ornithologist, Victor, Ritter von
Tschusi zu Schmidhoften, has most courteously sent me four
specimens of Acanthis cabaret from Austria, thus enabling me
to supplement my former paper (Auk, 1887, p. 31) on the sub-
ject with a few notes.
I stated that from the examination of an Italian specimen I
was ‘‘strongly inclined to think that it will be necessary ulti-
mately to recognize A. rufescens (Vieill.) as different from A.
cabaret.” The Italian specimen, as compared with British
birds, differed chiefly (1) in being of a brighter and more ochra-
ceous brown; (2) in having whitish (not pale umber brown)
outer margins to the tail-feathers; (3) in having the flanks more
heavily streaked; (4) in having dusky streaks across the fore
neck, and (5) in having a decidedly smaller bill.
The four Austrian birds show conclusively that the above
characters wiil not hold as distinguishing continental specimens
from British ones. They are practically identical with typical
British A. cabaret, and can be matched completely, and I have
British specimens of A. cabaret before me which are considerably,
brighter in general coloration, and have the flanks more heavily
streaked than the Austrian examples, none of which exhibit any
dusky streaks across the fore neck. Of the latter two have whit-
ish outer margins to the tail-feathers, while in the other two they
are brownish, and as to the size of the bill, the table below de-
1887.] BREWSTER oz Three New Forms of North American Birds. 145
monstrates that the Austrian specimens have the bills larger, if
anything, than the average British bird. (Compare tablesin Auk,
1887, pp. 34, 35-) This table also shows how closely Austrian
and British examples agree in general size.
It is hardly probable that the form inhabiting the mountains of
Italy should be different from that breeding in the Austrian Alps,
and I therefore now regard A. rufescens as a true synonym of
A. cabaret.
MEASUREMENTS.
Sleek eee eases
Sex to | SY | Sea | ag
and Loca.ity. DaTE. cee ee | ES
A = 0 5
g@ ad.* | Hallein, Salzburg, Austria. ....... Nov. 15, 1883. | 71 | 53 | 7-5 | 10
at a - She VRtist sai Shion sy ts Oct. 21, 1883. | 70 | 52 | 7-2 10
ot Mariahoff, Steiermark, Austria... .... Feb. 24, 1881. | 71 | 54| 7-5 12
Q Mallen, Salzburg crete 3) « yelie© ese a Oct. 21, 1883. | 67 | 49 | 7-0 Il
Average measurements of three males . .
* Throat and breast red.
t+ Without red.
71
_
~
THREE NEW FORMS OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS.
BY WILLIAM BREWSTER.
Mr. J. M. Souruwick, of Providence, has called my atten-
tion to the fact that western specimens of the Willet differ in
size, color, and markings from those of the Atlantic coast.
Upon testing these differences by a fairly large series I find the
birds of the two regions apparently distinct, at least subspecifi-
cally. The western form may be characterized as follows:
Symphemia semipalmata inornata, subsp. nov.—WESTERN WILLET.
Suspsp. CuHar. Male and Female, breeding plumage : — Differing
from S. semi~almata in being larger, with a longer, slenderer bill; the
dark markings above fewer, finer, and fainter, on a much paler (grayish-
drab) ground; those beneath duller, more confused or broken, and bor-
dered by pinkish-salmon, which often spreads over or suffuses the entire
underparts, excepting the abdomen. Middle tail-feathers either quite
immaculate or very faintly barred.
146 Brewster on Three New Forms of North American Birds, (April
Measurements: Eight specimens from Larimer County, Colorado, and
two from Moody County, Dakota; all adults taken in May or June; aver-
age: Wing, 8.11; tail, 3.29; tarsus, 2.66; culmen from feathers, 2.46.
The same birds give the following extremes: Wing, 7.88-8.26; tail, 3.10-
3.50; tarsus, 2.45-2.95; culmen from feathers, 2.28-2.70.*
Types, No. 13,529, g ad., Larimer County, Colorado, May 14, 1886;
No. 13.530, Q ad., Larimer County, Colorado, May 5, 1885; both in my
collection.
Habitat. Interior of North America between the Mississippi and the
Rocky Mountains, wintering along the coasts of the Gulf and Southern
Atlantic States (Florida, Georgia, South Carolina).
S. semipalmata typica is brownish-olive, above confusedly
and densely barred, streaked, or spotted with blackish, this giv-
ing the prevailing tone to the plumage. The bars beneath are
usually coarse, dark, regular, and seldom bordered with pinkish
or salmon. The central tail-feathers are almost invariably crossed
by three or four distinct and continuous blackish bars. The two
birds do not seem to differ in respect to the white on the wings
or upper tail-coverts.
Among the breeding (May and June) specimens before me the
differences just pointed out are nearly constant, and so pronounced
that they may be seen at a glance. They are less striking in some
examples taken in early spring (March and April) in South
Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, several of which seem to be fair
intermediates, although they may be eastern birds which have
not perfected the nuptial plumage. I have a few specimens
(winter and early spring) from Georgia and the Carolinas which
are apparently true ¢zornata.
In the plain gray and white winter dress the two forms ap-
pear to be distinguishable only by size. Unfortunately, this dif-
ference is not absolutely reliable as the above measurements
show. Rather curiously, the young, from whatever locality,
seem to be larger than the old birds.
Touching briefly on synonymy it appears:
(1) That the Scolopax semipalmata of Gmelin (Sys. Nat., I,
1788, 659) was based on the eastern bird.
(2) That Zotanus crasstrostris Vieillot (Nouv. Dict. d’Hist.
Nat., 1816, 406) was founded on a specimen (from Louisiana)
* An equal number of adult eastern birds, four from Georgia, five from Northamp-
ton County, Virginia, and one from Warwick, Rhode Island, average: Wing, 7.36;
tail, 2.91; tarsus, 2.29; culmen from feathers, 2.19. Extremes: Wing, 7.06-7.75; tail,
2.71-3.30; tarsus, 2.08-2.42; culmen from feathers, 2.02-2.31. ;
1887.] BREWSTER on Three New Forms of North American Birds. 144
in winter plumage, in which condition, as just stated, the two
forms are not certainly separable.
(3) That Symphemia atlantica Rafinesque ( Journ. Phys.,
LXXXVIII, 1819, 417) is a xomen nudum.
(4) That Zotanus speculiferus Cuvier (R. A., 1, 1817, 351)
and Pucheran (R. et M. Z., III, 1851, 569) is not now deter-
minable.
It follows that none of these names are available for the West-
-ern Willet, although it is not improbable that at least. two of
them (crass¢rostrés Vieill. and speculéferus Cuv.) were origi-
nally applied to it. .
Most of our recent authorities describe both forms under S.
semt palmata, confusing them and attributing their differences to
age, season, or individual variations.
I am indebted to Mr. Southwick for most of the specimens on
which the above comparisons are based, as well as for pei mission
to announce what is really his discovery rather than my own.
Phalenoptilus nuttalli nitidus, subsp. nov. — FROSTED PoOoR-WILL.
SuBsp. CHAR.—Similar to true P. xuwftfall7, but with the dark markings
of the crown, back, etc., fewer and more sharply defined on a much
lighter ground, the transverse bars beneath finer, paler, and less conspic-
uous.
FHlabitat. Texas and Arizona.
Types, Nos. 13076, @ ad., and 13077, 9 ad., Nueces River, Texas, Feb.
27, 1886; F. B. Armstrong; both in my collection.
This bird seems to be another example of a ‘bleached desert
race.’ It is very much paler than true zz¢tal/z, with fewer, finer
dark markings, which, however, are more conspicuous than in
nuttaliz, owing to the generally lighter ground color. This on
the forehead, sides of crown, rump, upper tail-coverts, and scap-
ulars is pearly or ashy white, giving the parts a delicate frosted
appearance. The chin. sides of head, and a broad band around
the nape are light faded brown, whereas in wat¢tal/? they are
many shades darker and (the chin and cheeks at least) often
strongly blackish. That Audubon described and figured the
darker bird is open to no doubt.
Texas specimens show little variation, several taken in Febru-
ary on the Nueces River being practically identical with a breed-
ing female shot at Rio Grande City in June (No. 977, Coll. of
148 BREWSTER on Three New Forms of North American Birds. (April
George B. Sennett). Arizona apparently furnishes both forms for
a specimen from the Catalina Mts. (¢, No. 2177, Coll. W. E.
D. Scott, April 19, 1885) is typical xz¢zdus, while six others
from the same locality are referable to xattallz. The latter,
however, do not average as dark as examples from further north.
California birds are usually, but by no means invariably, the
deepest-colored of all. It is not impossible that both zzttallz
and zzf¢zdus breed in Arizona at different elevations, or one of
them (zz/édus) may occur only as a migrant. The evidence at
hand seems to favor the latter view.
In Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway’s Land Birds (Vol. II, page
417) the female Poor-will is described as ‘‘without the white
tip of tail.” This is obviously an error, for not one of the
twelve females before me lacks the white, although in several it
is more or less tinged with buff, and is, perhaps, also usually
narrower than in the male.
The material examined in the above connection includes the
entire series of the National, American (of New York), and
Cambridge Museums, besides those of several private collections,
the whole aggregating forty-one specimens—five from Texas, two
from New Mexico, sixteen from Arizona, two from Colorado,
five from Utah, four from Montana, one from Nevada, and six
from California.
Vireo noveboracensis maynardi, subsp. nov.—KEy WEST VIREO.
Supsp. CuHar. —In size and proportions similar to V. crasszrostris, the
bill equally large and stout. Coloring more like that of V. xovebora-
censis but grayer above, the yellow beneath paler (but of the same green-
ish or lemon tinge) and equally, if not more, restricted.
Wing, 2.20-2.53; tail, 1.90-2.07; tarsus, .70-.79; culmen from base,
.55--65; do. from feathers, .42-.50; do. from nostril, .30-.35; depth of bill
at nostril, .18—.20
Habitat. Key West, Florida.
Types, Nos. 108,860, g ad., Key West, Fla., March 29, 1886, Str. Alba-
tross ; 108,862, 9 ad., Key West, March 29, 1886, Str. Albatross; both in
collection of National Museum.
In general terms this bird may be said to combine the struc-
tural peculiarities of V. crasstrostris with the coloring of V.
noveboracensis. It has the long, stout bill of the former, the
yellow beneath greenish instead of brownish, and essentially
1887.] Recent Literature. 149
confined to the sides as in the latter. That it is a connecting
link between the two is evident, for several of the Key West
specimens unmistakably approach crass¢rostr?s, while others
vary in the direction of zoveboracenszs. With the latter, in-
deed, the large series before me* establishes a perfect intergra-
dation. This seems to be effected within a narrow latitudinal
belt, all my specimens from Northern Florida being essentially
similar to those from the United States at large, the intermedi-
ates coming from Miami and the keys between that point and
Key West. A bird from Cozumel [sland is apparently typical
noveboracensis, While two Bermuda specimens show only slight,
and perhaps accidental, peculiarities.
Several of the Key West examples used in the above compar-
ison were collected by Mr. C. J. Maynard, to whom the new
bird is dedicated.
RECENT LITERATURE.
Sclater’s Catalogue of the Ccerebidze, Tanagridz, and Icteridze.—In
the eleventh volume of the British Museum Catalogue of Birdst Dr. P. L.
Sclater treats the three strictly American families Coerebide, Tanagride,
and Icteride—groups to which, as is well known, he has for many years
given special attention. Of the family Ccerebide (Guit-guits, or Honey
Creepers), 70 species are recognized, of which 63 are represented in the
collection of the British Museum by 672, specimens. The members of this
family are of small size, mostly of brilliant color; some are closely related
to the Mniotiltide, from which they may, however, be distinguished by
‘“‘the more slender unnotched bill and filamentous termination of the ex-
tensile tongue”; others are with difficulty separable from the Tanagridz.
Of the great group Tanagridz 377 species are admitted, all but 20 of
which are represented in the British Museum Collection by 3413 speci-
mens. Thirty-three species are referred to the genus Euphonza, 61 to
the genus Cadliste, 32 to Chlorospingus, and 35 to Buarremon. The total
number of genera is 59.
* About one hundred and fifty specimens, chiefly from the collections of the National
and Cambridge Museums.
+ Catalogue of the Passeriformes, or Perching Birds, in the Collection of the British
Museum, Fringilliformes: Part II, containing the families Coerebidze, Tanagridze, and
Icteridze. By Philip Lutley Sclater. London: Printed by order of the Trustees. 1886,
8vo, pp. xviii, 431, pll. xviii.
150 Recent Literature. [April
Of the Icteride 128 species are accepted, 125 of which are represented
in the British Museum by an agregate of 1409 specimens. The whole
number of species treated in the volume is therefore 545, represented by
5494 species. Means’so ample, in the hands of a specialist so thoroughly
competent for the task, cannot fail to give most satisfactory results.
The position of the Icteride next to the Tanagride, necessitated by the
scheme of classification adopted by Mr. Sharpe for the Oscines, does not
meet with Mr. Sclater’s full approval, who considers the Tanagridz as
very closely allied to the Fringillidz, and as being in fact ‘‘fruit and insect-
eating Finches.” The Icteride, he believes, would be better placed after
the Fringillidz, in the immediate neighborhood of the Sturnide.
Although subspecies are freely admitted, the system of nomenclature
conforms to that of the previous volumes of the ‘Catalogue.’ The treatment
of specific and subspecific forms is, in general, decidedly conservative; if.
however, the author had followed, in certain instances, his own expressed
convictions in place of deferring to the opinion of some previous author,
the results would, we believe, have been more satisfactory.
Two species (Arremon nigrtrostris and Agelatus forbes¢) and three
genera (Pseudodacnis, Delothraupis, and Gymuostinops) are indicated as
new. Twenty-three species are figured.
The families here treated could not have fallen into better hands. The
authorities of the British Museum are to be congratulated on having se-
cured the assistance of Mr. Sclater for this work; and we are sure ornithol-
ogists will be rejoiced to learn thatanother volume of this invaluable series
will be prepared by the same distinguished authority on American birds.
—j. A. A.
Conclusion of the Great Work on the Nests and Eggs of the Birds
of Ohio.* For several years we have noted the progress of this undertak-
* Collation:
1g covertitles : Part [1-23 (msc.)] | Price $5. [later omitted] | Illustrations | of the |
Nests and Eggs | of the | Birds of Ohio | with Text | by | Genevieve E. Jones and Eliza
J. Shulze [names later omitted.] | Circleville, Ohio | 1879 [Dates omitted after Part 5]
Copyrighted by Genevieve E. Jones and Eliza J. Shulze | [Dates,Stamped or Msc. ]
Illustrations | of the | Nests and Eggs | of | Birds of Ohio | with Text. | Illustrations
by | Mrs. N. E. Jones | Text by | Howard Jones, A.M., M.D. | Circleville, Ohio, U. S.
A. | [1879 to] 1886. | Folio. Txt. in loose sheets; pll. plain lithog. or hand-col’d;
pub. in 23 Parts. Text, pp. i-xxxviii, xxxvili a-d, 41-329. Plates i-Ixviil.
Part 1, July, 1879 [there was a trial or specimen part pub. Dec. 1878] pp. 41-46, pll.
i-ili. Part 2, Oct. 1879, pp. 47-54, pll. iv-vi. Part 3, Jan., 1880, pp. 55-58, pll. vii-ix.
Part 4, April, 1880, pp. 59-66, pll.x-xii. Part 5, July, 1880, pp. 67-70, pll. xiii-xv. Part 6,
Oct., 1880, pp. 71-82, pll. xvi-xviii. Part 7, Jan., 1881, pp. 83-90, pll. xix-xxi. Part 8,
April, 1881, pp. 91-98, pll. xxii-xxiv. Part 9, July, 1881, pp. 99-106, pll. xxv-xxvii. Parts
10, 11 (Double No.), pp. 107-118, pll. xviii-xxxiii (“Oct., 1881" to) Jan., 1882. Part
12, Apr., 1882, pp. 119-122, pll. xxxiv-xxxvi. Part 13, July, 1882, pp. 123-138, pll. xxxvii-
xxxix. Parts 14, 15 (Double No.), pp. 139-154, pll. xl-xlv (“Oct., 1882” to) Jan., 1883.
Part 16, Apr., 1883, pp. 155-166, pll. xlvi-xlviii. Parts 17, 18 (Double No.), pp. 167-190,
pil. xlix-liv (“July to”) Oct., 1883. Part 19, Jan., 1884, pp. 191-206, pll. lv-lvii. Part 20,
1887.] Recent. Literature. I51
ing in the pages of the ‘Nuttall Bulletin’ and of ‘The Auk.’ It now gives
us real pleasure to record the completion of so meritorious and important
a publication, pushed with every painstaking through a period of eight
years to a successful termination. Circumstances have been against the
authors in more ways than one, which one alone would have led most
persons to abandon the project. But they have steadily persevered, and
the result is one which will take its place among the most original and
most notable treatises on ornithology which have appeared in this country.
It might be going too far to say that the work does for caliology and
odlogy what Audubon’s did for its own subject; but if the drawings and
writings of the latter had been confined to the birds of a single State, the
comparison would hold. Several treatises on eggsand nests, more or less
ambitious, have been essayed, but they have all broken down, though most-
ly projected under more favorable circumstances than this one. With
little encouragement from high sources, with less assistance still, and
with no adequate pecuniary support, it required courage, patience, and en-
thusiastic devotion to a purpose to accomplish such a result—circum-
stances which, in these days of that easy book-making which results in
such hard book-reading, carry us in mind back to Alexander Wilson’s
appearance before the public with the first two volumes of ‘American Orni-
thology’ under his arm.
The work is simply admirable. Its cost may place it beyond the reach
of many working ornithologists, but it should be found in our principal
libraries, as we have no doubt that it will. In Ohio, at any rate, it should
not be beneath the notice of the Legislature, with reference to those edu-
cational institutions which are under legislative jurisdiction.
Upwards of one hundred species of eggs are figured in colors by hand,
usually with several specimens of each, showing the variations in size,
shape and markings. Their average excellence—for they vary somewhat
—has not been equalled in this country, and they are surpassed only by
the best productions of foreign artists. No such series of the figures of
nests has ever appeared anywhere. Nests are often introduced as acces-
sories of figures of birds, as they were, notably, by Audubon, and many
very pretty and effective woodcuts of these objects are extant. But these
are a larger collection than have appeared together before; they are life-
sized and life-colored—if such expressions be permitted. and many of them
ere introduced with their accessories. In some cases the eggs rest in the
nest, and the whole effect is singularly true to nature. There is room for
criticism, as where is there not? But we imagine few critics would speak,
Apr., 1885, pp. 207-234, pll. lviii-lx. Parts 21,22 (Double No.), pp. 235-286, pll. Lxi-Ixvi
(“July to”) Oct., 1886. Part 23, Dec., 1886, pp. i-x xxviii, xx xviii-a-d, 287-3209, pll. lxvii-
Ixviii.
Title, etc., pub. with Part 23. Title, p.i; Dedication, p. iii; Preface, pp. v-viii; Intro-
ductory, pp. ix-xxxiii, including Lists of Ohio Birds: Key to the Eggs of the Summer
Residents of Ohio, pp. Xx Xiv-xxxvili, xxxviii a-d; Main Text pp. 41-314; Etymo-
logical Key, pp. 315-320; Names of Subscribers, pp. 321-322; Index to Illustrations,
PP- 323, 324; General Index, pp. 325-329.
152 Recent Literature. [April
if the condition of their being heard were, that they should be able to do
as well themselves.
The text is very original, resting almost entirely upon the personal ob-
servations of the authors. It has no literary merit, unless directness and
clearness be such. It resists the usual temptation to prepare full biogra-
phies of the birds, confining itself strictly to the subject in hand. Each
article opens with general statements regarding the bird in its Ohion as-
pects, continuing with the ‘locality,’ ‘position’ and ‘materials’ of the nest,
descriptions of the ‘eggs,’ ‘differential points’ of the same, and concluding
remarks at large. The text is almost entirely from the pen of Dr. Howard >
E. Jones, and the plates have in nearly every instance been drawn from
fresh material collected by this author, mainly in the vicinity of Circleville.
The project was initiated by Miss Genevieve Estelle Jones and Miss Eliza
J. Shulze, who determined in 1877 to make a series of colored plates. The
sad death of the former young lady, August 17, 1879, and the withdrawal
of Miss Shulze in April, 1880, threw the work upon the hands of the Jones
family. Dr. N. E. Jones assumed the expense of the work, Mrs. N. E.
Jones proceeded with the plates, Dr. Howard Jones (brother of Miss Gene-
vieve) undertook the text as already said, and subsequently Miss Nellie
D. Jacob of Circleville, Miss Josephine Kippart of Columbus, and Miss
Kate Gephart, of Circleville, were engaged to assist Mrs. Jones in the col-
oring. Had the result been but a measured success instead of a remarka-
ble accomplishment, ‘great credit would have been due to all concerned.
The Introductory is a general sketch of the Birds of Ohio. It appears
that of summer residents there are 129; of permanent residents, 41; prob-
able residents and summer residents, 42. This category is followed bya
systematic, annotated list, copied from Dr. J. M. Wheaton’s work, noting
292 species known to occur in the State.
A quite original and peculiar ‘Key to the Eggs’ follows. The eggs are
found to be groupable by color in the following manner: I. Eggs plain.
A, white or whitish; 22 spp. B, blue or bluish, green or greenish; 17 spp.
C, some other plain color as buff, etc. ; 5 spp. Il. Eggs marked. A, B, C,
as before, as to ground color; A, 56 spp.; B, 20 spp.; C, 25 spp. And in
every case in this remarkable set of tables, the eggs are not only thus
classified, but described concisely, with measurements of length and
breadth, the linear arrangement in each group being according to size.
It is a very pretty and effectual piece of work.
Among appendicular matters is an ‘Etymological Key,’ in which Rev.
S. H. McMullin undertakes to give the English equivalents of all the
Latin and Greek names of the birds, and offers quite as much ornithophilo-
logicality as the average bird-lover may require.—E. C.
Ridgway’s Nomenclature of Colors and Ornithologists’ Compendium.*
*A | Nomenclature of Colors | for Naturalists, | and | Compendium of Useful Knowl-
edge | for Ornithologists. | By | Robert Ridgway, | Curator of Birds, United States
National Museum. | With ten colored plates and seven plates | of outline illustrations
Boston: | Little, Brown, and Company. 1886, 8vo., pp. 129, pll. i-xviii, faced by ex-
planatory leaves.
1887.] Recent Literature. I 53
—Mr.Ridgway’s little manual will doubtless prove of great utility, and
should meet with a hearty welcome. It consists of two parts. Of Part I,
‘Nomenclature of Colors,’ some twenty pages are devoted to ‘Principles
of Color,’ and consist largely of directions as to the selection of pig-
ments and their combination to form certain desired tints. This is fol-
lowed by a ‘Comparative Vocabulary of Colors,’ giving the equivalent
names in English, Latin, German, French, Spanish, Italian, Norwegian,
and Danish, occupying nearly twenty pages more. Two pages of ‘Bibli-
ography’ complete Part I, which is illustrated by ten hand-colored plates.
Part II is entitled ‘Ornithologists’ Compendium,’ and is made up large-
ly of a ‘Glossary of Technical Terms used in Descriptive Ornithology,’
which occupies nearly one-half of the book; it is illustrated by six plates
of outline figures, three of which are devoted to the ‘topography’ or ‘exter-
nal anatomy’ of a bird, two to various forms of color-marks on feathers,
and one to egg-contours. Another plate gives a comparative scale of
measurement standards, as the English inch, the French inch (pied du
roi), and millimetres.
Part II closes with a table showing ‘‘the equivalents in English inches,
and decimals thereof, of every tenth of a milimetre, from 1.0 to 100.9,” and
another ‘‘for converting English inches and decimals into millimetres.”
The author acknowledges his indebtedness to Dr. Leonhard Stejneger not
only for suggesting these useful tables but for their preparation, and for aid
in compiling the comparative color-vocabulary.
In Part I of the present work Mr. Ridgway has attempted a difficult task,
requiring much research, a nice display of judgment, and other qualifica-
tions which only experience and skill as a colorist, combined with critical
knowledge of the requirements of descriptive ornithology, could give.
The details of the subject afford much latitude for a diversity of opinion;
and whatever the results attained, they would be more or less subject to
adverse criticism, especially in regard to the proper designation of partic-
ular shades of color. ‘‘Undoubtedly,” as the author says, ‘‘one of the
chief desiderata of naturalists, both professional and amateur, is a means
of identifying the various shades of colors named in descriptions, and of
being able to determine exactly what name to apply to a particular tint
which it is desired to designate in an original description.” There being
no modern work of this character extant, Mr. Ridgway has very laudably
attempted to supply the want. While he has supplied a standard for color
nomenclature—and so far as we can see an excellent one—it fails by far,
from the nature of the subject, to clear away all the difficulties, since the
names of colors in current use are in many cases both vague and variable.
The general adoption by future describers of the standard here set would
do much to improve matters, and would give a uniform basis for color-
nomenclature ; but it would be, unfortunately, highly unsafe to attempt to
make the standard retroactive, and interpret by it the color descriptions of
the already existing literature. But this is no fault of the present author
or his system; and his work as a whole cannot fail to be extremely useful.
Part II must prove especially welcome to all beginners in ornithology, to
whom, however, its usefulness will be by no means limited.—J. A. A.
154 Recent Literature. [April
Bryant on the Ornithology of Guadalupe Island.—In December, 1885,
Mr. Bryant visited Guadalupe Island, and the results of his three and
a half months’ work there is given in a paper* of 50 pages, published in
the ‘Bulletin’ of the California Academy of Sciences. The only previous
exploration of the island in the interest of ornithology was made by Dr.
Edward Palmer, in 1875, who obtained 72 specimens of birds, representing
nine species, eight of them being land birds and new toscience. To this
list Mr. Bryant added 27 species, raising the total number now known from
the island to 36. All but four of the species are land birds, and eight of
them are peculiar to the island. Mr. Bryant’s paper opens with a detailed
account of the topography, climate, and vegetation of the island, which is
followed by a copiously annotated list of the species, consisting of bio-
graphical notes of much interest, including descriptions of the nests and
eggs of most of the resident species, of which nothing was previously
known. Good series of specimens were obtained of most of the species
met with, measurements of which are also included.
Although Dr. Palmer seems to have harvested the ‘first fruits’ (Mr. Bry-
ant failing to obtain any species new to science), Mr. Bryant’s paper ad-
mirably supplements Mr. Ridgway’s papers on the bird fauna of the island,
based on Dr. Palmer’s collections, and forms a highly important contribu-
tion to the subject, leaving apparently little to be added by future explor-
OPS) fo JG aN
Ralph and Bagg on the Birds of Oneida County, N. Y.—The ‘Anno-
tated List of the Birds of Oneida County, N. Y., and its immediate vicin-
ity,’ + by Dr. William L. Ralph and Mr. Egbert Bagg, though not ‘‘put
forth as complete,” is based on the observations of several years, and ap-
pears to have been compiled in a thoroughly scientific spirit and with due
care, the authority being stated for such data as are not given on their per-
sonal knowledge. A few species have been included from having been
found in neighboring counties, for which there is as yet no positive
record for the county in question, but they are duly distinguished in the
annotations, and are covered by the title in the phrase ‘‘its immediate
vicinity.” Many valuable observations are accredited to Dr. C. Hart
Merriam (now of Washington, D. C.), and Messrs. A. L. Brainard and
A. A. Howlet, of Syracuse. The List numbers 224 species.—J. A. A.
Platt on the Birds of Meriden, Conn.—Mr. Platt’s Listt appears to
have strict reference to the town limits of Meriden, Conn., and to be
based almost wholly on the author’s personal observations. It is briefly
annotated and numbers 116 species. The list is very attractively printed,
and seems thoroughly trustworthy, so far as it goes, but is obviously in-
* Additions to the Ornithology of Guadalupe Island. By Walter E. Bryant. Bull.
California Acad. Sciences, No. 6, pp. 269-318. (“Issued Jan. 5, 1887.”)
t Trans. of the Oneida Hist. Soc., Vol. III, pp. ror-147, 1886.
fA List of the Birds of Meriden, Conn, By Franklin Platt. Trans. of the Meriden
Scientific Assoc., Meriden, Conn., Vol, II, 1885-86, (Feb. 1887), pp. 30-53.
1887.] PRecent Literature. I 5 5
complete. The author has wisely, however, confined his list to the species
positively known to occur.—J. A. A.
Maynard on ‘Five New Species of Birds from the Bahamas.’—In a
paper entitled ‘Corrected Descriptions of Five New Species of Birds
from the Bahamas,’ published in an obscure trade journal,* Mr. C. J.
Maynard has briefly characterized ‘‘ provisionally, in advance of my [his]
work on illustrations and notes of Birds of the Bahamas,” the following
species as new: Pandion ridgwayt, Fallus coryt, Chamepelia bahamen-
sis, Ammodramus australis, Geothlypis restricta. The Ammodramus
australis is said to be ‘‘Rare in the Bahamas, but constantly resident in
Florida.” Most of the species are closely allied to well-known continental
forms, to which they have been hitherto, and probably will be in future,
commonly referred. But whatever their fate, Mr. Maynard most un-
wisely chose his medium for their publication, and was most unfortunate
in the treatment his original article, published in a previous issue of
the paper in question, received at the hands of the printer, it being so full
of misprints, particularly in the scientific names, as to necessitate its re-
publication in a corrected form; hence the title, as above cited. Mr.
Maynard, not feeling sure that Columba passerina of Linnzus was not
based on Bahama specimens rather than on examples from the main
land, has taken the precaution to ‘‘propose the name of Chamepelia
purpurea tor the larger continental dove” !—J. A. A.
Shufeldt’s Contributions to Science.t—Dr. Shufeldt has recently pub-
lished an annotated list of his scientific papers, numbering 123 titles.
They embrace a wide range of topics, though mainly ornithological, and
indicate great industry and intellectual activity on the part of their author.
The list forms an exceptionally neat and well-printed pamphlet of twenty
pages.—]J. A. A.
Stejneger ‘On the Status of Synthliboramphus wumizusume as a North
American Bird.’ Under this titlef Dr Stejneger affirms that the only
specimens extant of this species from North American localities prove to
be immature or winter examples of S. antiguus. He therefore believes
that ‘‘Until authenticated and undoubted American specimens are found,
it may be expedient to remove Syxthliboramphus wumizusume to the
‘Hypothetical List’ (A. O. U. Check List, p. 347). It isa case in many
respects completely parallel to that of Cepphus carbo.”—J. A. A.
* The American Exchange and Mart and Household Journal, Vol. III, No. 6,
Feb. 5, 1887, p. 69. (Boston and New York.)
+ 1881-1887. | — | Contributions to Science | and | Bibliographical Résumé | of the
Writings | of | R. W. Shufeldt, M. D., | Captain; Medical Department, U.S. Army |
.... [= lines, titles]. | — | By their Author. | — | — | Press of L. S. Foster, New
York. | 1887. 8vo, pp. 20.
f Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1836, p. 524.
I 56 Recent Literature. [April
Ridgway on New Species of American Birds, etc.—A species of Myzar-
chus* supposed to be from the Orinoco district of South America, is de-
scribed as Myzarchus coale7. It is said to most resemble M. nigriceps Scl.,
and is from the collection of Mr. H. K. Coale. A new species of Picolaf-
tes (P. riker#) is describedt from near Santarem, Lower Amazon, where
it was recently collected by Mr. C. B. Riker. A new subspecies of Cy-
clorhis (C. faviventris yucatanensis) is describedt from three specimens
taken in Yucatan.
Mr. Ridgway has also described a new Plumed Partridge from Sonora,§
under the name Cadlipepla elegans benson7, based on five specimens taken
by Lieut. H. C. Benson, U.S. A., in Sonora. Mr. Ridgway has also re-
corded a Woodpecker|| supposed to be a hybrid between Nuttall’s Wood-
pecker and Gairdner’s Woodpecker, which in ‘‘every feature of size, form,
and coloration” is exactly intermediate between these two species.—J. A. A.
Publications Received.—Berlepsch, Hans von. (1) On some interest-
ing additions to the Avifauna of Bucaramanga, U. S. of Columbia. (Ibis,
1886, pp. 53-57; pl. iv.) (2) Kritische Bemerkungen zur Colibri-Literatur.
(Separat. aus der Festschrift der Ver. fiir Naturk. zu Cassel. 1886.)
Berlepsch, Hans von, und Dr. Herman von Jhoring. Die Végel der
Ungegend von Taquara do Mundo Novo, Prov. Rio Grande do Sul. (Sep-
arat. aus der Zeitsch. fiir gesammte Orn., 1885.)
Blasius, R. (1) Ueber den Wanderzug des Tannhehers (Nucifraga
caryocatactes L.) im Herbste 1885. (Braunschweigische Anzeigen, No.
164, 16 Juli, 1886.) (2) Der Dompfaff Brutvogel bei Braunschweig; Der
diesjihrige Wanderzug der Sperbereule (Surnia nisoria Wolf) ; Brutplatze
des Alpenseglers (Cypselus melba L.). (Ibid., No. 305, 30 Dec., 1886.)
Bryant, Walter E. Additions to the Ornithology of Guadalupe Island.
(Extr. Bull. No. 6, California Acad. Sci., Jan. 5, 1887.)
Carpenter, Frederic H. The occurrence of the Osprey in the Fauna of
Bristol County, Mass. (Publ. Bristol Co. Orn. Club, No. 2, 1887.)
Dubois, Alph. Compte rendu des observations ornithologiques faites en
Belgique pendant l’année 1885. (Extr. Bull. du Mus. roy. d’Hist. Nat.
de Belgique, IV, 1886.)
Maynard, C. J. Corrected descriptions of five new species of Birds
from the Bahamas. (Amer. Exch. and Mart. III, “No. 6, p. 69, Feb. 5,
1887.)
Pelzeln, August von, und Dr. Ludwig von Lorenz. Typen der ornithol-
* Description of a new species of Myiarchus, presumably from the Orinoco District
of South America. By Robert Ridgway. Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886, p. 521.
¢ Description of a new species of Picolaptes from the Lower Amazon, Ibid., p. 523.
{ Description ofa new Subspecies of Cyclorhis from Yucatan. Ibid., p. 519.
§ Description of a new Plumed Partridge from Sonora (Callipepla elegans bensoni)
Forest and Stream, Vol. XXVIII, No.6, March 3, 1887, p. 106.
|| Ona probable Hybrid between Dryobates nuttalli (Gamb.) and D. pubescens
gairdnerii (Aud.). Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 521, 522,
-1887.] Recent Literature. 157
ogischen Sammlung des k. k. naturhistorischen Hofmuseums, Wien.
(Extr. Ann. des k. k. Naturhist. Hofmuseums, I, 1886.)
Platt, Franklin. A list of the Birds of Meriden, Conn. (Trans. Meri-
den Sci. Ass., II, pp. 30-53, 1887.)
Ralph, Wm. L., andEgbert Bagg. Annotated list of the Birds of Oneida
County, N. Y., and its immediate vicinity. (Trans. Oneida Hist. Soc.,
III, 1886, pp. 101-147.)
Ridgway, Robert. (1) Nomenclature of Colors for Naturalists, and Com-
pendium of Useful Knowledge for Ornithologists. 8vo. Boston: Little,
Brown, and Company, 1886. (2) Descriptions of an apparently new Spe-
cies of Picolaptes, from the Lower Amazon. (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
1886, p. 523.)
Salvadori, Tommaso. Elenco degli Uccelli Italiani. (Ann. Mus. Civ.
di Stor. Nat. di Genova, Ser. 2, Vol. III, 1887.)
Shufeldt, R. W. Contributions to Science and Bibliographical Résumé
of the Writings of R. W. Shufeldt, M.D., etc., 1881-1887. 8vo. pp. 20.
L. S. Foster, New York, 1887.
Stejneger, L. (1) On Turdus alpestris and Turdus torquatus, two dis-
tinct species of European Thrushes. (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp.
365-373.) (2) Review of Japanese Birds, Part II, Tits and Nuthatches.
Part III, Rails, Gallinules and Coots. (Ibid., pp. 374-408.) (3) Notes on
species of the Australian Genus Pardalotus. (Ibid., pp. 294-296.) (4) De-
scription of Rallus jouyi, with Remarks on Rallus striatus and Rallus
gularis. (Ibid., pp. 362-364.) (5) The British Marsh-Tit. (Ibid., pp. 200,
201.) (6) On the Status of Synthliboramphus wumizusume. (Ibid.. p. 524.)
(7) On a Collection of Birds made by Mr. M. Namize, in the Liu Kiu
Islands, Japan, with descriptions of New Species. (Ibid., pp. 634-651.)
Swinburne, Spearman. Notes on Birds observed on Voyages between
England and the Cape of Good Hope. Communicated by J. J. Dalgleish.
(Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc. Edinburgh, IX, 1885-86, pp. 193-201.)
Agassiz Companion, A Month. Mag. devoted to the Nat. Sci., Philately,
_and the interest of the Agassiz Ass., II, No. 1, Jan. 1887.
American Field, XX VII, Nos. 1-12, 1887.
American Naturalist, XXI, Jan., 1887.
American Journal of Science, XX XIII, Jan.-March, 1887.
Anzeiger, Zoologischer, Nos. 240-245, 1887.
Audubon Magazine, I, Nos. 1, 2, 1887.
Bird Call, The, I, Nos. 1-3, Jan.-March, 1887.
Bulletin American Museum Natural History, Vol. I, Nos. 1-8, 1881-87 ;
Annual Reports do., 1871-1886.
Curiosity World, I, No. 6, Feb., 1887.
Forest and Stream, XXVII, Nos. 23-26, XXVIII, Nos. 1-8, 1887.
Hoosier Naturalist, Il, No. 4-6, Dec., 1886-Jan., 1887.
Jornal de Scien. Math., Phys. e Nat. da Acad. real das Sci. de Lisboa,
_No. 40-44, Jul. 1885-Dec. 1886.
Journal Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., IX, No. 4, Jan. 1887.
Naturalist, The, A Month. Journ. Nat. Hist. for the North of England,
No. 138-140, Jan.-March, 1887.
15 8 General Notes. [April
Ornis, Jahr. II, Heft 1, 2, 1886.
Ornithologist and Odlogist, XI, Nos. 11-12, 1886, XII, Nos. 1-3, 1887.
Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Agriculture, 1886.
Report of the Fish and Game Commissioners of Massachusetts for 1886.
Reports of the Micr. Soc. of West Chester, Pa., onan Act of the Assem-
bly of Pennsylvania, awarding a premium for the Destruction of Hawks,
Owls, Minks, Weasels, etc., 1887.
Swiss Cross, a Month. Mag. of the Agassiz Ass., I, Jan.-March, 1887.
Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, pt. 3, Oct.-Dec., 1886.
Proceedings U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886, pp. 289-624.
Zoologist, XI, Nos. 121-123, Jan.-March, 1887.
GENERAL NOTES.
The Common Murre (Urza trozle) and the Razor-billed Auk (Alca
torda) on the New England Coast.—Among some birds received by Mr.
F. B. Webster from a gunner at Eastport, Maine, December 27, 1886, I
found three Murres. They were in the flesh and evidently had been dead
only a few days. With them were sent one Briinnich’s Murre (Urza
Zomvia), and no less than twenty Razor-billed Auks. The latter occurred
in great numbers at various points between Eastport, Maine, and Prov-
incetown, Mass., during November and December, 1886; ordinarily they
are notcommon. The Briinnich’s Murre, usually an abundant visitor in
the late autumn, has been apparently nearly wanting the past season.—
WILLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass.
Capture of the Razor-billed Auk at Norfolk, Virginia.—By request of
Dr. A. K. Fisher I sefd to ‘The Auk’ the foliowing note recording the
capture of the Razor-billed Auk (Adca forda) in the vicinity of Norfolk,
Virginia. Jam not able to state by whom it was shot, nor the date, but
it was about the 15th of October. The bird was a male, in fine plumage
and good condition. This, I believe, is the first one taken so far south.—
FREDERICK 5S. WEBSTER, Washington, D. C.
Megalestris skua.—In ‘The Auk,’ Vol. III, No. 4, Oct., 1886, p. 432, I
recorded what I supposed to be the third occurrence of this species in
North America. A previous record of two seen on Nantucket Shoals,
Oct. 11, 1883, may be found in ‘Notes on the Habits and Methods of Cap-
ture of Various Species of Sea Birds that occur on the Fishing Banks off
the Eastern Coast of North America, and which are used for bait for
catching Codfish by New England Fishermen,’ by Capt. J. W. Collins
(pp- 13 and 14, of separate, extracted from the Annual Report of the Com-
missioner of Fish and Fisheries for’ 1882, pp. 323 and 324).—WILLIAM
DutcHerR, New York City.
1887. ] General Notes. 159
More News of Ardea wuerdemanni.—I have lately received from Mr.
R. X. Stuart, of Tampa, Florida, four specimens of A. wuerdemannt,
which were taken on the small island southwest of Cape Sable, Florida.
Mr. Stuart writes me he procured six examples of this rare bird, as well
as a fine series of Ardea occtidentalis, which he found breeding in Decem-
ber, and obtained many eggs. Several sets of eggs of Halzaétus leuco-
cephalus were taken in the same locality.k—CuARLES B. Cory, Boston,
Mass.
Ardea egretta in Niagara County, N. Y. — In April, 1884, I reported to
the ‘Forest and Stream’ the capture of three birds of this species in the ad-
joining county of Orleans, on Nov. 28, 1883. At that time I little ex-
pected that I would ever have an opportunity to mention its occurrence
nearer home. But on the 18th of last August two specimens were
brought to me, by different persons, for identification, both taken in
the town of Newfane, this county. near the village of Olcott, on Lake
Ontario. I did not have an opportunity to learn the sex, but took the
measurements of one of them: Length, 363 inches; wing, 154; tarsus, 6.
—J. L. Davison, Lockport, Niagara County, N. Y.
Further Notes on the Masked Bob-white ( Colinus ridgway?).—Mr. J. C.
Cahoon, who is at present collecting in Northern Mexico, has just sent me
ten specimens of the Masked Bob-white, taken February 5-8, 1887, in the
province of Sonora, about fifty miles south of the United States boun-
dary.
The eight males included in this series show an even greater range of
variation than the ten birds of the same sex so carefully described* by Mr.
Allen. Two agree closely with the male figured in Mr. Allen’s plate, hav-
ing similarly solid black foreheads and throats, and plain, rich cinnamon
underparts relieved by only a few markings of black or white on the cris-
sum and under tail-coverts. Both show traces of a white superciliary
stripe, which in one extends forward to the front border of the eye, in the
other to within about a quarter of an inch of the nostril.
The remaining six males have the mask and underparts more or less
freely sprinkled with white. Rather curiously, those which have the
most white about the head show the least beneath, and those which are
largely white beneath have the mask nearlyimmaculate. In the specimen
representing the extreme of the former condition the crown is scarcely
darker than in C. v¢rgintanus, while a white stripe, averaging about one-
tenth of an inch in width, extends along the side of the head from the
nostrils to the nape, passing just over the eye. The chin, also, is nearly
pure white, and the throat everywhere thickly spotted with white, the
only unmixed black areas being a small patch just below the eye anda
‘cravat’ about half an inch wide on the jugulum.
The bird illustrating the other extreme has the central line of the abdo-
* Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., No. 7, July, 1886, pp. 273-290, pl. xxiii,
160 General Notes. [April
men soiled white and the remainder of the underparts behind or below the
jugulum, excepting a small area in the middle of the breast, variegated
everywhere with black and white, each feather having a pair of rounded
white spots tipping its opposite webs, these spots being usually embraced
between the horns of V-shaped, black markings. In this series the shade
of the cinnamon of the underparts is in proportion to the amount of white,
the cinnamon being palest in the birds having the most white, and deep-
est in those which have the least. This fact has suggested to me the pos-
sibility that the paler, spotted birds may be the young, and those with
nearly or perfectly black masks and immaculate underparts the adults; but
Mr. Allen’s theory that such variations indicate near relationship to, if not
actual intergradation with, the white-throated C. graysonz is perhaps
more probable. I notice, however, that all the specimens examined. by
Mr. Allen (except my type, taken early in August, and an unusually
deep-colored and black-headed bird) were killed in September and Febru-
ary, months when young or immature birds would naturally outnumber
the fully mature ones. Mr. Ridgway’s ‘‘suspicion” that C. graysoné and
C. ridgwayt ‘‘may be individual color phases of the same species” seems
to me the least likely hypothesis of the three, unless we may assume
that the two ‘phases’ have different habitats; or, at least, that a portion
of the region occupied by each phase is not invaded by the other.
Mr. Cahoon found the Masked Bob-white about Bacuachi and at.a
ranch some eighteen miles north of Cumpas. They were abundant
(several large covies were seen and eight specimens shot in one day),
haunting patches of weeds in gardens and barren ‘‘sand wastes, where.
they fed on the seeds of a plant called red-root.” Their habits are hke
those of C. vérginianus and their call-notes precisely similar. When
scattered they lie very closely.—WILLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass.
Capture of a Third Specimen of the Short-tailed Hawk (Buéeo bra-
chyurus) in Florida. — Mr. E. H. Forbush, of Worcester, has lately sent
me a Buteo brachyurus which was shot by Mr. Charles E. Bailey at the
head of Ten-Mile Creek (a tributary of the St. Lucie River), Brevard
County, Florida, March 11, 1886. Jt isan adult female of the white-bellied
form. ‘Two specimens (one in the black plumage) haye been previously
recorded* from Florida by Mr. Ridgway. The occurrence of this third
bird strengthens the suspicion that the species may have become perma-
nently established in that State.—WILL1IAM BrewsTER, Cambridge, Mass.
A Third New England Specimen of Swainson’s Hawk (Bufeo swazu-
sont). — Mr. E. S. Bowler has just sent me a Swainson’s Hawk. taken at
Gouldsboro’, Maine, Sept. 15, 1886, by Mr. E. Gordon. It isa young bird
of the melanistic type, but not wholly black. The species is known to have
occurred only twice before in New England, both times in Massachusetts
Salem, winter of 1871-72 (Addex, Bull. Essex Inst., X, 1878, 22); Way-
land,.Sept. 12, 1876 (Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, II], 1878, 39).—
WILLIAM BrREwSTER, Cambridge, Mass.
* Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, 1881, pp. 210, 212.
1887.] General Notes. 161
A Migration of Hawks at Germantown, Pa.—On the afternoons of
September 21 and 29, 1886, great numbers of Hawks passed over here.
They flew in a westerly direction and were observed from 2to4p.m. I
did not notice them in the morning or on any of the intervening dates.
On the 21sti'they came ina long line, two or three at a time; occasionally
they would circle about and wait until others caught up with them and
then. all would pass on together; at no time during the afternoon was I
able to count more than thirty in sight at once.
On the 29th a few dozen passed over as described above, and then came
alarge flock containing at least two hundred and fifty Hawks. When
directly overhead they divided into two flocks and began circling about,
and finally passed on to the west.
I could see that there were several different species in the flock, but they
were too high up for me to identify them.— WITMER STONE, German-
town, Pa.
The Saw-whet Owl in the District of Columbia.—I have also the
pleasure of recording the occurrence of the Saw-whet Owl (Wyc/ala
acadica) in the District of Columbia. The first one was found by a
farmer about October 3. It was lodged in the branches of a small tree,
where it had evidently died; from what cause is not positively known.
This bird has the habit of doing this sort of thing. A few years ago I
obtained one that had died in this manner, and about the same time, I
think the following year, I-had three brought to me that were found in
barns dead. This experience very conclusively proves to my mind the
delicate make-up of this bird and its inability to cope with the adversities
of bird life. About.a week later, lam informed, two others were obtained
by a farmer just outside of the District limits. I have not yet ascertained
whether or not these two birds were shot or found dead, as all the others
were that I ever obtained. — FREDERICK S. WEBSTER, Washington, D.C.
The Imperial Woodpecker (Campephilus z¢mperialis) in Northern
Sonora. — During a scouting expedition in the Apache campaign of last
year Lieutenant: H. C. Benson, of the U. S. Army, found this species to
be common in the pine forests of the Sierra Madre, in Sonora, within fifty
miles of the Arizona boundary. Owing to lack of time and facilities he
was unable to preserve specimens, but a head which he sent to the Na-
tional Museum renders the identification of the species positive. This
magnificent bird—the largest of all known Woodpeckers, considerably
exceeding the Ivory-bill in size (the wing measuring 11.70 to 13.20 inches
and the exposed culmen 2.70 to 3.60 inches)—will doubtless soon be
added to the North American fauna. —RoBERT RipGWay, Washington,
1OY ES
The Coppery-tailed Trogon (Z7vrogox ambiguus) breeding in South-
ern Arizona.—A young male of this species, still in nestling plumage,
though full grown, was collected August 24, 1885, in the Huachuca Moun-
162 General Notes. [April
tains, by Lieutenant H. C. Benson, U.S. A. This capture renders it ex-
tremely probable that the Trogon referred to by Mr. W. E. D. Scott in
‘The Auk’ for October, 1886, p. 425, as observed in the Chiracahua Moun-
tains, was this species, which is the only one of the Red-bellied Mexican
species whose range extends beyond the southern half of that country.
Lieutenant Benson’s specimen, which is now in the National Museum
collection, will be described in full in the ‘Proceedings’ of the National
Museum for 1887.—RoBERT RipGway, Washington, D. C.
Capture of a Fish Crow (Corvus osstfragus) at Wareham, Massachu-
setts.—Inasmuch as my record (Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, I, 1876, p. 19) of a
Fish Crow seen at Cambridge, March 16, 1875, has been treated with
wholesome caution—not to say incredulity—by several recent writers on
New England birds, it gives me pleasure to present a second and quite un-
impeachable instance of the occurrence of the species in Massachusetts.
This time the bird was actually taken ;—at Wareham, July 16, 1884, by Mr.
E. A. Bangs, in whose collection the specimen is now preserved, and to
whom Iam indebted for the following account of its capture:
‘‘T was fishing with my brother in Tihonet Pond and, as usual on such
occasions, had my gun with me. While crossing the pond we saw two
birds sitting on a tree near the mouth of a brook. From their actions I
thought at first that they were Pigeons, but on getting nearer made out
that they were black and resembled small Crows. We approached them
with all possible caution, but they flew before we got within sixty yards.
I brought down one, when the other.circled over it for a moment, but it
escaped before I could reload the gun (a single barrel). The one I killed
proved to be a female in full plumage.”—WILLIAM BrewsTER, Cambridge,
Mass.
Occurrence of Agelaius pheeniceus (L.) on the West Coast of England.
—Additions to the useful ‘List of Occurrences of North American Birds in
Europe,’ contributed by Mr. Dalgleish to the ‘Bulletin’ of the Nuttall
Ornithological Club in 1880, will, doubtless, always be welcome in the
pages of ‘The Auk.’ It affords me much pleasure to add to that list the
capture of an immigrant specimen of Agelaius phaniceus (L.)—a species
which has been recorded as occurring in Britain on at least a dozen occa-
sions on evidence of a more or less satisfactory nature, some of the speci-
mens being supposed escapes from confinement. The bird now to be
recorded struck against the lantern of the Nash Lighthouse, on the Welsh
Coast of the Bristol Channel, at 3 A.M. on the 27th of October last, and
was intended to be forwarded to me by its captor, Mr. Henry Nicholas,
one of the most valued observers of the British Association’s Bird Mi-
gration Committee, but during his absence for a few moments was
unfortunately carried off by the cat. Mr. Nicholas had no difficulty in
identifying the bird by the aid of his books, but I at once sent him a
skin of the bird (an adult) in order to test his determination of the species,
and he replied ‘‘that the bird killed very much resembled the one sent ex-
4
d
,
1887.] General Notes. I 63
cept that the yellow on the wings was rather paler; the tips of the wings
and the back of the neck were more sooty black, and I think it wasa
little larger’’;—a description indicating an immature bird, which is what
we should have expected, since it is from the ranks of these youngsters
that nine-tenths of the erratic wanderers visiting our shores are recruited.
The late hours of the 26th of October and the early ones of the 27th
would seem, from the returns, to have constituted an important ‘immigra-
tion night,’ as a few particulars furnished from the schedule of the Nash
Light will make manifest :—At 9.50 p.m., Missel Thrushes ( Zurdus vis-
ctvorus); at 10 P.M., Bramblings (friuzgilla montifrigilla); at 10.30
P.M., Snipes (Gallinago celestis), four of which struck and were killed;
at 12.40 A.M., Redwings (Zurdus tliacus), two killed; at 2 A.m., Wrens
(Troglodytes parvulus), one captured; at 2.10 A.M., Robins (4r7thacus
rubecula), and Black Redstart (/tu¢zeclla titys), killed; and finally at 3
A.M., the bird in which we are specially interested. The wind prevailing
at the time was a strong easterly breeze; weather cloudy with passing
showers of rain.—Wmn. EAGLE CLARKE, F. L. S., The Museum, Leeds,
England.
The Redpolls of Massachusetts.—In his ‘Revised List of the Birds of
Massachusetts’ Mr. Allen includes only two Redpolls, Acanthis linaria
and A. 7. rostrata. He does not give his reasons for excluding Acanthis
hornemanni extlifes, but whatever they may have been, this bird has an
indisputable right to a place in our fauna. Ihave exan.ined the speci-
men taken by Jeffries at Swampscott, Nov. 16, 1878 (see Bull. N. O. C.,
IV, April, 1879, p. 121); that shot by Atkinson and recorded by Dr.
Brewer-(Proc._Bos. Soc. N. H., XX, 1879, p- 270); and a bird in the
Cambridge Museum, to which Mr. Allen probably referred when he at-
tributed exzlzjes to Massachusetts in 1870 (Am. Nat., III, p. 583). and all
three are unmistakable examples of A. &. extlifes. To this number I can
add the following, none of which seem to have been previously an-
nounced* : ©
A male in the collection of Mr. H. M. Spelman, taken Nov. 15, 1880, in
Cambridge; a pair shot at Revere Beach, Mass., March 8, 1879, by Mr.
Foster H. Brackett, and now in the collection of Mr. Charles R. Lamb; a
pair killed at Revere Beach, March g, 1883, by Messrs. Spelman and Chad-
bourne, the former of whom has the male, the latter the female; anda
male shot at Nantasket Beach, Feb. 22, 1883, by Matthew Lucas, Jr., and
in the collection of the present writer. All of the males just mentioned
are in gray (immature ?) plumage.
Besides the forms above referred to, a fourth occurs, at least rarely, in
Massachusetts. This is Acanthis linarta holbellit Brehm, of which I
have two examples,t shot together at Swampscott, March 26, 1883; both
are males, one in gray plumage. the other a rosy-breasted adult (?).
* Several of them, perhaps, were incidentally referred to by Mr. Chadbourne (Quar.
Jour. Boston ZoGl. Soc., Vol. II, April, 1883, p. 31).
+ Dr. Stejneger has kindly examined them and confirmed my determination,
I 64 General Notes. [April
Thus of the five Redpolls attributed to North America at large four
have been found in Massachusetts. Of these A. d‘varza visits us in abun-
dance, but of course more or less irregularly; A. rostrata in smaller
numbers, but still plentifully at times, as in February, 1883 (see Bull.
N.O.C., Vol. VIII, pp. 95-99, recorded as 42 giothus linaria holboell?) ;
A. h. exilipes in very limited numbers, and perhaps even less regularly
than either of the two preceding; while A. 7. holbeliiZ is apparently the
rarest of the four and possibly a mere accidental straggler. The fifth
North American form, Acanthis hornemannt tyfica, has never been taken
within the limits of the United States.
As the recent shifting of names in this group is somewhat confusing it
may be well to explain, that the <4gvothus linaria holboelli which I re-
recorded* from: Massachusetts in 1883 is the Acamthzs linaria rostrata
of the A. O. U. List, and the Acanthis linaria holb@liiz, now for the ‘first
time reported from our State, another and very different form, much
more nearly like true démzarza, from which it can be distinguished only
by its greater size and longer bill. Those who care to look further into
this subject should consult Dr. Stejneger’s able papers on the genus
Acanthis.,|—WILLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge, Mass.
[The omission of Acanthis hornemanni extlipfes from my ‘Revised List’
was due (1) to the fact that the then latest authorities on this group did
not recognize exz/zfes as occurring south of ‘‘ Arctic America and North-
eastern Asia”; (2) in view of the recent radical shifting of names, and
the supposed not wholly trustworthy identification of at least some of
the specimens of ‘exz/zfes,’ referred to above as recorded from Massachu-
setts, the omission of this form was thought to be the safer course, es-
pecially as the alleged specimens were not then accessible to me for
examination.—J. A. ALLEN. ]
Vireo solitarius alticola in Tennessee.—In my list of birds taken in
Roane County, Tennessee (Auk, III, p. 317), I record two specimens of
Vireo solitarius. Mr. Ridgway has since informed me that the-specimens
are typical of the new form adt/cola. Both specimens were females, and
were taken at the foot of the ridge, in a grove of small pines.—WILLIAM
H. Fox, M. D., Mew York City.
Another Specimen of the Prothonotary Warbler in Massachusetts.—
Recently when examining the collection of birds made by Mr. E. O. Da-
mon at Northampton, Mass., I saw a beautiful Protonotaria citrea which
he told me he killed in that vicinity on high ground, in May, 1883, and
that two other specimens were shot at the same time by a friend of his.
These examples, additional to those already recorded by Messrs. Brewster
and Purdie (Auk, July and Oct., 1886), would seem to indicate that the
species enters New England regularly.—JNo. H. Sacre, Portland, Conn.
* Bull N. O. C, VIII, pp. 95-99.
7 Auk, I, 1884, pp. 145-155; ibid., IV, 1887, pp. 30-35.
1887. } General Notes. T 65
An Overlooked Specimen of Bachman’s Warbler.—Some time since,
while working on the fine old Lafresnaye Collection in the Boston Society
of Natural History I unearthed an interesting and valuable specimen,
nothing less in fact than a Bachmian’s Warbler (Helminthophila bachmanz).
This bird agrees closely with Audubon’s figure and description of the
adult female, but differs from a female in Mr. Cory’s collection by having
a well-marked patch of black on the jugulum, and traces of a dark band
across the fore part of the crown. The body plumage is fresh and perfect,
but shows no indication of a recent moult; the primaries are somewhat
faded; the tail-feathers decidedly faded and worn.
The label bore the inscription, ‘‘No. 4079, Dendroica virens, Gmel., N.
America.” This proved to be a correct transcript of the entry under the
corresponding number in the fac-simile Lafresnaye Catalogue belonging
to the Society, save that in the latter ‘‘N. America” is written 77 Jenczl.
Going still farther back to the scrap-book where the original Lafresnaye
labels are preserved, each numbered in red ink to correspond with the
catalogue just mentioned, I found ‘‘407g” on a small slip of paper, yellow
with age, the writing so faded that only ‘‘Sylvicola ” can be certainly
deciphered. The dash is followed by a mark resembling the sign Q (was
this sign used in ornithology in Lafresnaye’s time?) but probably in-
tended fora ? There is also something that looks like ‘‘orig ne?”
The plain inference from these data is that the label last described was
the original one belonging to this specimen, and that the person who
wrote it (whether Lafresnaye or some correspondent from whom he may
have had the skin) was unable to identify the bird. It is equally obvious
that the locality entered in pencil in our copy of the Lafresnaye Catalogue
was added, doubtless inferentially, after the specimen came into the pos-
session of the Society. It follows that the origin of the bird is unknown.
Can it be the female figured in Audubon’s plate? If Iam not mistaken,
the latter has been lost sight of.—WuLLIAM BREWSTER, Cambridge,
Mass.
Remarks on Four Examples of the Yellow-throated Warbler from
Chester County, S. C.—A series of four specimens, taken during September,
1886, display characters so different from those commonly ascribed to the
Yellow-throated Warbler (Dezdroica dominica) of the Atlantic States as
to merit special notice. The variations in each are as follows :—
1. @. Bill (from nostril), 9.2 mm. ; superciliary stripe without yellow;
yellow of chin and maxille interrupted anteriorly by white.
2. @. Bill (from nostril), 1omm.; superciliary stripe, above the lores,
very faintly tinged with yellow for about 4 mm.; thence immaculate to
the base of the upper mandible; chin and maxillz as in the preceding.
3. @. Bill (from nostril) 9.5 mm.; superciliary stripe, anterior to
eye, strongly tinged with yellow for about 4mm.; otherwise similar to
the foregoing.
4. Essentially like 3, but with tinge of yellowin superciliary more
pronounced.
166 General Notes. f [April
In the flesh the yellow in the eye-stripe of 3 and 4 appeared sufficiently
intense to warrant their being assigned to dom¢nica; but as a skin, the
yellow in 3 is less prominent, and it might be referred without violence
to albtlora. Unless the white adjoining the base of the lower mandible
be considered diagnostic, the determination of such intermediates seems
to be a matter of considerable uncertainty, depending on doubtful estimates
as to quantity and intensity of the yellow in the white line above the eye.
—LEVERETT M. Loomis, Chester, S. C.
Discovery of the Nest and Eggs of the Western Warbler (Dendroica
occidentalés).—During the past season (1886) Mr. C. A. Allen had the
good fortune to find two nests of Dendrotca occidentalis in Blue Cafion,
California. The first contained two eggs on June 4. It was left fora full
set, but on visiting it three days later, Mr. Allen found it in a dilapitated
condition, the eggs broken, and their yelks smeared over the lining, evi-
dently the work of squirrels. Of the eggs, Mr. Allen writes: ‘‘I cannot
give you an exact description of these eggs, but in size and appearance
they resembled those of D. wstiva, only they were more heavily marked
on their entire surface. I am very sorry now that I did not take them,
but I wanted the full set, which, I think, would not have exceeded three,
as I found a nest seven or eight years ago with three young, and another
with the same number while returning from my second visit to the nest
with eggs. All three nests were similarly placed ;—in ‘pitch pines,’ from
twenty-five to forty feet above the ground, on thick, scraggy limbs, where
they were so well concealed that it would have been impossible to find
them except by watching the birds, as was done in each instance. The
female of the nest that was destroyed was seen digging up fine roots from
a logging road morning after morning, but I could never follow her to
the nest, which I finally found by accident; happening to shoot a
Douglass’s squirrel in the adjoining tree, the report of the gun started
her out.”
The nest with young, taken June 7, 1886, is now before me. It is com-
posed of the fibrous stalks of herbaceous plants, fine dead twigs, lichens
(Evernia vulpina), ana a little cotton twine, and is lined with the soft
inner bark of some coniferous tree and fine long hairs, apparently from
the tail of a squirrel. The bright, yellow Hvernzza, sprinkled rather
plentifully about the rim, gives a touch of color to the otherwise cold,
gray tone of the exterior and contrasts agreeably with the warm, reddish-
brown lining. Although the materials are coarse and wadded, rather
than woven, together, the general effect of this nest is neat and tasteful.
It does not resemble any other Warbler’s nest that I have seen, but rather
recalls the nest of some Fringilline bird, being perhaps most like that of
the Lark Finch. It measures externally 4.50 inches in width by 2 inches
in depth. The cavity is 1.25 inches deep by 2.50 inches wide at the top.
The walls at the rim average nearly an inch in thickness.
The three young taken from this nest, together with both their parents,
were also sent me by Mr. Allen. The young are about two-thirds grown
1887.] General Notes. I 67
and sparsely clothed with first plumage, which above and across the breast
is uniform grayish-brown, on the abdomen yellowish-white. There are two
light (brownish-white) bars on the wing-coverts.
If [am not mistaken, the nests and eggs just described are the first iden-
tified ones that have been thus far reported, but Captain Bendire writes
me that he has what he believes to be ‘‘a set of these eggs taken at the
Big Meadows on the banks of the Des Chutes River near its headwaters»
on my way from Fort Walla Walla, W. T., to Fort Klamath, Oregon’
June 12, 1882. The nest was placed in the crotch of a willow overhanging
the water, and the parent shot, but falling into the river was carried
away. The eggs have a faint grayish-green ground color; two of them
are heavily spotted and blotched with lilac and dark umber brown. They
are about the size of the eggs of D. @stiva, and resemble the eggs of D.
blackburnie, with the exception of the ground color, the green of which
is notas perceptible as in the eggs of blackburnie.”—WILLIAM BREWSTER,
Cambridge, Mass.
What constitutes a Full Set of Eggs?— The question as to what con-
stitutes a full set of eggs, and how to determine the number with any cer-
tainty, is a matter to which I desire to call attention, and, in doing so, will
say that I have given the matter considerable thought, and have reached
the conclusion, on account of the many nest robbers of the birds, that the
larger number is the only safe one to enter as a full set. For example, say
thirty nests of frst sets of a species are found, with birds sitting, as follows :
Four nests with four eggs in each; six nests with three eggs in each;
ten nests with two eggs in each; and ten nests with one egg in each. | In
this case I would enter three and four—possibly two to four—as a full
set. But in no case one to four, believing the undisturbed birds of a
species do not vary much, if any, as to number of eggs laid. Say four
eggs in first set, and three in the second; that is, in case the first set is
destroyed, or the birds rear two or more broods ina season; for I find as
a rule that the first set is the larger one.
Many of the birds, especially the larger ones that breed in trees, as
Hawks, Herons, etc., cannot hide their bulky nests; in fact, the branches
overhead are more a protection to the thieves than to the nests when the
parent birds are away; for all birds, however watchful, will, during the
early stages of laying and love making, steal away from their nests a short
time, for a sail or flirtation, which affords the cunning Crows, Jays, squir-
rels, etc., an opportunity to come up from the lower limbs and steal the
eggs unobserved, or before the parent birds can return to protect them.
Such robberies, and the advancement of incubation, make the birds more
watchful and closer sitters. But, with all their vigilance, I think to find a
full set the exception and not the rule. It is to the interest of paid collec-
tors and dealers in eggs to have the smaller as well as the larger number
treated as full sets. But the odlogist at heart, whether a collector or not,
can have but one desire, and that is to arrive at the facts in the case.
In my ‘Revised Catalogue of the Birds of Kansas,’ I was governed in
168 Correspondence. [April
giving the dimensions and coloration of the eggs by the sets examined,
but I did not venture to change the number when given by other writers,
lest such changes, based on my limited observation, might prove errone-
ous or misleading; but the more I look the matter over, its importance to
my mind increases. I therefore call attention to it, hoping to draw out,
through ‘The Auk’ and other sources, the views of others.—N. S. Goss,
Topeka, Kans.
CORRESPONDENCE.
[Correspondents are requested to write briefy and to the point. No attention will
be paid to anonymous communications.|
The Camera and Field Ornithology.
To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK :—
Dear Sirs:—A year ago last autumn I purchased me a first class photo-
grapic camera with all the chemicals and appliances complete. In doing
this I had three or four objects in view, in which it struck me that this
instrument could be of very considerable assistance. In the first place, I
was led to believe that it would prove a valuable auxiliary in my anatomi-
cal work, such as the photographing of certain dissections, osteological
subjects, and the reduction in size of large skeletons that I intended to
have lithographed to illustrate my memoirs. Secondly, I found myself in
an Indian country that was rapidly undergoing those changes which an
advancing civilization is sure to bring with it, and it was my aim to pre-
serve, in the way of good photographs, much that pertained to their life,
habits, and mode of living in the past, etc. Lastly, however, I felt that I
had a very pretty field open before me that would, if worked with patience,
yield another valuable series of figures for illustrative work, and this was
the photographing in their native haunts many of the wild animals of the
country. During the past ten years I have seen the time when I have
been near enough to have obtained good photographs, either in the
mountains or on the boundless plains, of such animals as our antelope,
buffalo, mountain sheep, and a great many of the smaller mammals and
birds. In this letter, however, it is my object merely to say a few words in
regard to the advantages to be derived from the use of the camera in field
ornithology. In the first place, if we can secure good photographic nega-
tives of such subjects, the rapidly-improving processes permit us to trans-
fer them with absolute accuracy to either metal or stone, and if Iam not
mistaken, to wood, also. Moreover, these processes are becoming cheap-
er and better every year that goes by, so that it falls within the means of
nearly every scientific publishing medium to reproduce such drawings
1887.] Correspondence. I 69
from the negatives, and thus secure the most accurate class of figures of
living birds. ‘
Again, if we photograph, or rather print them on non-albumenized
paper, they may be colored very nicely from the original subject. By the
use of an ‘instantaneous shutter,’ I find that birds may be obtained in
nearly all positions, and I know of no pursuit so thoroughly full of inter-
est for the ornithologist as this photographing of birds in their native
haunts. It requires, too, all the ingenuity at our command, to say nothing
of patience, to pursue it successfully. Birds may be photographed in the
most engaging of their avocations, and in the most interesting attitudes
for illustrations that one can possibly imagine. Out here on the prairies
we will often find an old stump or stalk, upon which a dozen or fifteen
species of birds will alight during seven or eight hours, on almost any
day suitable to use the camera upon them. Now all we have to do is to
properly set up our instrument near this point, conceal it in such a way
as not to alarm the birds, focus it sharply upon the perch where they
alight, place on your ‘snap shutter,’ and fix it with a string, and then re-
move yourself far enough away to pull it, when you have a subject sitting
to your liking. Birds that you have wounded but slightly may be photo-
graphed under the most favorable circumstances; they may also be taken
while sitting on their nests; in actual flight, however swift; in pursuit of
their food; in leading about their young; indeed, the list is almost an
endless one.
Rookeries also offer admirable subjects, and a splendid field is open at
those wonderful resorts of water-birds in such places as the Bahamas
or the Alaskan coasts. In the former locality, during the breeding
season, I have seen the time when I could have secured excellent pictures
of the majority of species in the most interesting positions possible.
Even now, there are a great many of our birds that still remain to be
figured, and a number that have already been produced,—yes, in some
cases by so famous a master as Audubon,—that will repay reproduction.
Take for instance his Myadestes townsendi; it is an exceedingly indif-
ferent representation of the bird, and figures only the female besides.
Moreover, it is evident from his illustration that Audubon was under the
impression (he never having seen it alive) that its action was more or less
akin to some such bird as a Redstart, whereas its behavior in life fails to
remind us at all of any such species.
If I remember correctly, my photographic outfit cost me something like
$125, but very good ones, I believe, can be purchased for about $50, which
will take an excellent 5 X 8 picture. The art, in its present state of per-
fection. is a delightful study and brimful of interest. Never shall I forget
my sensations, as, shut up in a small, dark room, lit only by the ruby
lantern, I studied to develop my first plate of a living animal, taken by
myself. It was a fine old Meotoma, and I can well remember my enthu-
siasm as I saw his form slowly, but sharply, come out on the plate, as I
rocked it to and fro in the developing tray.
R. W. SHUFELDT.
Fort Wingate, N. Mex., Feb. toth, 1887.
170 Correspondence. [April
Classification of the Macrochires.
To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK :—
Dear Strs:—Dr. Shufeldt’s letter in the October ‘Auk,’ last year, requires
only a few lines in reply from my side.
Iam sorry that Dr. Shufeldt in ‘‘carefully reading a number of times”
the sentence commencing: ‘‘internally they differ,” etc., failed to see that
the whole was a case of typographical error, and still more sorry that he
did not know ‘‘the kind of comparison he [I] wishes to institute between
the sternum of a Swift and a Swallow,” when I referred to the bifurcate
manubrium and deeply ‘‘two-notched” sternum of the latter. Dr. Shufeldt
will probably believe me, when I state, that in the original, from which
the sentence in question was quoted, the kind of comparison was made
clear, and that the words ‘‘fozxted manubrial process and no posterior
notches to the’—an entire line—has fallen out between ‘‘a” and ‘‘sterzum.”
I cannot prevent Dr. Shufeldt from taking exception to the remark that
the sternum is ‘two-notched’ in the Swallows, notwithstanding the fact
that he admits its having ‘‘@ pazr of notches in its xiphoidal extremity,”
and my own belief that ‘‘a pair of notches” and ‘‘two notches” mean ex-
actly the same thing. but I must protest against his remark that ‘‘the two-
notched sternum is seen in such forms as Prcus.” To the uninitiated mind
it would seem to be a decided misnomer to call the sternum of Pzczs two-
notched when the fact remains, that it possesses fowx notches. ‘Such
forms as Picus” of course, have two notches on each side of the mesial line,
but Dr. Shufeldt will probably pardon me for not calling a horse a two-
legged animal, or a mana one-legged animal, notwithstanding the fact
that they have respectively two legs and one leg on each side of the mesial
line. But if Dr. Shufeldt calls a horse a four-legged animal, why object to
calling the sternum of the Woodpeckers four-notched?
In regard to the similarity or dissimilarity of the flight of the Swifts as
compared with that of the Swallows or Hummingbirds, I shall only re-
mark that Dr. Shufeldt’s supposition that I would never have asked, ‘‘what
differences are there in the Swifts’ flight from that of the Swallows’ that
should have caused such a remarkable modification towards the Humming-
birds,” if I ‘thad ever had the opportunity to compare in nature the flight
of two such birds, for example, as Mzcropus melanoleucus and Tachycineta
thalassina,’ will not hold for the simple reason that I have had the oppor-
tunity to compare in nature the flights of several species of Swifts and
Swallows. Iam also familiar with the flight of the Hummingbird, and in
spite of this, or rather just on account of my observations, do I reiterate
that the flight of the Swift is decidedly more like that of the Swallow than
it is like that of the Hummingbird. And I also insist that I am still with-
out an answer to the question, What in the nature of these birds’ flight
has brought about such an extraordinary similarity, osteologically, myo-
logically, and pterylographically in the wing-structure of the Swifts and
Hummingbirds, as compared with that of the Swallows? For surely, it
cannot be denied, that the flying apparatus of Swifts and Hummers pos:
?
‘
‘
4
-«
i
.
J
1887.] Correspondence. I71I
sesses features and combination of features quite unique, and shared by no
other birds, and especially not by the Swallows. That a Swift hovers in
front of its nest before enteringit ‘like a Hummingbird over a flower,”
shows certainly no special relationship, for I have seen despised English
Sparrows do the same, and as for swift and precipitous flight and its in-
stantaneous checking I might quote numerous birds which in their wing-
structure show no analogy to that of the Macrochires. The superfictal
similarities of certain structures in the Swallows’ and the Swifts’ wings can
undoubtedly be traced ‘*to the modification of these structures gradually
brought about by the habits or actions of the forms in question,” to use
Dr. Shufeldt’s own phraseology. It is upon the recognition of the essen-
tial and the unessential similarities, and of the superficial analogies and
the radical affinities, that the present question hinges.
Yours, very truly,
LEONHARD STEJNEGER.
Smithsonian Institution,
December 25, 1886.
To THE EpITORS OF THE AUK :—
Srs:—Will you kindly allow me a little space in which to reply to Dr.
Shufeldt’s comments on the footnotes of my recent paper on ‘The Affini-
ties of Chetura’?
At the outset let me say that I object less to the separation of Swift and
Hummingbird than to the union of Swift and Swallow. As Dr. Shufeldt
now concludes (or did in October last) that the Swifts are not a family of
Passeres placed next the Swallows, but an order by themselves, we are
less at variance than when the paper on Chetura appeared.
In one and the same paragraph Dr. Shufeldt objects to my statement that
Professor Huxley united the Swifts and Hummingbirds, while quoting Hux-
ley’s own words, which show the statement to have been correct! (p. 86).
The remark that Professor Huxley ‘‘evidently believed that Swifts were but
profoundly modified Swallows” is purely an assumption; but even if it be
a correct one, the fact remains that he believed them to be so very ‘‘pro-
foundly modified” as to require a place in quite a different order. In view
of the fact that Dr. Shufeldt has not been in Washington for over two
years, it is a little surprising that he should assume to know exactly what
material is contained in the collections of the National Museum. Nevyer-
theless, Dr. Shufeldt is this time correct in his supposition, for at the time
of writing neither Panyftizla, nor Tachycineta thalassina (T. bicolor I
did have) were in my possession, although since then crania of both
species have been extracted from skins, supplied by the courtesy of Mr.
Ridgway, and verify my statement that the mawnzllo-palatines as figured
by Dr. Shufeldt are imperfect. While my specimen of Panyptila is a
poor one, having suffered from decalcification, traces of the slender
maxillo-palatines still remain, and show them to be practically of the same
shape as those of Chetura, Cypselus apus, and Dendrochelidon mystacea,
172 Correspondence. [April
this latter bird having been kindly furnished me by Professor Henry A.
Ward. Dr. Shufeldt’s very figure of Zachyczneta shows at a glance that
the expanded ends of the maxillo-palatines have been broken off, and I
have yet to learn that doubling the size of a drawing doubles its accuracy.
I should have been very glad to have found myself in error concerning
Panyptila, as it would have given me another, although slight, point of
resemblance between the Swifts and Hummingbirds.
The material in the National Museum has already taught me that the
sternum may be notched or entire in Auks of the same species, and the
same thing will be found to occur in the Loons; also, if my memory is
not treacherous, in other water fowl. The reason for this is, it seems to
me, very evident, while the fact itself has no bearing whatever on the
present case. That Dr. Shufeldt is aware of this is shown by his haste to
remark that ‘‘Of course in recording what I have just done in the preced-
ing paragraph, I by no means wish it to be understood that in any way
underrate the significance of the ‘notching’ of the xiphoidal end of the
sternum, in the vast majority of birds.” I would also note that the entire-
ty ot the posterior margin of the sternum was but one of four good char-
acters pointed out. Since Dr. Shufeldt places but little reliance on the
structure of the bony palate as a taxonomic character, has had his faith in
the sternum shaken, and rejects the modifications of the limbs (aside from
the modification of the phalanges, on which he lays considerable stress !),
it would seem that but little of the skeleton was left on which to found
comparative distinctions.
That the ‘osteologist-in-chief’ is not conversant with a large amount of
ornithological literature is unluckily too true, and he has always regarded
itas a great misfortune. Still, had my commentator been less engrossed
by the footnotes, he might have inferred from a paragraph almost at the
very outset, that I was not es¢zrely ignorant of Dr. Parker’s opinions on
the subject under consideration.
In conclusion, allow me to express my surprise at the concluding para-
graph of Dr. Shufeldt’s letter, the sarcastic tone of which leads me to infer
that he prefers to evolve opinions which do zof compare favorably with
those held by living masters in morphology.
Very respectfully,
FREDERIC A. LuCAs.
Washington, D. C., Jan. 25, 1887.
The Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura.
To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK :—
Szrs:—In his article in the January number of this Journal, Mr. Ira Sayles
has added another instance to the already long list of fallacious ‘proofs’
of the remarkable power of scent in the American Vultures. I[gnoring
the fact that there is certainly room for some difference of opinion as to
what constitutes a remarkable power of smell, he sets aside as utterly
,
EE ————
qe
1887. ] Correspondence. 173
worthless the experiments of Audubon, Bachman, and Darwin, and offers
his own chance observations as proof that these able and careful observers
were entirely wrong as regards both their methods and conclusions. It
seems almost superfluous to say that our critic can scarcely have read the
original accounts of the experiments he condemns, or he would neither
accuse so thoughtlessly nor explain so easily.
As to the anatomical evidence introduced, it may be remarked that such
an argument from structure to function is often extremely unsafe, even
for the accomplished anatomist, and the danger is greatest where the ex-
perience is least. True, Owen has shown that the Turkey Buzzard has
well-developed olfactory nerves; but in the same paper (P. Z.S., V, 1837,
P- 34,35) where he records this, he states that the same nerves were found
to be fully as well developed in the Goose, while even in the Turkey they
were fairly developed, although only about one sixth as large. Further-
more, this distinguished anatomist, a part of whose testimony Mr. Sayles
finds so ‘‘entirely satisfactory,” closes his paper with the remark, that ‘‘The
above notes show that the Vulture has a well-developed organ of smell,
but whether he finds his prey by that sense alone, or in what degree it as-
sists, anatomy is not so well calculated to explain as experiment.” Again,
according to Owen (Comp. Anat. and Phys. Vert., II, 132), the olfactory
nerves are relatively largest, among birds, in the Apteryx; yet this bird
appears to use its power of smell mainly for the detection of the worms
which form its daily food, and for which it probes in the ground, thus
apparently using its keen scent only at very short distances,— hardly
more indeed than the length of its own bill.
Turning now to the personal observations of Mr. Sayles, let us consider
the evidence which he calls ‘‘positive,” yet which I regard as entirely in-
conclusive. In the first place, the data given us are very incomplete, and
several of the most important points recorded were observed merely by
chance, and before any significance was attached to them; and one can
scarcely help questioning the accuracy of many of the details of such ob-
servations, especially when it is remembered that the occurrences narrated
took place more than a dozen years ago, and we are not informed whether
the narrator writes from memory or from notes taken at the time. It is
doubtful whether, under the most favorable circumstances, the movements
of Buzzards could be fairly watched at a distance of ‘‘more than two miles,”
and we are not even told how this distance was determined. Again, as the
observations were simply accidental, it is more than possible that single
Buzzards had already reached the place unobserved by our critic, but zof
without attracting the attention of the distant flock, which responded in
the usual manner. In order to account for the coming of these first few
individuals we have only to assume that the dogs had carried out and left
exposed a few fragments of offal, which would readily be detected by any
sharp-sighted Buzzard which chanced to be passing, or which may have
been in the habit of visiting the plantation every morning. *
*In March, 1886, the writer received from S. E. Cassino & Co., the publishers of the
‘Standard Natural History,’ a lengthy criticism of his statements about the power of
174 Notes and News. [April
Finally, the fact that the birds failed to find the source of the stench, and
‘‘gave up the search” after staying about ‘‘for an hour or two,” is totally
irreconcilable with the possession of such powers of scent as would en-
able them to detect the same odor at a distance of more than two miles.
If the space can be spared, I should be glad, in a future number of ‘The
Auk,’ to discuss this subject further, and to give a brief résumé of the
evidence on both sides of the question.
Respectfully,
Washington, D. C., March 4, 1887. WALTER B. BARRows.
NOTES AND NEWS.
Dr. Joun M. WHEATON, one of the original members of the A. O. U.
and well known as an ornithologist, died at his residence in Columbus,
Ohio, January 28, after protracted illness from consumption, at the age of
forty-six. Dr. Wheaton has for many years been an occasional contribu-
tor to current ornithological literature; his principal work, however, was
a report on the Birds of Ohio, published in 1882, in the fourth volume of
the Geological Report of the State of Ohio.* His unrivalled collection of
the birds of Ohio is now at the State University. Dr. Wheaton was born
at Columbus, and was educated at Davison University; he afterward
studied medicine, graduating from the Starling Medical College in 1884,
and immediately after entered the army as an assistant surgeon. In 1867
he was made Professor of Anatomy in the Starling Medical College. which
position he held till his death. He was also a trustee of the college, and
secretary of the board. Ile was a successful physician. a teacher of recog-
nized ability, and held in high esteem by all who knew him. He leaves a
wife and ason nine years of age. Dr. Wheaton’s death is the first that
has occurred among the Active Members of the A. O. U.
ConGREss has appropriated $12,000 for carrying on the work of the
Department of Economic Ornithology and Mammalogy for the year
ending June 30, 1888. Now thatthe adjournment of Congress has brought
some relief to the Government Printing Office, it is hoped that some of
the long-expected special reports of the Department will soon be put in
type.
scent in Vultures, as published in Volume IV of that work. The criticism, which was
by Mr. Sayles, embodied all the facts since published by him in ‘The Auk,’ and much
additional matter on various subjects. In connection with the particular instance cited
above, it was there distinctly stated that a flock of Buzzards was no unusual sight on the
plantation, and that nothing was thought of it in this case until they were seen wheel-
ing about the ofex wood-shed (the italics are mine) where, during the night, the pot of
offal had been upset by the dogs.
* For a review of this work see Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, Vol. VIII, p. 110. ©
oe
—
ae’
1887. ] Notes and News. 175
Tue bill authorizing an appropriation of $400,000 by the City of New
York for the construction of an addition to the American Museum of Nat-
ural History building has passed both branches of the New York State
legislature almost unanimously and has become a law. The addition will
be at the 77th Street end of the present structure, and will be of about the
same size as the portion already constructed. It is expected that work on
the proposed addition will be begun at an early day.
Two numbers of a new monthly journal, called ‘The Audubon Magazine,’
have appeared. It is ‘‘published in the interest of the Audubon Society
for the Protection of Birds,” by the ‘Forest and Stream’ Publishing Com-
pany of New York. Besides being a medium of communication between
the friends of Bird Protection, it is intended to interest the young in the
general subject of natural history, giving, however, special prominence
to ornithology. Its purposes are excellent, and, under the editorial super-
vision of Dr. George Bird Grinnell, it promises to become a very acceptable
and useful popular journal, covering essentially a new field, where much
good may be accomplished.
ANOTHER very promising addition to periodical literature devoted to
popularizing natural history is ‘The Swiss Cross,’ the new official organ
of the Agassiz Association. It is a monthly, edited by Harlan H. Bal-
lard, President of the Agassiz Association, and published by N. D. C.
Hodges (the editor of ‘Science’), at 47 Lafayette Place, New York. It is
‘devoted to spreading among the people an accurate knowledge of
nature.” Three numbers have already appeared.
TuarT the interest in the subject of Bird Protection is earnest and wide-
spread is evinced by the number of journals which are springing up de-
voted more or less exclusively to the support of the movement. Besides
‘The Audubon Magazine,’ noticed above, we have received three numbers
(Jan.-March, 1887) of a monthly journalentitled ‘The Bird Call,’ publish-
ed by the Pennsylvania Audubon Society, Miss A. C. Knight, President,
No. 1o12 Walnut Street, Philadelphia. This Society was organized in
April, 1886, and duly incorporated the following August. ‘The Bird Call’
is issued in aid of the humane work of the Society—‘‘to plead for mercy
to God’s messengers of beauty, use, and song,” and to aid in *‘the cam-
paign against the mandates of a cruel and senseless fashion.” We wish
‘The Bird Call’ every success in its good work.
Mr. C. J. MAYNARD has issued a prospectus of ‘Illustrations and De-
scription of the Birds of the Bahamas.’ The work is to be large folio in
size, and published in from fifteen to twenty parts, monographic in char-
acter. Each part is intended to be ‘‘an exhaustive treatise of the species
under consideration, complete in itself,” and will contain a colored plate
and an uncolored one, the latter devoted to the osteological and other
anatomical details described in the accompanying text, which will include
biographical as well as technical matter. The first part, announced as
176 Notes and News. [April
now ready ‘‘contains a finely colored plate on which are represented seven
specimens of the Bahama Fruit Finch (Sfzvdal’s zena), covering all
stages of plumage from nestling to adult,” etc.
THE antedating of papers or works on natural history is an evil to which
attention has often been called, and efforts have from time to time been
made, on the part of both authors and editors, to guard against misdating.
These efforts, however well intended, seem not always effectual, and even
may make a bad matter worse. The dilatoriness of the Government Press
in issuing reports and other works relating to science is notorious; such
dccuments sometimes slumbering in the form of printed sheets for months
and even years, before they are distributed to the public. Their authors
are powerless, as are the would-be readers of these important scientific
contributions, to secure their prompt publication; they frequently do not
reach the public till a year or two later than the supposed date of publica-
tion borne on their title-pages. Cases of this sort are too numerous and
too well-known to require specification; but it seems a pity that the Pro-
ceedings’ and other publications of the National Museum should have to
be added to the category of antedated publications. Presumably to fix the
exact date of publication, each signature of the ‘Proceedings’ is dated with
what is supposed to be the date of its issuance from the Government
Printing Office; and generally the date has accorded reasonably well with
the date of their reception by libraries and the specialists to whom they
are sent. This, however, has not been the case of late, three or four months
sometimes having elapsed between the presumed dates of publication borne
on the sheets and the actual date of their distribution. In the interest
of both science and veracity, it would be well to omit the dates altogether,
or take some means to have them give correctly the information implied.
WE are pleased to learn that Mr. Charles F. Morrison, now of Fort
Lewis, Colorado, Vice-President of the Bristol County, Mass., Ornitho-
logical Club, is engaged in the preparation of a complete list of the birds
of Colorado, which will form ‘Publication No. 1’ of the recently organized
Colorado State Ornithological Association, of which Mr. Morrison is Pres-
ident pro tem. The members of the Association are codperating in the work,
and excellent circulars of instruction have been issued by Mr. Morrison,
calling upon them for full and carefully annotated lists of the birds of their
respective localities. Doubtless good results may be safely anticipated
from this carefully planned system of coéperation.
Mr. THomas McItwrarrnu’s excellent little manual, entitled ‘The Birds
of Ontario,’ comes to hand barely in time for this brief announcement.
It form an octavo volume of 320 pages, published by the Hamilton Asso-
ciation, of Hamilton, Ontario.
a ee ee
The AUK:
A QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF
ORNITHOLOGY.
VOL. IV. Jur, 1887: No. 3.
DESCRIPTIONS OF SIX SUPPOSED NEW SPECIES
OF BIRDS FROM THE ISLANDS OF OLD
PROVIDENCE AND ST. ANDREWS,
CARIBBEAN SEA.*
BY CHARLES B. CORY.
Lampornis hendersoni, sp. nov.
Sp. Cuar.—Similar to Z. Prevost; but bill much shorter and back green
instead of bronzy; the bluish black patch on the throat longer and
narrower, the top of the head shows a faint ash tinge.
Adult & (Type, No. rorgo, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Upper plumage
bronzy green, a slight ash tinge on the top of the head; a stripe of
bluish black down the centre of the throat, becoming blue on the
breast, bordered on either side by grass green, showing bronzy
green on the sides of the neck; a tuft of white on the thighs; upper
surface of central tail-feathers dark bronze green, outer feathers
brownish purple, showing rufous in some lights, edged with dark
blue; most of under surface of tail-feathers purple when held in
the light; quills dark brown; bill black, about two-thirds as long as
that of revostz. ‘
Length, 4; wing, 2.65; tail, 1.50; bill, .78.
Female (No. 10196, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Upper parts similar to
the male; throat white with a broad black stripe passing down the
centre, becoming dark bluish green on the lower throat and upper
breast; under surface of tail-feathers tipped with white and _ bor-
dered sub-terminally with dark steel blue.
Habitat. Old.Providence Island.
[*An author’s edition of 250 copies of this paper was published May 28, 1887.—EDD.]
I 78 Cory, Descriptions of New Species of West Indian Birds. [ July
The immature bird has a patch of bright green on the centre
of the throat separated by a narrow white stripe from the deep
chestnut brown which borders the sides of the throat and breast ;
most of the tail-feathers are broadly tipped with white, showing
a sub-terminal band of dark blue.
Vireosylvia canescens, sp. nov.
Spe. CHar.—Resembles Vireosyluia grandior Ridgw., but is ashy instead
of greenish on the back, and lacks the olive on the flanks and the
yellowish crissum; tail-feathers not green.
Adult & (Type, No. 1o1gs5, Coll. C. B. Cory) :— Head ash gray,
becoming dull grayish olive on the back; a superciliary stripe of
dull, buffy white, bordered by a narrow streak of brown on the sides
of the crown; a malar stripe of dull brown. Underparts white,
faintly tinged with olive; crissum dull white, showing a slight yel-
lowish tinge at the vent; quills and tail brown, showing a tinge of
olive on the outer webs of the inner feathers.
Length, 5.60; wing, 3.50; tail, 2.60; tarsus, 80; bill, .7o.
Flabitat. St. Andrews Island.
Icterus lawrencil, sp. nov.
Sp. CHar. —Similar to Zcterus bairdi ; but having the upper plumage and
especially the upper tail-coverts more olive. General plumage
apparently darker.
Adult & (Type, No. 10193, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Above yellowish
olive, showing a faint brown tinge on the head and nape, nearly
absent in some specimens; rump and upper tail-coverts yellowish
olive, like the back; throat black, the black passing in front of the
eye extending to the nostril; rest of underparts pale orange yellow;
wings black, the coverts pure white, forming a broad white wing-
patch; tertials and secondaries heavily edged with white, primaries
showing a faint indication of white edging on the inner feathers.
Tail black, narrowly tipped with dull white.
Length, 7.80; wing, 4.40; tail, .37; tarsus, 1; bill, .80.
Flabitat. St. Andrews Island.
I take pleasure in dedicating this beautiful species to Mr. Geo.
N. Lawrence, of New York.
Mimus magnirostris, sp. nov.
Sp. CuHar.—Bill very large; breast and throat showing a faint tinge of
reddish brown, lacking in some specimens.
Adult & (Type, No. 1o1g2, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Upper plumage
5
*
4
1887.] Cory, Descriptions of New Species of West Indian Birds. 179
slaty gray, showing a brownish tinge on top of the head ; underparts
white, tinged with orange brown on the throat and breast; tail
brownish black, tipped with white, narrowly on the two central
feathers but gradually becoming heavier, until the outer feathers
have the terminal third and outer web white; quills brownish
black, faintly edged with white; bill and feet black.
Length, 11.50; wing, 4.85; tail, 5.75; tarsus, 1.40; bill, 1.
Habitat. St. Andrews Island.
The orange brown coloration of the throat and breast is
apparently nota constant character, as several specimens before
me show it but slightly and two not at all.
Engyptila neoxena, sp nov.
Sp. CHar.—Resembles Engyftila collaris, but is more olive on the back,
and lacks the violet metalic collar, which is apparently replaced by
green; the general color of the upper parts more closely resembles
that in &. jamaicensis, but the specimens of the latter bird now be-
fore me have the top of the head purplish, showing a greenish gloss
on the occiput, while in &. neoxena the top of the head is white
shading to ash gray.
Adult & (Type, No 10194, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Top of head white,
shading into gray on the occiput; chin and throat white, becoming
pale purple or violet on the breast; sides of the neck and breast
showing metallic purple mixed with metallic green when held in the
light; feathers on the upper back showing metallic green, faintly
tinged with purple; back dark olive; belly dull white; rest of plu-
mage resembling that of &. codlarts. ;
Length, 9; wing, 4.75; tail, 4; tarsus, I.
Habitat. St. Andrews Island.
But two specimens of this interesting bird were taken and both
were badly prepared. It is possible that a larger series would
show it to be not specifically separable from EE. jamaicensts.
Dendroica flavida, sp. nov.
Sp. Cuar.—Resembles Dendroica rufivertex, but has the orange brown
on the head more restricted and paler; throat unspotted, or very
nearly so; underparts, including sides and flanks, heavily striped
with rufous brown.
Adult & (Type, No. 1o1gt, Coll. C. B. Cory) :—Top of the head
orange brown showing yellow in front of the eye; nape, back and
upper tail-coverts yellowish olive ; throat bright pale yellow, touched
with one or two indistinct pencilings of brown, rest of underparts
180 Cory, Birds of Old Providence and St. Andrews. [ July
yellow, heavily streaked with rufous brown; wings dark brown
edged with yellow; tail-feathers brown, heavily marked with yellow
on the inner webs and faintly edged with it on the outer.
Length, 4.75; wing, 2.35; tail, 2; tarsus, .S0; bill, .30.
Habitat. St. Andrews Island.
A LIST OF THE BIRDS. TAKEN BY MK. ROBERT
HENDERSON, IN THE ISLANDS OF OLD PROV-
IDENCE AND ST ANDREWS, CARIBBEAN
SEA, DURING THE WINTER OF 1886-87.*
BY CHARLES B. CORY.
Old Providence.
Dendroica palmarum (Gvel.).
Dendroica coronata (Zzzz.).
Compsothlypis americana (Z7uzz.).
Seiurus noveboracensis (Gywel.).
Seiurus noveboracensis notabilis (Grzzz.).
Seiurus aurocapillus (Zzzz.).
Seiurus motacilla ( Vzez//.).
Certhiola tricolor Aidgw.
Vireo approximans /t/dgw.
Vireosylvia grandior Azdgw.
Spiza americana (Gme/.).
Euethia bicolor (£z7.).
Tyrannus tyrannus (Zzzz.).
Elainea cinerescens Adgw.
Lampornis hendersoni ods.
Coccyzus minor (Gwel.).
Melopelia leucoptera (Z7zv.).
Columba leucocephala Zzzz.
Actitis macularia (L2zzz.).
Ardea virescens (Lzzz.).
Ardea cerulea (Zzzz.).
Ardea tricolor ruficollis ( Gosse).
Fregata aquila (Lizz.).
* [An author's edition of 250 copies of this paper was published May 28, 1887.—EDD.]
1337.] Lioyp ox Birds of Western Texas. ISI
Sula piscator (Zzzz.).
Puffinus auduboni /izsch.
St. Andrews.
Mimus magnirostris 7odcs.
Galeoscoptes carolinensis (Zzvz.).
Mniotilta varia (Lzzz.).
Dendroica flavida xodcs.
Seiurus noveboracensis (Gwc/.).
?Certhiola tricolor /r7dgw.
Vireosylvia canescens zodvs.
Vireo noveboracensis (Gmel.).
Euethia bicolor (Zzzz.).
Icterus lawrencii zod¢s.
?Elainea martinica (L277.)
Sphyrapicus varius (Lzzz.).
Ceryle alcyon (Lzzz.).
Engyptila neoxena zodvs.
Actitis macularia (Z2zv.).
Ardea virescens (Zzzz.).
Ardea tricolor ruficollis (Gosse).
Fregata aquila (Z/xz.).
Sula piscator (Z7zz.).
BIRDS OF TOM GREEN AND CONCHO COUNTIES,
TEXAS.
BY WILLIAM LLOYD.
THE present paper deals principally with the avi-fauna of
the valleys of the Concho River and its tributaries east to the
Colorado River. It also includes the birds of the plains west of
the Pecos River, and north to the Texas and Pacific Railroad,
and some few noted incidentally south in Crockett and Edwards
Counties, andin Nueces Cation. The district has a general and
nearly equal elevation of nearly 2000 feet above the sea-level, and
152 Lioyp oz Birds of Western Texas. [ July
is well watered. Spring and Dove Creeks, with the South
Concho, flow into the Middle Concho, which unites with the
the North Concho at San Angelo, Tom Green County (Lat. 31°
22', Long. 23°, 19' W.), and forms the Main Concho, which,
after a general easterly course of about forty-five miles, receiving
Kickapoo, Lipan (Euterpe on map), Duck, Mustang, and Horse
Creeks, falls into the Colorado River, in the extreme east of the
county. The creeks are well timbered with pecan, elm, hack-
berry, a species of walnut, and willows, etc., and have well
defined bottoms of an average width of about fifty yards, but fre-
quently are half a mile wide, densely grown with scrub mesquit,
smnall groves of hackberry, wild china, and other small trees, over-
run with poison ivy, and laden with parasitic mistletoe. At the
heads of the larger creeks is generally a considerable growth of
various small oaks, while the hillsides are covered with shin-oak
and a species of laurel; and in Tom Green County the head
draws of the creeks are full of cedar groves. There are no hills
worth noting in Concho County, where the surface is level
prairie, gently rolling and broken only by the creeks and dry
ravines. It was once treeless but is now being rapidly covered
with dwarf mesquit ; in many places there is not even a shrub;
other parts are well grown with cat-claw, algarita, chapparal,
wahilla (a kind of evergreen), and nopal catcus. In summer it
is covered with hundreds of flowering plants, of which the ver-
bena and lupin are most numerous. Tom Green County is
more broken and has well-defined chains of hills dividing the
upper water courses. They are not timbered, however, and, like
the Castle Mountains on the plains. exercise no appreciable in-
fluence onour birds. The Pecos River is entirely devoid of tim-
ber, with exception of the ubiquitous button bush, and has no
bird-life whatever peculiar to it, owing no doubt to the alkaline
nature of its waters. There is a lake of fresh water on the plains
which I have never examined. About a dozen species of catcus
occur. A swamp on the head of South Concho is the only
ground of the kind in the district ; this has some very large live
oak studding its borders, and water oak in it. Acres of thistles, in
various places in both counties, form in winter admirable feed-
ing grounds for various birds. The soil is very fertile, and un-
derlaid with limestone, of the middle Eocene. Stock-raising
was, until the last few years, the only pursuit; now farms are
1887.] Lioyp oz Birds of Western Texas. 183
numerous, and an increasing area is in Cultivation every year, on
which are raised millet and sorghum for the winter use of stock.
The prevailing wind throughout the year is from the south,
tempered in winter every ten days (on an average) by a brisk
norther that drives all the birds to the river and creek bottoms.
The temperature in winter, though once recorded as below zero,
is for December and January 35° in the morning, 45° to 70° at
noon, and 4o° at dusk. The winter of 1886-57 was exceptionally
mild; the temperature has not gone below 10°, and it sleeted
once, with a register of 20°. In spring the average temperature
is 70° to 80° at noon, rising to 95° in April, and in summer
touches 102°.
I have carefully hunted each creek with the sole exceptions of
Grape Creek and North Concho—the latter scarcely touched—
and have been to Pecos River four times, along the line of the
Texas and Pacific Railroad, across the sand-hills, and south into
Crockett County and beyond. After I became an observer for
the Mississippi ValleyDistrict I noted arrivals every day carefully,
as follows :— fall, 1884, Main Concho, near mouth; February to
June, 1884, Middle Concho; fall, 1884, South Concho and
Plains ; 1885, spring, on Spring Creek ; fall, on Kickapoo, Lipan,
Main Concho, Middle Concho, and Plains; 1886, fall, Lipan
and Main Concho, besides visiting all the other localities at vari-
ous periods.
The record, besides including the following (about 240
species and varieties), should, I have no doubt, contain various
others noted north and south of me, as the Blackburnian Warbler,
Ground Dove, Prairie Falcon, etc., but as I have not been able to
record them for the last three years, with Messrs. Sennett’s,
Brown’s, Goss’s, and Ragsdale’s (Colorado City) lists to guide
me, I have thought it best to make no remarks about them.
Whilst having no new species or varieties to describe, my list
considerably extends the range of the species named, while others
are frequently first records for Texas, as the Western Goshawk,
Wright’s Flycatcher, Woodhouse’s Jay, Black-chinned Hum-
mer (?), Townsend’s Warbler (?), and Lewis’s Woodpecker.
Iam under great obligations to Mr. Everett Smith, who first
kindly aided me in my efforts to locate birds of this district, and
later to Mr. Ridgway, whose time I am afraid I have considerably
imposed upon by my frequent questions as to the status of species
184 Lioyp on Lirds of Western Texas. [ July
here and elsewhere, and for the last three years to Prof. W. W.
Cooke, who has revised my names frequently and given me every
assistance in his power in preparing my list. Lastly to Mr. John
A. Loomis, of Silvercliff Ranche, I am indebted for much assis-
tance in my later work in Concho County, and who has been
able to extend my list considerably, especially among the Game
Birds and Raptores, as will be noted in connection with various
birds mentioned in the list.
The arrangement and nomenclature is that of the A. O. U.
Check-List.
1. Podilymbus podiceps. PiED-BILLED GREBE.—Tolorably common
in winter.
2. Urinator imber. Loon.—Two seen in the winter of 18So.
3. Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis. BLAcK TERN.—Tolerably com-
mon during the fall migration.
4. Anhinga anhinga. ANHINGA.—Tolerably common during the fall
migration on South Concho.
5. Phalacrocorax dilophus floridanus. DouBLE-cRESTED CORMO-
RANT.—One shot in the fall of 188o.
6. Pelecanus erythrorhynchos. Wuitre PeLican.—Rare in spring and
fall.
7. Merganser americanus. AMERICAN MERGANSER.— Common in
winter.
8. Lophodytes cucullatus. HooprEp MerGanser.—Common_ in
winter.
g- Anas boschas. MALLARD.—Abundant in winter.
10. Anas obscura. BLack Duck.—Tolerably common in fall.
11. Anas strepera. GADWALL.—Abundant in early winter.
12. Anas americana. BALDPATE.—Tolerably common in winter.
13. Anas carolinensis. GREEN-WINGED TEeAL.—Abundant during
spring and fall; a few remain through the winter. Arrives earlier than
other Ducks.
14. Anas discors. BLUE-wINGED TEAL.—Abundant during spring and
fall; a few remain through the winter. Arrives with the last, earlier than
other Ducks.
15. Anas cyanoptera. CINNAMON TEAL.—Rare in fall.
16. Spatula clypeata. SHOvELLER.—Common during spring aud fall.
17. Dafila acuta. PinrarL.—Tolerably common in spring and fall.
One female shot in June, 1881.
18. Aix sponsa. Woop Ducx.—Migrant in fall; not observed in
spring; winters on the Rio Llano.
19. Aythya americana. RED-HEAD-—Common in winter.
20. Aythya vallisneria. CANVAS-BACK.—Tolerably common in early
winter.
21. Aythya affinis, LirrL—E Scaup Ducx.—Tolerably common In
winter,
»)
|
ur
1887.] Lioyp oz Birds of Western Texas. 185
22. Aythya collaris. RING-NECKED Duck.—Common in Concho
County; some observed in Tom Green County.
23. Charitonetta albeola. BurrLe-HEAD.—Rare; shot in the spring of
1886, in Concho County by Mr. Loomis.
24. Erismatura rubida. Ruppy Duck.—Rare;seenonly during spring
migration.
25. Chen hyperborea. Lesser SNow GoosE.—Tolerably common
during the spring migration.
26. Anser albifrons gambeli. AMERICAN WHITE-FRONTED GOOSE.—
Tolerably common in winter.
27. Branta canadensis. CANADA Goosge.— Tolerably common in
spring and fall.
28. Branta nigricans. BLACK Brant.—Rare. Shot only in Tom
Green County in the winter of 1884.
29. Dendrocygna autumnalis. BLACK-BELLIED TREE-DUCK.—Rare in
fall on South Concho.
30. Dendrocygna fulva. FuLvous TREE-puck.—Tolerably common
during the winter of 1884, on the North Concho.
31. Olor buccinator. TRUMPETER Swan. — Tolerably common in
winter.
32. Phoenicopterus ruber. FLAmINGo.—Accidental visitor in August,
1881, and July, 1882.
33. Botaurus lentiginosus. Birrern.—Common fall migrant.
34. Botaurusexilis. Least Birrern.—Common fall migrant.
35. Ardea herodias. Great Biue Hrron.—Resident; breeds, but
nest not found.
36. Ardea candidissima. SNowy HERoNn.—Resident; breeds, but nest
not found.
37- Ardeaccerulea. LirrLe Heron.—Resident; breeds, but nest not
found. An abundant fall migrant.
38. Grus americanus. Wuoorinc CRANE.— Rare spring and_ fall
migrant.
39. Grus mexicana. SANDHILL CRANE.—Abundant spring and fall
migrant. ;
40. Porzana carolina. Sora Rait.—Rare spring migrant; abundant
in fall.
41. Fulica americana. Coor.—Common for nine months of the year,
and possibly breeds, as I have seen them in June and July.
42. Phalaropus tricolor. WILSON’s PHALAROPE.—Tolerably common
spring migrant; not found in the fall.
43- Recurvirostra americana. Avocer.—Common fall migrant.
44. Philohela minor. AMERICAN Woopcock.—Rare in fall and win-
ter on Middle Concho River.
45. Gallinago delicata. Wuitson’s SNirE.—Common. Seen every
month in the year. No nests or eggs found.
46. Macrorhamphus griseus. DowircHer.—Tolerably common in the
fall. Arrives early in September.
186 Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas. a: tihaty.
47. Micropalama himantopus. STi_T SANDPIPER.—Common in fall;
arrives September 3 to 5. Rare in spring.
48. Tringa maculata. PicroraAL SANDPIPER.—Common spring and
fall migrant; arrives in spring April 27 to 29; in fall in September.
49. Tringa bairdii. Bairp’s SANDPIPER. —Common spring and fall
migrant, ariving in spring May g and 10, and in fall August 30, leaving
about October 20.
50. Tringa minutilla. Least SANDPIPER.—Common in spring and
fall; arriving in spring April to to May 12; and in fall from July 20 to
October 1.
51. Tringa alpina. Dunriin.—Only one observed; shot by Mr. Loomis
on Kickapoo Creek, October, 1886.
52. Ereunetes occidentalis. WrSTERN SANDPIPER.— Common in
spring and fall, arriving in spring April 10 to May 12; in the fall from
September 4 to October 20.
53. Totanus melanoleucus. GREATER YELLOW LEeGs.—Common in
spring and fall, arriving August 30, some remaining through the winter.
54. Totanus solitarius. SoxrirAry SANpDpiIPER.—Tolerably common
from September 5 to 22; a few only remaining till October. Rarely
noted in spring.
55- Bartramia longicauda. BARTRAMIAN SANDPIPER.—Abundant fall
migrant, arriving the first week in July, and numerous until September 30.
In spring tolerably common, arriving April 19.
56. Tryngites subruficollis. Burr-BREASTED SANDPIPER.—One shot
in a flock of Mountain Plover, August 31, 1886, by Mr. Chester Loomis.
57. Actitis macularia. SporrED SANDPIPER.—Abundant; a few stay
to breed; no nests found.
58. Numenius longirostris. LoNnG-BILLED CuRLEW.— Arrives August
7 to 12, and is frequently found in large flocks. Some remain to winter,
and are again abundant in spring.
59. Squatarola helvetica. BLACK-BELLIED PLover.—One shot by Mr.
Ridge Goodrum, August 31, 1886, is the only record for the district.
60. Charadrius dominicus. GoLDEN PLOveR.—AII the birds of this
species I have seen were shot by Mr. J. A. Loomis, who states that they
are tolerably common in fall.
61. A®gialitis vocifera. KiLLDEER.—Abundant resident. Found eggs
March 9, 10, and April 24. In winter they take to the open prairie in
flocks of six to ten.
62. A®gialitis montana. Mounrain PLover.—Abundant migrant in
spring and fall. Arrives in flocks August 31 (earliest date), and some re-
main to winter.
63. Colinus virginianus texanus. TEXAN Bos-wHire.— Abundant
resident. Raise two broods. Nest, a depression lined with dried grass
at the roots of small bushes, generally ‘algarita’. Eggs six to fifteen.
Earliest clutch found May 6 (twelve eggs); latest August 10 (fourteen
eggs). Range extends west toPecos. In winter they frequently associate
with the Blue Quail.
1887. ] Lioyp ox Birds of Western Texas. 187
64. Callipepla squamata. SCALED PARTRIDGE.—Abundant resident.
A depression under a bush, generally unlined, serves as a nest. I
believe only one brood is raised here, as the latest clutch found was May
18 (15 eggs) ; earliest clutch April 26 (12 eggs). This notice, I believe,
extends the range considerably to the eastward, as the bird is found as far
east as the Colorado River. Locally known as the Blue Quail. Most
abundant between Castle Mountains and Pecos River, in a sort of fine,
loose, sandy soil.
65. Cyrtonyx montezume. Massena PARTRIDGE.—Resident in Tom
Green County, on the plains near Castle Mountains, and east to within
about 20 miles west of San Angelo, on Middle Concho. Also noted in
Crockett and Edwards Counties, nearly due south. No nests found.
Known as the Black Partridge. The new A. O. U. ‘Code and Check-
List’ gives its habitat as Northwestern Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and
Northwestern Mexico. I have traced it as far south as a line east of
Eagle Pass, in Nueces and Frio Cafions; so Western Texas may also be
included.
66. Tympanuchus pallidicinctus. Lesser PRAIRIE HEN.— Winter
visitor; seen in October and November in Concho County, and also in
winter on Middle Concho in Tom Green County. Abundant near Colo-
rado City on the Texas and Pacific Railroad: I believe this record extends
the range to the south-west. Westward it was abundant to the foothills
ofthe Davis Mountains. Said to have been driven from the Pan Handle
counties by the numerous prairie fires.
67. Meleagris gallopavo mexicana. MexIcAN TurRKey.—Resident.
Once very abundant on every creek, but now rarely to be met with. I
a depression in a patch of low bushes—May
flushed a hen from her nest
29, 1882, containing eight eggs; but I have frequently heard of them
further south with ten to fourteen eggs. Another brood was raised on a
small rushy island in Brady Creek, in the eastern part of Concho County,
the young running about June 1, 1883.
68. Ectopistes migratorius. PASSENGER PIGEON.—Though not ob-
served in this immediate district, an immense roost was noted in the
winter of 1881, near the head of Frio Canon. The settlers informed me
that they had been there all the winter, eating acorns on the hills, and
passing and repassing morning and evening in myriads. It was about
February 1,1882, that I saw them.
69. Zenaidura macroura. MourNinG Dove.—Abundant resident. In
winter more local, but in large flocks, when they frequently change their
roosting place, as a friend (Mr. Loomis) suggests, in consequence of be-
ing disturbed by the numerous Owls. He first noticed the fact by noting
where they roosted, so as to shoot them as they came in, and returning
three or four nights after they had altered their resting place, and did so
again and again. They raise two if not three broods, as I found a nest
containing two fresh eggs of this species the 2oth September, 1886, the
latest date I have recorded for any eggs. The earliest date is April 26.
They frequently use old Mocking Bird’s nests.
188 Luioyp on Birds of Western Texas. [ July
yo. Cathartes aura. TurkKEY VULTURE.—Arrives March 17 (earliest
date recorded), and remains abundant through the summer, breeding in
caves, but frequently on the bare edge of a bluff. Clutches found contain
only two eggs (one, doubtful whether this ornext, having three). First
one found May 6; last one June 10. Leave in September.
After trying various experiments, I notice that although they may smell
their prey finally, they often seize and devour it before it has time to
smell. These Vultures, the Carrion Crows, and Ravens frequently line
the trees or posts waiting for a sheep to die, if in an exposed place.
71. Catharista atrata. BLACK VuLTURE.—Arrives March Io to 20, and
nearly equals the last in numbers. Breeds ow bare rocks—-June 13, 1884,
two eggs.
72. Elanus leucurus. WHITE-TAILED KitTEe.—Rare fall visitor.
73. Ictinia mississippiensis. Mrssissipp1 Kirk.—Common in fall, in
flocks of two to ten. A few must breed, as I have noted them in all the
summer months.
74. Circus hudsonius. Marsu Harrirr.—Abundant resident. No
nests have been found referable without doubt to this species. A great
pest to the poultry yard. I have seen them eating carrion. One at the
present date (January, 1887), frequently eats the carcasses of birds I
have skinned, standing on the ground for that purpose. Generally they
fly off with their prey, but eat iton the ground. The Sharp-shinned Hawk
turns the wire-fence barbs to account, and the Cooper’s occasionally will
join the Marsh Harrier in eating a fresh-skinned carcass.
75. Accipiter velox. SHARP-SHINNED HAwKk.—Abundant in fall; less
so in winter. An excessively bold Hawk. I have seen it fly away with a
pullet as big or bigger than itself, so heavy that its legs dragged the
ground.
76. Accipiter cooperi. Coorer’s HAwk.—Another pest of the poultry
yard. One flying after some tame Pigeons flew with force through a win-
dow in the barn, and was picked up stunned. Abundant in fall; less so
in winter,
77. Accipiter atricapillus striatulus. WesTERN GosHAwKk.—I shot a
male that was digesting a Meadow Lark, in December, 1885, and saw its
mate several times.
78. Buteo borealis calurus. WersTerN Rep-TAIL.—Abundant resident.
Breeds from April 22 to May 22. Full clutch, three eggs. Feeds on
prairie-dogs, cotton-tails, jack rabbits, and occasionally brings a Scaled
Quail to its young. The plumages vary greatly, some birds having very
dark under-parts,—but I believe they are referable to this variety.
79. Buteo lineatus. Rep-sHOULDERED HAwk.—Resident; rare. Breeds
(May 10, 1882, three eggs). I have never seen them in winter, but my
friend, Mr. Loomis, has several specimens shot by him in November and
December, 1885.
80. Buteo abbreviatus. ZoNE-TAILED HAwk.—Fall visitant. One
noted September 10, 1884.
81. Buteo albicaudatus. WHITE-TAILED I!\wK.—Fall and winter
tr Se, is ois
' 1887. } Lioyp ox Birds of Western Texas. 159
visitor. I sent a description of this Hawk—seen often before and since—
to Mr. Ridgway who says it probably is of this species.
S82. Buteo swainsoni. Swarnson’s Hawk.—Resident. Abundant in
summer. Breeds in low trees in ravines. in wild china or hackberries,
or on the top of bluffs in similar trees. Clutch, three eges
later ones,
conan
strange to say, have only two. Thus nests found March 1, April 1, 4, and
| 6, had each three eggs, while nests found May 1, 2, and 20, had only two.
The young are extremely handsome and seem to go through several
changes of color, from light creamy to almost melanistic specimens.
This. like the Red-tail, is clumsy, and unwary. It can, however, sail with
great swiftness for several miles without flapping its wings, Goesin large
flocks sometimes; one seen at Fort Davis, February, 1886, had 200 in it.
83. Archibuteo ferrugineus. FrRRUGINEOUS RoUGH-LEG.—This spe-
; cies (abundant in winter) was first brought to my notice by Mr. Loomis,
who has had great success in killing them in several phases of plumage.
It may breed—a point to be ascertained shortly.
84. Halizetus leucocephalus. BaLtp EaGLie.— Abundant resident.
} Breeds, March to May. A couple were seen repairing a nest this Chirist-
| mas, 1886, with cane stalks, and my informant says one bird is now sitting.
is The nest is in a high pecan, but others are found in mesquit, ten to fifteen
a feet high.
m 85. Falco columbarius. PIGEON HAwKk.—Winter visitor. Common
be in Tom Green County, in 1883-84.
86. Falco sparverius. AMERICAN SPARROW Hawk.—Abundant resi-
¥ dent. Nests in old Woodpecker holes in mesquit and live-oak. Nest with
young found May 1, 1885; eggs found as late as July 1 (1884). Clutch,
seven to eight. A flock of about fifty observed in September, 1885. in
Concho County.
87. Polyborus cheriway. AupUBON’s CARACARA.— Resident in the
eastern part of Concho County ; a few visit the western half in fall; none
seen in Tom Green County. Breeds. Nest found in live-oak, about
eighteen feet from the ground, with three eggs, April 24, 1881. Thesame
nest was used for two years after. Though in the southern part of ‘Texas
they prey on carrion, in Menard and Concho Counties they hunt prairie
dogs in couples. Not at all alarmed (as yet) at the ‘human form divine.’
88. Pandion haliaétus carolinensis. AMERICAN Osprey.—My authority
for this as a fall visitor is Mr. Loomis, who noted one last fall (1885)
on Kickapoo Creek.
4 89. Strix pratincola. AMERICAN BARN OwL.—Resident; rare; breeds.
No nest found, but young met with in San Angelo, July, 1885. Seen in
Concho County, in August, 1885. Known as the Monkey Owl, or
Monkey-faced Owl.
go. Asiowilsonianus. AMERICAN LONG-EARED OwL.—Two specimens
shot in the fall of 1886, and others noted.
| gt. Asio accipitrinus. SiHORT-EARED OwL.—Tolerably common in
fall; rare in spring.
g2. Syrnium nebulosum. BARRED OWL.—Seems to be common on the
190 Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas. [ July
main streams, but, like nearly all other Owls, is far oftener heard than
seen. No nests found, but undoubtedly a resident. May be var. @dlen?.
93. Megascops asio mccallii. TEXAN ScREECH OwL.— Abundant, at
least in winter, on the river. Their notes can be heard from September
10 until March 1o.
94. Bubo virginianus subarcticus. WESTERN HoRNED OwL.—Abun-
dant resident. Breeds from February 20 to end of May, in hackberry or
mesquit on prairies, and in holes in the large pecans on rivers. I
have rarely found more than two eggs in one clutch; three, however, occur
in about one nest in six. Feeds on poultry, skunks, and rabbits, and is
often on wing during the day. The birds seem to grow lighter with
age.
95. Speotyto cunicularia hypogea. Burrowinc OwL.— Abundant
resident. Breeds from April 1 to May 10, in old deserted dog-holes.
Fly by day as well as night. I have found remains of Bell’s Vireo, Sav-
anna Sparrow, and other birds in their holes.. In winter they hibernate,
going in according to the severity of the weather. They appear just be-
fore the first migrants. I have noted them for several years, retiring
December I to 10, and appearing March 1 or 2.
96. Crotophaga sulcirostris. GRoovE-BILLED ANI.—Fall visitor. One
was shot by Mr. Loomis in October, 1885. I saw several, but did not pro-
cure any, in October, 1886. This record extends the range of this species
considerably to the north, Mr. Sennett recording it for the Lower Rio
Grande.
97. Geococcyx californianus. ROAD-RUNNER.— Abundant resident.
Breeds from March 30 to May 10. Nest a huge structure in the middle of
a bush, in thickets or dry ravines. Clutches number four, seven, six, five,
five, eight, nine; average six.
98. Coccyzus americanus YELLOW-BILLED Cuckoo.— Abundant in
summer. Arrives first week in May; departs middle of September. My
notes for 1884, 1885, r886, respectively, give September 14, September 15,
September 14, as latest records. First nest found June 2; last, July 30.
Full clutches four-five. | Nests in low hackberries, or high pecans. The
nest is avery flimsy structure, of about twenty straws crossed, and so
poorly put together that after-a high wind eggs of both this bird and the
Mourning Dove are frequently found on the ground, in pieces.
99. Coccyzus erythrophthalmus. BLACK-BILLED Cuckoo.—Spring and
fall migrant. Not found west of Concho County.
too. Ceryle alcyon. BeLTeED KINGFISHER.-— Abundant resident.
Found in spring in small flocks. No nests found.
tot. Ceryle cabanisi. TrExAN KINGFISHER.—Not detected on Pecos or
Concho Rivers. Found in Nueces and Frio Cafions, in Edwards County.
In the latter cafion in company with the Belted Kingfisher.
102. Dryobates pubescens. Downy WooprecKer.— One shot on
Middle Concho, in Tom Green County, January 1883.
103. Dryobates scalaris. TExAN WooppecKEeR.—Abundant resident.
Breeds April 16 to May 28.
1887. | LioypD ox Birds of Western Texas. IgI
104. Sphyrapicus thyroideus. WILLIAMSON’s SAPSUCKER.—Irregular
winter visitant. Tolerably common during the winter of 1883. Like all
migrating Woodpeckers here, they are very local and may be common
in places overlooked by me. Found on North Concho, and also in
Nueces Cafion, in Uvalde County.
105 Melanerpes erythrocephalus. RED-HEADED WoopDPECKER. —
Irregular visitant. One shot August, 1885, and another seen but not se-
cured. Only noted on Kickapoo Creek.
106. Melanerpes torquatus. Lrwis’s WooprEcKER.—Winter visitor,
to the heads ofcreeks that rise inthe plains. Tolerably common on Spring
Creek. This record considerably extends the range of this species south-
ward, and is the first (undoubted) notice for Texas.
107. Melanerpes carolinus. RED-BELLIED WoopPECKER.—Tolerably
common winter resident on Main Concho.
108. Melanerpes aurifrons. YELLOW-NAPED WoopPECKER.—Abun-
dant resident. Breeds in holes in mesquit, pecan, and live-oak, from
April to to May 14. Clutch six. I have traced this bird west to the Cas-
tle Mountains, near Pecos River, in Tom Green County, and north to line
of Texas and Pacific Railroad, so its range is considerably extended from
that given in the A. O. U. ‘Check-List,’ which merely gives Southern
Texas, etc. None found west of Pecos River.
10g. Colaptes auratus. FLicKer.— Winter visitor. Tolerably common,
but excessively wild.
110. Calaptes cafer. RED-SHAFTED FLICKER.—Winter visitor. More
common than the last and less wild. I have found it due south as far as
Frio Cafion, in Uvalde County. Arrives in fall from September 20 to
October 6. Latest seen April 17.
Intermediate or ‘hybrid’ specimens between this species and the last
occur in winter.
111. Antrostomus vociferus. WHIP-POOR-WILL.—Summer resident.
Found only in the eastern part of Concho County.
112. Phalenoptilus nuttalli. Poor-wiLt.—Abundant summer visitor.
First seen in 1884, March 6; in 1885, March 20. Last seen in 1884, Nov-
ember 23; in 1885, October 8. Breeds, andI have undoubtedly found eggs,
but stupidly thinking they should be speckled, I thought they were Dove’s
and left them. Its note is easily imitated. Midnight is their favorite
hour on moonlight nights. They lie close in shubbery during the day,
or on open flats, and are not easily fiushed. Mr. Loomis last year told me
they rested on limbs of trees on the creek during the day, to test which
statement I went with him and we flushed several as stated.
113.- Chordeiles texensis. TEXAN NIGHTHAWK.—Abundant summer
visitor. Arrives last weekin April, in flocks, and at once mate. Raise
two broods, and breed on little gravelly ridges on bare ground. Clutch
alwaystwo. Eggs found May 14, 29, 30, June 1, 30, and July 4. Departs
first week in October.
114. Trochiluscolubris. RusBy-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD.—Abundant
summer visitor, arriving April 10-11. I have noted nests only in May, but
Ig2 Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas [ July
it must breed earlier. In fall (September) the eastern migrants are abun-
dant for a week in Concho County; not detected in Tom Green County.
115. Trochilus alexandri. BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD —Abundant
summer visitor. Males arrive April 1; common April 7. Seen in flocks
during the fall migration (September 21 to 28). Raise two broods. Nests
found from May 12 to July 2.
Mr Nathan C. Browne first added this species to the Texas avi-fauna;
he found it at Boerne, and surmised that it bred to the north of that place,
so its range is thus much extended beyond its previously known habitat,
z. c., ‘Pacific coast region, from California east to Arizona, and Utah,
and southward.”
116. Milvulus forficatus. ScIssOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER.—Abundant
summer visitor. Earliest arrival March 14; not common until ten days
later. Departs, main body, about October 20; a few linger till the first
severe norther. Breeds commonly on prairies in mesquit thickets, but
often in high pecans. First nest May 6, clutch 5; latest July 16, clutch 5.
In ten nests examined only one clutch was 4.
117. Tyrannus tyrannus. KinGcBirp.—Fall visitant. Two recorded in
fall of 1886.
118. Tyrannus verticalis. ARKANSAS KINGBIRD.-—Spring migrant. I
noted a pair June 1, 1885, in Tom Green County, which had evidently
stayed to breed.
119. Myiarchus crinitus. GREAT-CRESTED FLYCATCHER.— Summer
visitant. Arrives May 31 (probably before); breeds. Nest found in a
hole in a mesquit, June 8, 1884; five eggs. Very abundant migrant dur-
ing September.
120. Myiarchus cinerascens. ASH-THROATED FLYCATCHER.—Abun-
dant summer visitor. Arrives the day after or same day as the Scissor-
tailed Flycatcher, 7. e., after the first cloudy weather in middle of March.
Departs a month before the Scissor-tail, but one or two linger for a fort-
night after the bulk go. Last seen October 7. Breeds in holes of trees—
generally in old Texas Sapsucker holes— and clutches range from 4 to 7 ;
ordinary clutch 6. First clutch found May 9; last, June 9.
121. Sayornis pheebe. Pua:Be.—-Resident; rarein summer and winter;
common in fall. Nests on rocky ledges in caves; clutch 4 to 6. First
nest found April 4; last, May 4. Does not winter in Tom Green County,
122. Sayornis saya. Say’s Puaspe.—Tolerably common winter resi-
dent. First arrival, October 10; departs April 13. Ranges east as far as
the Colorado River, Texas.
123. Sayornis nigricans. BLAck PHa@spe. — Rare summer visitor.
Found only in Tom Green County, on Spring Creek. Arrives end of
March. Breeds April 4; one clutch found, 6 eggs; nest on a ledge.
124. Contopus borealis. OLIvE-sIDED FLycATCcHER.—Fall migrant;
tolerably common in September. Not observed in spring.
125. Contopusvirens. Woop PrweEe.—Summer visitor. Not observed
until May 5; last seen October 21. Tolerably common on South Concho,
in Tom Green County, where it breeds. No nests were found, but young
1$87.] (Hay, the Red-headed Woodpecker a Floarder. 193
were shot in June. Common in Concho County for two months in the
fall.
126. Contopus richardsonii. WrsTerN Woop PrEwer.—Two shot in
fall of 1886, in Concho County.
127. Empidonax pusillus. LItrTLe Friycatcuer.—Tolerably common
summer visitant. Breeds. Young shot.
128. Empidonax pusillus trailli, TramLi’s FrycaTcHER.— Spring
migrant in the western half of Concho County, and I believe it breeds—
a point I thought I had already ascertained, but as there may be some
doubt, I cannot positively record it yet as breeding.
129. Empidonax minimus. Lrastr FLiycarcuer.—Tolerably common
summer visitant. Abundant in fall. Have shot young; no nests taken.
Arrival noted April 27, 1885.
130. Empidonax hammondi. HAMMoND’s FLYCATCHER. Fall migrant.
Rare in Concho County; tolerably common in Tom Green County and
the most abundant Emf/donax across the Pecos River.
131. Empidonax obscurus. WRIGHT'S FLYCATCHER.— Rare fall mi-
grant. Secured twice in Tom Green County.
132. Otocoris alpestris arenicola. Desert HoRNED Lark.—Abundant
winter visitor. Arrives October 20; departs March 6. This is the only
Horned Lark noted for either county. None occur in summer to my
knowledge, although I have looked especially for them.
( To be continued.)
THE RED-HEADED WOODPECKER A HOARDER.
TE OIG EA We
Tue Woodpeckers are eminently an insect-eating family, and
their whole organization fits them for gaining access to situations
where the supply of their normal food is perennial, if not always
abundant. There are, however, in all probability, few members
of the group that will not, when opportunities are offered, fore-
go their accustomed animal diet and solace themselves on soft
fruits and luscious berries; and when the blasts blow cold, and
the soggy limb is frozen hard, and the larva no longer betrays
its location by its industry, the few Woodpeckers of the species
which brave our winters are, no doubt, glad to avail themselves
of such dry forms of nutriment as grains, seeds of grasses, and
the softer nuts.
Notwithstanding the many sagacious traits exhibited by birds,
it is, to judge from the books, rather unusual for them to lay up
194 Hay, the Ied-headed Woodpecker a Hoarder. {| July
a store of food for a period of scarcity; and yet it is probable
that when we have thoroughly learned their modes of life many
will be found to do this. One Woodpecker, Alelanerpes formi-
ctvorus, a near relative of our Red-headed Woodpecker, has long
been known as a hoarder of treasures, and an interesting account
of its habits is given in Baird, Brewer and Ridgway’s ‘Birds of
North America.’ This species is accustomed to dig small holes
in the trunks of trees, and to drive into each hole with great
force a single acorn. ‘‘Thus the bark of a large pine forty or
fifty feet high will present the appearance of being. closely
studded with brass nails, the heads only being visible.” It has,
by some, been denied that these acorns are collected for food ;
and it is quite probable that many more are stored away than are
ever eaten. It is even related that these birds sometimes hide
away in trees collections of small stones. But there are evidences
that sometimes, at least, the acorns are utilized. Instinct probably
leads the bird to overdo the business of hoarding, just as human
reason in a similar direction often misleads its possessors.
Our Red-headed Woodpecker betrays its kinship to the Cali-
fornia species by the possession of somewhat similar habits. Its
propensity for hoarding does not appear to have escaped the
observation of many persons who make no claims to being or-
nithologists, and yet I find in no scientific work that I have been
able to consult any notice thereof. Gentry, who describes
minutely the habits of this species, says nothing about this trait.
‘The Birds of North America’ contains no statement concern-
ing the food of the species; and concerning the hoarding habits
of the California Woodpecker they are spoken of as being ‘‘very
remarkable and, for a Woodpecker, somewhat anomalous.”
Along with the great abundance of grains and fruits of the
past year, there has been, in Central Indiana at least, an immense
crop of beech-nuts; and the Red-heads have appeared to be
animated with an ambition to make the most of their opportu-
nities. From the time the nuts began to ripen, these birds
appeared to be almost constantly on the wing, passing from the
beeches to some place of deposit. They have hidden away the
nuts in almost every conceivable situation. Many have been
placed in cavities in partially decayed trees; and the felling of
an old: beech is certain to provide a little feast for a bevy of
children, Large handfuls have been taken from a single knot-
1887. Hay, the Red-headed Woodpecker a Hoarder. 195
hole. They are often found under a patch of the raised bark of
trees, and single nuts have been driven into the cracks in bark.
They have been thrust into the cracks in front gate-posts: and
a favorite place of deposit is behind long slivers on fence-posts.
I have taken a good handfull from a single such crevice. That
sharpest of all observers, the small boy, early discovered the
location of these treasures. In a few cases grains of corn have
been mixed with beech-nuts, and I have found also a few drupes
apparently of the wild-cherry and a partially-eaten bitter-nut.
The nuts may often be seen driven into the cracks at the ends of
railroad ties; and, on the other hand, the birds have often been
seen on the roofs of houses, pounding nuts into the crevices be-
tween the shingles. In several instances I have observed that the
space formed by a board springing away from a fence-post, has
been nearly filled with nuts, and afterwards pieces of bark and
wood have been brought and driven down over the nuts as if to
hide them from poachers. These pieces of bark are sometimes
an inch or more square and half an inch thick and driven in with
such force that it is difficult to get them out. In one case the
nuts were covered over with a layer of empty involucres.
Usually the nuts are still covered with the hulls; but here and
there, where the crevice is very narrow, these have been taken
off and pieces of the kernels have been thrust in. An examina-
tion recently of some of these caches showed that the nuts were
being attacked by animals of some kind. The Red-heads are
frequently seen in the vicinity of these stores and they sometimes
manifest great impatience at the presence of other birds. That
other birds and animals of any kind disturb these caches I do
not know, but it is quite probable that they do.
Since it might be questioned whether or not the Woodpeckers
use for food the nuts thus stored up, I concluded to apply a test
that would probably decide the matter. To-day (Jan. 7.), after
the prevalance for sometime of severe weather, I shot two Red-
heads and made an examination of the contents of their alimen-
tary canal. In the gizzards of both were found considerable
quantities of the more or less broken kernels of what appeared
to the unaided eye to be beech-nuts. I then made microscopic
sections of the pieces and compared them with similar sections
of beech-nuts, and the two sets of sections were identical. The
Red-headed Woodpecker certainly eats beech-nuts. In the giz-
196 Scott on the Birds of Arizona. | July
zards there was also some kind of hard vegetable matter that I
could not determine, and some coarse sand; but there were no
remains of insects.
The laying up of such abundant stores of food for winter use,
in so many places easy of access, and the precautions taken to
conceal them, all show a high degree of intelligence in these
birds.
The above observations were made in the village of Irvington,
near Indianapolis, Ind.
ON THE AVI-FAUNA OF PINAL. COUNTY, ‘WITH
REMARKS ON SOME BIRDS OF PIMA AND
GILA COUNTIES, ARIZONA.
BY W. E. D. SCOTT.
With annotations by F. A. Allen.
(Continued from p. 24.)
137. Coccothraustes vespertina. EVENING GrosBEAK.—The only lo-
cality at which I met with this species was in the pine wood region of the
Santa Catalina Mountains, November 26-29, 1884, as already noted. (See
Auk, Vol. II, No. 2, p. 174, April, 1885.)
38. Carpodacus purpureus californicus. CALIFORNIA PURPLE FINCH.
—During several years of collecting in the region under consideration,
this species was not met with; and, therefore, I must assume that it is
not of regular occurrence. But during the fall of 18385, beginning early in
November, I found large flocks in the cafion near my house in the Cat-
alinas. The first flock, noticed on November 11, was, as far as could be
ascertained, composed of birds in immature plumage and mostly females.
On November 30, I took a male in full plumage, the first I had noticed.
All through December and January they were common in both phases of
plumage, but a perceptible diminution of adult males was noticed early in
February. About the middle of February the species began to disappear.
This is the only point where I have noticed their occurrence. They fed
almost exclusively on the ripe seed-balls of the sycamore, this season very
abundant.
[Among the birds received from Mr. Scott are 12 adult males, 5 young
males in the plumage of the female,and 18 females. These appear to
differ in no appreciable way from California examples. Mr. Scott’s
1887. ] Scott ox the Birds of Arizona. 197
record, as above, is the first for the Southern Rocky Mountain region.
As he suggests, their appearance there is doubtless unusual, and doubt-
less to be considered as a temporary incursion from the Pacific coast region.
—J. A. A.
139. Carpodacus cassini. CASSIN’s PuRPLE Fincu.—The first records
I have of this species were made in the pine region of the Catalinas late
in November, 1884. (See Auk, Vol. II, p. 173.) Later in the same year
they were present near my house, feeding on the young buds of cotton-
wood. My notes speak of them as not uncommon through February and
March at this point, females and immature birds largely predominating.
The latest note of 1885 is on April 27, when, at the same locality, a single
one was seen and taken, moulting. I did not meet with them in the moun-
tains afterward, but saw a large flock, many in aduit plumage, at Tucson,
February 19, 1886.
140. Carpodacus frontalis. House Fincu.—An abundant summer
resident, breeding both about Tucson and in the Catalinas up to an alti-
tude of about 6500 feet. They are present about Tucson in smaller num-
bers during the colder months. This is also true of the species in the
lower foothills of the Catalinas, though here they are not nearly so com-
mon in winter as about Tucson. The regular migration brings them back
to these mountains in large numbers late in February. At first they are
in flocks of considerable size, but soon pair and by the third week in
March begin nesting. ‘The nesting site is usually in a cholla at no great
distance from the ground. I have records of nests, however, sixty feet
from the ground in sycamores, and in almost every variety of bush and
tree.
141. Loxia curvirostra stricklandi. MrxicAN CrossBi_L.—During my
visit to the Catalinas in November, 1884, I did not meet with any Cross-
bills, though careful search was made. But ona subsequent visit to the
same locality, November 3-8, 1885, I found the species abundant and quite
generally distributed throughout the pine woods. They fed almost exclu-
sively on the seeds of the pine and seemed to affect the vicinity of streams
or brooks, constantly going to drink. Now and then I noticed single
birds alight on the ground, apparently in search of seeds that had been
dropped.
[Fifteen specimens were sent to me by Mr. Scott. They were forwarded
to Mr. Brewster for examination in connection with Professor Dyche’s
specimens obtained at Lawrence, Kansas, and form a part of the Arizona
material referred to by Mr. Brewster in his note to Professor Dyche’s
paper published in ‘The Auk,’ Vol. III, pp. 260-261.—J. A. A.]
142. Spinus tristis. AMERICAN GoLpFINCH.—My records of this
species are very limited and were all made near my house in the Cata-
linas. They are as follows:
December 19, 1885. Flock of three, two males and a female; all adult
and in winter plumage. December 30, 1885. Took two adults, —all
that were seen. February 4, 1886. Took a single female.
So far as Iam aware, Mr. Brown has not found this species about Tuc-
198 Scotr on the Birds of Arizona. { July
son. All the individuals that I have seen were feeding on the ripe seed
ball of the sycamore.
[Six specimens in winter plumage are strikingly different from the
eastern bird in corresponding plumage. The white edging of the feathers
of the wings and tail in the Arizona bird is much broader; the dorsal
surface is much lighter, the yellow of the throat is much purer, lacking
almost wholly the greenish shade seen in the eastern bird; the white of
the belly is purer, with a faint fulvous instead of grayish shade; the sides
are washed with a paler shade of fulvous brown, in quite strong contrast,
however, with the almost pure, solid white of the abdomen and lower tail-
coverts. If summer specimens should show correspondingly paler
tints in comparison with eastern examples, as they are almost sure to do,
the Arizona form is quite as well entitled to recognition as a subspecies as
are several of the pallid forms of Sparrows which have been accorded this
rank.—J. A. A.]
143. Spinus psaltria. ARKANSAS GOLDFINCH.—This species, as well
as its close ally, Spénus psaltria artzone, seems in the Catalina region to
be rather nomadic and never very common. The following records from
my note book will show the manner of their occurrence: Pepper Sauce
Canon, Catalina Mountains, September 16, 1884. One taken, No. 893, an
adult male. The testes in this individual were fully as large as in the
height of the breeding season. The birds are rather common. Several
seen to-day. Same locality, January 12, 1885. Noted; rare. Same
locality, March 19, 1885. No. 1916, male; has the testicles as fully de-
veloped asin the breeding season. Same locality, April 16, 1885. Pair
taken (No. 2172, male; No. 2173, female), apparently mated. On_dissec-
tion both proved to be adult, though the male is not in full plumage.
Probably psaltria. They were about to breed, as the testicles of the male
were fully developed and the eggs of the female were, some of them at least,
half formed and would have been laid at an early day. Same locality,
February 10, 1886. Male in full plumage taken, the first seen in two
months. The only one noted; feeding on cottonwood flowers. Same
locality, July 18, 1884. A number of young seen to-day, fully fledged and
no longer with parents. No. 567, young male taken. Same locality,
May 5, 1885, No. 2418, female, young of year.
I have been unable to find the nest of this species and am puzzled as to
its exact breeding habits, especially with regard to time of year, but a care-
ful consideration of the above notes leads me to believe that the period of
breeding extends over a considerable portion of the year.
144. Spinus psaltria arizone. ARIZONA GOLDFINCH. —This sub-
species is much more uncommon in the Catalinas—the only point where
I have:met with it—than the foregoing. Indeed, I find it difficult to dis-
tinguish the transition from true psadfrza to this form, and again from
this form to Spzvus psaltria mexicanus. Alone each seems distinct. A
series placed together renders it doubtful where to draw the dividing lines.
All of the examples that I can refer to this subspecies were taken near my
house in the Catalinas, as follows:
1887. ] Scott on the Birds of Arizona. 199
No. 68, ¢ ad. June 13, 1884. Is very dark and intense in color, forming
a near approach to mexicanus. No. 2663, @, May 28, 1885. Typical
arizone.. No. 2566,-4, May 19, 1885. Typical artzone. This very
meagre material is all that has come under my immediate notice.
145. Spinus lawrencei. LAwRENCE’s GOLDFINCH.—This species I have
not met with, but a female was taken by Mr. Herbert Brown on February
28, 1886, to which he kindly called my attention soon after its capture.
Mr. Brown also saw the male bird but was unable to get it.
146. Spinus pinus. Prine Fincu.—A rather common, and at times an
abundant fall and winter visitor in the Catalina Region, ranging as low
as an altitude of 3500 feet. The first fall record I have is October
28, and I have seen them as late as April 16. This was in the vicinity of
my house, at an altitude of about 4500 feet. During the winter of 1885-86
this species was associated with flocks of Carpodacus purpureus califor.
nicus, feeding on the fruit of the sycamore, and was rather common all
through the season.
[The considerable number of specimens of this species sent by Mr.
Scott, are uniformly somewhat lighter colored than eastern examples, but
the difference is much less than that noticed above as occurring between
eastern and western specimens of SAznus trist’s.—J. A. A. ]
147. Calcarius ornatus. CHESTNUT-COLORED LoNnGspur.—On_ the
mesas of the foothills of the Santa Catalinas, near American Flag (altitude
about 3500 feet), I took a single individual of this species, and saw a large
flock on November 11, 1885. These are the only times that it was met with.
148. Poocetes gramineus confinis. WESTERN VESPER SPARROW.—
In general a fall and spring migrant in the Catalina region, which is the
only point at which I have notes of their occurrence. During these sea-
sons they are quite common, and a few winterin the same locality. I saw
a small flock and took a male (No. 1635) in Mesquite Cafion, altitude
3500 feet, January 24, 1885. On March 12, 1885, there were many every-
where on the mesas of the Catalina foothills.
149. Ammodramus sandwichensis alaudinus. WersTERN SAVANNA
Sparrow.—Mr. Brown informs me of the occurrence of this species, rather
sparingly, about Tucson in fall, winter, and spring. I have not met with
it myself.
[I have received from Mr. Brown a specimen taken in the Rincon Moun-
tains, Arizona, May 8, 1886.— J. A. A.]
150. Ammodramus savannarum perpallidus. WersTERN GRASSHOP-
PER SPARROW.—Apparently a rather uncommon resident on the mesas of
the foothills of the Catalinas. The following are all the references to it
contained in my note book: Hills above Old Hat Cafion, altitude 3750
feet, January 29, 1885. Took an adult female (No. 1682); saw no others,
but observed another on January 24 in Mesquite Cafion, at a somewhat
lower altitude. Both of these were found in thickets of cat-claw mesquite
and zo¢ in a grassy region. Same locality, March 22, 1885. Took a
female (No. 1946), the only one seen.
151. Chondestes grammacus strigatus. WESTERN LARK SPARROW.
200 Scott on the Birds of Artzona. [ July
—Though resident about Tucson, and at the lower altitudes of the region
under consideration, they are common in the Catalina region, where they
range up to about 5000 feet, only during the warmer months, and I have
not met with them at all in the winter. A few were noted in the hills
above Old Hat Cation on May 11, 1885, the first of the season. They
breed in this locality, and though I have found no nests, I have taken the
young fully fledged in the first plumage.
152. Zonotrichia leucophrys. WuITE-CROWNED SPpARROW.—This spe-
cies, in comparison with the next, is apparently rare. I have met with it
in September, February, and May, in small numbers, associated with the
next.
153. Zonotrichia intermedia. INTERMEDIATE SPARROW.—Observed
from the last week of September till late in May. The greater part seen
in September were in immature plumage.
154. Spizella socialis arizone. WerSTERN CHIPPING SPARROW.—My
notes in regard to this form are all from the Catalina region. They indi-
cate that the species is rare in summer, and abundant during the fall,
winter, and spring. Mr. Brown has found it common about Tucson in
winter. Inthe Catalinas the birds seem to frequent the bottoms of the
wider cafions, feeding on seeds of various grasses, and congregating in
large flocks, sometimes numbering several hundred individuals. In March
they begin to take on the spring plumage.
[The series of 46 specimens of this form sent by Mr. Scott are mostly in
winter plumage, but the considerable number of spring specimens well
sustains Mr. Brewster’s remarks (Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, Vol. VIII, pp. 190-
191) respecting the differences that may be regarded as characteristic of
the western race of S. soc¢alzs.—J. A. A. ]
155. Spizella pallida. CLAyY-coLORED SpAkRow.—I have met with
this species only at Mineral Creek, in October and November, and in
March.
156. Spizella atrigularis. BLACK-cHINNED SpARROW.—Apparently a
very rare species throughout the area under consideration. I met with it
at the head waters of Mineral Creek on several occasions in October, 1882,
and once in the Catalina region, Feb. 26, 1885.
157- Juncohyemalis. SLATE-cOLORED JuNco.—A rare species, though
of regular occurrence in the Catalina region, which is the only point where
I have met with it. I took a male (No. 1576) in Old Hat Cafion, Jan. §,
1885, the only one seen. It was associated with a large flock of other
Juncos, the prevailing form being ¥. hyemalts oregonus. I also took a
male Feb. 10, and a female Feb. 11, 1886, near my house.
[The two specimens sent are quite indistinguishable from eastern exam-
ples.—J. A. A.]
157a. Junco hyemalis oregonus. OREGON JuNco.—The commonest
form of Junco in the Catalinas during the colder months. They arrive
about the last of October and remain till about April 1.
158. Junco annectens. PINK-sIDED JuNco.— This does not seem .a
very common form in the Catalinas, the only peint where I have observed
1887.] Scott on the Birds of Arizona. 201
it, but the specimens obtained seem to be very characteristic. I generally
found it associated with oregonus, but have seen small flocks of this species
alone, notably in the pines of the Catalinas, altitude 10,000 feet, from Nov-
ember 3 to § inclusive, 1885. They were rather common in Pepper Sauce
Cafion during the later part of February, 1886, but I did not detect their
presence in the pine region above alluded to in April, 1885.
159. Junco caniceps. GRAY-HEADED JuNco.—Next to oregonus, this
is probably the more common form of Junco, in the foothill region of the
Catalinas during the colder weather. My notes indicate that it arrived
about my house in the Catalinas October 15, 1884, and became common
ina few days. It was abundant in the pine region during my visit, from
November 26 to 29, 1884. During January and Feburary, 1885, I saw it
almost daily near my house, and late in the latter month noted it as par-
ticularly abundant. It was, however, uncommon during the winter of
1885 and 1886 in the same locality. Ihave taken this form later in the
spring, at and about my house, than any of the other Juncos, but did not
find itin the pines of the Catalinas in April.
160. Junco cinereus palliatus. Ari1zONA JuNco.—I have discussed the
occurrence. of this species in the pine woods of the Catalinas in a former
number of this journal (Auk, Vol. II, pp. 174, 354-355), where it is
referred to as Funco cinereus. It remains to be added that I also found it
in the pine forests of the Pinal Mountains, above Mineral Creek, where it
was apparently rare. This was late in October, 1882. In the cafions of
the foothills of the Catalinas, and about my house, it is the earliest form
to appear in the fall, and a few remain during mild winters. But during
the winter of 1885-86, which was severe, I only detected it on a single
occasion, February 10, 1886.
160a. Juncocinereus dorsalis. RED-BACKED JuNCcO.—Two Juncos taken
in the Catalinas near my house are fairly referable to this form, though
No. 1522, a male, had the bright colored sides of the ¥. cénereus palliatus.
The following are the records of the two birds in question taken from my
note book: Pepper Sauce Cafion, Catalinas, January, 7885, altitude
4500 feet. Took an adult male (No. 1522), which in color is typical of
this subspecies, but with bright yellow irides. April 7, same locality,
took a female (No. 2122).
[The very interesting series of Juncos in Mr. Scott’s collection num-
bers 197 specimens, of which 2 are referable to hyemalis, 80 to oregonus,
27 to annectens, 35 to caniceps, 3 to dorsalis, and 50 to palliatus. These
numbers may doubtless be taken as a fair index of the relative abundance
of these forms in the region under consideration. The specimens refera-
ble to oregonus and annectens call for no special notice. About one-third
of the caniceps series show more or less red on the crown, corresponding
in tint to that of the back. In several it tinges, more or less strongly, fully
one-half of the crown; in others it is restricted to a few well-defined
streaks. That it is not a seasonal feature is shown by its presence in
May specimens as well as in October ones. It is also traceable in a few
specimens of falizatus. There is thus a tendency toward the develop-
ment of a red crown in at least the canzceps form.
202 Scott on the Birds of Arizona. [ July
Of the three specimens of dorsalis one has the bill wholly black and of
exceptionally large size.
The fAalliatus series presents much variation in respect to the extension
of the red upon the secondaries and the wing-coverts, from those showing
but a slight trace of it on these parts, and thus barely separable from
dorsalis, to those having the greater coverts and inner secondaries as red
as the back. In short, the intergradation between these two forms is
shown to be complete by the specimens in Mr. Scott's series.
In early spring specimens of both caxiceps and falléatus, the red of the
dorsal region is of a much lighter and brighter tone than in autumnal
specimens.—J. A. A.]
161. Amphispiza bilineata. BLACK-THROATED SPARROW.—A _ com-
mon resident in the foothill region of the Catalinas, and also abundant
about Tucson. It breeds commonly at both points, and generally at suita-
ble elevations and localities throughout the region under consideration.
In the Catalinas, up to an altitude of 4500 feet, it is rather more abundant
in spring and fall than during the breeding season or in the winter. At
this point the breeding season begins early in March, and continues well
into the latter part of the summer. A male taken near my house, August
16, 1884, had the testes developed to fully as great an extent as at any time
during the breeding period. The number of eggs varies from two to five,
three or four being the general complement. The nests are built near the
ground in some low bush or cactus, and occasionally on the ground. By
the 1st to roth of May in the Catalina region the first broods of young
have left the nest and parent birds, and go about in small flocks of from
five to twenty. The amount of black showing on the throats of young
male birds varies greatly; in some it is hardly to be distinguished, while
in others it is conspicuous, though not as brilliant as in the adult birds.
There is every possible gradation between these two extremes; and young
females often show traces of the black throat-marking.
The species is very familiar, and being so common, and haying a pleas-
ing song, it may fairly be considered as occupying about the same relative
position in the Fringillidz of the region that the familiar SA7zella soctalis
does in the East.
[Mr. Scott’s series of 58 specimens includes 18 in first plumage. They
wholly lack the black of the throat and face, but the white superciliary and
maxillary stripes are distinct; the whole dorsal surface is of a lighter, more
ashy brown, and the feathers of the interscapular region are obscurely
streaked centrally with dusky; throat whitish, often with faint touches or
streaks of dusky; whole breast streaked with blackish, more or less heavily
in different individuals ;in some the streaks being narrow and indistinct, in
others broad and heavy. The tail is less intensely black, the white edg-
ing of the outer webs and the white spot on the inner web of the outer
feathers in the adult are usually wholly wanting; the latter is sometimes
present, but much reduced in size.
Adults in the fall have the brown of the dorsal surface deeper than in
spring and summer, but there is apparently no sexual difference in color.
J. A. Al
1887. ] Scotr oz the Birds of Arizona. 203
162. Amphispiza belli nevadensis. BELL’s SpARROw.—This species
is only mentioned once in my notes as occurring in the Catalina Moun-
tains. This at an altitude of 5-oo feetin late September, 1884. Mr. Her-
bert Brown considers it as nota common bird about Tucson in winter,
where he obtained a male, November 2, 1884, and a female, December 28,
1884. I noticed quite a number on the low mesas near the San Pedro,
November 22, 1884.
163. Peucza carpalis. RUFOUS-WINGED SPARROW. —In the foothills
of the Catalinas this is at times, particularly in late fall and early spring,
acommon species. During the warmer months, though met with now
and then, I cannot consider it as being common, and have been unable to
find its nest. In this region, which is the only point where I have met
it, it occurs from about 3000 up to 4500 feet, in flocks of from four to
twenty individuals, and is not infrequently associated with S. soczalis
artzone, having very similar habits.
164. Peuczea ruficeps boucardi.— The bird is present in the Catalina
region all the year, ranging more or less commonly down as low as 3000
feet in winter, and up into the pine woods during the warmer months. I
met with it casually at Mineral Creek, where it was apparently rare. Mr.
Brown has no records of it from about Tucson. The song is very pleas-
ing, and the bird is quite tame and familiar, coming to feed on grain and
crumbs daily about my house.
This species has been discussed quite fully in former papers of this
journal (Auk, Vol. II, p. 354, and Vol. III, p. 83), to which the reader is
referred for further details.
[Mr. Scott’s series of 46 specimens, 40 of them adult, shows that among
the latter there is much seasonal variation in color. In autumnal and
winter specimens the yellowish brown wash of the lower surface is much
stronger than in spring (April) specimens, this color becoming still paler
in specimens taken in June. The browish chestnut in fall and winter
birds loses later its vinaceous or purplish tinge, becoming deep reddish
brown in the breeding season, with the ashy bordering of the feathers
more restricted. The bill also becomes darker. It is thus quite easy to
recognize approximately the date of collecting, without reference to the
label, from an inspection of either the dorsal or ventral surface of the
specimen.
The young in first plumage have the feathers of the breast and flanks
narrowly streaked with dusky, the streaks being most distinct on the
breast. The general color of the lower parts differs little from that of the
adult. Above the head, neck, and interscapular region are ashy brown,
each feather broadly centered with dusky. The wings and tail are nearly
as in the adult.—J. A. A.]
165. Melospiza fasciata fallax. DESERT-sONG SPARROW. — The
only point where I have observed this species is in the immediate vicinity
of Tucson, where it is apparently resident, though most common during
the spring months, and where it breeds. Mr. Brown’s observations coin-
cide, I believe, with the above statement. I have no definite data in regard
to time of nesting, but have heard the birds singing in late January. So
. 204 Scorr ox the Birds of Arizona. [ July
far as I am aware they are not so familiar about houses as the Song
Sparrow of the East.
165 a. Melospiza fasciata montana. MOUNTAIN SONG SPARROW. —
This form of Song Sparrow I noticed not uncommonly on the San Pedro
River in January (26-29), 1886. I have also seen it in the vicinity of Tuc-
son on two occasions, both in the winter. Mr. Brown has found it to be
a rather irregular visitor and generally uncommon about Tucson during
the winter.
166. Melospiza lincolni. LincoLn’s SpARROow. —A regular, though
not very common, spring and fall migrant in the Catalina Mountains, and
a few probably winter in this locality.
167. Pipilo maculatus megalonyx. Spurred Townrr. —A common
resident in the Catalinas, where it breeds at altitudes above 5000 feet, and
ranges, except in the severest portion of the year, to the highest points.
Breeds in the vicinity of my house in May and June. Young, fully
fledged in the streaked plumage, were taken about the middle of July. (For
further reference to this form, see Auk, Vol. II, No. 4, p. 355.)
168. Pipilo chlorurus. GREEN-TAILED TOWHEE.— A common spring
and fall migrant, and a few winter in the Catalinaregion. Most abundant
in Septemberand April. I met with it at Riverside and at Mineral Creek,
and have also seen it about Tucson. Ido net think it breeds within the
region in question.
169. Pipilo fuscus mesoleucus. CANoN TowHEE.—A common resident
throughout the entire region, and ranges up to the pine forests in the
warmer months. The first nests were found in the Catalina region (alti-
tude 3500 feet) about the middle of March, from which time the breeding
period extends well into July.
[A young bird in first plumage lacks the chestnut crown-patch; the
rump and upper tail-coverts are decidedly rufous, contrasting with the
back; the wing-coverts are tipped with yellowish white, forming two
narrow wing-bars; the throat, whole breast, and flanks are distinctly
streaked with dusky. —J. A. A.]
170. Pipilo aberti. Asert’s TOWHEE.— Occurs as a resident about
Tucson and at Florence, which are the only points where I have person-
ally observed it. It is by no means as common as the last, and does not,
so far as I am aware, enter the foothills or range up into the moun-
tains. The height of the breeding season about Tucson is in the latter
part of May and early June.
171. Cardinalis cardinalis superbus. ARIZONA CARDINAL. — This
form seems to have a very general distribution throughout the area treated
of, ranging up to about 5000 feet in the mountains. It is perhaps most
common in the foothills at an altitude of 3500, and is particularly con-
spicuous, both by its very brilliant plumage and clear, melodious song.
This does not seem very different from that of the typical bird save that it
has possibly greater volume. In the Catalinas I find them most common
in cafions where there is considerable growth of juniper, and the same
holds true at the point where I observed them on Mineral Creek.
172. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata. Texan CarpinaL, —Rare or casual in
1887.] Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. 205
the foothills of the Catalinas. I have observed it here on only two occa- °
sions. Rather common, especially in early spring, about Tucson. Mr.
Brown found it commonly in the Quijitoa country in the winter of 1884
and 1885. I did not observe it at either Florence or at Riverside.
173. Habia melanocephala. BLACK-HEADED GROSBEAK. — At Mineral
Creek, altitude sooo feet, this species was breeding in small numbers
during the summer of 1882. The only other point where I have met with
it is in the Catalina Mountains, where it undoubtedly breeds at the high-
est altitudes, and where after the first of July it rapidly becomes abundant
as low down as 3500 feet. Mere I found it in large scattered flocks, during
July, August, and September, 1884, feeding on all the small wild fruits
and seeds that are abundant at this time of year. Its arrival at this same
locality was first noted May 1, and it remains till about the first week in
October.
I took a remarkably fine albino of this species on August 15, 1884, in
Pepper Sauce Cafion, Catalina Mountains.
174. Guiraca cerulea. BLUE GROSBEAK. — The only records I have of
this species are kindly furnished me by Mr. Brown, who finds it rather
rare about Tucson late in May and early in June.
175. Passerina ameena. LAzuLi BunrinGc. — Observed at Mineral
Creek in August, 1882. Took a young male (No. 624) in Pepper Sauce
Cafion (4500 feet), July 27, 1884. ‘These are the only records I have made
of the species. Mr. Brown has found it breeding, but not common, about
Tucson, where it is most frequent during the spring migration.
176. Spiza americana. DicKcisseL. — The only record of this species
is furnished by Mr. Herbert Brown, who took a female near Tucson on
September 11, 1884, and later kindly showed me the bird in his collection.
177. Calamospiza melanocorys. LARK BuNTING. This species, if it
does not breed within the area under consideration, is present almost the
entire year and sometimes is to be met with in enormous flocks. I find
in my notes large flocks noted near Florence, Dec. 10-20, 1883. On the
mesa, above Pepper Sauce Cafion, Catalinas (altitude 4ooo feet), I saw
Aug. 17, 1885, two large flocks, composed of adult and young in about
equal numbers, the adult males still in full plumage. A small flock was
seen in Old Hat Cafion, Catalinas (4000 feet), on March 10, 1885 — first
of the spring migration. A number of large flocks were noted on the
plains about Tucson, Feb. 19, 1886.
( Zo be continued.)
RARE BIRDS OF NORTHEASTERN NEW BRUNS-
WICK.
BY PHILIP COX, JR.
BeEForE entering upon the subject of this paper, it is well to
say something concerning the character and climate of this cor-
206 Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. [ July
ner of the Dominion (Newcastle on the Miramichi River), as
the reader will then be better able to appreciate the facts pre-
sented.
Snow falls here about November 1, and winter can be said to
begin about the 2oth ofthe month. Soon pond, lake, and river
are ice-bound, and field and forest clad in their winter robes.
The snowfall increases until about the middle of March, when
it lies to the depth of from three to six feet; and during all this
time the thermometer is hardly ever above zero. A temperature
of from 15° to 30° below is often reached, and for weeks and
weeks the average may be 18°; but, strange to say, our climate
does not seem severe, nor do our people complain of the cold.
This is largely due to the surprising dryness of the air, and the
absence of raw winds. Our days are bright, our nights, starry ;
the auroral displays are of surpassing grandeur, while the re-
markable uniformity of the temperature is not the least striking
feature of our climate.
About the 20th of March, the sun’s increasing power begins to
be felt, and the snow would henceforth waste away rapidly were
it not for cold east winds which at this time begin to blow from
off the floating ice-fields of the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and neutra-
lize the action of the sun. Thus spring creeps on very slowly,
or rather we have no spring atall, inthe general meaning of the
term ; for it is frequently the 1st of May before our fields are bare,
and then warm summer is upon us. Thus summer and winter
meet, as it were, on friendly terms, shake hands, and getalong tol-
erably well without the interference ofa meddlesome third person.
By the side of some ice-layer or snow-drift, the Mayflower, tril-
lium, and other plants are often found in bloom, marking the sud-
den transition of climate.
In this latitude a cold winter generally presupposes a warm
summer, but luckily for our country we are an exception to this
rule ; for no other locality, perhaps, in the Dominion of Canada
can boast of such cool, refreshing weather as the shores of the
Miramichi and far-famed Baie des Chaleurs. Of this fact our
neighbors to the south and west are becoming aware; for thou-
sands of them flock every summer to our little towns and villages
to enjoy the delicious coolness and health luxuries of our sea-
side homes. And what visions of pleasure and happiness must
they fondly recall after such a visit! Bright, sunny ‘days, tem-
1887. ] Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. 207
pered by gentle sea breezes, sweet, fresh and cool, like the fanning
of unseen wings; a sun, wondrously large and red, rising from
behind the sea, and as if cooled by its morning bath, lacking all
day its usual ‘‘ardent frown”; a sky unflecked with a cloud by
day, and deeply blue by night, studded all over with twinkling
stars; the mellowed whiteness of a moon soaring high through
an azure canopy, flooding meadow and forest with her silvery
beams, or lighting up the breeze-rippled surface of the sea in
long flickering lanes, like fairy paths leading to dreamland; a
distant mountain rearing its huge form higher and higher from
out the softened shades of night and anxious to catch the first
glimpse of returning day; a health-laden breeze from the sea
meeting a warmer one from the land and mingling its purity
and strength with the odor of flowers from lawn, meadow, and
forest ; the waves at their feet murmuring the mysterious soul-
language of eternity, and blending with the equally plaintive
rustling of leaves overhead; who that has once seen, felt, and
enjoyed all this will not yearn for it again?
Here, too, come students of nature to investigate her vigorous
northein life—her handiwork in sea and air, lake and river, moun-
tainand valley. The botanist findsa rich, interesting field, for in
addition to the varied flora of forest, plain, and shore, he can fairly
revel at ebb tide in a comparatively unexplored world of sea-ferns
and Alge. Bay and river, too, teem with fish, from the lordly
salmon to the quaint, delicate sea-needle ; and molluscan life in
myriad forms inhabits the sea-bottom, or in death yields to the
waves palaces of pearl to be strewn on the sand beaches—a gift of
beauty from the lovely unseen.
It is with the bird life, however, that I and the readers of ‘The
Auk’ are most concerned. Over this region an immense bird-
wave rolls twice every year; now harbingers of sweet songs,
rippling waters, and flowery banks; then forerunners of winter’s
icy reign. The varied character of surface makes it a favorite
resting ground and breeding place of very many species. On all
sides are extensive forests of evergreens ; while sloping hills, clad
with deciduous trees, marsh and upland, swamp and meadow,
mud flats and sandy shore, resound with the rustling of wings,
shrill piping notes, or sweet warbling songs.
During the migration the broad, shallow lagoons of the Mir-
amichi Bay, protected from the disturbing winds and waves o
208 Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. { July
the ocean by long winding sand bars, or ‘beaches,’ swarm with
Geese, Brant, Ducks, Cormorants, Gulls, Terns, etc., converting
this locality into the finest shooting ground to be found anywhere
on the Atlantic coast of America, where hundreds of sporting
gentlemen resort every year. Moreover, an additional charm
attaches to it as an observing station because of its proximity to
the Baie des Chaleurs, the generally accepted northern coast
limit of the Canadian Fauna, and many interesting problems in
ornithology, respecting the range of several species, may be
worked out in this section.
Having premised so much, I will now proceed to deal with
the subject of this sketch.
About the roth of January, 1884. some farmers in the neigh-
borhood of Nequac, an Acadian village on the northern shore of
Miramichi Bay, observed what they took to be a stray Turkey,
feeding almost daily around their houses and farmyards. Think-
ing it belonged to some villager, they did not molest it It was
remarked, however, that the bird did not roost at night about
the outbuildings ; it generally disappeared at sunset, no one knew
whither ; but early next morning #t would be found industriously
turning over refuse and manure, apparently as tame and con-
fiding as an ordinary domestic fowl. It would permit a person
to approach within six or eight feet before seeming to notice his
presence ; then it would flutter to the nearest post, returning to
the ground almost immediately. Its decided preference for gar-
bage became at length the subject of discussion in the neigh-
borhood, and several, among whom was Mr. Ruben Vienneau,
began to grow skeptical abeut the stranger’s genus. It was
pointed out, however, that the Turkey had a well known weak-
ness for flesh food, and was not particularly exact, sometimes,
about the quality either; but Mr. Vienneau, having witnessed
some of the stranger’s wondrous gastronomic feats in swallowing
wholesale large quantities of disgusting offal, refused to be con-
verted from the apparent error of his ways. He continued to
watch its movements and habits with mere suspicious eyes. The
hooked beak, long middle toe, and absence of the noisy ‘gobble’
were all noted and discussed, and finally the bird began to lose
caste. Many plans were taken to effect its capture, but in vain.
‘Childlike and bland’ when feeding, even stupidly indifferent
sometimes, it seemed capable, however, of exercising a surprising
1887.] Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. 209
amount of caution; and no eflorts or devices of its enemies could
induce it to enter trap, cage, or barn. A crisisat length arrived.
A sheep had died a few days before, and on January 29, Mr.
Vienneau descried the ‘Turkey’ on the carcass, feeding on the en-
trails. This was the last straw that broke the back of his tot-
tering faith. ‘*C’est Poiseau du diable,” exclaimed the excited
Frenchman, as he seized a gun and shot the impostor dead.
Through the timely thoughtfulness of Mr. Anthony Adams,
merchant of Nequac, the bird wassent to John Nevins, Esq.,
police magistrate of the town. Justice Nevins takes a lively in-
terest in ornithology, and has one of the finest private collections
in New Brunswick. It proved to be a veritable Turkey Buzzard
( Cathartes aura),and Mr. Vienneau’s ‘‘l’oiseau du diable” now
occupies a prominent place in that gentleman’s cabinet.
Towards the middle of last September, I was astonished at
learning that another. Turkey Buzzard had been captured by Mr.
David Savoy, of Black Brook, one of the numerous lumber-milling
villages on the estuary of the Miramichi, and about twenty miles
in a direct line from Nequac. The bird was. when I saw: it,
on exhibition in Chatham, a small town, situated about half-way
between Newcastle and Black Brook. Mr. Savoy described the
manner of its capture ; how he had hung up a salmon net todry,
and the bird had in some way become entangled in it. It was
yery wild he said, when first taken, but in three weeks a great
change had come over it; for when I saw the bird, it was feed-
ing in a yard with ordinary poultry, which took no more no-
tice of its presence than they did of one of themselves. I noticed,
too, that the sight of one eye had been destroyed, and the ball
was withered and sunken.
Its domestication seemed largely due to food alone ; for, as ob-
served above, the creature was wild when first captured, but
upon being fed grew remarkably docile, and made no further
attempt to escape. When describing its manner of eating, espe-
cially the first meal, Mr. Savoy ruefully shook his head. That
wasenough. If the creature had to be fed on meat, it must be
got rid of; as long as he kept it, he had a veritable white elephant
on his hands. One day he observed it greedily devouring some
unsavory garbage. He was horrified, but smiled asa thought of
relief came to him; the butcher’s slaughter-house was at hand,
and immediately Buzzard stock took a boom. Even after stufl-
210 Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. [ July
ing itself with offal, it would feed indiscriminately on the grain,
potatoes, etc., cast to the barn-yard fowls, seemingly never sat-
isfied.
I saw it also by night, perched a few feet above a stable floor ;
and in the presence of alamp it acted very much like an ordin-
ary fowl, except that it manifested a desire to hide its head from
the glare of the light. During the whole period of its captivity,
extending over three weeks, the bird made, it would seem, no
attempt to fly ; and this fact, added to its apparent stupidity, in- -
clined me to believe that it had received some injury. I pur-
chased it from the owner, who killed and sent it to me. Upon
skinning the specimen, I discovered the cause of the blindness,
for a small shot, probably a No. 6, was found imbedded under
the edge of the iris of the withered ball. ‘The pellet was encysted,
and very much oxydized, showing it had been lodged there some
time. Moreover, two similar pellets were detected, one under
the skin on the left side, the other on the arm of the left wing ;
while the arm of the right wing had lately been pierced by a large
shot, ploughing the muscle open and passing through the fleshy
part of the shoulder, forming an ugly wound. The surrounding
parts were very much discolored and inflamed. Such an injury
must certainly have destroyed the bird’s power of flight, and ac-
counts, to a certain extent, for its apparently rapid domestica-
tion, and the aversion it showed to flying, but does not bear out
the alleged manner in which it was captured.
This poor creature had evidently had a rough experience. Its
was the checkered career ofa tramp Ishmaelite, with every man’s
gun against it; and we cannot help regretting that its flight to
these boreal regions to escape its southern tormentors, resulted
so fatally to itself.
I am also informed by a gentleman who saw the bird after it
was killed, that a Turkey Buzzard was shot five years ago in the
vicinity of Kingston, Kent Co., about forty miles southeast of
this town, and near the seashore.
The only other records known to me of their occurrence in
northern localities, along the Atlantic sea-board are those of two
taken in Massachusetts in 1863, and one reported from St. Stephen
by Mr. Boardman, date not given. Nequac and Black Brook are,
however, two hundred miles north of St. Stephen, and the differ-
ence in average summer temperature is even greater than would
1887.] Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. Deray
be inferred trom the difference of latitude; for the latter place is
within the influence of the warm Bay of Fundy waters, whereas
the former are upon a coast washed by colder Arctic currents.
Why this species should be found here more frequently than to
the south of us is an interesting problem for ornithologists. I
cannot suggest an explanation. ‘The common food supply seems
neither more inviting nor abundant. Our coasts, it is true,
abound more in fish, and maritime garbage would likely be
more plentiful, but I am not sure that these birds show any
marked predilection for this kind of diet.
On the fifth of last April, 1 was walking on the railroad track,
in the vicinity of the town, shortly before sunset, when I came
across three birds which were entire strangers to me. They
were feeding at the time on the side of an embankment that,,
owing to its southern aspect, was already bare of snow; and as
they flitted to the ground and returned to the telegraph wires,
their blue backs and wings flashed brilliantly in the rays of the
setting sun, causing me to think at first of the Jay; but no, these
pretty strangers were but half his size. Fearing to approach too
closely, lest they might take flight, I attempted to observe them
for some time at a distance; but not having my field-glass, it
was very unsatisfactory, besides curiosity kept urging me nearer
and nearer. Presently, and to my great relief, it dawned on my
mind they were paying very little, if any, attention to me,
being wholly intent on foraging ; and thus I was enabled to ap-
proach within a few yards, whence I made out more clearly the
color of the plumage. Judge of my feelings of astonishment
and incredulity, when their general characteristics suggested
Szalia stalis—the Eastern Blue Bird, which I had merely read
of, but had never seen. Impossible! Up inthis cold dreary north
on the fifth of April, with the whole country, field and forest,
covered with a mantle of snow three feet thick! Surely I must be
snow or color blind! Look again. Observe their rapid, but
graceful descent, the accuracy with which they drop on their
prey, and their almost immediate return. How quietly and still
they sit on their perch, until some moving object attracts their
attention; how familiar and confiding: they do not seem to
notice my presence at all. If they are apprehensive of danger,
and move off a little, the distrust is concealed under the
appearance of business, seemingly making a longer flight to
212 Cox on Rare New Brunswick Birds. [ July
pounce upon some insect. O yes, there can be no mistake
about the birds’ identity, those bright blue backs. wings, and
tails, the reddish-brown breasts, the quiet demeanor, the feed-
ing habits, all belong to but one, the Blue Bird; but will not
the identification be discredited by professional ornithologists,
since it. was. the- work of an. amateur? As far as I knew
. the species had never been reported farther north tnan the vicin-
ity of St. John, and but. rarely from there; Newcastle, however,
was 150 miles from St. John, and almost directly north. . These
seemed to me strong reasons for taking one, but alas; I had no
gun.
By this time the sun had set. The air began to grow. chilly ;
my interesting companions ceased feeding, and commenced
chirping to one another, as if discussing, what next? Presently
a decision was reached; for the three rose on the wing, and
were soon lost in the gathering shades of the dark pine forest.
The gray dawn of the morrow found me, gun in hand, hasten-
ing over the strong crust field, across which even a Goliath could
have strode in safety. Everywhere silence reigned, disturbed
only by the hard snow crunching under my feet, and echoing from
the nearest pine clad hills.
The dark green of the woods had, during night, given place to
a silvery covering of frost which transformed the whole forest
into a mass resembling a great white cloud, thrown against the
horizon of a blue sky. From the early chimney tops, columns
of pale smoke were rising into the still morning air, so tall and
graceful and white as to seem like delicate marble pillars support-
ing the arched dome overhead. But that which claimed most of
my attention, and filled me with alternate hope and fear, was,
shall I see again my feathered visitors of the evening before?
When IL reached their feeding ground nothing was to be seen.
I waited long and anxiously. Presently the sun rose large and
red, and shook. his brilliant rays in profusion over the snowy
landscape. Soon the whole forest was aglow, flashing and
sparkling as if set with a million gems, but, like some fond dream
or hope of the young heart. it soon vanished, leaving nothing
except the dull reality. In a few minutes the hardy Crossbills
ventured forth from their night retreat, and with sharpened appe-
tites, began breakfasting on the cones, whispering to one another
all the'time. A Pine Grosbeak and Purple Finch, a solitary
1887-] Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. 213
Robin, and an occasional Jay added in turn their voices to wake
up the slumbers of bird life.
What blue fash Wat is) itr Yes, there are the three
pretty objects of my curiosity, perched on the telegraph wires
where I last saw them, as quiet and easy of manner, as confiding
and thoughtless of danger, and even more beautiful than on the
evening before. I had killed hundreds of birds in my life: I had
never felt such an absorbing interest in one before; yet on no
occasion did I ever raise my gun with so much reluctance to take
a life. And when at length I held in my hand ‘a beautiful life-
less form, heard its two little friends, companions of its long
journey and dreary nights, whispering to one another, methought,
in mournful tones ; when I saw them rise in the air, uttering a
loud shrill note that sounded in my guilty ears like the curse of
betrayed innocence, and fly away never to be seen by me again,
my heart grew heavy, and I almost cursed that professional in-—
credulity which drives an amateur into acts of needless cruelty.
And even now as I raise my eyes from the paper, and look upon
the graceful form, perched on a tiny stand, ornamented more
than usual as if to make some restitution for the destruction of
its life, the motionless presence recalls the events of that sunny
April morning, and stirs anew the feeling ofregret and pain.
THE PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE
BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GULF COAST
OF FLORIDA.
BY -W. E. Di SCORT.
Second Paper.
Saturpay, May 8. We were up and away early. Sailed out of
the Nyakka River and along the northwest shores of Charlotte
Harbor as far as Cape Haze ; saw very few birds, and those only
the commoner species.
From Cape Haze we crossed the harbor to the mouth of
Matlacha Pass, the wind blowiny almost a gale from the west.
214 Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [ July
This pass is between the mainland and Pine Island, the largest
of the islands in Charlotte Harbor. On the way over my atten-
tion was attracted by large flocks of Man-o’-war Birds, which,
with an ease and grace that surprised me, were fishing in the
rough water during a very strong wind. There were hundreds
of them in all phases of plumage.
We reached our destination—the island which Mr. Wilkerson
at about
four o’clock, and at once came to anchor. A few Herons were
had told me was the breeding place of Reddish Egrets
to be seen from time to time flying to the island, and presently I
took the small boat and went ashore to reconnoitre. This had
evidently been only a short time before a large rookery. The
trees were full of nests, some of which still contained eggs, and
hundreds of broken eggs strewed the ground everywhere. Fish
Crows and both kinds of Buzzards were present in great numbers
and were rapidly destroying the remaining eggs. I found a huge
pile of dead, half decayed birds, lying on the ground which had
apparently been killed fora day or two. All of them had the
‘plumes’ taken with a patch of the skin from the back, and some
had the wings cut off; otherwise they were uninjured. I counted
over two hundred birds treated in this way. The most common
species was the Reddish Egret, though there were about as many
Louisiana Herons; the other species were the Snowy Heron,
Great White Egret, and the Little Blue Heron in both phases of
plumage. There were also a few Pelicans, White Ibises, and
one or two Great Blue Herons. I remained there till almost
dark, but did not fire at any of the few frightened Herons (about
fifty in all), which came to roost on the island. Among these I
noticed a few Reddish Egrets and two of the so-called Peale’s
Egrets, but most of the birds were the commoner species of
Heron. This was the rookery that Mr. Wilkerson had spoken
of; within the last few days it had been almost destroyed, hun-
dreds of old birds having been killed and thousands of eggs
broken. Ido not know ofa ‘hore horrible and brutal exhibition
of wanton destruction than that which I witnessed here. I shall
have to refer to this point later, as I visited it again in about a
week, and there learned from a man I met further details of the
slaughter, the results of which I had witnessed.
Sunday, May 9. This morning Capt. Baker went with me in
the small boat to explore in detail the neighboring islands. We
1887. | Scott ox the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. 215
found a lamentable scarcity of birds, and the Captain assured me
that ten years before, when on fishing trips in these same waters,
and at about the same time of year, the whole region fairly teemed
with bird life of all kinds.
About 12 o’clock we returned to the sloop and got under way,
going through the pass in the direction of Punta Rossa. After
sailing along for some six or seven miles we came in sight of a
small island where many Brown Pelicans were breeding or about
to breed. We anchored and went to the island in question to
have a closer look at the inhabitants. The Pelicans, of which
there were some forty or fifty pairs, were just beginning to build.
There were also some Reddish Egrets, a few of which were in
the white phase of plumage. Beside these were many Ardea
ruficollis tricolor, some Ardea candidisstma, and a few Ardea
egretta. None of the Herons, save a pair of Ardea virescens,
had begun to build; the others were only looking the ground
over. I fancied that some of them had been driven to this point
from the large rookery found deserted the evening before. I
watched the rookery till dark, not firing at anything; a great
many Herons of all the kinds above enumerated, as well as one
pair of A. herodias, many Florida Cormorants, White Ibises,
and additional pairs of Pelicans came to roost at the island. All
of them were very shy and suspicious, being startled by the
slightest noise or movement, and none of the birds would come
near the island until the small boat had returned to the sloop.
Just at dusk six of the so-called Peale’s Egrets came in and
alighted on the mangroves close by me. I learned later that the
birds on this island had been much persecuted by gunners, and
that thousands of all the species seen here had formerly bred and
roosted at this point. Also that at one time many Roseate
Spoonbills (Azaza ajaja) had made this a roosting place.
Monday, May ro. In the morning we camped on the island,
about half a mile away from the rookery, and during the day I
added to my collection seven Reddish Egrets, one Peale’s Egret,
and four other Herons, including a fine A. herodias. Among
the Reddish Egrets taken were three specimens which showed a
very considerable admixture of whzte feathers on the head,
throat, and breast, thus approaching the Peale’s Egret type;
and there is no question in my mind but that the two phases are
forms of the same species. For further remarks on this matter
216 Scotr on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. [July
I refer to certain notes made by Mr. James Henry Devereux in
Tampa Bay and published by me in the ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall
Ornithological Club,’ Vol. VII, 1881, p. 20.
While hunting to-day I heard repeatedly the song of a Vireo
that was new to me, but as the birds were shy and kept in the
densest mangrove swamps, I was unable toy procure one.
Thanks, however, to Mr. Atkins, then at Punta Rossa, but
now of Key West, I later identified the species as the Black-
whiskered Vireo ( Véreo altzloquus barbatulus), as I have already
recorded (Auk, Vol. IV, April, 1857, pp. 133-134).
During the afternoon there were countless Man-o’-war Birds
flying over in enormous ftocks, and at great height.
Tuesday, May 11. The Captain and Mr. Dickinson went to
Punta Rossa for water and letters, and I spent the day making
into skins the birds killed late yesterday. About 5.30 in the
evening I went to the rookery, but though I sent the boat back
to our camp, and though not a gun had been fired in the heronry
during the day, the birds were so alarmed by the little shooting
I had done the day before, that but very few birds save Brown
Pelicans came to roost at the rookery. I mention this to show
how very wary the birds had become, and how weli they knew
the meaning of the report of a gun. I took only seven birds dur-
ing the time between half past five and dark.
Wednesday, May 12. Wishing to visit again the rookery
before mentioned, the Captain and myself started in the small
boat early this morning, leaving Mr. Dickinson in charge of the
sloop and camp. We had only some seven miles to go, and
reached our destination about noon. On the way through the
islands there were many Reddish Egrets and other small Herons,
but all were very shy and had evidently been much hunted.
After getting some dinner and making a sort of camping place
for the night on one of the islands, we went, about the middle of
the afternoon, to the rookery.
The condition of affairs here was much the same as I have
already described, except that not having been disturbed for a
few days, the birds were beginning to come back to the ground
in considerable numbers, and many Louisiana Herons were
building, and some had nests with one or two eggs.
We found, in camp at the rookery, Mr. Frank Johnson, of
Mound Key, whose postoffice address is Punta Rossa, Florida,
—— ea
1887. ] Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. 217
and who is a professional ‘bird-plumer.’ He had returned to
this point this afternoon, having been here a few weeks earlier,
when he had found the birds very numerous. He was hunting
plumes, particularly of the Snowy Heron, American Egret, and
Reddish Egret, as they brought the highest prices, but he killed
to sell to the ‘taxidermists,’ as he called them, ‘‘almost anything
that wore feathers.” He said he wished there was some law to
protect the birds, at least during the breeding time, which would
not be violated. He added, however, that as everybody else
was ‘pluming’, he had made up his mind that he might as well
have his share.
He was killing birds and taking plumes now for Mr. J. H.
Batty, of New York City, who employed many men along the
entire Gulf Coast from Cedar Keys to Key West. When asked
what Mr. Batty purchased, it was again ‘‘almost anything
that wore feathers, but more particularly the Herons, Spoon-
bills, and showy birds.”
Mr. Batty was, he told me, well known all along the Gulf
Coast, and had made regular trips to this region for the past
three winters or more. He was the gentleman I heard of at
Hickory Bluff, who bought birds, travelling about the coast in a
small schooner and supplying the native gunners with breech-
loading shot guns and ammunition. Mr. Johnson had bought a
gun of Mr. Batty and was using it whenI met him. One barrel
of this gun was for shot, 12-guage, and the other was a small
bore rifled. This last, Johnson explained to me, he used for
Pelicans and other wild birds, and as it made so little noise, was
serviceable in getting the smaller Herons at close range in the
rookeries.
I shall give ilater more details of Mr. Batty and his method of
working, as I met him and stayed about for some five or six.days
where he was killing birds. Togo on with Mr. Johnson. He
had lived about here for many years, and told me of the enormous
rookeries and breeding places that had formerly been the homes
of the birds of this region. Now most of them were entirely
deserted, and the number of those still resorted to by anever |
decreasing population were yearly becoming smaller; that it
was easy to find thousands of birds, five or six years back, where
absolutely none existed now. My own observation leads me to
agree with this statement, but, in fact, the destruction must have
been greater than can be realized.
218 Scotr on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. [ July
Mr. Johnson told me of the extermination of a Brown Pelican
Rookery, near where he lived, which is a very fair example of
the atrocities that have been and are still being committed to ob-
tain ‘bird plumes.’
It seems that the year before the Brown Pelicans selected a
small mangrove island near to that on which Mr. Johnson lived,
and about eighty or a hundred pairs made nests, laid eggs, and
hatched out their young. Johnson had not touched the birds or
disturbed them, as he proposed to let them rear their young. But
one afternoon when Johnson was absent from home hunting, the
old Frenchman before referred to, A. Lechevallier, came in with
a boat. and deliberately killed off the old birds as they were feed-
ing the young, obtaining about one hundred and eighty of them.
The young, about three weeks old, to the number of several hun-
dred at least, and utterly unable to care for themselves in any
way, were simply left to starve to death in their nests, or to be
eaten by raccoons and Buzzards. It is needless to say that the
birds never came back to that rookery.
There were very few birds that came in to roost at the rookery
where we were, and I killed only one Reddish Egret. I paid
Johnson two dollars not to shoot, so that I might get a good idea
of the birds, both as to kind and number that roosted there.
Johnson went with us back to the camp, and it was during the
evening that he gave the information transcribed above.
Thursday, May 13. Going back to the sloop this morning I
saw very few birds; in the afternoon I went out to the roosting
place and killed two Reddish Egrets; one of them had large
patches of white feathers on the throat, neck, breast, and back.
A flock of them in the pure white phase (A. Zealez) flew by me,
just out of gun shot, during the afternoon. These birds are not
at all uncommon at this locality, but are not so numerous as at
points further south. They are well known by the ‘plume hun-
ters’ as ‘mufHled-jawed Egrets’, and sound and flat skins of them
command good prices. I saw, in a rookery at the north entrance
to Matlacha Pass, among a great pile of other birds that had
been recently killed and their plumes removed, twelve of this
phase that were easily recognizable, having had only the skin of
part of the back, neck, and head taken off.
For the last few days I have noted Black-bellied Plover in
full plumage, going north in considerable flocks. These were,
-
1887.] Scotr on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. 219
I think, undoubtedly Charadrius sqguatarola, although no spec-
imens were obtained. I am much impressed with the great
numbers of the far northward breeding birds which are present
still in large numbers at points about here. At any of the
passes or outside beaches I see daily and in large flocks such
birds as Charadrius squatarola, Egialitis semipalmata, Are-
naria tnterpres, Macroramphus griseus, Tringa canutus,
T. minutilla, 7. alpina, Calidris arenarta, etc. These I
carefully identified and made almost daily notes of their occur-
rence until the 25th of May. After that observations were
made of Macroramphus griseus in large flocks as late as
June ro.
Friday, May 14. Spent the day in waiting for some of the
larger birds to dry—so as to pack them—and in hunting for the
Black-whiskered Vireos, which appear to be common but par-
ticularly wary and difficult to see in the thick mangrove.
Saturday, May 15. Packed up everything in readiness to
continue course to-morrow, leaving birds to dry until the last
moment.
Sunday, May 16. Left early this morning, and going south
about four miles, anchored again off two large mangrove islands
just inside of the south end of Pine Island. Here were more
birds breeding than at any point where we had thus far cruised.
These were principally Brown Pelicans, and there must have
been at least two hundred pairs or more. The nests were in
most cases finished, and many of them contained eggs.
The Florida Cormorants also had nests in considerable num-
bers, and beside these a few pairs of Great Blue Herons were
breeding on the island. No other birds were breeding here.
There were many thousands of Man-o’-war Birds that made
this a roosting or resting place, and many of them were here
more or less through the day, their numbers being greatly
augmented every night. They were in all phases of plumage
and generally moulting.
The birds are said not to breed anywhere on the Gulf Coast,
except at two points near Key West, and the breeding season,
judging from the examples of the birds obtained, was past by two
or three months. These birds haunt the Pelican and Heron
rookeries, preying on the fish brought to the young birds,
and are as truly parasitic as the Jaegers. Often, too, I have seen
220 Scott on the Bird Rookertes of Southern Florida. | April
them chasing the small Gulls, obliging them to give up fish
just caught. _Again they are to be seen in the wake of a school
of porpoises, taking whatever comes in their way, such as muti
lated fish and the like.
In the nests of the Great Blue Herons in the rookery, four nests
in all, I was surprised to find young birds. In most cases they
were nearly ready to fly, but one nest contained chicks not more
than two weeks old. This, taken in connection with the fact of
their having half grown young as early as February 7, at Tarpon
Springs—a point more than a hundred miles north — is indica-
tive of a long breeding season—at least five or six months—and
the probability that two broods are hatched. However, this late
breeding may not be normal, for the birds are all so harassed
and driven about by plume hunters, that their plans for breeding
are evidently greatly disarranged.
Perhaps the following facts will make this more apparent to
the reader and corroborate the above statement.
I have several times taken the different species of Herons and
Egrets at roosting rookerzes where there was not a single nest,
and far away from any known breeding ground, which had in
their ovaries fully developed eggs with shells on. Some of them
had evidently laid one or more eggs and, being severely frightened
by hunters, had deserted their breeding grounds. At such rookeries
I have frequently found broken eggs lying on the ground, though
there would be no nests on the island and the birds would only
come to roost late in the afternoon and leave very early in the
morning.
Again during the late summer and early-fall months of the
present year I have twice found inland rookeries where the nests
still contained some eggs and where there were young birds of
all ages. One such case was near Tarpon Springs where several
hundred birds were breeding, August 26, 1886. At this date
there were unhatched eggs in the nests, besides young in all
stages, from those just hatched to those ready to fly. The
birds were mainly Ardea ce@rulea, though there were a few A.
ruficoll’s tricolor, and A. candidissima.
At the rookery last mentioned before this digression, I spent
the day after eleven o’clock, and asI did not fire a gun during
the time there was ample opportunity to examine the various
species that were breeding, and those that came to roost there at
1887. | Scott ox the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. DAG
night. Among the latter were many Reddish Egrets, a few of
which were in the white phase, and all of the common Herons
and Egrets in small numbers.
Monday, May 17. Obtained a number of Man-’o-war Birds as
they flew by our anchorage, the weather being stormy. The day
was about consumed in making them into skins. All of these
birds were moulting and some of them I took to be young of
that year.
Tuesday, May 18. Spent about as yesterday, save that I was
all the afternoon at the rookery, where the birds seem to have
increased in numbers, especially at roosting times, and I think
that some other breeding place, not very remote, having been
attacked by the plume hunters, numbers of the birds have been
driven off and have escaped to this point.
Wednesday, May 19. Packed up all the birds collected at this
and other points, all having been unpacked to dry, and started in
in the afternoon for Punta Rossa, some six miles distant. Ihave
omitted to state that our camp for the past few days had been
on the north point at the mouth of the Caloosahatchie River and
at least a mile away from the rookery. Arriving at Punta Rossa
at about four o’clock, I soon made the acquaintance of Mr. J. W.
Atkins, the assistant telegraph operator at this point, the cable
for Key West and Cuba having its starting point at Punta Rossa.
Mr. Atkins is much interested in birds, and hasa good col-
lection of skins made in the main just about Punta Rossa.
His collection embraces most of the commoner species of smal!
birds that occur in the vicinity, and I noticed such rare birds as
Cape May Warblers, and a single Mangrove Cuckoo, taken at
Punta Rossa. Here we obtained the Dendroica discolor de-
scribed at length in ‘The Auk’ for April, 1887 (p. 134).
Thursday, May 20. We waited for the mail to arrive and
about 10 A.M. started again on our cruise, this time going to the
east of Pine Island, and kept a northerly course ; for, wishing to
look over some of the ground in more detail on the way back, I
had determined to go no further south. At Punta Rossa to-day
I again met Mr. Abe Wilkerson, who had just returned from his
trip to the Myakka Lakes, where he did not meet with much
success, for though he found large rookeries, the birds had been
so persistently hunted they had become very wild. He had
about seventy-five ‘plumes,’ I believe, as the result of the trip,
222 Scott on the Bird Rookeries of Southern Florida. { July
mostly of the Snowy Heron. He told me that the Mexican Buz-
zard, as he called it, was common in the region where he had
been and showed me a skin of one that he had killed. The bird
was Polyborus chertway, and it breeds in this area, at least such
is my conjecture from birds of the year that have been sent to me
from the vicinity of the headwaters of the Myakka River.
Wanting a good pilot and a man conversant with the country
I hired Mr. Wilkerson to make the trip with me back to Tarpon
Springs, and besides the work he did I gained much valuable
information concerning the condition of the breeding grounds
further south, and the decrease in birds during the past few
years. Without going into too great details, it was substantially
the same as the facts gathered from Frank Johnson, Mr. Atkins,
and others, and is a story of almost a war of extermination.
To-day we passed a large rookery known as the Boca Grande
Rookery, and here I saw a few ‘Pink Curlews,’ as the ‘plumers’
call Ajajsa ajaja, but as there was a constant discharge of guns,
and as the war seemed to be going on without any appearance of
ceasing, we passed on without stopping. The principal birds
seemed to be Man-o’-war Birds and Brown Pelicans, and though
there were large numbers of each, Captain Baker said that when
he was fishing for a season at this point a few years before, there
were hundreds of birds of all kinds at this rookery where there
was one now.
We kept on our course north and, sailing up along the east
coast of Pine Island, crossed over the mouth of Charlotte Harbor
and anchored for the night at a deserted fishing station just south
of Big Gasparilla Pass. It was quite dark when we anchored
here, so I saw no birds. But during the afternoon and until dark
large flocks—hundreds—of Gulls, which I thought were mostly
Larus atricilla, passed close to the water, not fishing but evi-
dently migrating northward. Many of these birds were in im-
mature plumage, and I shall have occasion to refer to them again
later in connection with other species observed.
(To be continued.)
fe
1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 222
4
ELE BIRDS OF THE WEST INDIES, -INGLUDING
THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER AND
THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING
THE 1 SeAMDsS. Or TOBAGO
AND: TRINIDAD.
BY CHAREES B. CORY.
[Continued from p. 120.]
Famitry PHASIANIDZ.
Genus Numida Linn.
Numida LINN£US, Syst. Nat. I, 1766.
oe HEEL meleagris LINN.
Numida meleagris LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 273 (1766).—Gossr, Bds. Jam.
p. 325 (1847).—-DeNny, P. Z. S. 1847, p. 39 (Jamaica).—Sa..z,
Pp. Z. S. 1857, p. 236 (San Domingo).—Sct. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80
(Jamaica).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 204 (Jamaica).—Marcu,
Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863, p. 303 (Jamaica).—BRYANT, Pr.
Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 97 (1866) (San Domingo).—GuNDL.
Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 397 (1866).—-SuNDEv. Oefv. K. Vet.
Akad. For. 1869, p. 601 (Porto Rico).—Lawre. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus.
I. p. 487 (1878) (Barbuda).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p.
117 (1881).—Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 16 (1885); 2d.
List Bds. W. I. p. 24 (1885).
Common in Cuba, San Domingo, Jamaica, Porto Rico, and
Barbuda.
- 5 % :
Ortalida ruficauda is mentioned as occurring in the Grena-
dines, and is supposed to have been introduced (Lawr. Pr. U.S.
Nat. Mus. I, p. 278 (1878).
Famity TETRAONID2.
Genus Colinus Less.
Colinus Lesson, Man. d'Orn. II, p. 190, 1828.
“Golinus cubanensis (GouLpD).
Ortyx virginianus D’ORB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 182
(1840).—SuNpDEv. Oefyv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 601.
224 Cory ox the Birds of the West Indies. '{ July
Ortyx cubanensts GouLD, Mon. Odont. (1850).—Cas. J. f. O. 1856, p. 337-
—Brewer, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 307 (1860).—ALBRECHT,
J. f. O. 1861, p. 213.—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 303
(1866).—Gray, Handl. Bds. II, p. 273 (1870).-—GunbL. J. f. O. 1874,
p- 300; 2b. 1875, p. 293; 2b. 1878, p. 161; 2b. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist.
Nat. VII, p. 350 (1878).
Ortyx cubensis Sci. & SALV. Nom. Avium Neotr. p. 137 (1873).
Ortyx virginianus var. cubanensis Bp. Bwr. & RipGw. Hist. N. Am. Bds.
III, p. 468 (1874).
Colinus cubanensis Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 24 (1885).
Sp. CHAR.—Upper portions of throat and superciliary stripe white; band
of neck passing from the mandible, under the eye, down the sides of
the neck; breast and lower portion of throat black; back chestnut,
variegated with dull brown; the feathers on the nape heavily spotted
with white; under parts variegated, dull brown, rufous, white, and
dark brown; sides of the body dull rufous, heavily spotted with
white and black; primaries dull brown.
The female differs from the male in having the white stripe and
throat tawny buff, and in lacking the chestnut on the breast toa
great extent. :
Length, 8; wing, 4; tail, 2.50; tarsus, 1; bill, .45.
Hapirat. Cuba and Porto Rico.
Colinus virginianus (LINN.).
Tetrao virginianus LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 277 (1766).
Ortyx virginiana GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 328 (1847).—Cory, Bull. Nutt.
Orn. Club, VI, p. 154 (1881) (Haiti).
Ortyx virginianus A. & E. NEwTon, Ibis, 1859, p. 254 (St. Croix).—Bry-
ANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 120 (1859) (Bahamas).—Sct.
P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205
(Jamaica).—Marcn, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1863, p. 303
(Jamaica).—Lawere. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, pp. 237, 487 (1878) (An-
tigua).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I..p. 142 (1880).—A. & E. NEwron,
Handb. Jamaica, p. 117 (1881).—Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo,
p- 138 (1885).
Colinus virginianus Cory, List Bds. W.1. p. 24 (1885).
Sp. Cuar. Male:—Above rich brownish red, mottled with black; crown
black, shading into brown at the base of the skull, and mottled with
black and white on the nape; a white superciliary line passing from
nostril to nape; throat white, bordered broadly with black; upper
breast and sides reddish brown, shading into white on the belly, the ,
feathers thickly banded with black; crissum reddish brown; tertials
and some of the wing-coverts edged with yellowish white; bill en-
tirely black.
1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. eA
Female:—Resembles the male; the white of the head and throat
replaced by tawny, without black edging.
Length, 8.50; wing, 4.50; tail, 2.50; tarsus, 1; bill, .52.
Hasirat. Bahamas, Haiti, San Domingo, Jamaica, St. Croix,
and Antigua.
The forms represented in the different islands vary considera-
bly, and itis possible that they represent good geographical races.
The Bahama bird differs from that found in Florida in having
heavy chestnut stripings on the side much broader than in the
Florida birds. The black on the throat is more restricted; the
lower throat showing considerable chestnut, separating the black
from the upper breast ; the red on the back is paler. The feath-
ers on the underparts are very heavily banded with black, about
equalling some specimens of florédanus in this respect, but the
underparts are never mottled gray as in some specimens of caéa-
mensts. The Bahama bird differs even more from that found in
San Domingo, which has the underparts covered with narrow
black arrow-shaped markings, somewhat obsolete in the female ;
the male having a patch of black on the throat succeeded by pale
chestnut ; the general chestnut coloring is paler than in the Baha-
ma bird.
GrEnus Eupsychortyx Gou tp.
Eupsychortyx Goutp, Mon. Odontophorine, p. 15-16, 1850. Type, Tetrao
cristatus LINN.
Eupsychortyx sonninii (TEmm.).
Perdix sonninit Tem. Pig. et Gall. III, p. 451 (1815); 2b. Pl. Col. 75
(1820-29).
Eupsychortyx sonnimi Newton, Ibis, 1860, p. 308 (St. Thomas).— Cas-
stn, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1860, p. 378 (St. Thomas).—Cory,
Revised List Bds. W. lI. p. 24 (1885).
Ortyx sonninti NEWTON (REINHARDT), Ibis, 1861, p. 114 (St. Thomas).
Sp. Cuar. Male:—Face dull white ; head crested ; feathers of the crest dull
buff brown; throat and superciliary stripe passing down the sides of
the neck dull brownish red; sides of the neck mottled with black
and white; upper back mottled with reddish brown, buff, and black ;
rest of upper surface marked with chestnut, black, and gray, mar-
gined with buff; tail slaty dotted and marked with buff and dark
brown; primaries brown; chest grayish, mottled with brown; rest
226 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [ July
of under surface, sides, and under tail-coverts chestnut brown, the
feathers dotted with white; bill black.
Female:—Yop of the head and crest brown; throat and super-
ciliary stripe dark gray, tinged with pale brown; flank marking
paler than in the male; general plumage somewhat paler than in
the male, and the black patches somewhat heavier.
Length, 7.50; wing, 4.30; tail. 2.55; tarsus, 1.30; bill, .54.
HABITAT. ot Lhomas:
In 1860 Professor Newton mentions this species as occurring in
St. Thomas. The bird undoubtedly still exists in the Island of
St. Thomas. I have lately seen a specimen in the collection of
Mr. Geo. N. Lawrence, from that Island. It was probably in-
troduced from South America.
Cassin writes (l.c.), ‘*Mr. Swift has had the kindness to inform
me that this species was introduced into the Island of St. Thomas
some years since; from Venezuela, and that it has now become of
frequent occurrence, quite naturalized, and rearing young freely
throughout the Island. The present specimens are exactly the
species figured by Mr. Gould under this name, and identical
with specimens in Acad. Mus. labelled ‘Venezuela’ and ‘Cu-
mana.’ ”
Famity GEDICNEMID.
GeENus CEdicnemus T'EMM.
Gdicnemus TEMMINCK, Man. d’Orn. 1815.
GEdicnemus dominicensis Cory.
(Edicnemus dominicensis Cory, Journ. Bost. Zool. Soc. I, p. 46 (1883) ;
vb. Auk, I, p. 4 (1884); 2b. Bds. Haiti and San Domingo, p. 140
(1885); 26. List Bds. W. I. p. 25 (1885).—THompson, Auk, II, p.
110 (1885).
Sp. Cuar. Male:—Top of the head, back, wing-coverts, and tail brown ;
feathers with very pale edgings, giving a mottled appearance to the
back; the tail-feathers showing a band of dull white, succeeded by
a broad black tip; breast slaty becoming dull white on the throat;
abdomen white tinged with very pale rufous; a line of black passing
from the top of the eye, along the sides of the head to the neck;
under surface of wings white, becoming dark brown at the tips;
the shafts of the feathers on the breast and throat dark brown, form-
:
:
a
1887. | Cory on the Birds of the West Indtes. 227
ing numerous hair-like lines on the surface of the plumage; legs
and feet greenish yellow; upper mandible black; under mandible
green at the base, shading into black at the tip.
The sexes appear to be similar.
Length, 14.50; wing, 8.50; tail, 3.75; tarsus, 3.75; bill, 1.50.
Hasirar. San Domingo.
Famity CHARADRIIDE.
Genus Charadrius LINN.
Charadrius LINN&US, Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 150, 1758; 2b. 12th ed. p.
253, 1766.
oe = . . ae
Charadrius dominicus Mutt.
Charadrius dominicus MULy. Syst. Nat. Suppl. p. 116 (1776).—Cassin,
Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 241 (Jamaica).—A. & E. NewrTon,
Handb. Jamaica, p. 115 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 25 (1885).
—WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 7 (1886).
Charadrius virginianus Gosse, Bds. Jam. p. 333 (1847).—Gunopt. J. f. O.
1856, p. 423 (Cuba).—A. & E. Newron, Ibis, 1859, p. 255 (St.
Croix).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 66 (Jamaica).—
GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat.’Cuba, I, p. 358 (1866).—Lawre. Ann.
Lyc. N. Y. VIII, p. 98 (1567) (Sombrero).—GuNnpL. J. f. O. 1875,
p. 332 (Cubay-—Lawre. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 67 (1878) (Do-
minica) ; 7. p. 197 (St. Vincent); zd. p. 238 (Antigua); 7b. p. 241
(Barbuda) ; 76. p. 276 (Grenada) ; 7d. p- 461 (Gaudeloupe).—GuNDL.
Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 381 (1878) (Porto Rico).
Charadrius marmoratus LEMB. Aves Cuba, p. 105 (1850).—BrEWER, Pr.
Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).
Charadrius virginiacus ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).
Charadrtus pluvialis SUNDEV. Oefyv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 588 (St.
Bartholomew).
Charadrius pluvialis americanus SUNDEV. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869,
p. 602 (Porto Rico).
Charadrius fulvus var. virgtniacus Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 145 (1886).
Antilles in Winter.
Soneratois squatarola (Linn.).
Tringa squatarola Linn. Syst. Nat. I, toth ed. p. 149 (1758); 2d. 12th ed.
p- 252 (1766).
Tringa helvetica LINN. Syst. Nat. I. p. 250 (1766).
Vanellus squatarolus D’ORB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 242
(1840).
228 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. { July
Squatarola helvetica GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 333 (1847).—Bryant, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859) (Bahamas).—ALBREcHT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—Marcn, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864,
p. 66 (Jamaica).—GuNpDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat Cuba, I, p. 358
(1866) ; 2d. J. f. O. 1875, p. 232 (Cuba).—Lawr. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus.
I, p. 197 (1878) (St. Vincent).—GunpDL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat.
VII, p. 380 (1878) (Porto Rico).—Cory, Bds. Bahamas I. p. 144
(1880).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 115 (1881).—Cory,
List Bds. W. I. p..25 (1885).—WEeELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 7
(1886).
Charadrius helveticus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860)
(Cuba).
Found in winter in the Bahamas, Cuba, Jamaica, Porto Rico,
St. Vincent, and Grenada.
Genus A®gialitis Loire.
Egialitis Bor, Isis, 1822, p. 558.
“Egialitis vocifera (Linn.).
Charadrius vociferus Linn. Syst. Nat. I, 1oth ed. p. 150 (1758).—D’OrB.
in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 246 (1840).—BREWER, Pr.
Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—SunpeEv. Oefv.
K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 602 (Porto Rico).
Egialitis vociferus Gossk, Bds. Jam. p. 330 (1847).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864,
p. 66 (Jamaica).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 145 (1880); 2. Bds.
Haiti & San Domingo, p. 141 (1885) ; 7b. List Bds. W. I. p. 25 (1885).
Oxyechus vociferus GUNDL. J. f. O. 1856, p. 424 (Cuba) ; 7b. Repert. Fisico-
Nat.. Cuba; I, -‘p:' 350) (7866) 570... 1675 ,) Dp: 333 (Cuba); 7.
Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 382 (1878) (Porto Rico).
gialites vociferus SALLE, P. Z. S. 1857, p- 236 (San Domingo).—Bry-
ANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859) (Bahamas).—NeEw-
TON, Ibis, 1860, p. 307 (St. Thomas).
Charadrius (4igialitis) vociferus BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI,
p. 97 (1867) San Domingo).
LEgialitis vocifera A. & E. NEwron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 115 (1881).
Oxychecus vociferus WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 7 (1886).
Recorded from the Bahamas and Greater Antilles.
ne ee : ;
fEgialitis wilsonia (Orp).
Charadrius wilsontus Orv, ed. Wils. IX, p. 77 (1825). — Lems. Aves
Cuba, p. 106 (1850).—Brewer, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p.
308 (1860) (Cuba).
1887. | Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 229
Egtalitis wilsonius BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859)
(Cuba).
159. Zonotrichia leucophrys. WHITE-CROWNED SPARROW. — Abun-
dant winter visitor, in Concho County. Arrives the middle of October
and remains until May. Frequently found in immense flocks. In song
all winter on sunny days.
160. Zonotrichia intermedia. INTERMEDIATE SPARROW. — Common
winter visitor in Tom Green County; tolerably common in Concho
County. Arrives same time as the last in small flocks of six to twelve.
161. Spizella socialis. CnippInGc SPpARRow.—Tolerably common in
small flocks of four to six in Concho County, in fall and early winter. A
few remain until spring.
162. Spizella socialis arizone. WESTERN CHIPPING SPARROW. —
Resident in Tom Green County. Tolerably common in winter; rare in
summer. Breeds. A nest, the only one met with, found on Spring
Creek, May 8, 1885, in a low chapparal bush, contained four eggs fully
incubated.
163. Spizella pallida. CLAy-coLOoRED SPARROW.—Abundant in spring
and fall.
164. Spizella breweri. BREWER’S SPARROW. —Tolerably common in
Tom Green County in fall. Winters in abundance in Pecos County.
165. Spizella pusilla. FrrLp SpARROw. — Tolerably common in small
flocks of from four to five in fall; rare in winter. Not noted in Tom Green
County.
166. Spizella pusilla arenacea. Texas FIELD SPARROW.—Rare in fall
and winter in Tom Green and Concho Counties.
167. Junco hyemalis. SLATE-COLORED JuNco.— Common in winter.
Arrives middle of October and remains until end of March.
168. Junco hyemalis oregonus. OREGON JuNco.—Tolerably common
in Tom Green County in winter. Occurs on the Main Concho in Concho
County, in limited numbers.
169. Amphispiza bilineata. BLACK-THROATED SPARROW. — Common
resident This species has extended east within the last six years to the
Colorado River. Breeds, raising two broods. Nests in cat-claw or chap-
paral bushes. Nests found May 6, May 13, June 12, July 13. The eggs
have a bluish tinge until blown, when they become pure white. A volu-
able and pleasing songster. Sings about noon every day after middle of
March.
170. Peucza estivalis bachmanii. BACHMAN’s SPARROW. — Summer
visitor in eastern Concho County. Nests found May 20 to June1r; eggs
invariably four.
171. Peuczea cassini. CassiInNs SPpARROW.—Common summier visitor
in Tom Green County, and tolerably common in Concho County in fall.
Breeds on the Plains at the head of Spring and Dove Creeks. Four nests,
found May 25, 27, and 29, had five eggs in each. Nests in low bushes,
not higher than one foot from the ground, or in tufts of grass. A remark-
able songster during the breeding season. Like the last species, it as-
cends in spirals about twenty feet, singing, the apex of its flight marking
the termination of its song. Alights often on the same bush and again
soars.
1887.] Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas. 293
172. Melospiza fasciata. SonG Sparrow. — Tolerably common in
winter in Tom Green and Concho Counties.
173. Melospiza lincolni. LiNcoLn’s SpARROw. — Tolerably common
during spring and fall migrations from the Pecos east to Colorado. Lin-
gers in cane fields until Christmas.
174. Melospiza georgiana. SwAmp SPARROW.—Rare in spring migra-
tion in Concho County. Winters on the edge of the Plains at the head of
the South Concho (Tom Green County).
175. Pipilo erythrophthalmus. TowHeEr.—Occasional winter visitor in
Tom Green and Concho Counties. Two were shot in January, 1884.
176. Pipilo maculatus arcticus. Arcric TowHEE. — Winter visitor.
Tolerably common in suitable places. Arrives October 8, and remains
until the first week in May.
177. Pipilo fuscus mesoleucus. CANON TowHEE.—Resident and tol-
erably common in Tom Green County. Mr. Loomis shot three in the
fall of 1886 in Eastern Concho County. Nest with three incubated eggs,
in fork of small live oak in Tom Green County, found April 12, 1885.
Nests found further west contained five eggs; so three is an exception.
The A. O. U. ‘Code and Check-List’ gives dts habitat as ‘‘Valley of Upper
Rio Grande”; it should now include Valley of the Conchos to Colorado
River. Heard its song only once, August 12, 1884.
178. Pipilo chlorurus. GREEN-TAILED TOWHEE. — This bird must be
spreading east, as I see it as far east as the head draws of the Middle
Concho. Common on the east side of Pecos River. Probably breeds.
179. Cardinalis cardinalis. CarprinaL. — Abundant resident. Very
small flocks of this species are found in the river bottoms in winter. None
seen west of the head draws of the creeks that rise in the Plains. Raises
two broods. Earliest clutch found April 7; latest June 30.
180. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata. TEXAN CARDINAL. — Accidental visitor in
Tom Green County. One was shot in May, 1885. I hear they occur in
winter in the eastern part of Concho County, but have not seen them.
181. Habia melanocephala. BLACK-HEADED GROSBEAK. — Rare sum-
mer visitor; probably breeds. Shot a male August 5, 1886, in Concho
County. No nests found. This supplements Mr. Geo. H. Ragsdale’s
record of one observed in spring at Colorado City, on the Texas and
Pacific Railroad.
182. Guiraca cerulea. BLUE GRosBEAK.—Tolerably common migrant
in fall, from the Pecos River to the Colorado River; breeds abundantly
further west.
183. Passerina cyanea. INDIGO BuNTING.—Rare fall migrant in Tom
Green County. One was observed June 5, 1883, in Concho County.
184. Passerina ciris. PAINTED BuNTING.—Common summer visitor.
Raises two broods. Nests found from May 12 to July 14. Clutch 4-5.
Builds generally in hackberry, but often in cat-claw and chapparal. The
males arrive April 27 to 30 in small flocks. One female recorded April 19,
1885, but for two other years the females came after the males. A well
known and delightful songster. The young female does not assume full
plumage until the second year.
204 Lioyp oz Birds of Western Texas. [October
185. Spiza americana. BLACK-THROATED BuntTinec. — Abundant
spring and fall migrant. Appears in wandering flocks through the sum-
mer, but I know of no instance of its breeding. This is another bird,
which, like the Black-throated Sparrow, six years ago scarcely known, is
now abundant.
186. Calamospiza melanocorys. Lark BunTiInG.— Abundant in win-
ter in immense flocks. Arrives the beginning of November and stays
until the first week in March. Frequents grain fields.
187. Piranga ludoviciana. Lourst1ANa TANAGER.-— A male was shot
by Mr. Cope in the spring of 1886 in South Concho.
188. Piranga erythromelas. ScarLeT TANAGER.—Accidental in Tom
Green County in the spring of 1885. Described as being tolerably com-
mon in spring migration, in eastern Concho County.
189. Piranga rubra. SumMER TANAGER. — Tolerably common sum-
mer visitant. Males arrive April 6; the females April 24. Breeds. No
nest found before June 3, and June 6. Nest, like the Cardinal’s, general-
ly made ona branch of a low pecan on the main streams; never away
from the water. Departs September to.
190. Progne subis. PurRPLE MARTIN. —Common summer visitant in
suitable places. Breeds about the towns in colonies. Arrives the last of
February; departs November I.
1gt. Petrochelidon lunifrons. CLIFF SWALLOW. — Common summer
visitant. Arrives early in April. I believe they raise two broods. Some-
times breed in barns. First nest, found under a bluff, May 4, with three
eggs; another July 20, with four fresh eggs.
192. Chelidon erythrogaster. BARN SwALLow. — Common summer
visitant. Breeds about settlements, raising two broods. Nest with four
eggs found August 1, 1883, at Paint Rock, Concho County.
193. Tachycineta thalassina. VIOLET-GREEN SWALLow. — Fall mi-
grant in Concho County; observed and taken September 1, 1885; seen
October 1, 1886. Not recorded in Tom Green County.
194. Clivicola riparia. BANK SwALLow. — Rare fall migrant in Con-
cho County.
Swallows are numerous in fall (September to end of October), but as
they often fly at great heights, it is impossible to procure or identify
them.
195. Ampelis cedrorum. CEDAR WaxwinG.— Abundant in fall and
again in spring. A few winter, feeding on the mistletoe berries — about
the only berry left after January 1. Winter all over Western Texas. One
shot in the fall of 1886 had orange tips to the tail-feathers.
196. Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides. WHITE-RUMPED SHRIKE. —
Abundant resident. Nests found from April 27 to May 21. Clutch six
(in rare instances five). I first heard its song in September, 1884, and
could hardly imagine the vocalist was a Shrike. Its song is a very pleas-
ing one, ina minor key, as if practising. Since that date I have heard it
frequently in the fall, from September to the middle of November. It is
also an accomplished mimic, imitating Sturnella magna neglecta perfect-
1887.] Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas. 295
ly. It lives on grasshoppers when it can procure them, and in winter,
when the weather is severe, takes to carrion. I found one in January,
1884, so gorged from feeding on a dead sheep that it could not fly. In the
Davis Mountains it lives in winter on large coleoptera. In spring it occa-
sionally kills birds. I have seen Sfrzella socitalis arizone, Vireo belli,
Polioptila cerulea, and others, amongst its victims, and in summer it has
a fancy for nestlings. It is usually very tame.
197. Vireo olivaceus. RED-EYED Vireo. — Abundant summer visitor
in Tom Green County. Only noted during the fall migration in Concho
County. Arrives April 11, after the Black-capped Vireo and on the same
day as Bell’s. Comes in pairs; nest found May 6, 1885, with sixeggs. A
pleasing songster.
198. Vireo gilvus. WarBLING VIREO. — Rare spring migrant. Not
noted in Concho County.
199. Vireo atricapillus. BLACK-cAPPED VIREO. — Tolerably common
in Concho County, during the fall migration. Breeds in two localities
in Tom Green County. The males arrive April 6, the females the 7th.
Though silent on arrival, by the roth the famous song of the male is
heard, and is continued through the summer until the middle of August.
The song is loud, clear, and very musical, and the singer generally selects
some blasted pecan stump for the site of his vocal efforts. The female has
also a song, sweet, but not particularly noticeable. This joyous habit led
me to look for the vocalist, April 28, 1885, and I soon discovered him sit-
ting on a nest just completed. I found three other nests in the same way.
The nest was always in some low tree at the edge of thick shrubbery, and
is at once distinguishable from that of Bell’s Vireo, which breeds in the
same vicinity, in that the latter is lined with wool, while the Black-cap’s
is not. The eggs are pale white, as stated by Dr. Coues and others, and
a full clutch is 4-5. Leaves Tom Green County altogether from August
20 to 25, but lingers in Concho County until the last week in September.
This record fills part of the gap between Mr. Nathan C. Brown’s record
at Boerne, Mr. Ragsdale’s in Cook County, and Col. Goss’s in Kansas.
200. Vireo noveboracensis. WHITE-EYED VIREO. — Fall migrant.
Two secured in Concho County, October, 1886. The eyes were pink in
the specimens shot.
201. Vireo belli. BrLt’s VirEo.— Abundant summer visitant. Ar-
rives about the same day as the Red-eyed Vireo, and stays until the mid-
dle of September. Raises two broods. Nests found May 6 to July 6,
Average clutch, six. One nest found May 8, 1884, had eight eggs. A
tireless songster, but there are so many fine singers in this district that it
does not attract much attention.
202. Mniotilta varia. BLACK-AND-WHITE WARBLER.—Common during
migrations. Arrives April 12-13; departs September 12-14. I believe
some breed, as I have seen them in June, but as they frequent the main
stream, it would be only by chance that their nest could be found.
203. Helminthophila ruficapilla gutturalis. CALAVERAS WARBLER. —
This western representative of the Nashyille Warbler is abundant in fall,
296 Lioyp ox Birds of Western Texas. [ October
with the Orange-crowned; seen on the Plains with Bell’s Vireo, Blue
Grosbeak, etc., in October, 1885.
204. Helminthophila celata. ORANGE-CROWNED WARBLER. — Abun-
dant in the fall migration (may be var. Jufescens).
205. Helminthophila peregrina. TENNESSEE WARBLER. — Early fall
migrant in Tom Green County. Tolerably common,
206. Dendroica zstiva. YELLOW WARBLER. — More abundant than
all the other Warblers together in spring and fall. A few may breed, as I
have seen them during all the summer months.
207. Dendroica coronata. MyrTLE WARBLER. — Spring migrant.
Tolerably common, May 13.
208. Dendroica auduboni. AupDUBON’s WARBLER. — Tolerably com-
mon spring and fall migrant. Arrives in spring, May 13. In fall I saw
it in crossing the Plains the first week in October, and shot two from a
flock as late as October 20, 1886, in Concho County.
209. Dendroica cerulea. CERULEAN WARBLER.—Saw small flocks of
five to eight in crossing the Plains, the middle of October, 1885.
210. Dendroica chrysoparia. GOLDEN-CHEEKED WARBLER. — One
was shot ina hackberry in April, 1887. Its stomach contained winged
(female) ants.
211. Dendroica virens. BLACK-THROATED GREEN WARBLER. — Com-
mon fall migrant, from August 1 to September 20.
212. Dendroica townsendi. —TowNseNpb’s WARBLER. — Rare migrant
in spring and fall. Arrives May 8. Undoubtedly breeds in Tom Green
County, near the plains, ina dense swampy undergrowth full of springs,
about five miles in circumference. Seen May 31 and July 31, in thickets
some two miles from the river, along which it migrates. In fall seen
from September 1 to 12, on Lipan Creek (Euterpe on map), where one
was killed on the roth by Mr. Loomis. Shot September 5, in Tom Green
County. Mr. Henshaw, in ‘The Auk,’ speaks of it as occurring on the
Upper Pecos. The A. O. U. habitat is east as far as Western Colorado
and south into Mexico; hence this record considerably extends the range
of this species to the south and west.
213. Seiurus aurocapillus. Oven-pirp.—Overlooked until September
10, 1886, when I shot one specimen and saw another in Concho County.
214. Geothlypis philadelphia. Mourninc WarB Ler. — Tolerably
common in fall migration in Concho County. None seen after Septem-
ber 1. Feeds on ants. Mr. Sennett’s record is the only other notice I can
find of this species in Texas.
215. Geothlypis macgillivrayi. MacGILLIvRAy’s WARBLER. — Abun-
dant from Castle Hill to Pecos River. Probably breeds.
216. Geothlypis trichas occidentalis. WrSTERN YELLOW-THROAT. —
Abundant spring and fall migrant.
217. Icteria virens. YELLOW-BREASTED Cuat.— Tolerably common
during the spring migrations.
218. Icteria virens longicauda. LoNG-TAILED CHAT.—Abundant sum-
mer visitor, especially in dense undergrowth. Very numerous in the
1887. ] Lioyp on Birds of Western Texas. 297
swamps above mentioned, where I believe Townsend’s Warbler breeds.
Arrives in pairs the middle of April; all are mated by the end of April.
They have a peculiar breeding cry,—like the sound of a gate swinging on
rusty hinges, easily and successfully imitated to procure specimens. I
found its nest May 6, 1885, at the edge of a thicket in a low bush; clutch
four. All summer it is a most admirable mimic, and frequently throws
such ventriloquial powers into its voice as to make the vocalist seem any-
where but where he is. Migrates leisurely, and is not finally lost sight
of until October 1.
219. Sylvania pusilla. Wuitson’s WARBLER. — Abundant spring and
fall migrant. In fall every storm brings a fresh lot of this Warbler, the
Golden, Nashville, Orange-crowned, and others. They linger often only
a few hours, and there is a lull in the migration until the next storm.
Abundant all over Western Texas from April 2 to May 15, and from Sep-
tember 3 to 30.
220. Sylvania canadensis. CANADIAN WARBLER.—One was shot from
a flock of six, about the end of August, 1885, in Concho County.
221. Setophaga ruticilla. RepsTART.— Abundant during the fall mi-
gration from August 31 to September 10, in Concho County.
222. Anthus pensilvanicus. AMERICAN Pipir. — Common in fall mi-
gration; less common in spring.
223. Anthus spragueii. SPRAGUE’S Prpir.—One was shot in January,
1885, in Tom Green County, at the edge of the Plains. A small flock was
seen in Concho County, October 15, 1886.
224. Oroscoptes montanus. SAGE THRASHER. — Tolerably common
resident in Tom Green County. Winters in Concho County, as far east
at least as Colorado. No eggs found but I have seen scores of nests.
225. Mimus polyglottus. Mockincpirp. — Abundant resident. Lo-
cally migratory in winter. Raises two broods, perhaps three. Nests
found from April 15 to July 16. Clutch 4-5. Sings all through the win-
ter, and often at night. A great scold, and in winter has a special enmity
to Flickers.
226. Galeoscoptes carolinensis. CATBIRD. — Occasional migrant in
spring and fall, in the eastern part of Concho County.
227. Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus. Cacrus Wren.—A summer
bird, and probably resident in Tom Green County on the Plains. Seen
migrating south with other birds September 30, 1885. Abundant in July,
on the line of the Texas and Pacific Railroad. No nests found within our
limits, but just outside (west) one was found May 6, containing three
young, and on May 16 one with six eggs, in a palma cactus.
228. Salpinctes obsoletus. Rock WreNnN.—Common winter visitor,
from October 7 to May 1. Breeds further west.
229. Thryothorus ludovicianus. CAROLINA WREN.—Rare winter visi-
tant; seen only on Spring Creek, in Tom Green County. Probably
breeds, as a pair were noted in a thicket, May 6, 1885.
230. Thryothorus bewickii bairdii. BaAirD’s WREN. — Resident; com-
mon. A fine singer from early spring till fall. Breeds anywhere; in old
298 Luioyp on Birds of Western Texas. [October
coat sleeves, behind mirrors, in piles of sacks, in old posts. Raises two
broods; eggs 4 to 6. Nests April 15 to June 5.
231. Troglodytes aédon parkmanii. PARKMAN’S WREN. — Very com-
mon in the fall in Concho County.
232. Cistothorus palustris. LoNG-BILLED MarsH WReEN. — Spring
migrant, in both counties. Rare.
233. Certhia familiaris americana. Brown CREEPER. — Tolerably
common winter visitor. Arrives October 15.
234. Sitta carolinensis. WHITE-BREASTED NuTHATCH. — Resident.
Rare. Shot in June and January. Found in both counties. No nests
known.
235. Parus atricristatus. BLACK-cRESTED TITMOUSE.—Resident. Tol-
erably common. Breeds in old Woodpecker holes. Nest found April 15,
1885, and two others April 18 and 20. This is another species that is
spreading eastward. Four years ago they were rarely found except on
the main river. Now each creek has a family or two, as far east as the
Colorado River. I have found this the prevailing species from here to El
Paso.
236. Parus atricapillus. CHICKADEE. — One taken during the spring
migration in eastern Concho County.
237. Parus carolinensis. CAROLINA CHICKADEE. — One taken during
spring migration in eastern Concho County. A pair found wintering on
the river in 1886.
238. Regulus satrapa. GOLDEN-CROWNED KINGLET.—Tolerably com
mon during the fall migration. A few winter in Concho County.
239. Regulus calendula. RuByY-CcROWNED KINGLET.—Abundant from
October 1 to April to.
240. Polioptila czrulea. BLUE-GRAY GNATCATCHER. — Abundant
summer visitant. Arrives in pairs March r3; common March 24. Last
seen in 1884, October 5; in 1886, October 8. No eggs found, but nests
with young (5 each) May 1 and 12.
241. Turdus ustulatus swainsoni. OLIvE-BACKED TurusH. — Fall
migrant. Rare in Tom Green County; not observed in Concho County.
242. Turdus aonalaschke. Dwarr Hermir THRusH. — Tolerably
common fall migrant. Noted every day from September 20 to October
10; to at least Fort Stockton, crossing the Plains.
243. Turdus aonalaschke auduboni. AupuBON’s HERMIT THRUSH.—
Spring migrant. Tolerably common in Tom Green County; rare in
winter in Concho County. Noted for the first time in 1886-87.
244. Turdus aonalaschke pallasi. Hermit THrusH. — One taken
during the spring migration in eastern Concho County.
245. Merula migratoria. AMERICAN Rosin. — Tolerably common in
spring and fall. A few winter in the river bottoms and abundantly further
south.
246. Merula migratoria propinqua. WESTERN RoBIN. — Rare in fall
in Concho County. A few. winter in Tom Green County. Abundant in
winter west of this county.
1887. ] BECKHAM ox the Birds of Bayou Sara, La. 299
247. Sialia sialis. BLuEBIRD.—Resident in portions of Concho Coun-
ty. Very common in spring and fall. They wander considerably after
January I, in search of berries, which are very scarce. Associates fre-
quently with the two next. A nest was found ina hole in an old stump
in July, 1882, with four eggs. Young in spotted plumage shot through-
out August.
248. Sialia mexicana. WrESTERN BLUEBIRD. — Rare winter visitant.
Shot in flocks of the common Bluebird in Concho County.
249. Sialia arctica. MouNrTain BLUEBIRD. — Rare until the fall of
1886, when it appeared in immense flocks, and was very unwary, feeding
with Cedarbirds and other species on the numerous wild berries in Octo-
ber and November. Some of the males were nearly ultramarine; others
in the same flock were various shades of blue. None seen since January
10, 1887.
ADDENDA. — 250. Rallus elegans. KinG RAIL. — One seen in South
Concho, in the spring of 1886, by Mr. Cope, who tried to catch it witha
dog.
251. Pandion haliaétus carolinensis. Osprey. — Several pairs breed
on South Brady, according to Mr. Cope.
252. Chordeiles virginianus henryi. WrsTERN NIGHTHAWK. — Rare
on the Plains; probably breeds.
253. Spizella monticola ochracea. WESTERN TREE SPARROW.—Com-
mon in small flocks, winter of 1884-85.
CorRECTION.—On page 183, line 16 from bottom, for ‘‘about 240” read
253:
ADDITIONS TO THE AVI-FAUNA OF BAYOU
OA eA ee
BY CHARLES WICKLIFFE BECKHAM.
In the ‘Bulletin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club’ for July,
1882, I gave an annotated list of the birds of Bayou Sara, Louis-
iana, the result of five days’ work during the month of April of
that year. Eighty-six species were enumerated. Since then I
have had an opportunity of making further observations at the
same place; extending over a much longer period, from April 1
to April 28, and am able to add twenty-seven species to the fauna
as heretofore given.
The weather during the period mentioned was exceptionally
dry, both for the season and the locality, which fact doubtless
300 BECKHAM oz the Birds of Bayou Sara, La. | October
had its effect upon the water birds, as but few were seen, but
nearly all the species of land birds noted were represented by
large numbers of individuals. At the date of my arrival vegeta-
tion was very far advanced, and at the stage which ordinarily
prevails in the neighborhood of Washington about the middle of
May.
A great deal of time was spent collecting in the densely wooded
ravines alluded to further on, localities almost entirely neglected
during my former visit. It was here that Swainson’s Warbler
most abounded, and the Hooded was always to be seen and heard
in the same haunts; the male leisurely skipping about the
branches at a distance of ten or twenty feet from the ground, sing-
ing in a languid sort of way, while the sharp ¢szf of the less
gaudily attired female proceeded from the canes and scant under-
growth near the ground. On April 17 I found an empty nest,
just finished, two feet from the ground, in a clump of small canes
in one of these ravines, attached to one of the canes. On the
24th the female was seen on the nest, which then contained four
perfectly fresh eggs. These birds were also very abundant in
the swamp, where I once heard four singing at the same time.
The Mockingbird and Brown Thrasher were fully as abundant
as in 1882; the former being found in the usual open places,
near dwellings, in gardens, etc., and great numbers of them were
nesting in the Cherokee rose bushes along Alexander’s Creek.
Like most of his tribe, the Mockingbird readily adapts himself
to his environment in the matter of nest-building, and finding
cotton-wool the most abundant and accessible material suitable for
his purposes he uses a great deal of it. In all the nests examined
(at least a dozen) the ‘great staple’ was the principal constit-
uent. The Thrashers I found in every sort of place visited:
building their nests in the crepe myrtles and rose bushes about
the house, and again down in the darkest and most dismal places
in the swamp.
The Catbird did not put in his appearance until the 18th.
Although abundant here, he is a bird of very retiring habits, and
exclusively a denizen of the woods and dense thickets, so that
but few of the natives know of his presence at all, while in most
northern and eastern localities he is as familiar a bird as the
Robin or House Wren. However, the Wood Thrush, which is
very common, makes an agreeable substitute, coming about the
1887-] BreckHamM on the Birds of Bayou Sara, La. 301
dwellings with the fearless confidence of the Chipping Sparrow,
and by his unexpected sociability atoning for the Catbird’s short-
comings in this respect. They were first seen on April 4.
Bluebirds were not numerous, but the two or three pairs seen
were evidently nesting. The Gnatcatchers and Blue Yellow-
backed Warblers were particularly abundant and voluble; the
former always going in pairs. Carolina Chicadees were found
every day, and I saw several pairs of adult birds conducting their
noisy broods through the woods in search of food. Their active
relatives, the Tufted Titmice, were very common and found in
all sorts of places, almost equaling in this respect the ubiqui-
tous Carolina Wren, a bird probably exceeding in numbers any
other summer resident here, and which finds itself at home any-
where, nesting indifferently in the stable, under the piazza, or in
an old stump down in the swamp. But wherever he may be, he
makes no secret of his whereabouts, for hill and dale and swamp
and garden, all resound from dawn to twilight with the full-toned,
tireless songs of this Orphean prodigy. I say songs, for the
Carolina Wren is no one-tuned musical bore, but possesses much
of the vocal versatility of his more favored rival the Mockingbird.
They pair quite early here, for towards the last of April I saw
many young birds flying about accompanied by the parents.
I saw but three or four Black-and-white Warblers, but was
fortunate enough to find a nest on the 23d, containing four partly
incubated eggs. It was on the ground on a densely wooded hill-
side, loosely constructed of dead leaves, etc.,and was roofed over
so as to be completely sheltered from the rain. The female did
not leave her nest until I was within two or three feet of her,
when she flew to the ground feigning lameness, but this old and
pathetic subterfuge had just the opposite effect it was intended to
have. The nest was admirably concealed and would never have
been found had not the bird itself indicated its location.
The Yellow Warbler was often seen in the tree tops along the
creek bottom, and the Redstart was generally found in the same
places but always among the lower branches. The Pine War-
bler, which was not uncommon in 1882, was not seen at all, nor
was the Sycamore Warbler met with; and but one Blackburnian
was observed, a male taken on the 2oth.
Golden-crowned Thrushes arrived on the 24th and soon became
common in their usual haunts, which were frequented also by
302 BECKHAM ox the Birds of Bayou Sara, La. [ October
the Kentucky Warbler, one of the most abundant birds here.
The Maryland Yellow-throat and Yellow-breasted Chat became
very numerous towards the last of the month, particularly in open
places near the edges of the swamp, localities I was surprised to
find much affected by the White-throated Sparrow, which was
abundant up to the date of my departure.
The Red-eyed and White-eyed Vireos were found in abun-
dance, the latter much the more numerous of the two, while the
Warbling Vireo was seen but once—in a shade tree in Bayou
Sara. The Purple Martin was abundant in town but was seen no-
where else. The Cedarbird was several times observed in small
flocks. It is said that none are seen here in summer, but in fall
and early spring it is very abundant and great numbers of them
are killed for the table.
The Rough-winged Swallows, which arrived in March, were
present in force, and were breeding in holesin the banks along
Alexander’s Creek, where the Kingfishers were also nesting. A
nest containing young Kingfishers was found on the 20th. The
Summer Tanagers arrived on the 12th in full song and immedi-
ately became common. I found them at home in the swamp as
well as on the high ground.
The Savanna Sparrow, Indigo Bunting, and Chewink were
rather common, but Bachman’s Finch, though diligently searched
for, was not seen at all. Two specimens of this rare bird were
taken here in 1882. The Nonpareil is a scarce bird here, as but
two were seen during my stay: a male and female on the 23d.
The Swamp Sparrow was sparingly represented among the
transients.
The Cardinal Grosbeak was breeding abundantly everywhere,
and the Red-winged Blackbirds, preferring upland ponds to other
places, were paired and beginning to build. A few Meadow
Larks and Baltimore Orioles were seen, and the Orchard
Orioles were- quite abundant, the yellow males considerably
exceeding in numbers those in chestnut and black.
In the former paper the following note concerning the Grackle
found here is given: ‘*‘ Qu¢scalus purpureus. Purple Grackle.—
A common Grackle about the river and bayou at Bayou Sara is re-
ferred to this form, as the one found forty or fifty miles down the
river is, according to Dr. Langdon, the Purple, and notthe Bronzed
Grackle.” This supposition turns out to be erroneous. No spec-
1887.] BECKHAM oz the Birds of Bayou Sara, La. 303
imens were shot in 1882, but this time I was fortunate enough to
obtain one, which proves to be typical Qu7scalus quiscula eneus.
They appeared in the neighborhood of Bayou Sara during the
preceding winter in enormons flocks and did a great deal of
damage to the growing crops. They destroyed five acres of corn
for Mr. James P. Bowman, a planter, near Bayou Sara, pulling
the young sprouts up by the roots. Mr. Bowman poisoned
several thousand of them with arsenic, but unfortunately a good
many Carolina Doves were killed along with the Grackles.
The Blue Jays were exceedingly abundant, and the customary
state of warfare prevailed between these rowdy freebooters and
the rest of the feathered tribe. Kingbirds, Great-crested Fly-
catchers, and Woodpeckers were about equally represented ; and
their respective dates of arrival being April 3,7,and6. Acadian
Flycatchers, first noted on the 13th, were occasionally seen and
heard in dense woodland. Ruby-throated Hummingbirds and
Chimney Swifts were abundant. The note of Chuck-will’s-widow
was first heard on the evening of April 11 ; the birds soon became
very common, and as soonas twilight came on were to be heard
on all sides. They would generally cease singing before eight
o'clock, and occasionally one would be heard in the morning at
daybreak. A few Nighthawks were seen, and one was shot
from a small pine tree in an open place. It permitted me to
approach within fifteen feet.
Among the Woodpeckers, besides Picus vzllosus, elsewhere
noted, the Downy, Red-bellied, and Red-headed were well rep-
resented, but only three or four Flickers were observed. The
Yellow-billed Cuckoos arrived on the 18th and were very abun-
dant.
Judge Lawrason, who lives in the country near Bayou Sara,
informed me that as late as 1875 he found the Carolina Parakeet
every year at his place, but since that date he has neither seen nor
heard of any in this locality.
A great many Vultures and Carrion Crows were seen, the
latter being particularly abundant.
The only water birds observed, other than those elsewhere
mentioned, were Wilson’s Snipe, Solitary Sandpiper, Spotted
Sandpiper, Little Green Heron, and Coot. A pair of the latter
were seen on a large upland pond, considerably overgrown with
water-lillies, etc., and a negro living near by asserts that they
breed there,
304 BECKHAM ox the Birds of Bayou Sara, La. [ October
87. Ajaja ajaja. RosEATE SpoonBILL.—Mr. George Bains, of Waverly
Plantation, shot one of these birds several years ago, feeding along the
edge of a pond near his house, and Judge Lawrason informed me that it
breeds sparingly in the swamp.
88. Elanoides forficatus. SwALLow-TAILED Kire.—I did not see this
bird, but several trustworthy persons informed me that it was not uncom-
mon in the swamp.
89. Buteo harlani. HARLAN’s HAwk.—Not seen by me. Audubon
states that he shot the type specimen of this rare Hawk at Bayou Sara.
go. Dryobates villosus. Hairy WooppecKER.—A common bird here.
On April 11 I shota fully fledged young female. The only difference
noted between it and the adult was in the smaller size of the latter, partic-
ularly the bill.
gt. Empidonax flaviventris. YELLOW-BELLIED FLYCATCHER. — Not
seen until the 26th when two were taken and several more observed. Ap-
parently preferring open places to the woodland.
g2. Ammodramus savannarum passerinus. GRASSHOPPER SPARROW.
—First seen on the gth ; common afterwards.
93. Spizella socialis. CHIPPING SPARROW. — Common in suitable
places. Not seen in the woods.
94. Spizella pusilla, FreLtp SpARRow.—Abundant and breeding.
95. Passer domesticus. EurRoPEAN Housr Sparrow.—These pests
have recently gained a foothold in Bayou Sara, but are not very numerous.
None were seen in the country.
96. Spiza americana. DickcissEL.—But one individual of this hand-
some species was seen, a male, which was shot on the 20th, in a meadow
in company with Grasshopper Sparrows.
97. Pirangaerythromelas. ScARLET TANAGER.—While here in 1882
I shot a female of this species which is still in my collection, but in writ-
ing up my notes of that trip the capture was overlooked. None were
seen during my last visit.
g8. Petrochelidon lunifrons. CLirF SwALLow.—Noted but once, on
April 23, when several were seen flying about a large pond in company
with 7. dzcolor, C. erythrogastra, and Stelgidopteryx serripennis.
g9- Chelidon erythrogastra. BARN SWALLow.—Several times seen
but apparently not common.
100. Tachycineta bicolor. TREE SwALLow.—First observed perched
on some telegraph wires on the 9th, and again seen in considerable num-
bers near the same place on April 23.
tol. Vireo flavifrons. YELLOW-THROATED VIREO.—This Vireo was
not observed until April 9, when two were heard singing. Several times
seen afterwards, but never in the dense woods; always in trees about open
places.
102. Protonotaria citrea. PROTHONOTARY WARBLER.—The first indi-
vidual of this species was seen and captured on April 6, in a willow tree
near a pond in the creek bottom, but they did not appear in force until
the 12th, on which day I shot five, and saw at least twenty more. They
1887.] BECKHAM on the Birds of Bayou Sara, La. 305
continued to be common in suitable places up to the time of my depart-
ure, and a great many pairs were undoubtedly breeding. I found two
nests just completed, one on the 16th and the other on the 25th, neither
of which contained eggs. They were placed in old Woodpecker holes, in
hollow snags about fifteen feet from the ground. Although a number of
the birds were seen in the swamp, the most of them were found about the
willow trees along Alexander’s Creek, a locality, however, only about one
half of a mile from the swamp. ‘They were usually quite tame and unsus-
picious. Five or six of the twenty-five specimens taken had the feathers
of the forehead stained and gummed up with some sticky, resinous sub-
stance that could not be washed off.
103. Helmitherus vermivorus. WoRM-EATING WARBLER.—A rather
common bird, inhabiting mostly the same places as H. swaznsonz, that is,
densely wooded ravines. Firstseenon April 11. Towards the end of the
month I found several pairs which were evidently mated and nesting, but
no nests were found.
104. Helinaia swainsoni. SWAINSON’s WARBLER.—Although I only
spent five days at this place in 1882, it is surprising, in view of facts. cited
below, that Swainson’s Warbler was not met with. On April 8, while
standing near the edge of a dense tangle of cane and ‘black jack’ (a
sort of vine), I heard a bird-note entirely new to me, but which reminded
me very much of the song of the Large-billed Water-thrush. It was im-
possible to get at the bird, and I did not again hear the note until three
days afterward. I was sitting on the ground in a densely wooded ravine,
where the only sounds to be heard proceeded from the usual horde of
hungry mosquitoes, singing about my head, now and then mingled with
the languid ditty of a Hooded Warbler lazily foraging for insects in the
branches above, when a small, dark looking bird whizzed by me like an
arrow and disappeared in a small clump of canes and bushes growing in
the bottom of the ravine. Just as I was about getting up to look for it the
same Seiurine song, heard before, burst forth, apparently only a few feet dis-
tant; then it dawned upon me that I was in the presence of the much sought
for Helinata swatnsont. The song was uttered at intervals of about half
a minute, the bird all the time remaining perfectly motionless, and for
fully ten minutes I sat in the same place eagerly scanning everything in
the direction of the sound, which apparently changed with every utter-
ance, afraid to move lest the slightest noise or motion should drive off the
puzzling ventriloquist. After having finished the performance to his ap-
parent satisfaction, he flew from a twig directly in front of me to the
ground, when the usual tragedy took place. Hardly had I picked the bird
up before two more appeared upon the scene; two belligerent males fight-
ing and chasing each other about. One of these was also secured, and
two or three more were seen or heard that day in similar localities.
The bird is undoubtedly common here, for altogether I obtained twenty
specimens during my stay; on one day taking as many as four. It is,
however, exceedingly difficult to get them, but, as Mr. Brewster in his in-
teresting account of the species, says, ‘‘once seen it is yours”—if you can
306 BECKHAM ox the Birds of Bayou Sara, La. [October
only see it, for, like the Whip-poor-will, it is oftener heard than seen. On
at least a dozen occasions I have stood within twenty or thirty feet of a
male singing in the manner above described, and been unable to see him,
until, tired of fruitless searching, I would make a noise, when.off he would
dart into a brake where it would be a waste of time and energy to follow.
Four or five times I saw the bird on the ground, wadkizg about in that
deliberate manner peculiar to the Golden-crowned and Water Thrushes,
and twice I have observed the male singing on the ground, pausing every
eight or ten steps in his search for insects to throw back his head and pour
forth his curious melody, a habit, so far as I have read, not noted by pre-
vious observers.
Although occasionally found along the edges of the swamp, the favorite
haunts were the dark, wooded ravines, making off from Alexander’s Creek
and other water courses. Along the bottoms of these ravines cane is
always to be found growing, and the bare ground in these small brakes
forms the favorite feeding places of the bird. Although no nests were
found, they were evidently paired and breeding before I left.
105. Helminthophila peregrina. TENNESSEE WARBLER.—Only one
individual was recognized, a male shot out of a party of four or five War-
blers skipping about the top of a willow in the creek bottom on April 25.
106. Dendroica coronata. MyrTLe WARBLER.—During the first three
or four days of my stay I found the Myrtle Warbler quite common in
parties of from four to eight, but none were seen after April 7. All those
observed were moulting.
107. Dendroica cerulea. CasRULEAN WARBLER.—But one individual
of this species was seen, a handsome male in full spring plumage, which
was shot from the top of a sycamore on April 20.
108. Dendroica pennsylvanica. CHESNUT-SIDED WARBLER.—This
Warbler seems also to be a rare bird here, as but one was observed, a male
shot in the creek bottom, April 22.
109. Seiurus noveboracensis. WATER THRUSH.—One of these birds
was taken in the swamp on April 26. It was in company with another of
the same species. No others were noted.
110. Troglodytes aédon. Housrt Wren.—Evidently a rare bird here,
as I saw it but once, April 20, when one of a pair was shot in a clump of
briars.
111. Regulus calendula. RusBy-cROWwNED KINGLET.—This Kinglet
was quite abundant early in April, and the males were in full song, but
they soon left for the North. &. satrafa was not seen at all.
112. Turdus alicie. GRAY-CHEEKED THRUSH.—Not seen until the
22d, after which date they became rather common, but I never saw more
than one in the same place.
113. Turdus aonlaschke pallasi' Hrrmir THrRusH.—Rather com-
mon in suitable places. Doubtless a winter resident here.
1887. ] TROTTER on the Genus Helminthophila. 307
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CERTAIN PHASES IN THE
GENUS HEALMINTHOPHILA.
BY SPENCER TROTTER, M. D.
Tue Mniotiltine genus Helminthophila has of late years
presented some very interesting and curious features in the re-
lations of certain of its species to one another and to several
remarkable forms which have come to light in the past decade. In
fact, in its earlier known history as a genus two forms appeared,
one of which has only lately turned up again within our limits,
while the other, if indeed it belonged with the genus, has long
been relegated to the list of ‘lost’ or ‘doubtful’ species, a veritable
myth, never having been seen since its first discovery, so that the
genus has always figured in a rather eccentric light.
The group is highly characteristic of the Nearctic Region, con-
sisting of eight well defined species, which pass under the gen-
eral name of Swamp Warblers. Nowhere what might be called
abundant birds, the Helminthophile still enjoy an extensive range
over the continent, and are essentially migratory, as the insect
nature of their food demands. The species fall into two sub-
groups, as regards their general form and pattern of color, and
this corresponds pretty closely with the extent of their dis-
tribution.
Celata, ruficapilla, peregrina, lucite, and virginie form one
section, small birds of a more or less uniform and quiet colora-
tion, the two former being the most widely distributed species of
the genus.
The Orange-crowned Warbler, ce/ata, with its western variety
lutescens, ranges over the entire continent from ocean to ocean,
but is comparatively rare in the Eastern Province, being seldom
met with. It winters southward, beyond United States limits
into Mexico, and reaches high latitudes in the Northwest. The
Nashville Warbler, rajficapzlla, on the other hand, with as wide
a range as ce/aza, is far more abundant in the Eastern Province
than in the West, and extends its migrations northward to the
Arctic Basin on the east. The Tennessee Warbler, peregrina, is
chiefly eastern in its distribution, breeding northward into high
latitudes.
308 TROTTER ox the Genus Helminthophila. [ October
Virginie and luct@ are restricted in their ranges, being char-
acteristic of the Colorado Valley and Southern Rocky Mountain
region.
The other section comprises bachmanti, chrysoptera, pinus,
and their curious allies, Zewrencez and leucobronchialis ; birds of
striking coloration and of much more restricted ranges than the
three plainer colored species of the former sub-group. Bachmand
is exceedingly rare, having been taken but a few times in the
Southern States. The Blue Golden-winged Warbler, chry-
soptera, and the Blue-winged Yellow Warbler, pzzwzs, are
exclusively birds of the Eastern Province, the former ranging
into Canada, though rarer in the Northern States, the latter
scarcely if ever going beyond Massachusetts and Minnesota.
Both winter south of our limits.
I have taken the liberty of thus hastily reviewing the genus for
the purpose of bringing together as nearly as possible our present
knowledge of the distribution of the several species. The history
of the two forms /awrencet and leucobronchialis is already so
well known to ornithologists that it need not be reiterated here,
except to recall the very general belief of their hybrid nature.
The question naturally arises in the minds of most persons
who have given any thought to the subject, What does the oc-
currence of such peculiar forms, taken in conjunction with other
facts, signify? We are stepping into a somewhat uncertain re-
gion when we attempt to speculate on a subject of this character,
but I believe that the only way in which we may hope to throw
any light whatever upon such a subject is from an evolutionary
standpoint.
The rise and decay of genera and species in the struggle for
existence; the pressure of dominant groups upon smaller and
less adapted races ; action and reaction through environment ;—
these are the factors involved, and that have given rise to many
apparently inexplicable phenomena.
A dominant group is characterized by the abundance of its
forms, both in species and individuals, over wide areas, this being
the index of its vigor and consequent ability to maintain itself
against competitors, and its adaptability to varying conditions of
environment. Rarity in species and individuals is indicative of
degeneracy, the expression of the inability of the group to hold
its own.
1887. ] TROTTER 07 the Genus Helminthophila. 309
Hybridism under nature is a further expression of decay, the
result of a growing rarity in the individuals of a species.
Of course a hybrid may be purely accidental, as I believe the
case to have been with the cross between the Barn and the Cliff
Swallow which I described some years ago, the result of a mesal-
(tance between two individuals during the spring flights when
numbers of both species are ‘hawking’ in the air together prior
to nesting. But when we see crossing repeatedly performed the
question of accident must be set aside and another means of solu-
tion sought.
Let us see how these principles will apply to the genus Fe/-
minthophila. Were we have a group of eight species, as has
been cited above, none of which are as a rule very abundant,
especially when compared with other birds, e. 9., certain species
of Dendroica.
Recalling the distribution of the species, we find that each has
a more or less definite area, but their habitats considerably over-
lap one another That of the two sub-divisions noted, celata,
ruficapilla, and peregrina are the most widely distributed, while
chrysoptera, pinus, and their allies are much more restricted, and
it is in this latter section that we find what is to my mind an evidence
of decay. Strictly insectivorous, the elminthophile have come
in direct competition with other insectivorous forms, and among
them the closely allied and dominant genus Dezdrofca, with its
thirty odd well defined species, whose habits and nature closely
resemble the Swamp Warblers in many ways. The pressure ex-
erted by Dezdrotca would be very much greater in the East than
in the West, owing to the greater preponderance of individuals
and species in the former area; consequently the more restricted
eastern species of He/minthophila would feel this competition
keenly.
Many of the Dexdrotce pursue and capture their food in much
the same manner as the Helminthophile, and in similar locali-
ties; more than this, the majority are expert fly-catchers, taking
mature insects on the wing with much greater readiness and per-
sistency than do the species of Swamp Warblers. A glance at
the bills of the two will show which is the best adapted for diver-
sified work.
And what has been the upshot of all this? Simply that these
restricted species of Helminthophila are succumbing to more
wide-spread and better adapted forms, and their decrease in num-
310 TROTTER on the Genus Helminthophila. [October
bers, though not directly apparent in all the species, is expressed
by the curious phenomena which have lately come under our
notice. Bachmani is exceedingly rare, for aught we know on
the verge of extinction, though it still exists in favorable localities
in the vast swamps of the Southern States.
The mythical carbonata might have been the last of another
form,—who can tell? Audubon gave it a place in this genus.
Chrysoptera and pinus yet remain fairly abundant but forced
apparently to cross with each other, and the resulting forms,
lawrencet and leucobronchialis, without doubt recross with the
parent species.* Further, we find evidence that Azzzs has un-
doubtedly gone over to the strange genus Oforornzs and con-
tracted an alliance there.f
These are the facts, and we are left to draw our own conclu-
sions in the best way possible. Genera and species rise up, in-
crease and become dominant only to break down again under the
pressure of other and better adapted forms. What the other
genera of the Mniotiltida may have been in the past we can only
surmise.
Those that now possess but one or two species may, and very
likely have, possessed more and been dominant in their time. A
change in habit under pressure and consequent structural modi-
fication would be of immense advantage, and finally result in one
or two well adapted species forming a well defined genus. Such
may have been the history of AZ@zzotzlia, Protonotaréa, and others,
and such may be the future of these Helminthophile who now,
as it seems to me, show unmistakable evidence of break-down
after a long and severe struggle against better adapted forms.
This or ultimate extinction are the only alternatives.
* Brewster, Wm. Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club, Vol. VI, Oct. 1881, p. 218.
+ Langdon, Frank W. Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club, Vol V, Oct. 1880, p. 208, plate, iv.
1887] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 301
THE BIRDS OF THE WEST INDIES, INCLUDING
THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER AND
THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING
THE ISLANDS OF TOBAGO
AND TRINIDAD.
BY CHARLES B. CORY.
[Continued from page 232.]
Famity SCOLOPACID.
Genus Gallinago LEacn,
Gallinago LEACH, Syst. Cat. Brit. Mam. & Bds. p. 31, 1816.
“ Gallinago delicata (Orp).
Scolopax delicata ORD, Wils. Orn. ix, 1825, p. ccxviii.
Scolopax wilsont SUNDEV. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 587 (St.
Baitholomew) ; 2b. p. 601 (Porto Rico).
Scolopax gallinago D’ORB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 231
(1840).
Gallinago wilsont GosseE. Bds. Jam. p. 353 (1847).— BRYANT, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859) (Bahamas); 2d. BREWER, p. 308
(1860) (Cuba). — GuNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 85 (Cuba).— Marcu, Pr.
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 67 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fis-
ico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 353 (1866); 2b. J. f. O. 1875, p. 321 (Cuba). —
Lawr. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 197 (1878) (St. Vincent); 28. p.
238 (Antigua); 2b. p. 242 (Barbuda). —GunpL. Anal. Soc. Esp.
Hist. Nat. VII, p. 368 (1878) (Porto Rico).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I.
p- 156 (1880). —A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 116 (1881).
—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 26 (1885).
Gallinago wilsontt A. & E. NEwTON, Ibis, 1859, p. 258 (St. Croix).—Scr.
P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205
(Jamaica).
Gallinago media wilsont WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 8 (1884).
Bahamas and Antilles during migrations.
‘Philohela minor (GMEL.).
Scolopax minor A. & E. NEwron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 116 (1881).
Rusticola minor Goss, Bds. Jam. p. 354 (1847) (Hill). — Marcu, Pr.
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 68 (Jamaica).
312 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [October
Recorded by Gosse and others from Jamaica. The bird might
occasionally wander to Cuba, and possibly Jamaica, as it is not
uncommon in some parts of Florida in winter.
GrENus Macrorhamphus LeEacu.
Macrorhamphus ‘‘LEAcH, Cat. Brit. Birds, 1816.”
“Macrorhamphus griseus (GmeEL.).
Scolopax grisea GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 568 (1788).
Limnodramus griseus LEMB. Aves Cuba, p. g1 (1850).
Macrorhamphus griseus GUNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 85 (Cuba); 2b. Repert.
Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 353 (1866); 2d, J. f. O. 1875, p. 322 (Cuba).
Macrorhamphus griseus Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 157 (1880). —A. & E.
Newton, Handb. Jamaica, p. 116 (1881). — Cory, List Bds. W. I.
p- 26 (1885).
Recorded from Bahamas, Cuba, and Jamaica.
“ Macrorhamphus scolopaceus (Say).
Limosa scolopacea SAy, Long’s Exp. 1823, p. 170.
Macrorhamphus scolopaceus ALBRECHT, J. f.O. 1861, p. 213 (Cuba); 2d.
GuNDL. 1862, p. 85 (Cuba); 2b. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 354
(1S06))724- J. t. ©. 1975, p. 322) (Cuba).
Macrorhamphus scolopaceus Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 26 (1885).
Cuba and Antilles during migrations.
Genus Micropalama Bairp.
Micropalama Batrv, Birds N. Am. p. 726, 1858.
“Micropalama himantopus (Bonap.).
Tringa himantopus Br. Ann. Lyc..N. Y. II, p. 157 (1826). —BREWER, Pr.
Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).
Totanus himantopus LemsB. Aves Cuba, p. 95 (1850).—Marcu, Pr. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 67 (Jamaica). —GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-
Nat. Cuba, I, p. 356 (1866). — A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica,
p- 116 (188r).
Ereunetes himantopus SUNDEV. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 587 (St.
Bartholomew) ; 2d. p. 602 (Porto Rico).
Micropalma himantofus Moore, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XIX, p. 241
(1877) (Bahamas).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 26 (1885).
Micropalama himantopus GUNDL. J. f. O. 1875, p. 326 (Cuba); 7b. Anal.
Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 373 (1878). — Cory, Revised List Bds.
W. I. p. 26 (1885).— WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. § (1886).
Found throughout the Antilles,
1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indtes. oN Oy
Genus Ereunetes ILtic.
Eveunetes ILLIGER, Prodromus, p. 262, 1811.
“Ereunetes pusillus (Linvy.).
Tringa pusilla LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 252 (1766).
Pelidna pusilla Gosstk, Bds. Jam. p. 348 (1847)?
Hemipalama semipalmata Lrems. Aves Cuba, p. 96 (1850). — BREWER,
Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).
Hemipalama minor Lemp. Aves Cuba, p. 97 (1850).—BREWER, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).
Tringa semipalmata BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121
(1859) (Bahamas).
Ereunetes pusillus Cassin, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1860, p. 195 ( Jamai-
ca). —GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 356 (1866); 2d. J. f.
O. 1875, p. 327 (Cuba); Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 374
(1878) (Porto Rico). — SunpDEv. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p.
587 (St. Bartholomew) ; 2b. p. 602 (Porto Rico).—-Cory, Bds.
Bahama I. p. 157 (1880). — A. & E. Newton, Handb. Jamaica, p.
116 (1881).— Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 26 (1885).— WELLs, List
Bds. Grenada, p. 8 (1886). — Cory, Ibis, 1886, p. 502 (Grand Cay-
man).
Ereunetes petrificatus Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 68
(Jamaica).— Lawre. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 488 (1878) (Domin-
ica) ; 2b. p. 238 (Antigua) ; 2d. p. 242 (Barbuda) ; zd. p. 488 (Guade-
loupe).
Throughout the Antilles during migrations.
Erreunetes occidentalis Lawr.. if it be considered different
from the preceding species, must be given a place in the West
India Avifauna.
Genus Tringa Linn.
Tringa LINN2US, Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 148, 1758; 2b. 12th ed. p. 247,
1766.
/
Tringa minutilla VIEILL.
Tringa minutilla ViEILL. Nouv. Dict. XXXIV, p. 452 (1819). — Lawr.
Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 197 (1878) (St. Vincent). — ALLEN, Bull.
Nutt. Orn. Club, V, p. 169 (1880) (Santa Lucia).— Cory, Bds.
Bahama I. p. 158 (1880).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p.
116 (1881). — Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 26 (1885); 2b. Ibis, 1886, p.
502 (Grand Cayman),
314 Cory on the Birds of the West Indtes. [October
Tringa temminckit D’OrB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 240
(1840).
Pelidna pusilla GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 348 (1847) ?— GuNDL. J. f. O. 1862,
p- 87 (Cuba).
Actodromas wilsonti A. & E. NEwTon, Ibis, 1859, p. 258 (St. Croix).
Tringa wilsont BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859)
(Bahamas).—Sct. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80 ( Jamaica).
Tringa pusilla BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860)
(Cuba).
Tringa wilsontd ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 ( Jamaica).
Actodromas minutilla Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 67
(Jamaica). —GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 357 (1866) ;
zb. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 376 (1878) (Porto Rico).
Winter visitant to the Bahamas and Antilles.
“Tringa maculata VIEILL.
Tringa maculata ViEILL. Nouv. Dict. XXXIV, p. 456 (1819).—A. & E.
Newton, Ibis, 1859, p. 258 (St. Croix). — BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc,
Nat. Hist. XI, p. 69 (1867) (Bahamas); 2b. Moore, XIX, p. 241
(1877) (Bahamas).—SuNDEV. Oefy. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 587
(St. Bartholomew). — Lawr. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 461 (1878)
(Guadeloupe). — Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 159 (1880). —A. & E.
Newton, Handb. Jamaica, p. 116 (1881). — Cory, List Bds. W. I.
p- 26 (1885); 2d. Ibis, 1886, p. 502 (Grand Cayman).
Tringa pectoralis Lemp. Aves Cuba, p. 98 (1850).—BREWER, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba). — SuNDEv. Oefy. K.
Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 602 (Porto Rico).
Pelidna pectoralis GUNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 87 (Cuba).
Actodromas maculata GUNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 356 (1866) ;
zi. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 375 (1878) (Porto Rico).—
WeELLs, List Bds. Grenada, p. 8 (1886).
Actodromas maculatus GUNDL. J. f. O. 1875, p. 328 (Cuba).
Tringa maculosa Moore, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XIX, p. 241 (1877)
(Bahamas).
Antilles in winter.
“Tringa fuscicollis VieILu.
Tringa fuscicollis VIEILL. Nouv. Dict. XXXIV, p. 461 (1819). — Sct. P.
Z. S. 1876, p. 14 (Santa Lucia).—ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V,
p- 169 (1880) (Santa Lucia). — A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica,
p- 116 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 26 (1885).
Tringa schinztt LEMB. Aves Cuba, p. 98 (1850).—BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc.
Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).
Pelidna schinzii Gunvt. J. f. O. 1856, p. 421 (Cuba); 2b. 1862, p. 87
(Cuba).
1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. Bs
Tringa bonapartii Scu. P. Z. S. 1861, pp. 70, 80 ( Jamaica).—ALBRECHT,
J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 ( Jamaica). — Moore, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist.
XIX, p. 241 (1877) (Bahamas).
Actodromas bonapartiit GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 356
(1866) ; 2. J. f. O. 1875, p. 328 (Cuba).
Tringa bonapartez Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 159 (1880).
Antilles in winter.
Tringa canutus Linn.
Tringa canutus LINN. Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 149 (1758) ; 2d. 12th ed. p.
251 (1766). —Gosse, Bds. Jam. p. 354(1847). — Marcu, Pr. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 67 ( Jamaica).—A. & E. Newron, Handb.
Jamaica, p. 116 (1881). — Cory, Revised List Bds. W. I. p. 26
(1886).
Recorded from Jamaica.
Tringa ferruginea BRUNN.
Tringa ferruginea BRUNN. Orn. Bor. 1764, p. 53. —A. O. U. Check-list,
N. Am. Bds. p. 152 (1886).
Anclyohetlus subarquata Kaup, Sk. Ent. Eur. Theirw. 1829, p. 50.
Ancylochilus subarquatus WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 8 (1886).
Recorded from Grenada.
Genus Calidris Cuv.
Calidrzs Cuvier, Anat. Comp. V, 1805.
“Calidris arenaria (Linn. ).
Tringa arenarta LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 251 (1766).
Calidris arenaria Gosse, Bds. jam. p. 354 (1847).—GUNDL. J. f. O. 1856,
p- 422 (Cuba). — Brewer, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308
(1860) (Cuba). — Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 67
(Jamaica). —GuNpbL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 357 (1866) ;
2b. J. f. O. 1875, p. 329 (Cuba). —Lawre. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p.
197 (1878) (St. Vincent); 2b. p. 461 (Guadeloupe).—GunbL. Anal.
Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 376 (1878) (Porto Rico).—Cory, Bds.
Bahama I. p. 160 (1880). — A. & E. NEwron, Handb. Jamaica, p.
116 (1881).—Cory, List. Bds. W. I. p. 26 (1885).
Arenaria calidris LemsB. Aves Cuba, p. 1or (1850).
Antilles in winter.
Genus Limosa Briss.
Limosa Brisson, Orn. 1760,
3 16 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [October
“Limosa fedoa (Linn.).
Scolopax fedoa LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 244 (1766).
Limosa fedoa LremsB. Aves Cuba, p. 90 (1850).—BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc.
Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba). — Gunpt. J. f. O. 1862, p. 84
(Cuba) ; zd. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba. I, p. 353 (1866) ; zd. J. f. O.
1875, p. 320 (Cuba) ; 26. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 368 (1878)
(Porto Rico).—WELLs, List Bds. Gredada, p. 8 (1886).
Recorded from the Greater Antilles.
“Limosa hemastica (Linv.).
Scolopax hemastica Linn. Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 147 (1758).
Limosa hudsonica LemMB. Aves Cuba, Suppl. (1850).—GunpL. J. f. O.
1862, p. 84 (Cuba); 2d. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I. p. 353 (1866) ;
zb. J. f. O. 1875, p. 320 (Cuba).
Limosa hemastica Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 26 (1885).
Recorded from Cuba.
GrENus Symphemia Rar.
Symphemia RAFINESQUE, Jour. de Phys. 1819.
“Symphemia semipalmata (GMeEL.).
Scolopax semipalmata GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 959 (1788).
Totanus semipalmatus LemB. Aves Cuba, p. 92 (1850).— Cory, Bds.
Bahama I, p. 160 (1880).
Catoptrophorus semipalmatus Gosse, Bds. Jam. p. 354 (1847).—BREWER,
Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).
Symphemia semipalmata BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 122
(1859) (Bahamas).—Marcn, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 67
(Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 354 (1866) ; 2.
J. f. O. 1875, p. 322 (Cuba).—Lawre. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 238
(1878) (Antigua); 2b. p. 242 (Barbuda).—GuNbDL. Anal. Soc. Esp.
Hist. Nat. VII, p. 369 (1878) (Porto Rico).—A. & E. Newton,
Handb. Jamaica, p. 116 (1881).—Cory, Revised List Bds. W. I.
p. 27 (1886).—WELLs, List Bds. Grenada, p. 8 (1886).
Catophtrophorus speculiferus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p.
308 (1860) (Cuba).
Symphemia semipalmatus Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).
Common in the Bahamas and Antilles.
1887. |
Cory oz the Birds of the West Indies. 317
Genus Totanus BeEcust.
Totanus BECHSTEIN, Orn. Taschenb. Deutschl. p. 282, 1803.
Y
Totanus melanoleucus (GMEL.).
Scolopax melanoleucus GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 659 (1788).
Totanus melanoleucus GOSSE, Bds. Jam. p. 352 (1847).—BRYANT, Pr.
Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 69 (1867) (Bahamas).—SuNpDEvV. Oefv.
K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 588 (St. Bartholomew) ; 2. p. 602 (Porto
Rico).—ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V, p. 169 (1880).—Cory,
Bds. Bahama I. p. 161 (1880).—A. & E. Newton, Handb. Jamaica,
p- 116 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).--WELLs, List
Bds. Grenada, p. 8 (1886).
Totanus voctferus LemMB. Aves Cuba, p. 93 (1850).—BREWER, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VIT, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).
Gambetta melanoleuca Scu. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT,
J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.
1864, p. 68 (Jamaica).— GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p.
354 (1866) ; 2. J. f. O. 1875, p. 323 (Cuba).—Lawre. Pr. U. S. Nat.
Mus. I, p. 238 (1878) (Antigua).—GuNnpbL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist.
VII, p. 370 (1878) (Porto Rico).
Glott?s melanoleuca GUNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 85 (Cuba).
Records from Bahamas, Cuba, Jamaica, Porto Rico, St. Bar-
tholomew, Antigua, and Grenada.
“Totanus flavipes (GMEL.).
Scolopax flavipes GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 659 (1788).
Min Seu taed Ors. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 234 (1840).
—GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 351 (1847).—BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat.
Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862. p. 205
(Jamaica).—BrRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 69 (1867) (Ba-
hamas).—SuNDEV. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 588 (St. Bar-
tholomew); 23. p. 602 (Porto Rico).—ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn.
Club, V, p. 169 (1880) (Santa Lucia).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p.
162 (1880).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 116 (1881).—
Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).—WELLs, List Bds. Grenada, p.
8, 1886.—Cory, Ibis, 1886, p. 502 (Grand Cayman).
Gambetta flavipes Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 68 (Jamaica).
—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 354 (1866).—Lawr. Ann.
Lyc. N. Y. VIII, p. 100 (1867) (Sombrero) ; 2d. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus.
I, p. 197 (1878) (St. Vincent) ; 7b. p. 242 (Barbuda).—GuNDL. Anal.
Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 371 (1878) (Porto Rico).
- Antilles in Winter.
3 18 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [October
“ Totanus solitarius (Wus.).
Tringa solitarta Wits. Am. Orn. VII, p. 53 (1813).
Totanus solitarius D’ORB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 238
(1840).—SuNDEV. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 587 (St. Bar-
tholomew); 26. p. 602 (Porto Rico).—A. & E. Newron, Handb.
Jamaica, p. 116 (1881).
Totanus chloropygius GOSsE, Bds. Jam. p. 350 (1847).—BREWER, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—GunNDL. J. f. O. 1862,
p- 86 (Cuba).
Phyacophilus solttartus Sci. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT,
J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.
1864, p. 67 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 355
(1886) ; 2d. J. f. O. 1874, p. 313 (Porto Rico) ; 2b. 1875, p. 324 (Cuba) ;
7b. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 372 (1878) (Porto Rico).—
Lawkr. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 238 (1878) (Antigua); 2. p. 242
(Barbuda); 7. p. 461 (Gaudeloupe).—ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn.
Club, V, p. 169 (1880) (Santa Lucia).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p.
27 (1885).
Records from Cuba, Jamaica, Porto Rico, Santa Lucia, An-
tigua, Barbuda, Gaudeloupe, and St. Bartholomew.
Genus Actitis ILLIGER.
Actit’s ILLIGER, Prodr. 1811, p. 262.
“Actitis macularia (Lryn.).
Tringa macularia LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 249 (1766).—BryYAnrt, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. X, p. 257 (1866) (Porto Rico).
Actitis macularius GOSSE, Bds. Jam. p. 349 (1847).
Totanus macularius LEMB. Aves Cuba, p. 94 (1850).
Tringoides macularia BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308
(1860) (Cuba).
Tringotdes macularius Sci. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 80 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT,
J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba,
I, p. 355 (1866) ; 2b. J. f. O. 1875, p. 325 (Cuba).—Sci. P. Z. S. 1872,
p- 653 (Santa Lucia).—Lawre. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 67 (1878)
(Dominica) ; 74. p. 197 (St. Vincent) ; 26. p. 276 (Grenada); 2d. p.
360 (Martinique).—GunpbL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 372
(1878) (Porto Rico).—ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V, p. 169
(1880) (Santa Lucia).—LisTErR, Ibis, 1880, p. 44 (St. Vincent).—
Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 162 (1880).—A. & E. NeEwron, Handb.
Jamaica, p. 115 (1881).—Cory, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, p. 154
(1881) (Haiti); 2. Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 148 (1885); 2d.
List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).—WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 8
(1886).
1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 319
Actitis macularia SUNDEV. Oefy. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 587 (St.
Bartholomew) ; zd. p. 602 (Porto Rico).
Antilles, common.
Genus Bartramia LEss.
Bartramia Lesson, Traite d’ Orn. p. 553, 1831.
“ Bartramia longicauda (Brcust.).
Tringa longicauda Becust. Vog. Nachtr. iibers. Lath. Ind. Orn. p. 453
(1812).
Totanus longicauda D’OrB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 237
(1840).
Tringoides bartramius BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308
(1860) (Cuba).
Euligia bartramia GUNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 86 (Cuba).
Actiturus bartramius Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 67 (Ja-
maica) ?P
Actiturus longicaudus GUNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 355 (1866) ;
z6. J. f. O. 1875, p. 326 (Cuba).
Actiturus longicaudatus GUNDL. J. f. O. 1881, p. 401 (Cuba).
Actiturus longicauda A. & E. Newton, Handb. Jamaica, p. 115 (1881).
Bartramia longtcauda Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 57 (1885).—WELLs, List
Bds. Grenada, p. 8 (1886).
Records from Cuba, Jamaica, and Grenada. I have seen a
specimen taken in the Bahama Islands.
Genus Tryngites Cas.
Tryngites CABANIS, J. f. O. 1856, p. 418.
' Tryngites subruficollis (VIErLt.).
Tringa subruficollis ViEILL. Nouv. Dict. XXXIV, p. 465 (1819).
Tringa rufescens ViEILL. Nouv. Dict. XXXIX, p. 470 (1819).—LEMB.
Aves Cuba, p. 99 (1850).—BREWER, Pr. Bost. Nat. Hist. VII, p.
308 (1860) (Cuba).
Tringites rufescens GUNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 355 (1866) ; 2d.
J. f. O. 1875, p. 325 (Cuba).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).
Accidental in Cuba.
Genus Numenius Linn.
Numenius LINN2ZUS, Syst. Nat. 1746.
320 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [October
“Numenius hudsonicus Laru.
Numenius hudsonicus Latu. Ind. Orn. II, p. 712 (1790).—Lawre. Ann.
Lyc. N. Y. VIII, p. roo (1867) (Sombrero) ; 76. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus.
I, p. 238 (1878) (Antigua) ; 2b. p. 242 (Barbuda) ; 7d. p. 277 (Grenada).
—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).—WELLS, List Bds. Grenada,
p- 8 (1886).
Numentius hudsontus GUNDL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 367 (1878)
(Porto Rico).
Winter visitant to the Antilles.
Numenius borealis (Forst.).
Scolopax boreal’s Forst. Phil. Trans. LXII, p. 411 (1772).
Numenius borealis GuNDL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 367 (1878)
(Porto Rico).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).—WELLs, List
Bds. Grenada, p. 8 (1886).
West Indies in winter ; reported from Porto Rico and Grenada.
‘Numenius longirostris Wits.
Numenius longirostris Wits. Am. Orn. VII, p. 24 (1814).—DeEnny,
P. Z. S. 1847 p. 39 (Jamaica).—Lrems. Aves Cuba, p. 88 (1850).—
BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—
Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 68 (Jamaica). — GuUNDL.
Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 352 (1866); 2b. J. f. O. 1875, p. 320
(Cuba).—Lawr. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 197 (1878) (St. Vincent).
—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 116 (1881).—Cory, List
Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).
Greater Antilles in winter.
Famity CICONIIDE.
Grnus Tantalus LINN.
Tantalus LINN=US, Syst. Nat. roth ed. 1758.
Tantalus loculator LInn. ¥
Tantalus loculator LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 240 (1766).—D’Ors. in La
Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 219 (1840).—Denny, P. Z. S.
1847, p- 39 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. J. f. O. 1856, p. 348 (Cuba).—
BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—
1887. | Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 321
GuNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 83 (Cuba) ; 2. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I,
,P- 351 (1866) ; zd. J. f. O. 1875, p. 313 (Cuba).—Cory, List Bds. W.
I. p. 27 (1885).
Recorded from Cuba and Jamaica.
Famity IBIDID/.
Genus Guara REIcu.
Guara REICHENBACH, Syst. Avium, 1852, p. xiv.
Guara alba (Linn.). v
Scolopax alba Linn. Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 145 (1758).
Ibis alba Denny, P. Z. S. 1847, p. 39 (Jamaica).—Lems. Aves Cuba, p.
86 (1850).
Endocimus albus BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860)
(Cuba).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 352 (1866); 2d.
J. f. O. 1875, p. 315 (Cuba); #6. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p.
364 (1878) (Porto Rico).—Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p.
150 (1885); 2b. List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).
Common in most of the Greater Antilles.
Guara rubra (Linvn.). ;
Tantalus ruber LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 241 (1766).
Ibis rubra D’OrB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 228 (1840).—
GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 348 (1847).—DrENnny, P. Z. S. 1847, p. 39
(Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 65 (Jamaica).
Endocimus ruber GuNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 83 (Cuba).—A. & E. Newron,
Handb. Jamaica, p. 112 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).
Recorded from Cuba and Jamaica.
Genus Plegadis Kaur.
Plegadis Kaur, Skizz. Entuv. Gesch. p. 82, 1829.
Plegadis. antummalis\(Hasseia.). ¥
Tringa autumnalts HASSELQ. Reise nach Palast Deutsch Ausq. 1762, p.
306. (38287) Bs .¢ .) W).ebal
Tantalus falctnellus LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 241 (1766).
Ibis falcinellus Lemp. Aves Cuba, Pp: 87, (1859) cars SE. Quy itt. wal
322 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [October
Falcinellus erythrorhynchus Cas. J. f. O. 1856, p. 349 (Cuba) ; 26. GuNDL.
1882, p. 84 (Cuba).
Faicinellus ordiit BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860)
(Cuba).—GuNpDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 352 (1866); 2d.
J. f. O. 1875, p. 318 (Cuba) ; 26. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p.
366 (1878) (Porto Rico).
Plegadis falcinellus Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 27 (1885).
Accidental in the Greater Antilles.
Plegadis guarauna (Linn.) is claimed to have occurred in
the West Indies, but I can find no satisfactory record of its
capture.
Famity Plataleide.
Genus Ajaja Reicu.
Ajaja REICHENBACH, Handb. xvi, 1851.
Ajaja ajaja (Linn.).*
Platalea ajaja LINN. Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 140 (1758); #5. 12th ed. p.
231 (1766).—D’Ors. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 216
(1840).—GosseE, Bds. Jam. p. 346 (1847).—GuNDL. J. f. O. 1856,
p- 347 (Cuba).—Bryant, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121
(1859) (Bahamas) ; 26. BREWER, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—ALBRECHT,
J. f. O. 1862, p. 206 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila.
1864, p- 65 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p.
351 (1866) ; zd. J. f. O. 1875, p. 311 (Cuba).—Lawr. Pr. U. S. Nat.
Mus. I, p. 275 (1878) (Grenada) (?).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p.
164 (1880).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 112 (1881).—
TRISTRAM, Ibis, 1884, p. 168 (San Domingo).
Platalea ajuga DENNY, P. Z. S. 1847, p. 39 (Jamaica).
Ajaja rosea Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 28 (1885).
Resident in the Bahamas and Greater Antilles.
Famity PHCENICOPTERID.
Genus Pheenicopterus Linn.
Phenicopterus LINNZUS, 1748; zb. Syst. Nat. I, p. 230, 1766.
1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies.
Oo
i)
ies)
Phoenicopterus ruber Linn. /,
Phenicopterus ruber LINN. Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 139 (1758); 2b. 12th
ed. p. 230 (1766).—GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 390 (1847).—DENNy, P. Z.
S. 1847, p. 39 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. J. f. O. 1856, p. 342 (Cuba).—
SALLE, P. Z. S. 1857, p. 236 (San Domingo).—BryYANT, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 121 (1859) (Bahamas); 2d. XI, p. 97 (1867)
(San Domingo); zd. Brewer, VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—
ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 206 (Jamaica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat.
Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 65 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat.
Cuba, I, p. 386 (1866); zd. J. f. O. 1874, p. 314 (Porto Rico) ; 2d.
1875, p. 368 (Cuba); zd. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 398
(1878) (Porto Rico).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 180 (1880).—A. &
E. Newton, Handb. Jamaica, p. 112 (1881).—Cory, Bull. Nutt.
Orn. Club, VI, p. 155 (1881) (Haiti).—Tristram, Ibis, 1884, p.
168 (San Domingo). — Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 165
(1885) ; 26. List Bds. W. 1. p. 28 (1885).
Resident and not uncommon in the Bahamas and Greater
Antilles.
Famity ARDEIDZ.
Genus Ardea LINN.
Ardea LINN&US, Syst. Nat. I, p. 233, 1766.
Ardea herodias Linn. *
Ardea herodias LINN. Syst. Nat. I, p. 237 (1766).—D’Ors. in La Sagra’s
Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 199 (1840).—Gossr, Bds. Jam. p. 346
(1847).—A. & E. Newron, Ibis, 1859, p. 263 (St. Croix) (?).—
Bryant, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 120 (1859) (Bahamas) ;
zb. BREWER, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—Sci. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 81
(Jamaica).—GuNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 82 (Cuba).—Marcun, Pr.
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 63 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert.
Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 347 (1866).—Lawre. Ann. Lyc. N. Y. VIII,
p- 98 (1867) (Sombrero).—SunpEv. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For.
1869, p. 589 (St. Bartholomew) ; 2d. p. 602 (Porto Rico).—GuNDL.
J. f. O. 1875, p. 296 (Cuba).—Lawre. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 196
(1878) (St. Vincent); 2d. p. 236 (Antigua) ; 2. p. 240 (Barbuda) ;
zb. p. 274 (Grenada) ; zd. p. 359 (Martinique).— GuNbL. Anal. Soc.
Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 352 (1878) (Porto Rico).—Scxi. P. Z. S.
1879, p- 765 (Montserrat).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 166 (1880).—
A. & E. Newton, Handb. Jamaica, p. 111 (1881).—Cory, List Bds.
W. I. p. 28 (1885).—WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 9 (1886).
Ardea herodias ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 206 (Jamaica).
324 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [October
This species ranges throughout the West Indies.
Ardea occidentalis Aup. /”
Ardea occidentalis Aup. Orn. Biog. III, p. 542 (1835).—LeEmB. Aves
Cuba, p. 82 (1850).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p.
63 (Jamaica).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 111 (1881).—
Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 28 (1885).
Hlerodias occidentalis BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VIII, p. 308
(1860) (Cuba).
?Ardea wurdemannit Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 64
(Jamaica).
Audubonia occtdentalis GuNbDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 348
(1866); 2d. J. f. O. 1874, p. 313 (Porto Rico); 2b. 1875, p. 298
(Cuba) ; #2. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 354 (1878) (Porto
Rico).
Recorded from Porto Rico, Cuba, and Jamaica.
Ardea egretta GMEL. »
Ardea egretta GMEL. Syst. Nat. I, p. 629 (1788).—Bryant, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VIII, p. 120 (1859) (Bahamas) ; 2d. X, p. 257 (1866)
(Porto Rico).—Sunp. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 602
(Porto Rico).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 167 (1880).—A. & E
NewrTon, Handb. Jamaica, p. 111 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I.
p- 28 (1885).
Ardea alba D’OrRB. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 191 (1840).
Egretta luce GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 346 (1847) (?).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 206 (Jamaica).
Ardea abba DENNY, P. Z. S. 1847, p- 39 (Jamaica).
Herodias egretta GUNDL. J. f. O. 1856, p. 341 (Cuba).—BrREweErR, Pr.
Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).—Scr. P. Z. S.
1861, pp. 70, 80 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Ja-
maica).—Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 63 (Jamaica).
—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 348 (1866); zd. J. f. O.
1875, p. 299 (Cuba).—Lawre. Pr. U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 241 (1878)
(Barbuda) (?).—GunpL. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VIII, p. 355
(1878) (Porto Rico).
Herodias luce SALLE,.P. Z. S. 1857, p. 236 (San Domingo).
Ardea leuce BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 97 (1867) (San
Domingo).
Bahamas and Greater Antilles.
Ardea candidissima GMEL.”
Ardea candidissima GMEL. Syst. Nat. IT, p. 633 (1788).—D’Ors. in La
Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 196 (1840).—BryantT, Pr. Bost.
1837-] Cory on the Birds of the West Ludies. 325
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p..120 (1859) (Bahamas) ; 2d. XI, p. 97 (1867)
(San Domingo).—Sct. P. Z. S. 1879, p. 765 (Montserrat).—Cory,
Bds. Bahama I. p. 167 (1880).—A. & E. Newton, Handb. Jamaica,
p. 111 (1881).—Cory, Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p. 153 (1885) ;
ib. List Bds. W. I. p. 28 (1885).—TRiIsTRAM, Ibis, 1884, p. 168
(San Domingo).
Egretta candidissima Gossk, Bds. Jam. p. 336 (1847).—Marcu, ier
Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 63 (Jamaica).
Herodtas candidissima SALLt, P. Z. S. 1857, p. 236 (San Domingo).—
Brewer, Pr. Bost. Soc Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860) (Cuba).
Garzetta candidissima Sci. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 81 (Jamaica).—ALBRECHT,
J. f. O. 1862, p. 205 (Jamaica).—GuNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba,
I, p. 349 (1866); ‘2b. J. f. O. 1875, p. 304 (Cuba); 2b. Anal. Soc.
Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p. 357 (1878) (Porto Rico).—Lawr. Pr. U. S.
Nat. Mus. I, p. 66 (1878) (Dominica); 2b. p. 196 (St. Vincent) ;
ib. p. 236 (Antigua); 7b. p. 274 (Grenada).—WELLs, List Bds.
Grenada, p. 9 (1886).
Bahamas and Antilles.
Ardea rufa Bopp.
Ardea rufa Bopp. Tabl. P. E. p. 54 (1783).—Cory, Bds. Bahama Is fe
170 (1880).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. II! (1881).—
Cory, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, VI, p. 154 (1881) (Haiti); 2. Bds.
Haiti & San Domingo, p. 152 (1885); ¢b. List Bds. W. I. p. 28
(1885). .
Ardea rufescens LemB. Aves Cuba, p. 83 (1850).
Ardea cubensis LemB. Aves Cuba, p. 84 (1850).
Herodias rufescens BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p, 308 (1860)
(Cuba).—GuNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 82 (Cuba).
Herodias pealii BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860)
(Cuba).—GunbL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 82 (Cuba).
Dimigretta rufa Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 63 ( Jamaica).
Demiegretta rufa GUNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 348 (1866) ; 2d.
J. f. O. 1875, p. 302 (Cuba).
Demiegretta pealit GUNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 348 (1866) ;
7b. J. f. O. 1875, p. 301 (Cuba).
Bahamas and Greater Antilles.
rd
Ardea cezrulea LINN. ”
Ardea cerulea LINN. Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 143 (1758); 20. 12th ed. p.
238 (1766). —D’Ors. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 201
(1840). — Denny, P. Z. S. 1847, p. 36 (Jamaica). — BRYANT, Br
Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 120 (1859) (Bahamas); 2b. X, p. 257
(1866) (Porto Rico). —Taytor, Ibis, 1864, p. 171 (Porto Rico) .—
326 Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. [October
SuNDEV. Oefv. K. Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 588 (St. Bartholomew) ;
2b. p. 602 (Porto Rico). — ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, V, p. 169
(1880) (Santa Lucia).—Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 171 (1880).—A. &
E. Newton, Handb. Jamaica, p. 111 (1881). — Cory, Bull. Nutt.
Orn. Club, VI, p. 155 (1881) (Haiti) ; 7b. Bds. Haiti & San Domin-
go, p. 154 (1885); 2b. List. Bds. W. I. p. 28 (1885). — TRISTRAM,
Ibis, 1884, p. 168 (San Domingo).
‘‘Egretta nivea Gosse, Bds. Jam. p. 334 (1847)”?
Egretta cerulea Gosse, Bds. Jam. p. 337 (1847).
Herodias cerulea BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860)
(Cuba).—GunDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 83 (Cuba).
Florida cerulea Scu. P. Z. S. 1861, p. 81 ( Jamaica).—ALBRECHT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 205 (Jamaica). — Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864,
p- 62 (Jamaica).—GuNpbL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 349
(1866) ; 2b. J. f. O. 1875, p. 305 (Cuba); 2b. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist.
Nat. VII, p. 357 (1878) (Porto Rico).— Lawr. Pr. U. S. Nat. Mus.
I, p. 66 (1878) (Dominica); 2b. p. 196 (St. Vincent); 2b. p. 236
(Antigua); zd. p. 241 (Barbuda); zb. p. 274 (Grenada); 7b. p. 359
(Martinique).—WELLs, List Bds. Grenada, p. g (1886).
Bahamas and Antilles.
Ardea virescens Linn. ¥
Ardea virescens LINN. Syst. Nat. I, roth ed. p. 144 (1758); zb. 12th ed.
p- 238 (1766). —D’Ors. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 203
(1840).—DeEnny, P. Z. S. 1847 p. 39 ( Jamaica).—Bryanr, Pr. Bost.
Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 120 (1859) (Bahamas). — SUNDEv. Oefv. K.
Vet. Akad. For. 1869, p. 589 (St. Bartholomew) ; 28. p. 602 (Porto
Rico).— Cory, Bds. Bahama I, p. 171 (1880); 7. Bull. Nutt. Orn.
Club, VI, p. 155 (1881) (Haiti); 2. Bds. Haiti & San Domingo, p.
155 (1885); 2b. List Bds. W. I. p. 28 (1885).—TRIsTRAM, Ibis, 1884,
p. 168 (San Domingo). — Cory, Ibis, 1886, pp. 472, 474, 475 (Bar-
badoes, La Desirade and Grand Terre) ; 76, Auk, III, p. 502 (1886)
(Grand Cayman).
Herodias virescens GossE, Bds. Jam. p. 340 (1847). — ALBRECHT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 205 ( Jamaica).
Butorides virescens SALLE, P. Z. S. 1857, p. 236 (San Domingo). — A. &
E. NewrTon, Ibis, 1859, p. 261 (St. Croix). — Cassin, Pr. Acad.
Nat. Sci. Phila. 1860, p. 378 (St. Thomas) ; 7. Marcu, 1864, p. 64
(Jamaica).— Sex. P. Z. S. 1871, p. 273 (Santa Lucia).—Lawr. Pr.
U.S. Nat. Mus. I, p. 66 (1878) (Dominica); #4. p. 196 (St. Vin-
cent); zb. p. 236 (Antigua); 72. p. 241 (Barbuda); 72d. p. 275
(Grenada); 7b. p. 359 (Martinique); 7d. p. 460 (Guadeloupe). —
Sct. P. Z. S. 1879, p. 765 (Montserrat). — ALLEN, Bull. Nutt. Orn.
Club, V, p. 169 (1880) (Santa Lucia). — LisrEr, Ibis, 1880, p. 44 ~
(St. Vincent).—A. & E. Newron, Handb. Jamaica, p. 111 (1881).—
WELLS, List Bds. Grenada, p. 9 (1886).
1887.] Cory on the Birds of the West Indies. 327
Ocniscus virescens BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860)
(Cuba). — GunpL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p, 349 (1866) ; 2.
J. f. O. 1875, p. 307 (Cuba); 7d. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII, p.
359 (1878) (Porto Rico).
Butorides brunnescens? Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 64
( Jamaica).
Ardea (Butorides) virescens BRYANT, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XI, p. 97
(1867) (San Domingo).
Common throughout the Bahamas and Antilles.
Ardea brunnescens ‘‘GuNDL.”
Ardea brunnescens ‘‘GuNDL. Mss.” — Lems. Aves Cuba, p. 84 (1850).—
REIcu. J. f. O. 1877, p. 255.—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 28 (1885).
Ocniscus brunnescens Cap. J. f. O. 1856, p. 344. — BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc.
Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860). — GuNpDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba,
I, p. 350 (1866) ; 7. J. f. O. 1875, p. 308.
Butorides brunnescens BARD, Bds. N. Am. p. 677 (1858); 26. Cat. Am.
Bds. No. 494 (1859).—GuNnpL. Ann. N. Y. Lyc. Nat. Hist. 1862, p.
271.—Gray, Handl. Bds. III, p. 32 (1871). —Bp. Bwr. & Ripew.
Hist. N. Am. W. Bds. I, p. 49 (1884).
Sp. CHar. — Pilium and occipital crest greenish black, showing a green
gloss in the light; whole throat and neck rich rufous brown, show-
ing a tinge of orange brown on the chin; back feathers slaty gray;
wing-coverts not margined with white, but showing slight brown-
ish edgings; otherwise resembling A. vzrescens.
Length, 19.00; wing, 6.50; tail, 2.75; tarsus, 2.10; bill, 2.60.
HasiratT. Cuba.
Ardea tricolor ruficollis (Gossr). “
Ardea leucogastra D’Ors. in La Sagra’s Hist. Nat. Cuba, Ois. p. 200
(1840). ‘
Egretta ruficollis Gossx, Bds. Jam. p. 338 (1847). — ALBRECHT, J. f. O.
1862, p. 205 ( Jamaica).
Herodias ludoviciana BREWER, Pr. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. VII, p. 308 (1860)
(Cuba).
Herodias ruficollis GUNDL. J. f. O. 1862, p. 83? (Cuba).
Demiegretta ludoviciana Marcu, Pr. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila. 1864, p. 63
( Jamaica).
Demiegretta ruficollis GUNDL. Repert. Fisico-Nat. Cuba, I, p. 348 (1866) ;
ib. J. f. O. 1875, p. 303 (Cuba); 2b. Anal. Soc. Esp. Hist. Nat. VII,
p- 356 (1878) (Porto Rico).
Ardea leucogastra var. leucoprymna Cory, Bds. Bahama I. p. 168 (1880).
Ardea ludoviciana A. & E. Newton, Handb. Jamaica, p. 111 (1881).
Ardea tricolor Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 28 (1885).
328 BLAKE on Birds of Santa Cruz Island, Cal. [ October
Ardea cyantrostris Cory, Bds. Bahama I, p. 168 (1880). — ALLEN, Bull.
Nutt. Orn. VII, p. 21 (1881).—Cory, List Bds. W. I. p. 28 (1885).
‘Ardea tricolor ruficollis Cory, Auk, III, p. 502 (1886).
Common in the Bahama Islands and Greater Antilles (breeds).
In originally naming A. cyanzrostrzs I considered it distinct
from A. rauficollis, from the totally different coloration of the
bill and legs supposed to occur only in the breeding season.
Since that time specimens have been taken in the winter months
representing this same state of plumage. A. ¢rzcolor undoubt-
edly assumes a.yellow bill during most of the year, even if
Audubon was wrong in his statement to the effect that it had
a yellow bill in the breeding season. It is probable that the
two birds are identical, but it is also possible that the Bahama
bird may be distinct, and colonies occasionally wander to Flori-
da, where it has been found breeding. This would account for
the blue-billed specimens being taken in Florida, and would not
prove its specific identity with A. ¢rzcolor.
SUMMER BIRDS OF SANTA CRUZ ISLAND,
CALIFORNIA.
BY ELI WHITNEY BLAKE, JR.
Tue island of Santa Cruz is the second in size of the Santa
Barbara group; it is twenty-four miles in length by about six in
breadth, and lies twenty-three miles off shore, directly opposite
the town of Santa Barbara. In general character the island is
mountainous’ witha’ comparatively “level “valley between © ‘two
lofty ridges near its centre; _the,. highest, peaks. are, 2690, feet
above the sea. Santa Cruz is of course, very dry .in2summer,
although there. is water..in some; ofothe,caitons throughout the
year. It is owned by a stock company and is used as a sheep
ranch; the herders constitute the only human inhabitants. My
stay upon the island comprised two visits, extendipg from July
4 to July 24, and from August 6 to September 3. Our camp
wasin.a cafionnear: Platts’ Harbor, on the northern side of the
island. n
1) Gepphus “éotutnba: | 'Preron GUiLLenor. _ ap utes ‘along. the
rocky shores up to July 245 none seen during my, second visit. + Probably
te VL wG 20
breeds. ; Ay aN
SS es a ee
1887. ] BLAKE ox Birds of Santa Cruz Island, Cal. 329
2. Larus occidentalis. WrEsTERN GULL.—Extremely abundant; nests
on the isolated rocks along shore. Foufid many young.
3. Larus heermanni. HEERMANN’S GULL.—Less common than the
preceding. Probably breeds; saw many young in the dark plumage.
4. Sterna maxima. RoyaL TERN.—Seen once.
5. Phalacrocorax penicillatus. BRANDT’s CoRMORANT.—Abundant
along shore; nests on isolated rocks.
6. Phalacrocorax pelagicus resplendens. Bairp’s CORMORANT.—Less
common than the preceding; probably breeds.
7. Pelecanus californicus. CALIFORNIA BROwN PELICAN.—Common
off shore after August 14; none seen before that date. Very shy.
8. Ardea herodias. GREAT BLUE HERON.—Not uncommon along th
rocky shores.
g. Heteractitis incanus. WANDERING TATTLER.—Common along
the rocks.
1o. Arenaria melanocephala. BLAcK TuRNSTONE.—Not uncommon
after August 21. Taken on San Miguel in July by Mr. Streator, of Santa
Barbara; these observations add 200 miles to the southerly range of the
species as stated in the A. O. U. ‘Check List.’
11. Hzmatopus bachmani. BLAcK OysTERCATCHER.—Common, and
by no means shy; breeds on the outlying rocks.
12. Zenaidura macroura. MourninG Dove.—Common in the
wooded cafions.
13. Halizetus leucocephalus. BALD EAGLE.—Perhaps eight or nine
different individuals seen and three empty nests, on island rocks.
14. Ceryle alcyon. BeLTED KINGFISHER.—Common along shore.
15- Colaptes FLICKER.—The Flicker of the island differs from
typical cafer in that the scarlet malar patches of the male are replaced by
cinnamon in the female; there is also other rusty-brown about the head;
legs pale lilac. Not uncommon in the wooded cafions.
16. Trochilus rufus. Rurous HUMMINGBIRD.—Very common.
17. Sayornis nigricans. BLAcK PHaBE.—Common along the well-
watered cafions.
18. Empidonax difficilis. BAirp’s FLYCATCHER.—Very common up
to July 24; nests in rocky caves; three or four nests found in this position.
1g. Otocoris alpestris ——. Hornep LarK.—A variety of this bird
inhabits the more exposed portions of the island; the worn and bleached
plumage of my specimens precludes the possibility of determining them
exactly.
20. Aphelocoma insularis. ISLAND JAy.—By far the commonest land-
bird of the island, and familiar to the verge of impudence. General
habits like those of its near relatives on the mainland. Several nests
which must have belonged to this species were placed in trees or bushes
between six and thirty feet from the ground. They exhibited no marked
peculiarity of construction.
21. Corvus corax sinuatus. AMERICAN RAVEN.—Very common; feeds
on the dead sheep. Nests on inaccessible cliffs, often at some distance
from the sea.
330 CoALE on a New Subspecies of Funco. [ October
22. Carpodacus frontalis rhodocolpus. Crimson House Fincu.—
Quite common up to the middle of August. Nests in caves; one nest,
containing three fresh eggs, found July 13.
23. Spizella socialis arizonz. WESTERN CHIPPING SPARROW.—Not
uncommon.
24. Pipilo maculatus megalonyx. SPURRED TOWHEE.—Very common
in the hillside thickets.
25. Chelidon erythrogaster. BARN SwALLow.—Very common; nests
in caves.
26. Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides. WHITE-RUMPED SHRIKE.—
Extremely common.
27. Helminthophila celata lutescens. LuresceENT WARBLER.—Not
uncommon in the wooded cafions.
Notre.—I may also mention a small Wren, somewhat like Thkryothorus
bewickii spilurus, but with gray under-parts, wings faintly barred, and
superciliary stripe obscure. It is very common in the cafions, and has
a sweet song.
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SUBSPECIES OF JUNCO
FROM NEW MEXICO.
BY HENRY K. COALE.
Junco hyemalis shufeldti, sub. sp. nov.
Type, No. 106,035, Nat. Mus. Ad. ¢, Fort Wingate, N. M.,
Oct. 13, 1885; Dr. Robert W. Shufeldt, U. S. A.
Wishing to investigate a supposed difference in plumage
between northern and southern California Juncos, I wrote to
Professor Ridgway for the loan of some specimens of Fusco
hyemalis oregonus, which he kindly sent me. I could not
make out what I hoped to in regard to the California bird, but
five specimens from New Mexico at once attracted my attention.
They were larger than the west coast specimens, with a peculiar
mottling about the head and no distinct separation of the colors
of the back and neck. Referring the matter to Professor Ridg-
way he writes: ‘‘I have examined carefully the specimens of
Funco hyemalis oregonus, and agree with you that there are
two well marked races. The wxnzamed one is that from the
interior. This I am able to determine positively by examination
of the original specimen collected by Townsend, and the basis
of his Fringilla oregona, which is in our [Nat. Mus.] col-
lection.”
1887.] COALE ox Ornithological Curiosities. 25
AVERAGE MEASUREMENTS OF FIVE AD. @ SPECIMENS FROM CALIFORNIA.
Wing Tail Trs. Bill
Funco hyemalis oregonus : . 2.91 2.62 Sy fii -40
Four AD. ¢@ SPECIMENS FROM ForT WINGATE, N. M.
Funco hyemalis shufeldti : : sala 2.89 73 43
THREE AD. 2 SPECIMENS FROM CALIFORNIA.
Funco hyemalis oregonus : ° 2.74 2.44 Sih -40
ONE AD. 9 FROM ForT WINGATE, N. M.
Funco hyemalis shufeldt: : : 2.02 2.87 72 .42
Description.
Funco hyemalis oregonus. Coast specimens, California. Adult males.
Head and neck all round dull black, sharply defined from colors of the
body; back clear rusty; rump slate; central rectrices dull black, slaty
edges; belly and breast white; two outer rectrices white; a narrow white
streak on inner web of third feather; faint rusty wash on sides. Bill
and legs light.—Female. Head dull slaty black, blending with rusty color
of back; sides quite rusty; outer tail-feather white; second with broad
white streak.
Funco hyemalis shufeldtiv. Fort Wingate, New Mexico. Adult males.
Head dull black; neck mottled and fading into dull brown on back and
scapulars, which in turn fades into dark slate on rump and upper tail-cov-
erts. Tail darker; two outer rectrices pure white; third with white streak
on inside web, in several extending to end of feather. Centre of breast
and belly white; sides slaty rufous.—Female. Colors more subdued, with
more of the rufous washing on sides. A specimen in my collection (Mus.
H. K. C. No., 7321) §, shot at Waukegan, IIll., Feb. 20, 1887, appears to
be of this species. Measurements: Wing, 3.05; tail, 2.75; tarsus .74;
bill, .g40. Head and neck mottled and sides washed with rusty. Some
sixty skins of the common FYunco hyemalzs taken at the same time do not
show these characteristics, but agree with the typical hyemadzs.
It gives me pleasure to name this new variety in honor of my
esteemed friend Dr. Robert W. Shufeldt, U. S. A., who col-
lected and presented the specimens to the National Museum.
ORNITHOLOGICAL CURIOSITIES.—A HAWK WITH
NINE TOES, AND A BOBOLINK WITH SPURS
ON ITS WINGS.
BY HENRY K. COALE.
In presenting the following illustrations I wish to thank my
friends who have kindly assisted me—Mr. Jos. L. Hancock, who
332 CoaLE on Ornithological Curiosities. [ October
made the original drawings from the specimens; Mr. Henry L.
Fulton, who transferred the drawings to the engraver’s block, and
Mr. Fred. Erby, the engraver, whose generosity I especially
appreciate, as he refused to take a cent for his skilful handiwork,
although the order was given him to make the woodcut and send
in his bill.
During the past fifteen years, I
have devoted about two weeks in
spring, a few days in fall, and a day
or two in summer and winter in col-
lecting birdskins. Out ofsome eight
thousand specimens preserved I have
only met with two abnormally de-
veloped individuals.
‘*No. 5924(Mus. H. K.C.), Buteo
latisstmus (Wiails.), Broad - winged
Hawk. @ shot in small woods half-
mile S. E. of Grand Crossing, Ill.,
Sept. 6, 1884. Length, 14.75; ex-
tent, 32.50. Legs and feet yellow.
Bill black, cere greenish. Iris yel-
lowish buff. Stomach contained
crayfish.”
I regret that I did not send the fresh
specimen in alcohol to Dr. Shufeldt
for examination ; a few critical notes
from his pen would have been valu-
able in the present paper. I simply
noted the following: The extra toe
(of which the illustration is a per-
fect representation) grew out from the
thigh, just above the ankle joint. It
was not connected with the bone, but
could be moved in any direction,
seeming to grow from the muscles of
the thigh. The upper bone slightly
curved ; one movable joint, a straight
bone, and a perfect, movable claw.
Color yellow, claw black, like the
normal toes.
RIGHT LEG, INSIDE VIEW.
NATURAL SIZE,
on
1837. ] Recent Literature. 333
Professor Ridgway writes (1884) that the only bird in the
National Museum collection having abnormal toes is a Gull. It
is evidently a thing of rare occurrence, and further light on the
subject from other collectors would be of interest.
‘‘No. 7685 (Mus. H. K. C.), Dolichonyx oryzivorus (Linn.),
Bobolink, &. Prairie, 1 mile west of S. Englewood, III., May
24, 1887.” While collecting prairie birds with Mr. Amos W.
Butler, I shot this specimen. On each wing is a horny spur,
growing from the thumb tip.
The illustration shows the left wing, natural size. In both
wings the spurs are exactly alike. We secured some twenty-
three males and ten females the same day (Bobolinks being a
rarity with Mr. Butler). This was the only specimen having
spurs on the wings.
RECENT LITERATURE,
Ridgway’s ‘Manual of North American Birds.’*—The late Professor
Baird long since projected a work on North American Birds which should
serve as a manual and handy reference work for the sportsman and trav-
eller as well as the naturalist. His great responsibilities and engrossing
public duties, however, ‘‘precluded the possibility of his completing the
work which he had so long cherished. and had even begun, when called
to the high positions which hehas filled with so much advantage to science
and honor to himself.” The work was therefore very naturally and fit-
tingly intrusted to his pupil and collaborator in previous works on the
* A | Manual | of | North American Birds. | By | Robert Ridgway. | — | Illustrated
by 464 outline drawings of the | generic characters. | — | Philadelphia: | J. B. Lippin-
cott Company. | 1887.—Royal 8vo. pp. i-xi, 1-631. pll. i-cxxiv. (Reviewed from ad-
vance sheets, received from the Publishers, Aug. 5, 1887.)
334 Pecent Literature. [October
same subject and his successor as Curator of the Department of Birds in
the United States National Museum. It is needless to say that the work
could scarcely have fallen into more trustworthy hands.
The object of the work, as stated in the preface, ‘‘is to furnish a con-
venient manual of North American Ornithology, reduced to the smallest
compass, by the omission of everything that is not absolutely necessary
for determining the character of any given specimen, and including,
besides the current nomenclature of each species, a statement of its nat-
ural habitatand other concomitant data.” Consequently the volume is
made up of a series of analytical keys, covering all the various grades of
groups from orders to subspecies. Under each genus, in case it contains
more than a single species, are given the characters common to all the
species, followed by the distinctive features of the various species and sub-
species. In this way reiteration is reduced to a minimum, and the text
compressed to the smallest practicable amount. In addition to the es-
sential characters of the species and subspecies, however, their various
stages of plumage are concisely indicated. The strictly biographical mat-
ter consists of a brief statement of the character of the nest and eggs,
and the habitat.
The classification, nomenclature, and numeration ‘‘correspond strictly
with the ‘Check List of North American Birds’ published by the Ameri-
can Ornithologists’ Union.” The species added or described since the
publication of the ‘Check List’ have, however, been interpolated in their
proper places, and besides these many extra-limital species have been in-
cluded, but are distinguished from the strictly North American by being
given in smaller type and without numeration. The geographical limits,
so faras the numbered species are concerned, are those of the A. O. U.
‘Check List’; ‘‘but practically these limits have been enlarged so as to in-
clude all the species known to inhabit Socorro Island, off the coast of
Northwestern Mexico, which is decidedly Mearctic, or North American,
in its zodlogical affinities, while in many cases other extra-limital species
have been included, for the sake of comparison and also on account of the
greater or less probability of their occurrence within the southern boun-
dary of the United States,” or in Alaska. These extra-limital species,
however, include many not likely to be found within the United States,
since the Mexican, Central American, Cuban, and Bahaman species of
characteristically North American genera, and the genera of these regions
belonging to North American families, are also embraced, as are also all
the species of the order Tubinares belonging to genera which have
representatives in North American waters. While these inclusions, ap-
parently several hundred in number, have greatly increased not only the
size of the work but the labor of preparing it, they add immensely to its
value and interest.
The ‘Manual’ is based primarily upon the collection of the National
Museum, but all the leading ornithological collections of the country, both
public and private, have been drawn upon for additional material, includ-
ing some unique and many type specimens, for which due acknowl-
1887. ] Recent Literature. 335
edgements are made, as well as to Dr. Leonhard Stejneger for aid in set-
tling vexed questions of synonymy and difficult problems of relationship.
The nearly 500 outline drawings of generic characters are grouped at the
end of the volume in 124 plates.
It appears from the ‘Appendix’ (pp. 591-594) that four new subgenera,
and thirty-nine new species and subspecies are described in the work, of
which fourteen of the species and subspecies are from North America, as
defined in the A. O. U. ‘Check-List’; the rest being from Mexico, Cen-
tral America, and the Bahamas. Besides the fourteen species and sub-
species described as new to North America, ¢h7rty-ove others not included
in the A. O.U. ‘Check-List,’ are given as North Americans; eight of
these are introduced species; eleven have been described since the publi-
cation of the ‘Check-List’*; seven have been added on the ground of
actual capture since the ‘Check-List’ appeared, and four are forms ignored
as nominal in making up the ‘Check-List.’ On the other hand, two recog-
nized in the ‘Check-List’ are here ‘‘cancelled.” It further appears that
twelve technical names have undergone change, usually through the dis-
covery of tenable names given prior to those adopted in the ‘ Check-List,’
but in some instances through corrections of indentification.
ttstrelata gularis of the ‘Check-List’ becomes @. scalarzs Brewst. ;
Somateria mollissima becomes S: m. borealis (Brehm), the American
form being now considered subspecifically distinct from the European;
Ardea rufa becomes A. rufescens Gm., the name rufa proving to be pre-
occupied; the subgenus Wyctherodius becomes Vyctznassa Stejn., the
former name being preoccupied; the subgenus Rhyacophilus is replaced
by Helodromas Kaup; the genus Ulula becomes Scoftiapftex Sw., the use
of the name U/ula, in this connection, having been found to be an error;
Dryobates scalaris is now D. s. batrdié (Scl.), the form in question prov-
ing to be not true scalaris; D. stricklandi becomes D. artzone (Harg.)
(see Auk, III, p. 426); Contopus borealis is made the type of a new sub-
genus Wuttallornis; Molothrus eneus is placed in the genus Cadlothrus
Cass.; Pinicola enucleator appears once more as P. e. canadensis (Cab.) ;
Carpodacus frontalis becomes C. mexicanus frontalis; for the genus Cer-
thiola it is proposed (in the ‘Appendix,’ p. 590) to substitute the name
Cereba, on the ground of priority.
The ‘new’ species and subspecies characterized as North American are
Coccyzus americanus occidentalis, from ‘‘Western United States, north to
Oregon, east to New Mexico and Colorado, south over table-lands of Mex-
ico”; Coccyzus maynard?, ‘‘Bahamas and Florida Keys”; Aphelocoma
californica hypoleucus, ‘‘Lower California”; Corvus corax principalis
=Corvus carnivorus Bartr., ‘‘ nomen nudum” (but what is the objec-
tion to C. corax carntvorus (Bd.)?); Corvus americanus hesperus,
‘‘Western United States, north to Washington Territory (Puget Sound),
Idaho, Montana, etc., south to Northern Mexico, east to Rocky Moun-
* Exclusive of one described in ‘The Auk’ for July, 1887—too late doubtless for notice
in the ‘ Manual.’
336 Leecent Literature. | October
tains”; Agelaius pheniceus sonoriensis, ‘‘Northwestern Mexico and
Lower Colorado Valley, in Southern California and Arizona; south to
Mazatlan”; Agelaius phantceus bryanti, ‘Bahamas and Southern Florida
(Miami, Key West, etc.)”; Pénicola enucleator kadtaka, ‘Kodiak to Sitka,
Alaska,” and “‘probably southward to higher Sierra Nevada of California” ;
Carpodacus mexicanus (frontalis in the text, p. 291) ruberrimus (provis-
ionally separated) Lower California; Plectrophenax nivalis towensendi,
‘‘Prybilof Islands, Alaska, and Commander Islands, Kamtschatka”’; Passe-
rina versicolor pulchra, ‘Lower California and Western Mexico”; Lanzus
ludovicianus gambel1, ‘‘California, especially coast district”; Phalenopti-
lus nuttalli californicus (provisionally separated), Northern California ;
Parus stoneyt, Northwestern Alaska.
Old forms rejected from the ‘Check-List’ but here reinstated are Cyano-
cttta stelleri annectens Bd., Gutraca cerulea eurhyncha Cs., Progne cryp-
toleuca Bd., Vireo gilvus swatnsoni Bd., and Columbigallina passerina pal-
lescens Bd. The twoexcluded are Carfodacus frontalis rhodocolpus (now
believed to be merely an individual color-phase), and Peuc@a arizone
Ridgw.= P. mexicanus (Lawr.).
Colinus virginianus cubanensts is accredited to ‘‘Cuba and Southwestern
Florida,” and is hence enumerated as North American.
A copious and carefully prepared index closes the volume, which must
long reflect honor upon its author.—J. A. A.
Olphe-Galliard’s Ornithology of Western Europe.*—In this work the
veteran French ornithologist deposits the results of the labors and studies
of a long and useful life. The plan is one of considerable magnitude, in-
asmuch as he contemplates giving not only full descriptions, synomy-
mies, and biographies of all the species inhabiting Southwestern Europe
(embracing Portugal and Spain, with the Azores and the Baleares,
France, French Switzerland, all the country to the west of the Rhine,
and the English Channel Islands) but also such species as are nearly
related to, or may be easily confounded with, the birds inhabiting the region
particularly treated of. In this way the account of several genera has
grown into monographs which will be found to contain material useful
also to other ornithologists than those who are most directly interested
in the particular ornis referred to.
The work will be issued in 40 parts, or fascicules, each comprising one
or more groups or families, and each one is separately paged. This is
certainly a great drawback, but was necessary in order to secure a speedy
publication, as the parts are issued immediately after having been finished
* Contributions |a la|Faune Ornithologique | de | L’Europe Occidentale | —
Recueil | comprenant | les espéces d’oiseaux qui se reproduisent dans cette région |
ou qui s’y montrent réguliérement de passage | augmenté | de la description des
principales espéces exotiques | les plus voisines des indigénes | ou susceptibles d’étre
confondues avec elles | ainsi que l'’énumération des races domestiques | Par Léon
Olphe-Galliard.—8°
1887.] Recent Literature. 337
by the author irrespective of their place in the system. On the other
hand, the arrangement is convenient to those who only want to purchase
some of the monographs, as each fascicule is sold separately.
In our days of systematic uncertainty it is perhaps not to be wondered
at that Mr. Olphe-Galliard still in the main adheres to the ‘‘natural
system” which he proposed just thirty years ago, in pre-Darwinian times.
It commences with the swimmers, runs through waders, birds of prey,
Scansores, and Passeres, to Pigeons and game birds, and ends with the
Ostriches, the object being to establish a lineal system which. would
represent the birds as forming a continuous chain between the ‘‘lower
vetebrates” and the mammals.
American ornithologists*will note with satisfaction that Mr. Olphe-
Galliard has selected the year 1758 for his starting point in regard to the
nomenclature, and that he declares for a strict adherance to the law of
priority. We remark, however, that he adopts generic names previously
applied in another class of animals, a course opposite to most previous
codes of nomenclature, and also to Canon XXXIIJI, A. O. U. Code. Nor
is the law of priority always respected as it ought to be. For instance,
he accepts Clzvicola of Forster as the older name, but refuses to recognize
the same author’s genera Hzrundo and Chelzdon, though their status in
regard to Boie’s subsequent appellations is exactly the same as that of
Clivicola.
Want of space prevents us from entering into a detailed review, which
may be reserved until the whole work is concluded. That the latest
sources have not always been accessible to the author is hardly to be
criticized when we know that the work has been prepared ina small pro-
vincial town far from the great libraries and museums. On the other
hand, it is but just to mention that the author’s great familiarity with
foreign languages and literature is shown to great advantage throughout
the book, and is the more to be appreciated since it is of so rare occurrence
among the French ornithologists.
France has contributed very little to European ornithology during re-
cent years, and the present work is really the only larger contribution
since the publication of Degland and Gerbe’s ‘Ornithologie Européenne’
twenty years ago.
The present work appears to be published entirely at the expense of the
author, and its completion, therefore, depends upon the encouragement of
the ornithological public expressed in numerous subscriptions, of which
there ought to be no lack, as the price is very reasonable. The following
fascicules have come to hand: I, Brevipennes (1884); V, Cygnidz, and
XXXIII, Ploceidze (genus Passer!) (1885); XXXVII-XL, Gallinz, and
Cursores (1886) ; XXII, Brevipedes (1887).—L. S.
Minor Ornithological Publications.— ‘Forest and Stream,’ Vols. XX VI
and XXVII, contains the following (Nos. 1127-1199) :—
1127. Winter Snipe in Colorado. By R.V.R.S. Forest and Stream,
Vol. XXVI, No. 1, Jan. 26, 1886, p. 5.—Wilson’s Snipe reported as occur-
ring about warm spring holes in the coldest winter weather.
338 Flecent Literature. [October
1128. English Sparrow as ge Robber. E.D. Bowles. Jdzd., p. 5,
Jan. 28, 1886.
1129. Cardinal Birdin New Yorkin Winter. By C. P. Jbid., No.
2, Feb. 4, 1886, p. 24.—Seen on several occasions in Central Park.
1130. Zhe Audubon Society. Editorial. Jbzd., No. 3, Feb. 11, p. 41;
No. 4, Feb. 18, p. 61.—Its formation proposed, and the work it is intended
to do.
1131. The Audubon Society. TIbid., No. 5, Feb. 25, pp. 83, 84.—Edi-
torial remarks and letters on the Audubon Society.
1132. Birdsand Bonnets. Frank M. Chapman. Jbd7d., No.6, Feb. 25,
p- 84.—List of birds seen on ladies’ hats in an afternoon’s walk in New
York City.
1133. A Bill for Bird Protection. Ibid., No. 5, Feb. 25, p. 84.—The
first appearance in print of the A. O. U. Committee’s proposed bill.
1134. The Audubon Society. Ibid., No.6, March 4, pp. 103-104.—Edi-
torial remarks and extracts from the A. O. U. Committee’s ‘Bulletin No.
I,’ as published in ‘Science,’ followed by various letters on the work of the
Society. See further, on the subject of the Audubon Society, No. 7, March
II, p. 124; No. 8, March 18, p. 141; No. 9, March 18, p. 144; No. 10,
April 1, p. 182; No. 11, April 8, p. 201, 203; No. 12, April 15,-p. 222; No.
13, April 22, p. 243; No. 14, April 29, p. 262; No. 15, May 6, p. 283; No.
17, May 20, p. 327; No. 18, May 27, p. 347; No. 23, July 1, p. 447;
No. 24, July 8, p. 467; No. 25, July 1§, p. 487.
1135. The Feather Industry. Editorial. Jbid., No. 9, March 25, pp.
162, 163.—On the extent of the traffic in birds for millinery purposes.
1136. The Ivory-Billed Woodpecker. By Horace A. Kline. Jérd.,
No. 9, March 25, p. 163.—Taken near St. Mark’s River, Florida.
1137. Hawks and Owls. Beneficial or Injurtous? Ibid., No. 9, March
25, pp. 163, 164. Report of a committee of the West Chester (Pa.) Micro-
scopical Society on the good and bad traits of these birds, including letters
on the subject from Dr. C. Hart Merriam, Robert Ridgway Dr. Leonhard
Stejneger, H. W. Henshaw, and L. M. Turner.
1138. Taxidermists and Milliners’ Agents. By Raymond Lee New-
comb. Jézd., No. 10, April 1, p. 183.
1139. The Sparrow Hawk in Winter. By H. W. Henshaw. Jé:d.,
No. 12, April 15, p. 223.-—On its food in winter.
1140. A Least Bittern’s Nest in a Tvee.) Bote Te Woda Novae
April 15, p. 223.
1141. Sparrow Hawks Wise and Foolish. By M.G. Ellzey. Jbid.,
No. 13, April 22, p. 224.—On its food in winter, in answer to Mr. Hen-
shaw. (See above, No. 1139.)
1142. The Sparrow Hawk's Services. By A. (=H.] W. Henshaw.
Ibid., No. 14, April 19, p- 263. (Under the same title is a note also by
Henry Litchfield West.)—In answer to the last (No. 1141).
1143. Tame Ruffed Grouse. By M. H. Cryder. Jbrd., No. 15, May
6, p. 284.—A frequent visitor to the dooryard, and so tame as to take food
*rom the hand.
1887. ] Recent Literature. 339
1144. The Birds of Michigan. By Dr. Morris Gibbs. Zé¢d., No. 16,
May 13, pp- 305, 306; Vol. XXVII; No. 7, Sept. 9, pp. 123, 124; No. 12,
Oct. 14, pp. 223-224.
1145. {Destruction of Pigeons in Pennsylvania.| Editorial. Jbrd.,
No. 16, May 13, p- 802.—‘‘Thousands and tens of thousands” killed on
their nesting grounds.
1146. Zhe Sparrow Hawk. By M.G. Ellzey, M.D. JZbérd., No. 16,
May 13, p- 304.—A second reply to Mr. Henshaw (see above, No. 1142),
respecting the Sparrow Hawk as a destroyer of grasshoppers, etc.
1147. Eagles { Haliwetus leucocephalus| breeding in Captivity. By
Henry Hulce. Jézd., No. 17, May 20, p.- 327-
1148. Habits of the [Bald] Eagle. By Henry Hulce. Jézd., No. 19,
June 3, p- 369-
1149. Wildfowl of Western Waters. By Junius P. Leach. Jé7d., No.
18, May 27, p- 348; No. 19, p- 370.—Valuable information respecting the
Cranes, Swans, Geese, and Ducks.
1150. A Note about Audubon. Ibid., No. 1g, June 3, p. 369.—Extract
from a private letter, written Jan. 2, 1841, by Lewis Warriner.
1151. Birds of Central Park, New York [City]. A Preliminary List.
By Lewis B. Woodruff and Augustus G. Paine, Jr. Zézd., No. 20, June
10, pp. 386, 387.—A briefly annotated list of 121 species. The European
Goldfinch (Carduelis elegans) is given as ‘‘Resident; common; breeds.”
(See also Zhzd., No. 25, July 15, P- 488.)
1152. The Toledo Eaglet. By E. D. Potter. Jbid., No. 20, May 10,
p- 387-—Bred in confinement. (See above, No. 1148.)
1153. Additions to California Avifauna. By Walter E. Bryant. é¢d.,
No. 22, June 24, p. 426.—The additions are Porzana noveboracensis, P.
carolina, Anas penelope, and Selasphorus floressiz (Loddiges).
1154. The Toledo Eaglet. By Henry Hulce. Jézd., No. 22, June 24,
p- 426. (See above, Nos. 1148 and 1152.)
1155. Swifts, Humming Birds and Goatsuckers. By R. W. Shufeldt.
Ibid., No. 23, July 1, p. 447-—On the relationship of these birds, and an
appeal for aid in obtaining material for investigation.
1156. Barn Owl in Ohio. By A. Hall. Jbzd., No. 23, July 1, p- 446.
1157. Two Hints in Taxidermy. By W.E. B[ryant]. Jdzd., No. 24,
July 8, p. 467-—() Strengthening the neck in small birds as well as large
ones, by using a splinter of wood (as a hard-wood toothpick) in smal}
birds, and a piece of wire or wood in larger ones; (2) the use of absorbent
cotton for filling the skins.
1158. Occurrence of the Ivory Gull at Halifax, [N.'S.]. By J.
Mathew Jones. Jbid., No. 25, July 15, p- 487.
1159. Disappearance of the Bobolink [at Springfield, Mass.]. By E.
H. Lathrop. Jézd., No. 26, July 22, p- 507-
1160. Early Occurrence of the Great White Egret at Washington, D.
C. By C. Hart Merriam. /d¢d., No. 26, July 22, p. 508.—Taken July 15,
1886.
1161. The Shore Birds. By X.Y. Z. [=R. L. Newcomb]. /ézd., No.
26, July 22, p. 509.—Dates of their arrival at Salem, Mass., in July 1886.
340 Recent Literature. [ October
1162. Prairie Fires and the [Pinnated| Grouse. Editorial. Jbid.,
Vol. XXVII, No. 1, July 21, 1886, p. 1.—The number of the birds sadly
diminished by the late ‘burning over’ of prairie lands.
1163. Bzrd Protection. Editorial. Jbzd., No. 1, July 29, p. 4.—The
blanks prepared for use by the American Museum of Natural History in
issuing permits for collecting under the New York law are published,
with editorial comment.
1164. [Désappearance of | the Bobolink [in Central New York.| By
Portsa. Jézd., No. 1, July 29, p. 4.
1165. Zhe Toledo Eagiet. By Henry Hulce. Jbdzd., No. 1, July 29, p-
4.—A further account of the Bald Eagle, hatched and reared in confine-
ment. (See above, No. 1152.)
1166. Cerros Lsland. By Walter E. Bryant. Jbid., No. 4, Aug. 19,
pp. 62-64.—An interesting account of the Island, followed by an annotated
list of the birds observed there, numbering 27 species.
1167. The Audubon Society. Editorial. Jb¢d., No. 4, Aug. 19, p. 64.
—Its incorporation, including ‘Certificate of Incorporation.’
1168. Occurrence of Turkey Buzzard on Long Island. By Robert
B. Lawrence. Jdid., No. 4, Aug. 19, p. 64.—Seen at Flushing, Aug. 2,
1885.
1169. The Future for American Ornithology. By R. W. Shufeldt.
Ibid., No. 5, Aug. 26, p. 84.—A paper read before the Ridgway Ornitho-
logical Club of Chicago, Aug. 12, 1886, calling attention’ to useful lines of
ornithological investigation, etc.
1170. Bird Migration. By B. Horsford. Jdzd., No. 6, Sept. 2, p. 103.
—Pessimistic remarks on ornithological matters in general.
1171. ZLwo Indian Bird Stories. L. W. Shultz. Jb¢d., No. 6, Sept.
2, p- 104.—Folk-lore stories of the Woodpecker and Hawk.
1172. The Audubon Society. Editorial. Jd¢d., No. 6, Sept. 2, p. 104;
No. 10, p. 184; No. 19, Dec. 2, p. 361.
1173. Can Birds Count Their Eggs. By J. L. Davison. Jézd., No. 6,
Sept. 2, p. 104.
1174. Spotted Sandpiper Swimming. By H. A. Kline. Jdzd., No.8,
Sept. 16, p. 145.
1175. Fohn Fames Audubon. By Charles Lanman. Jdzd., No. 9, Sept.
23, pp. 162, 163.
1176. Economic Ornithology and Mammalogy. Ibid., No. 10, Sept. 30,
p- 185.—The Circulars asking for information on the economic relations
of birds and mammals, issued by the Chief of Division of Economic Orni-
thology and Mammalogy of the U. S. Department of Agriculture.
1177. Wild Turkey Domestication. By N. A. T. Jbzd., No. 11, Oct.
7, Pp» 204.
1178. A Use for Falconry. Editorial. JZbzd., No. 13, Oct. 21, p. 241.—
Trained Hawks suggested asa means of protecting the rice fields from the
depredations of the Ricebirds.
1179. The Sport of Hawking. By R. W. Seiss. I, Il. The Pere-
grine Falcon. Ibid., No. 13, Oct. 21, p. 243; No. 14, Oct. 28, p. 263;
1887-| * Recent Literature. 34 T
III. Zhe Gyrfalcon. No. 15, Nov. 4, pp. 282, 383; IV. The Lanter Fal-
con. No. 16. Nov. 11, pp- 202, 203; V. The American Merlin and Kestril.
No. 21, Dec. 16, pp. 403, 404.—On the rearing, training and management
of Falcons for use in hawking, with illustrations.
1180. Maryland Bird Notes. By J. Murray Ellzey. Jbzd., No. 14,
Oct. 28, p. 264.—A Hudsonian Godwit shot at West River, Md.
1181. Sipe Decoration. Editorial. Jb¢d., No. 15, Nov. 4, p. 281.—
Use of Snipe and migratory game birds for millinery purposes, in lieu o¢
song birds.
1182. That Thieving Rice Bird. By Chas. F. Amery. Jérd., No. 15,
Nov. 4, pp. 283, 284.—On its probable utility as well as destructiveness.
1183. Protection of Birds by Legislation. Bulletin No. 2 of the A. O.
U. Committee on Bird Protection. Jbzd., No. 16. Nov. 11, pp. 304, 305.
1184. American Ornithologists Union. Editorial. Jbzd., No. 17, Nov.
18, p. 322, and No. 18, Nov. 25, p. 341.—Brief account of the annual meet-
ing for 1886.
1185. Capture of an Eider Duck. By L. S. Foster. Jézd., No. 17,
Nov. 18, p. 323-—A young male Somateria dresserz shot Nov. 8, 1886, at
Center Moriches, Long Island, N. Y.
1186. Shore Bird Nomenclature. By J. C. Cahoon. Jézd., No. 18,
Nov. 25, p- 343- See also No. 19, Dec 2, p. 363-
1187. Snowy Owl in Illinois. By H. A. Kline. Jdbzd., No. 18, Nov.
25, p- 343---An early record—Nov. 13, 1886.
1188. Weapons tn Game. By Sancho. Jbid., No. 18, Nov. 25, p. 343.
—An ivory arrowhead in the breast of a Goose taken in Yolo Coss Gal.
1189. A Golden Eagle in Connecticut. By Inquirer. Jbdzd., No. 19,
Dec. 2, p. 362.—Taken near Stamford about Nov. 1, 1886.
1190. Shore Bird Nomenclature. By John Murdock. Jdzd., No. 20,
Dec. 9, p- 382.
1191. ‘* Weapons in Game.” By John Murdock. Jdzd., No. 20, Dec. 9,
p- 383-—In reply to ‘Sancho’ (See above, No. 1188) ; the ivory arrowhead
identified as of Eskimo origin.
1192. Song Bird Legislation. By John D. Collins. Jd¢d., No. 21.
Dec. 16, p. 402.—An absurd arraignment of the New York law for the
protection of birds.
1193. Long Island Bird Notes. By Robert B. Lawrence. Jdzd., No.
22, Dec. 23, p. 428.—Notes on 4 species—Tringa maritima, Somateria
dressert, Oceanites oceanicus, and Nyctala acadica.
1194. Arizona Bird Notes. By Herbert Brown. Jbzd., No. 24, Jan. 6,
1887, p. 464.—An interesting paper, relating chiefly to the winter birds.
1195. Clark's Crow in British Columbia. By John Fannin. Jd2d.,
No. 24, Jan. 6, 1887, p. 464.
1196. Florida Bird Notes. Eagles, Hawks and Owls. By Horace
A. Kline. Zézd., No. 25, Jan. 13, p- 484.—Contains nearly a column and
a half on the nesting of the Bald Eagle, and interesting notes on several
Hawks and Owls.
1197. Zhe Terns of Matinicus Rock, [Coast of Maine]. By Wm. G.
342 Recent Literature. [October
Grant. Jbzd., No. 25, Jan. 13, p. 485.—On the wholesale slaughter of
Terns at this point for millinery purposes by C. E. Cahoon, of Taunton,
Mass., during the season of 1886.
1198. Avian Tuberculosis tn the Ruffed Grouse. By Morton Grinnell,
M.D") fb7d., (No.)26,))an-.20;.p:, 503:
1199. Migrating Meadow Larks. ByJ.H.D. Jbid., No. 26, Jan. 20,
PP. 503, 504.—J. A. A.
Publications Received.—Berlepsch, Hans von. Systematisches Ver-
zeichniss der von Herrn Ricado Rohde in Paraguay gesammelten Vogel
und Appendix Systematisches Verzeichniss der in der Republik Paraguay
bisher beobachteten Vogelarten. (Separat. aus Journ. f. Orn., 1887, pp.
134 et seq. )
Blakiston, T. W. Water-Birds of Japan. (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1886,
pp. 652-660. )
Bryant, Walter E. (1) Description of a new subspecies of Petrel from
Guadalupe Island. (Bull. Cal. Acad. Sci. II, No. 8, 1887.) (2) Discovery
of the nest and eggs of the Evening Grosbeak ( Coccothraustes vespertina).
(Ibid.) (3) Unusual Nesting Sites. (Ibid.)
Emerson, W. Otto. Ornithological Observations in San Diego County.
(Bull. Cal. Acad. Sci. II, No. 7, 1887.)
Harvie-Brown, J. A., J. Cordeaux, R. M. Barrington, A. G. More and
W. Eagle Clarke. Report on the Migration of Birds in the Spring and
Autumn of 1886. 8vo, 1887, pp. 174.
Lawrence, G. N. Descriptions of New Species of Birds of the Families
Sylviide, Troglodytide and Tyrannide. (Ann. N. Y~ Acad. Sci., IV,
No. 2, 1887.)
Langdon, F. W. Birds. A Lecture delivered before the Cincinnati
Soc. of Nat. Hist., Mch. 25, 1887. (Jour. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist.,
July, 1887.)
Menzbier, Michael v. (1) Die Zugstrassen der V6gel im Europaeis-
chen Russland. Mit zwei Karten. (Bull. Soc. imp. d. Nat. de Moscow.
1886, No. 2.) (2) Notiz iiber einen neuen Griinspecht, Gecinus flaviros-
ERS tl-sp.) Llibid.)
Merriam, C. Hart. Report of the Ornithologist [to the Department of
Agriculture] for the year 1887. (Ann. Rep. Dept. Agr., 1886.)
Naroudnoi, N. Oiseaux de la Contrée Trans-Caspienne. Avec pré-
face de M. Menzbier. (Ibid., 1885, No. 2.)
Nazarow, P.S. Recherches zoologiques des Steppes des Kirguiz. Avec
carte et préface de M. Menzbier. (Ibid., 1866.)
Reichenow, A. Dr. Fischer’s Ornithologische Sammlungen wihrend
der letzten Reise zum Victoria Njansa. (Journ. f. Orn., Jan. 1887.)
Ridgway, R. A Manual of North American Birds. Roy, 8vo, pp. 631,
pll. 124. Philadelphia, 1887.
Shufeldt, R. W. (1) Notes on the Visceral Anatomy of certain Auks.
(Proc. Zool. Soc. London, 1887, pp. 43-47.) (2) A Critical Comparison
of a series of skulls of the Wild and Domesticated Turkeys. (Journ. Com.
1887.] Recent Literature. 343
Med. & Surg., July, 1887.) (3) Observations upon the Habits of Micro-
pus melanoleucus, with Critical Notes on its Plumage and External
Characters. (Ibis, 1887, pp. 151-158, pl. v.) (4) Audubon’s Grave.
(Science, X, No. 238.) (5) A Chapter on Pterylography. (Forest and
Stream, Aug. 25, 1887.) (6) The Pied Duck. (Ibid., Aug. 18, 1887.)
Stejneger, L. (1) Review of Japanese Birds. IV, Synopsis of the genus
Turdus. (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 1887, pp. 4, 5.) (2) Birds of Kanai, Ha-
waiian Archipelago, collected by Mr. Valdemar Knudsen, with Descrip-
tions of New Species. (Ibid., pp. 75-102.) (3) Notes on the Northern
Palearctic Bulltinches. (Ibid., pp. 103-110.) (4) Revisedand Annotated Cat-
alogue of the Birds inhabiting the Commander Islands. (Ibid., pp. 117-145,
pll. vi-ix.) (5) Description of a New Species of Fruit Pigeon. (Am. Nat.
June, 1877.) (6) A New Species of Thrush from Japan. (Science, X, No.
238.)
Agassiz Companion, II, No. 7, 1887.
American Field, XXVII, Nos. 24-26; XXVIII, Nos. 1- 13.
American Journ. Sci. XXXIII, July-Sept. 1887.
American Naturalist, XXI, June-Sept. 1887.
Anzeiger, Zoologischer, Nos. 252-259, 1887.
Audubon Magazine, I, Nos. 6-8, 1887.
Bird Call, I, Nos. 7-8, 1887.
Bulletin Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. II, No. 1, 1887.
Canadian Record of Science, II, No. 7, 1887.
Forest and Stream, XXVIII, Nos. 20-26; XXIX, Nos. 1-9, 1887.
Hoosier Naturalist, II, Nos. 11-12, 1887.
Journal Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist. X, No. 2, July, 1887.
Journal de Sci. Math., Phys. e Nat. de Acad. real das Sci. de Lisboa,
No. XLIV, Feb. 1887.
Naturalist, The, A Month. Journ. Nat. Hist. for the North of England,
Nos. 144-146, July-Sept. 1887,
Odlogist, The, IV, No. 2, Mch.-May, 1887.
Ornithologist and Odlogist, XII, Nos. 7-8, 1887.
Ottawa Naturalist, I, Nos. 3 and 6, 1887. (Nos. 4 and 5 not received. )
Proceedings U.S. Nat. Mus., 1887, pp. 97-320.
Proceedings Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, 1887, pt. 1.
Proceedings and Trans. Nat. Hist. Soc. Glasgow, I, pt. 3 (1885-86) 1887.
Smithsonian Report, 1885. Part 1.
Swiss Cross, II, July-Sept. 1887.
United States Geological Survey. Sixth Ann. Rep., 1884-85.
Western Naturalist, I, Nos. 5-7, 1887.
Zoologist, XI, Nos. 127-129, 1887.
344 General Notes. [October
GENERAL NOTES.
Merganser americanus breeding in New Mexico.—On and near the
head of the Pecos River, New Mexico (latitude 35° 45’, elevation 6800
feet), I saw, July 2, 1885, a female American Merganser, with four little
ones not over ten days old. I fail to find any record of the birds’ breeding
so far south, therefore think the ‘find’ worthy of mention.—N. S. Goss,
Topeka, Kan.
The Clapper Rail again in Massachusetts. —I have the pleasure of
hereby presenting for record a third example of Radlus longirostris crepi-
tans obtained in this State; and at a remarkably late date in the season.
The bird was taken in a small pond-hole in ‘Rocky Nook,’ Kingston, on
Dec. 29, 1885. It was in fair condition, showing no sign of being crippled.
It is now in possession of W. C. Hathaway of Plymouth, to whom I am
indebted for above particulars.
The dates and places of the previous authentic records are: May 4, 1875,
Boston Harbor (Purdze, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, 1877, p. 22), and October,
1879. Plymouth (Brewster, Bull. Nutt. Orn. Club, 1881, p. 62).—F. C.
Browne, ‘Framingham, Mass.
Ictinia mississippiensis and A®gialitis nivosa nesting in Southern
Central Kansas.—While collecting in this State, I found, Mayg, 1887,
quite a number of the Mississippi Kites sailing over and into the timber
skirting the Medicine River, near Sun City, Barber County, and from
their actions knew that they were mating and upon their breeding grounds,
-—a lucky find worth following up. On the 11th I noticed several of the
birds with sticks in their bills (green twigs in leaf), flying aimlessly about
as if undecided where to place them, keeping hidden within the trees as
much as possible, dropping the sticks when from fright or other cause
they raised much above the tree tops. I succeeded, however, in tracing
one of the birds to an old nest in the forks of a cottonwood; having thus
located the birds, and knowing that it must be some time before they
would begin to lay, I left for the salt plains on the Cimarron River, in
southwestern Comanche County and in the Indian Territory, where I
found the Snowy Plover quite abundant. (See Auk, Vol. III, No. 3, p.
409, in regard to finding the birds nesting in the same vicinity last season.)
I returned to the Kites on the 16th, and remained watching the birds until
the morning of the 22d, at which time the nests found, seven in number,
appeared to be completed, and I saw a pair of the birds in the act of copu-
lation. A business matter called me home, and IJ hired the man with whom
I stopped to climb the trees on the 28th for the eggs, but a hailstorm on
the 25th injured the nests badly, and in one case beat the nest out of the
tree. On the 31st he collected four sets of two eggs each and one with
only one egg—it being a hard tree to climb he decided to take the egg
rather than wait to see if the bird would lay more. Not hearing from him
1887. ] General Notes. 345
I returned to the ground June 10, and put in the day examining the nests,
etc., collecting two more sets of two eggs each. One of the sets was
nearly ready to hatch, but with care I was able to save it. The eggs are
all white, or rather bluish white, without markings or shell stains. It
having rained nearly every day since the commencement of the month,
the two last sets collected are somewhat soiled and stained by the wet
leaves in the nests. The eggs measured by sets as follows, viz.: 1st,
Tehe NT -8Gs le 52IOm QO 2d 1.70) M148; 165.56 1.35); sd; 170 X° 1130;
[50 @ 1635 3) 4th. We7O) M1 377) 1.6006, 1.305) Sth; 175: X° 1.305. Oth; 1.54 X
1.31, 1.45 X 1.24; 7th, 1.70 X 1.38, 1.68 X 1.43. The old nests had a few
leaves for lining in addition to the leaves attached to the twigs used in re-
pairing the same, but the new ones appeared to be without additional
leaves. They were all built either in the forks from the main body, or in
the forks of the larger limbs of the cottonwood and elm trees, and were at
least from ten to’ a hundred rods apart, were not bulky, and when old
would be taken for the nests of the common Crow. They ranged in height
from twenty-five to fifty feet from the ground.—N. S. Goss, Topeka, Kan.
The Merlin (alco esalon) in Greenland.—We have recently received
from Dr. C. F. Wiepken, of the Museum of Oldenburg, Germany, a fine
specimen of Falco esalon Lath., from Greenland. This makes an addi-
tional species for the fauna of North America, I believe.
The record is as follows: ‘‘ Falco @salon Lath. g juv. Shot at Cape
Farewell, Greenland, May 3, 1875.” It is esalon without any question—a
young of the preceding year. We got it with other specimens from the
same locality through Dr. W., and I have no reason whatever to doubt the
correctness of the label, as of the hundreds we have received from him I
have not as yet detected any discrepancies, and the labels are usually much
more minute than the above. Gov. Fencker, who was stationed at God-
havn, Greenland, as Governor when IJ wasthere, told me he had occasion-
ally seen a small Hawk between Julianshaab and Gothaab, but had failed
to secure a specimen. These were probably /. esalon.— Lupvic Kum-
LIEN, Public Museum, Milwaukee, Wis.
Notes on Melanerpes formicivorus bairdi in New Mexico. — To-day is
the 6th of August (1887), and while out collecting at a point some two
miles from Fort Wingate, New Mexico, I shot and secured a fine adult
male specimen of this Woodpecker, and in unusually good plumage for
this time of the year, with few or no pin-feathers present to speak of; a
feature wherein it differed from a number of other Picide taken on the
same occasion. Having collected birds in this locality for the past two
and a half years without ever having seen a specimen of this Woodpecker
here before ; and in view of the fact that our ‘Check List’ gives its habitat
and range as ‘‘Pacific Coast Region of the United States, east into Arizo-
na, south into Mexico,” I desire to make this record here of its capture in
the Territory of New Mexico, and ata point further east than, so far as
the writer is aware, it has ever been noted before. At the present writing
346 General Notes. [October
I have no means of ascertaining how far north true MW. formictvorus
ranges, but take the bird now in my possession to be our M. f. bazrdz.
This evening I madea skin of this specimen, and in preparing it found
no difficulty in passing the skin of the neck over the skull. [also noted
that the epibranchials of the hyoid arches reached a point on the top of
the cranium at an imaginary line joining the posterior peripheries of the
outer borders of the orbits, in other words, no further forwards than the
parietal region at the vault of the skull. When Ido make skins of birds
now-a-days, I have a habit ofrunning a thread through a label giving full
data in regard to the specimen, then pass the needle through the body,
the eyes,and the back of the skull, all of which we have removed in making
the skin, tie the whole in a bunch, and throw with others into a jar of
fresh alcohol. It is a capital practice, saves excellent material, and was
resorted to in the present instance.—R. W. SHUFELDT, Fort Wingate,
NV. Mexico.
Egg-laying extraordinary in Colaptes auratus.—On May 6th, 1883, I
found in a large willow tree, a hole containing two eggs of this bird; I
took one, leaving the other as a nest-egg, and continued to do this day
after day until she had laid seventy-one eggs.
The bird rested two days, taking seventy-three days to lay seventy-
one eggs. Ithink this is something very unusual; I have quite frequently
heard of from fifteen to twenty-eight being taken from one bird, but this
is a large number comparatively. I have the set complete, in my cabinet,
and prize it very highly.
This was published in a small journal called the ‘Young OGlogist’, Vol.
I, No. 2, 1884; but it being a rather obscure paper, and not reaching the
general public, I concluded to send it to ‘The Auk’ for publication.—
CHARLES L. PHILLIPS, Vaunton, Mass.
The Range of Quiscalus major.—In the A. O. U. ‘Check List’ the hab-
itat of the Boat-tailed Grackle is given as the ‘‘coast region of the South
Atlantic and Gulf States, from North Carolina to Texas.” The failure
to assign a more northern limit of range is evidently an oversight,
for the bird occurs as a regular inhabitant as far north at least as Cobb’s
Island, Virginia, about twenty-five miles above Cape Charles, and breeds
in considerable numbers on certain of the marshy islands off the coast
above the mouth of Chesapeake Bay. Mr. Robert Ridgway kindly
informs me that during his visit to this region in July, 1881, he saw
straggling flocks of this species almost daily, and killed several birds.
They were moulting and in very poor plumage, and none were preserved.
Mr. Ridgway further states that although he found no nests ‘he has ‘‘no
doubt these birds were, or had been, breeding either in the marshes on
Cobb’s Island or else on one of the neighboring islands.” In July, 1884,
I noticed the birds occasionally on Cobb’s Island and on several of the
islands adjacent thereto, and saw numbers of eggs that had been taken
earlier in the season, chiefly on a small sparsely-wooded island, by the
keeper of the U. S. Life Saving Station on Cobb’s Island.—HucuH M.
SmitH, Washington, D. C.
1887.] General Notes. 344
The Lapland Longspur about Washington, D. C.—My expectation of
finding the Calcartus lapponicus in this vicinity was verified last winter.
Dec. 11, while Dr. Fisher and I were riding along the road to Falls
Church, and distant from Washington perhaps four miles, we saw a
flock of fifteen or twenty Horned Larks by the road side. Scattered
through the flock were half a dozen or more Longspurs, one of which
was secured. Comparatively little collecting has ever been done about
Washington in winter, and to this fact more than to its excessive rarity
is due, I am persuaded, the absence of the species from the local lists.
Although probably not a regular migrant, the species occurs here in
small numbers, I am inclined to believe, during every hard winter. How-
ever, it is to be remarked that the records of this bird from so far south
are very few. In Bull. N. O. C., Vol. VII, Jan. 1882, p. 54, Mr. Allen re-
cords the capture of a single individual in Chester, South Carolina, this
being, so far as I know, the most southern record of its occurrence along
the Atlantic coast.—H. W. HENsHAw, Washington, D. C.
Description of Two New Races of Pyrrhuloxia sinuata Bonap.—
1. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata beckhami. ARIZONA PYRRHULOXIA.
Supsp. CHar. Differing from true P. szzwata* in decidedly browner
and somewhat lighter tone of the gray, and greater extent of dark red on
the tail; adult male with much less (often not any) blackish suffusion in
the lighter carmine-red of the capistrum, and red of the crest much lighter ;
female with much less of a grayish tinge across chest and along sides;
wing (2) 3-60-3.90, tail 4.40-4.60, depth of bill .50-.52. Had. Southern
Arizona and New Mexico and contiguous portion of Northern Mexico.
Type, No. 6370, U. S. Nat. Mus., g ad., El Paso, Texas; Lieut. J. G. Parke,
U.S. A. (Seventeen specimens examined. )
2. Pyrrhuloxia sinuata peninsule. Sr. Lucas PyrRHULOXIA.
Sussp. CHAR. Similar to P. S. beckham? in color, but decidedly smaller,
with larger bill; wing (4) 3.30-3.60, tail 3.80-4.15, depth of bill .52-.55.
Hab. Lower California. Type, No. 87547, U.S. Nat. Mus., San José,
Lower California, Apr. 13, 1882; L. Belding. (Eleven specimens exam-
ined.)
The first of the above-described new races is named in honor of Mr. C.
W. Beckham, who furnished the material enabling me to make a satisfac-
tory comparison of specimens.—ROBERT RipGWay, Smithsonian Institu-
tion.
Helinaia swainsonii near Chester C. H., S. C.—About a mile distant
-from the eastern portion of the town of Chester a male Swainson’s
Warbler was shot by me, Aug. 30, 1887, on the bank of a small branch
* About 30 specimens examined,
348 General Notes. [October
ina hardwood thicket at the extremity of a large body of woods. This
spot, which has scarcely an area of two acres, borders on the open
country and on a constantly travelled public highway. The ground is
largely free from lesser vegetation, having been swept bare during high
water by the overflow from the stream. There is not anything in the im-
mediate surroundings, or in the general vicinage, to suggest the ‘pine-
land gall’ which figures so prominently in the descriptions of the haunts
of this species in the Low-Country. The inland character of the place of
capture, situate as it is on the water-shed between the Broad and Ca-
tawba Rivers, in the heart of the Piedmont Region, one hundred and
fifty miles from the coast, renders this find one of special interest. While
it establishes nothing definitely beyond the mere fact of the occurrence
of a single bird—perhaps accidental—during the time of migration, it
awakens the mind to the possibility of an Up-Country habitat, yet await-
ing discovery, where the true centre of abundance will finally be located.
—LEvERETT M. Loomis, Chester, S. C.
Another Bachman’s Warbler in Florida.—-Mr. J. W. Atkins, of Key
West, Florida, writes me that on August 30 of this year, he collected a spec-
imen of Bachman’s Warbler (Helminthophila bachmanz ) in the outskirts
of the town of Key West. He found the bird, a female, he writes, ‘‘feeding
in the black mangrove trees that skirt the edge of a pond of an acre or two °
in extent, and was the only one I could find. It measures 4% inches in
length; wing, 24; tail, 2. Feet and legs brownish, soles of feet yellowish.
Bill blackish, light below at base. Forehead yellow, and lacks the band
of black given in Coues’s description of the species. Throat yellow, then
a black area occupying part of the throat and breast, succeeded behind by
yellow, which in turn becomes whitish on the belly and vent.: Sides of
neck faintly yellowish. Top of head and hind neck ashy. Rest of upper
parts olive, agreeing with Coues’s description. Tail-spots very small and
on the inner edges of the feathers. I think it isan adult female.”—W. E. D.
Scott, Tarpon Springs, Fla.
Additional Captures of Helminthophila leucobronchialis.—The spec-
imens below recorded were taken at Englewood, N. J., in a densely thick
eted, low, wet woods.
1. (Nowin Coll. Dr. A. K. Fisher, No. 2646, 2, May 15, 1886.) Rump
and interscapulars asin H. pzvus; wing-bars intermediate between 7.
chrysoptera and pinus. A yellow pectoral band and a slight suffusion of
same color on the underparts.
2. (Coll. F. M. C., No. 903, 9 ad., June 26, 1887.) Immediately after
the capture of this specimen I was attracted by the voices of young birds,
and a search revealed, almost directly overhead, four young being fed by
a typical male gzzus. For between four and five hours this family was
closely watched, and the non-appearance of a female during that period
renders it possible that the missing parent was the captured bird. Three
of the young were taken, all typical of pznus, the fourth escaped me.
i
1837.] General Notes. 349
Taking into consideration the fact that the female is in worn breeding
plumage, the abdomen being denuded of feathers, it may be said to agree
with the type of Zeucobronchialis. Why not consider these typical birds as
the w/¢imate result of a union between fzzus and chrysoptera, achieved by
series of unions between the original hybrids with themselves or either of
the parent species, in which both black and yellow are finally eliminated ?
If this be true the intermediate specimens should outnumber the typical
ones, and we have recorded, therefore, twenty-one birds approaching pzzus
and chrysoptera more or less closely and but eight agreeing with deuco-
bronchialis as originally described.
3. (Coll. F. M. C., No. 932, ¢ im., July 31, 1887.) Dorsal surface and
wing-bars as in fzuus, with an extremely faint grayish cervical collar.
Breast yellow, a flush of the same appearing on the white of the throat and
abdomen. Taken within less than one hundred feet of the place where
No. 903 was secured. The migration of Azzus haa not yet commenced, and
this bird, which was undoubtedly born in the vicinity, would answer ad_
mirably as the missing fourth bird of the brood before mentioned.—FRANK
M. CHapMANn, American Museum Natural History, New York City.
Helminthophila leucobronchialis in New Jersey.—May 15, 1887, a fine
male specimen of this bird was shot near this place. It differs from the
type in having a spot of lemon yellow on the breast and being washed
lightly with the same color on abdomen and back.—E. CARLETON THUR-
BER, Morristown, VN. F.
The Canadian Warbler breeding in Pike County, Pa.— On June g,
1887, in the mountains of Pike County, Pa., I was fortunate enough to find
a nest of the Canadian Warbler (Sylvania canadensis), containing four
young birds and one unhatched egg. The nest was placed among the
roots of an old stump and was well concealed from observation by weeds
and grasses. It was constructed of small twigs, leaves,and grasses. ‘The
egg which I secured measured .71 X .53 of an inch and corresponded with
the description given in Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway’s ‘History of North
American Birds,’ the ground color being white with dots and blotches of
blended brown and purple, varying in shades and tintsand forming almost
a wreath around the larger end. Both parent birds were seen and fully
identified.—ROBERT B. LAWRENCE, Mew York City.
On the correct Subspecific Title of Baird’s Wren (No. 719 4, A.O. U.
Check-List).—In their ‘Biologia Centrali Americana,’ Aves (1879), p- 96,
Messrs. Salvin and Godman very properly change the current name for
this form of Bewick’s Wren (Tkryothorus bewickti leucogaster Baird),
their reasons for so doing being thus explained:
“In differentiating these races [of 7. dewrckid], Prof. Baird thought
that he recognized in the Mexican bird the Troglodytes leucogastra of
Gould, and hence properly called it Tkryothorus bewickit, var. leucogaster,
But Mr. Gould’s name has since been found to apply to a very different
350 General Notes. [October
species, which now stands as Urops¢la leucogastra. This being the case,
it is obviously undesirable to retain the name deucogaster for the present
bird as well as for the Uropszla ; we therefore suggest that the form should
stand as Thkryothorus bairdi.”
It seems, however, that the Mexican form of Bewick’s Wren had pre-
viously been accurately described by Dr. Hartlaub as Thryothorus muri-
nus, in the ‘Revue et Magazin de Zoologie,’ Vol. IV, 1852, p. 4, a transla-
tion of the description being as follows:
‘‘Above pale brownish cinereous, the pileum more brownish; a long,
narrow, and sharply defined superciliary stripe of white; parotic region
streaked with white ; feathers of lower back and rump with partially hidden
ante-apical spots of white encircled by black; primaries (except the first)
and secondaries, for their basal half slightly, and tertials more distinctly,
barred ; two middle tail-feathers concolor with the back, barred with black-
ish; the two next blackish, with whitish tips, the rest with outer webs
more and more spotted with whitish, the outer with tip entirely whitish ;
under tail-coverts white barred with black; body beneath pale ashy, more
whitish medially, the chin and throat purer whitish; breast washed with
the color of the back; feet blackish, bill brownish; tail graduated; second
to fifth quills subequal. Length,* 5.40; bill from forehead, .65; from
rictus, .77; wing, 2.30; tail, 2.40; tarsus, .85. Mab. Mexico: Rio Frio.
Museums of Bremen and Hamburg.”
The only Mexican species which have the peculiar pattern of the tail-
feathers described aboveare 7. bew/scki (subspecies ‘‘batrdz” Salv. & Godm.
and spzlurus Vig.) and 7. albinucha (Cabot). The latter is of very dif-
ferent proportions, however, and is, moreover, confined to Yucatan and the
Peten district of Guatemala. Therefore, since the description cited ap-
plies very exactly to the bird first named Thryothorus bewick?, var. leuco-
gaster by Prof. Baird, and afterwards 7. bazrdZ by Salvin and Godman,
it appears necessary to discard both these appellations for that given earlier
by Hartlaub, the correct name of Baird’s Wren thus being Tkhryothorus
bewickii murinus (Hartl.).—RoBERT RipGway, Smithsonian Institution.
Central New York Notes.—HENSLOWw’s SPARROW (Ammodramus hens-
ZJowr). Anadult male of this bird was taken by me near Syracuse, on
June 30 of this year. Attention was drawn to the bird through its peculiar
song, delivered from a tall weed in a field.
ORANGE-CROWNED WARBLER (felminthophila celata). Oct. 2, 1886,
I shot a young female near Syracuse, as it was following a small company
of Golden-crowned Kinglets.
ComMoN TERN (Sterna hirundo). Secured an adult female August 12,
1887, on Onondaga Lake.
SANDERLING (Calédris arenaria). I havea female of this bird, taken
by a friend, Aug. 12, 1887, on Onondaga Lake.—Morris M. GREEN,
Syracuse, N. Y.
* The measurements are reduced from French inches and decimals to English inches
and decimals.
1887. | General Notes. 351
On the Westerly Trend of Certain Fall Migrants in Eastern Maine.
—In investigating the influence of the topography of the land upon the
flights of migratory birds, an interesting point is to ascertain to what ex-
tent the more prominent physical features of a region determine the direc-
tion of these flights, and especially is this important when great natural
barriers deviate in their line of extent from the general north and south
trend of the paths of migration. During a limited collecting experience
of two years in the vicinity of the St. Croix River, a few facts seemingly
bearing on this subject have come under my notice. I frequently came in
contact with some of those species that perform their migratory journeys
during the day, and one circumstance that struck my attention was, that
in their fall migrations they all appeared to be flying directly west. At
first I thought it to be merely a fortuitous circumstance, but repeated ob-
servation convinced me that there must be something more in it. I have
noted it most frequently in the Swallows and Swifts, and very often in the
Nighthawks, and my friend, Mr. Howard H. McAdam, informs me that
he has observed this westerly movement in some Hawks when migrating
in flocks.
In the case of the water birds, the surrounding country is so cut up by
lakes and rivers, that their evidence, unless very accurately taken, is un-
reliable. Mr. William Brewster, in his account of his observations on the
small, night-migrating birds at Point Lepreaux light-house (‘Bird Migra-
tion,’ Memoirs of Nuttall Club, No.1), states that on leaving the light
they always proceeded due west.
The question involved is this: Whether the birds inhabiting Maine,
New Brunswick, and the country further northward, proceed directly south
in their autumn journey until they reach the coast line, and then massing
upon the coast, take their course westward until they can again continue
directly south; or whether they pass across this territory in a westerly or
southwesterly direction from the first, holding such a course until they
reach the first great migration route tending directly south. My own ob-
servations being made only from thirty to fifty miles from the sea, would
have little weight, even if more thorough, but I note my experience in
order to call the attention of other field workers to a point that would be
of some interest to determine, and with the hope that someone else may
have had a similar experience.-—Louis M. Topp, Calais, Maine.
A Bird Scare.—At half-past three o’clock on the morning of the 26th
August, I was awakened by a noise which I had some difficulty, in my
drowsy condition, in making out. I first thought it was from heavy drops
of rain on the zinc floor of a balcony outside of my bedroom—such drops
as precede a thunderstorm—and I lay back to sleep again. The noise
continued, and I then knew it was caused by some objects flying against
the windows. There is an electric lamp on a level with the middle of
the window and only thirty feet away, and I thought it might be some
unusually large moths striking against the glass. The noise was so
irritating that sleep was out of the question, and I got up and went to the
352 General Notes. [October
window. The upper sash was down about 18 inches, and when I opened
the inside Venetians a bird flew in. I saw some others flying against
the glass, and throwing up the lower sash of the window I stepped on
the balcony and easily caught two birds—all that were there then. At
another window at the head of my bed I heard at least one bird, but I could
not easily reach it, and it soon went away or dropped to the ground.
I placed the two I had caught under a glass shade, where they continued
their fruitless efforts against the glass until I covered it up with a dark
colored cloth. The bird in the room kept up an incessant fluttering
against the walls and ceiling and eluded me completely. At daylight I
noticed the ceiling streaked on the window side with blood—some two
or three hundred marks altogether, from two inches long and _ three-
eighths of an inch wide down to almost imperceptible dots. With the aid
of a friend I secured the poor little frightened thing and put it also under
a glass shade, first compelling it to swallow some water. It was a Tennes-
see Warbler, and the feathers and skin were completely torn off its head
and showed a large and nasty wound already dry and healing. When
taking it out in the afternoon to try and feed it, for it would eat nothing
I put under the shade for it, it got out of my hand and again flew about
the top of the room. At four in the afternoon I let the two under the
shade out, and one found its way to the open window and flew a couple
of hundred yards, when it got beyond my sight. The other joined the
Warbler, but neither would fly low enough to get out at the top of the
windows. Neither flew so as to hurt itself. At last the smaller bird got
out, but the Warbler did not follow it. I left the windows wide open and
when I came back, just before dark, it was gone. They were all this
year’s birds, the two caught on the window being Flycatchers—one quite
young with the down still showing between the feathers, but flying well.
It turned out that during the night a general scare of birds had taken
place, and I was asked all sorts of questions on the subject. A number
of birds were brought to me to be identified. Some were rare visitors
here—the Hermit Thrush, for instance. I was handed a pretty specimen
of the Golden-crowned Thrush, but the crown was marred by a ghastly
wound on which the blood was still fresh; in trying to escape from the
hand its whole tail came out. It flew about the room, this was the 27th,
until evening when it at last went out at the window.
On the evening of the 26th I took a walk to my friends, the taxider-
mists, and I learned from them that they had been offered large numbers
of birds during the day by small boys who had caught them on the streets
or on hawthorn bushes. One little fellow saw the birds during the day
falling off the bushes exhausted. They flew in a circle and were quite
dazed. One man said he counted fifty dead birds lying against the wall
of a building as he walked past. During the night the ‘Free Press
premises were invaded by them until the windows had to be shut.
Through this paper I asked for information as to where the scare origi-
nated, but so far no one has replied.
My own opinion is that the birds were overtaken while roosting bya
——
1887.] Correspondence. 353
forest fire fanned by a southern breeze; that in their stupor, their in-
stincts teaching them at the time of fear to fly south if anywhere, they
flew into the smoke and got suffocated and frightened. No doubt thous-
ands lost their lives and fell into the flames below. The survivors then
flew away from the fire, and coming over this city were attracted by the
electric lights and flew madly against the walls of buildings. At the
Queen’s Hotel, where the windows also had to be shut, there is alight as
well as at the ‘Free Press.” Two years agoa similar stampede was re-
ported in one of the Southern States, but of Ducksalone. They flew in
hundreds against the electric masts, and then against buildings. Our
lights are on poles only 25 to 30 feet high.
'The birds were all small and most of them of this year. Among those
picked up or caught were the Redstart, the Black-and-white Creeper, the
Tennessee Warbler, the House Wren, Flycatchers, the Hermit Thrush,
the Golden-crowned Thrush, and the Chestnut-sided Warbler. The last
is a rare visitor here. Small Sparrows, Iam told, had been found, but
Iam not sure of this.
Mr. W. Hurd, our taxidermist, saw next day a Thrush flying along
Main Street diagonally and only about two feet above the ground. The
birds were all weak, but many, like those which struck my windows,
evidently recovered, at least their senses. All were stupified, and many
had wounds evidently caused by barbed wire.
In skinning the birds for preservation Mr. Hurd failed to notice any-
thing which could have caused death; the various organs appeared sound
and healthy, though the birds were rather small for him to be very certain
regarding all of them.
I should have mentioned that the forests were on fire some eight miles
south of the city. —ALEXANDER McARTHoR, Wnuuipeg, Manitoba.
CORRESPONDENCE.
[Correspondents are requested to write briefly and to the point. No attention will
be paid to anonymous communications.|
The Dermo-Tensor Patagii Muscle.
To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK :—
Dear Sirs :—In this letter the writer proposes to reply to a criticism of
Leonhard Stejneger, which appeared in ‘Science’ August 5, of an account
of mine of a muscle which is present in certain birds, and which I desig-
nated by the name entitling this communication.
To those who are aware of the conditions under which I prosecute my
anatomical work no word need be said; my labors in the myology of
354 Correspondence. [October
birds were chiefly inaugurated and have been pursued during a time
while their author found himself removed by several thousand miles from
the libraries wherein may be consulted the works of the older anatomists.
Under these circumstances my guides have been the general works of
Owen, Huxley, Garrod, Mivart, Parker (T. J.), Forbes, and others of
similar standing; several of these writers have given very exhaustive
accounts of the myology of birds, but none of them, so far as I have been
able to discover, have described the muscle in question.
This being the case I was intentionally guarded in my letter to
‘Science’ (No. 229), and said the dermo-tensor patagii ‘‘was a muscle for
which at this moment I recall no published description” (p. 624), and by
no means proclaimed it a ‘‘new discovery,” although, so far as I am con-
cerned, it has certainly proved to be an independent observation, but I
fail to see that it is any the worse for that circumstance. This answers
the first objection to my account made by Dr. Stejneger. Secondly, he
charges me with ‘‘supposing that it is peculiar to the true passerine birds,”
when I, in my letter, distinctly said that ‘‘I had investigated the matter
in but a limited number of birds” and would ‘‘look with interest for such
future researches that might be made in that direction by others” (p. 624).
Any structural difference in such a group of vertebrates as birds is
always to be welcomed, and as the muscle is evidently present in some
and absent in others, I still maintain ‘‘that it is of taxonomical value,”
perhaps of greater value than did the authorities whom Dr. Stejneger
pleases to quote to me,—dissectors, as a rule, who did not especially look
into the structure of birds with the view of determining their affinities as
Garrod did, and consequently would naturally not realize the importance
to avian classification of such a muscle, were it even a new discovery
to them.
Throughout the entire second paragraph of Dr. Stejneger’s letter, I am,
as it were, directly charged with doing Professor Garrod a ‘‘great injus-
tice,’ and ‘‘grossly misrepresenting” him, as if that were the sole aim of
my original description; whereas those who may be familiar with my
writings in anatomy, know full well that in the many, many instances
wherein J have been called upon to allude to his work or name, it has
always been with the greatest amount of regard, a regard which I ever
sincerely feel, and which is ever increasing as I more fully appreciate the
power and force of the work he was enabled to leave us in his only too
short career.
The dermo-tensor patagii was entirely absent oz bvth szdes in the speci-
men of Zyrannus tyrannus which I dissected, and I even went so far as to
bring the dissection under a powerful microscope (one inch objective) ;
there was no muscular tissue present, and, asI say, further than that I ©
have not investigated the matter, nor, just now, doI intend to do so, as
other anatomical work is engaging my attention.
In closing, perhaps I may be permitted to point out a few of the errors
which Dr. Stejneger has unfortunately allowed to creep into his letter of
criticism, and more especially into the figures which he published in
=e
1887.] Correspondence. 355
‘Science’ (No. 235) to show me how it ought to be done. These figures
(Figs. 1and 2, p.71) Dr. Stejneger informs us are ‘‘both of one-third natural
size”; if this be so their author is laboring under the impression that
Colaptes auratus has a head nearly five znches long, and everything else
in proportion, to say nothing of the dimensions Amazona would attain
under the statement’in question! And, may I ask, how long since do we
see upon ‘‘dorsal view” of a dissected Colaptes, the tips of the shoulder
in close anatomical connection with the s¢de of the middle of the neck?
(See his Fig. 1.) Turning to his ‘‘dorsal view” of a dissection of the
patagial muscles of a Parrot (doc. c7zt., Fig. 2), this latter error is again
repeated, but a far more glaring one here confronts us, for, among other
faults, Dr. Stejneger has plainly drawn and lettered his biceps muscle,
and would have us believe that it is inserted into the extensor metacarpi
radialis longus, between the tensor patagii brevis and the humerus. It
seems to me on an occasion of this kind, and where the opportunity pre-
sents itself to have two new figures added to anatomical science, it is
fortunate for us when they prove to be useful ones; such is by no means
the case in the present instance, and the true aims and accomplishments
of criticism have herein failed in Dr. Stejneger’s hands. Upon carefully
reconsidering my last letter to ‘Science’ upon this subject I am at loss to
find anything requiring any alteration, nor any adequate reason for
changing the name I have given the dermo-tensor patagii muscle; indeed,
in the latter instance, I am in full sympathy with Professor Eliott Coues,
who has reéently, and in the most forcible manner (‘N. Y. Med. Record’),
shown that the terminology of muscles requires a through reviewing, and
the day is with us when we ought, for the sheer sake of clearness and con-
venience, to lay aside some of the abominable names the old anatomists
bestowed upon some of them, and in some instances where the name was
five times as big as the muscle.
From this standpoint I think Dr. Stejneger can consider the ‘‘pars pro-
patagialis musculi cucullaris” of Fiirbringer and Gadow as the dermo-
tensor patagii of the present writer. ©
R. W. SHUFELDT.
Fort Wingate, New Mexico,
August 14, 1887. :
Postscript :—A description of the above muscle was published by the
writer in ‘Science,’ some little time ago (No. 234, July 29, ’87), and it
called forth, it seemed to me, rather an acrimonious protest from Dr.
Leonhard Stejneger in the same journal. That writer so misrepresented
the entire matter, that I felt his criticism really required some notice
from me, and the above reply was sent to ‘Science,’ but much to my sur-
prise, the editor of that paper objected to my defending myself in its col-
umns against a criticism which he saw fit to publish. Will ‘The Auk’
kindly do this matter justice for me, and insert the above rejoinder?
By the first of next month (Oct. 1, 87) I trust to have out a paper cover-
ing a description of all the muscles thus far used in the classification of
birds, and in it will be given a full account of the present one. Even
35 6 Correspondence. [October
until now I have had no time to further investigate this interesting struc-
ture, but will briefly remark here that I found it present, z. e. the dermo-
tensor patigiz muscle, inall the Acromyodian Passeres that I have thus
far examined, and it was extzrely absent in an alcoholic specimen of Z¥y--
rannus tyrannus, kindly supplied me by Mr. H. K. Coale, President of the
Ridgway Ornithological Club of Chicago.
I introduce two figures here showing the absence and presence of this
muscle on the occasion I examined it.
It is quite possible that this muscle may exist in other birds. I have
nowhere stated that it does not, so far as I can remember. But I will say
OMEN NESON
A, XR : Z a
7 kN NG WRU ay Ns
Ee
Z, BI NS AWS AWW
FIG. 1. Outer aspect, right arm of Xazthocephalus xanthocephalus, showing a dis-
section of the muscles of the region in question.
Fic. 2. ‘The same of Zyrannus tyrannus,; slightly enlarged. Both figures drawn by
the author from his own dissections. d¢. #. dermo-tensor patagii; 7. /., tensor patagii
longus; Z/. 4., tensor patagii brevis; 4, biceps; 4, triceps; e. m. 7. 4, extensor metacarpi
radialis longus; 5S. ?., secondary remiges.
that ifit is constant for the Acromyodian Passeres, and absent in the
Mesomyodian Passeres, the fact will constitute a taxonomic character of
value. Ifit is subsequently found to exist in both, a complete examina-
tion of it in our American birds will be a good thing; I do only insist that
I found at least one Kingbird wherein it was entirely absent, and that it
was present in a long list of Oscines.
With these few brief remarks upon the subject I close the case for the
present, with the hope that other dissectors with good eyes will look into
the matter. But if you illustrate your work, let us, gentlemen, have intel-
ligent drawings.
Very faithfully yours,
R. W. SHUFELDT.
Fort Wingate, N. Mexico,
13th Sept., 1887.
1887. ] Correspondence. 35 7
A Protest.
To THE EDITORS OF THE AUK:
Szrs:—Having waited until the last moment forthe return of Mr. Lucas,
who has been absent from the United States since the first of July and
thus unable to speak for himself, I wish to enter a respectful but most
earnest protest against Dr. Shufeldt’s shameful slur on him, printed on
page 265 of the last number of this journal. Whatever may be the custom
in that part of the world from which Dr. Shufeldt wrote his letter for the
July ‘Auk,’ it is not customary in most places for a person when fairly
beaten in an argument to attack the honesty of his opponent with a cry of
fraud. The reckless mannerin which Dr. Shufeldt flings an untruth at his
critic, and then declares that he will not re-open his ‘‘case” under any cir-
cumstances, might be amusing, perhaps, if both parties to the ‘‘case” were
children; but in the present instance it is simply contemptible. Mr. Lucas
had a right to expect better treatment, especially after the courtesy which
he has invariably accorded Dr. Shufeldt, even when, asin the present case,
the latter has been obviously and obstinately in error. As Mr. Lucas has
already accomplished (Science, July 1, 1887, p. 12) what Dr. Shufeldt pre-
ferred merely to talk about, namely, the publication of a true copy of Dr.
Shufeldt’s original figure side by side with his (Mr. Lucas’s (own tracing
of the same) which Dr. Shufeldt claims was purposely mutilated to support
a theory), no shadow of this unjust reflection remains where it was so un-
generously cast; and if it envelops its originator it only verifies the old
proverb about curses and chickens. It is naturally unpleasant to acknowl-_
edge a mistake, but it is not likely to become easier the longer it is de
layed. Even silence is preferable, however, to the attempt to defend an
untenable position; and when such defence becomes incompatible with
strict honesty, common sense allows a man but one course.
I feel that no apology is needed for calling attention to this matter now,
for the principle violated lies at the very foundation of all science, and its
general disregard would make utterly impossible that interchange of ideas
which now constitutes the brightest hope of American ornithologists.
Very respectfully,
WaLTER B. BARROWS.
Washington, D. C., August 31, 1887.
The Metric System.
To THE EpiTrors OF THE AUK :—
Szrs: In ‘The Auk’ of April, 1884, Dr. Merriam presented ‘A Plea for
the Metric System in Ornithology,’ which was editorially endorsed, and a
request made asking ‘‘all contributors to the pages of ‘The Auk’ to give
their measurements in the metric system.”
Since then a few have done so, most of the writers have not, and each
issue adds to the burden of inches and hundredths.
358 Notes and News. [October
Why has not the change been made?
Will you through these pages kindly shed some light on the subject and
thus bring it to the attention of the A. O. U.?
It seems desirable to have some fixed arrangement for the convenience
of all.
The choice in this locality appears to be for the metric system.
WILLIAM FLINT.
Oakland, Cal.
NOTES AND NEWS.
PE Pa
SPENCER FULLERTON Batirp died suddenly at Wood’s Holl, Mass.,
August 19, in his sixty-fifth year, after suffering for many months from
seriously impared health. In his death American ornithology has lost
its time honored leader, and zodlogical science one of its most powerful
and unselfish promoters. Although occupied during the later years of
his life with engrossing executive cares attending two of the most impor-
tant positions of scientific responsibility to which a naturalist could be
called—those of Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution and head of the
United States Fish Commission—his impress upon American zodlogy is
perhaps unequalled by that of any other naturalist, living or deceased.
His published works on the mammals, birds, reptiles, and fishes of North
America were for a long period of years the standard authorities of the
subject, and will always hold the place of classics. His influence upon
the progress of ornithology in America is beyond comparison, his work
of thirty years ago forming the basis of nearly all subsequent advance.
But his influence was by no means restricted to his published writings, he
having been the instigator and organizer of ornithological explorations
extending throughout the North American continent. To his influence
with the government authorities is due the excellent field work done in
connection with nearly all the Government Surveys and the Signal Ser-
vice Bureau, from the first inception of the various Pacific Railroad Sur-
veys to the present time. The immense resources thus gathered into the
National Museum have rendered possible the rapid progress in our
knowledge of North American birds which has especially marked the
last two decades.
In Professor Baird every rising naturalist has found a friend, ever
ready to render all possible assistance and encouragement. Many owe
to him opportunities for prosecuting distant explorations, or the material
for monographic work. His one object, to which he was most disinter-
estedly devoted, was the advancement of science, and every effort to that
end was sure of his generous encouragement. To the American Orni-
1887. ] Notes and News. 359
thologists’ Union he was ever a friend, giving it from the first his hearty
support, and rendering, as one of its Councilors, efficient aid in directing
its affairs.
At the meeting of the A. O. U., soon to be held in Boston, a memorial
address will be delivered by one eminently qualified to speak of his
scientific work and worth. This address will doubtless be published in
the next (January) number of ‘The Auk,’ rendering further notice of our
great Nestor unnecessary in the present connection.
Tue Fifth Congress of the American Ornithologists’ Union will convene
in Boston, Mass., Oct. 11, 1887. The meetings will be held in the Lecture
Room of the Boston Society of Natural History. The presentation of
ornithological papers will form a prominent feature of the meetings, al-
though other important mattérs will come up for action. A large attend-
ance of both Active and Associate Members is anticipated.
Owr1nc to continued ill health and the pressure of other engagements,
the present editor of ‘The Auk’ finds himself compelled to sever his edito-
rial connection with this journal with the close of the present volume.
invindex: to Volatv of “The Auk,’ owing to unexpected and un-
avoidable delay in its preparation, is necessarily omitted from the present
number. If not issued separately within the next few weeks, it will accom-
pany the number for January, 1888.
For the portrait of the late Professor Baird, forming the frontispiece to
the present number, ‘The Auk’ is indebted to the generosity of Prof. G.
Brown Goode, through the solicitation of Dr. Coues.
Ir HAs been proposed to erect a monument in New York City in mem-
ory of John J. Audubon, in connection with the removal of his remains
from an old family vault in Trinity Cemetery, rendered necessary by
proposed street alterations. A plot of ground has been offered forthe pur-
pose at the head of Audubon Avenue. The matter has been recently men-
tioned in ‘Science’ and other journals, and a resolution endorsing the
project was adopted by the American Association for the Advancement of
Science at its meeting recently held in New York. The subject is one in
which it becomes ornithologists to take a lively interest.
Mr. MonraGuE CHAMBERLAIN, of St. John, N. B., has sent to the printer
‘An Annotated Catalogue of the Birds of Canada.’ The ‘Catalogue’ will
include the whole area of Canada, from the Atlantic to the. Pacific, and
north to the Arctic Coast. Its publication may be looked forearly in Octo-
ber.
As 1s well known, Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, U.S. A., stationed at Fort
Verde, Arizona, is making extensive natural history explorations in Ari-
260 Notes and News. [ October
zona, the ornithology of the region receiving special attention. During
the past summer he has been able to make several extended and very suc-
cessful expeditions into the more unexplored parts of the Territory, includ-
ing the Matatzal and Mongollon Mountains. Large shipments of speci-
mens received from him at the American Museum of Natural History
attest his industry and success. He intends later to make them the basis
. of elaborate papers, giving the results of his several years’ natural history
work in the Territory.
Tue Report of the Ornithologist to the Department of Agriculture, Dr.
C. Hart Merriam, for the year 1886, which has recently come to hand, not
only reviews the work of the year, but contains what may be considered as
a preliminary report of extended investigations upon the House Sparrow
(Passer domesticus). The results stated are of startling importance and
suggestiveness. The report gives a brief history of its introduction,
rate of increase. method of diffusion, and its destructive proclivities. An
accompanying map shows its distribution in the United States at the close
of the year 1886, when the area occupied by it is given as 885,000 square
miles in the United States and about 148,000 square miles in Canada, or a
total of 1,033,000 square miles ower which it has spread in North America,
mainly during the present decade It now has overspread not only all
the region east of the Mississippi River, except a narrow border along the
Gulf Coast, but nearly all of Missouri, a large part of Kansas, Iowa, and
considerable areas in Nebraska, Minnesota, Utah, and California. It proves
to be not only an enemy of several of our most valued song birds, but ex-
ceedingly injurious to the gardener and fruit grower, especially grape-cul-
turists, and also extends its ravages to grain fields. It proves to be not
only a complete failure as a destroyer of insects, but is charged with actu-
ally causing an increase of one of our most noxious caterpillar pests.
Many abstracts of testimony on these points, from many and widely dis-
tant sources, are given in the Report, which submits a series of recom-
mendations to legislators, and to the people in reference to the Spar-
row question. To quote from the Report: ‘‘The English Sparrow is a
curse of such virulence that it ought to be systematically attacked and
destroyed before it becomes necessary to deplete the public treasury for the
purpose, as has been done in other countries. By concerted action, and
by taking advantage of its gregarious habits, much good may be accom-
plished with little or no expenditure of money.” Methods are then sug-
gested for its destruction.
The ravages of the Rice-bird (Dolichonyx oryztvorus) in the rice fields
of the South are then detailed, these involving, it is estimated, a loss of
millions of dollars annually to the rice-growers.
INDEX TO
ACANTHIS cabaret, 30, 31, 34, 144.
canescens, 32.
exilipes, 30, 32, 33, 34, 62, 63.
holbeellii, 33, 34, 35, 62, 63.
hornemanni, 30, 63.
hornemanni_ exilipes, 163,
164.
linaria, 30, 32, 33, 34, 62, 63,
163, 164.
linaria holbeellii, 12, 33, 163,
164.
linaria pallescens, 33.
linaria rostrata, 163, 164.
pallescens, 32, 33.
rostrata, 30, 63, 164.
rufescens, 31, 63, 144, 145.
sibirica, 33.
Accentor modularis, 268.
Accipiter atricapillus
183, 188
cooperi, 40, 103, 188.
fringilloides, 41.
fuscus, 41, 42.
gundlachi, 4o.
mexicanus, 40.
pileatus, 4o.
velox, 42, 103, 188, 264.
Actitis macularia, 12, 14, 16, 103,
129, 180, 181, 186, 303, 318. 319,
340: :
Actiturus bartramius, 319.
longicaudatus, 319.
longicaudus, 319.
Actodromas bonapartii, 315.
maculata, 314.
minutilla, 314.
wilsonii, 314.
fEgialeus melodus, 320.
semipalmatus, 229.
tenuirostris, 230.
ZEgialitis meloda, 230.
melodus, 230.
montana, gt, 186.
nivosa, 8, 60, 229,230, 344.
semipalmata, 12, 91, 219, 229.
striatulus,
VOLUME IV.
4Egialitis tenuirostris, 229.
vocifera, 124, 128, 129, 186,
228. 7
wilsonia, 137, 228, 229, 274,
276.
Egiothus borealis, 33.
linaria, 33.
linaria holboelli, 164.
4ésalon columbarius, 43.
#strelata gularis, 335.
scalaris, 335.
Agelaius forbesi, 150.
gubernator, 22.
pheeniceus, 124, 162, 241, 256,
290, 302.
pheeniceus bryanti, 336.
pheeniceus sonoriensis, 336.
Ajaja ajaja, 137, 143, 215, 222, 274,
280, 281, 304, 322.
rosea, 322.
Albatross, I, 2, 5, 6.
Sooty, 3.
Wandering, I, 3-
Alca torda, 158.
Allen, J. A., a further note on Cod-
tuus ridgwayt, 74; the Redpolls
of Massachusetts, 164; unusual
nesting-site of the Song Sparrow,
260; additional specimens of
Bachman’s and Swainson’s War-
blers obtained by Mr. Chas. S.
Galbraith in the spring of 1887,
263; the Pine Finch (Sfzuus
pinus) breeding at Cornwall-on-
Hudson.) Neiwy%, 254. See also
Scott, W. E. D.
American Ornithologists’ Union,
fourth meeting of the, 56.
Ammodramus australis, 155.
bairdii, 291.
beldingi, 251.
caudacutus, 232,
237, 238, 260.
caudacutus nelsoni, 232, 234,
235, 230, 237; 230:
234, 235)
362
Ammodramus caudacutus subvirga-
tus, 233, 235, 236, 237, 238.
henslowi, 350.
sandwichensis alaudinus, 122,
199, 291.
sandwichensis savanna, 16,
2371 259; 302.
savannarum passerinus, 248,
304.
savannarum perpallidus, 87,
199, 291.
Ampelis cedrorum, 16, 105, 128, 131,
244, 259, 294, 302.
Amphispiza belli, 93.
belli nevadensis, 203.
bilineata, 22, 202, 292.
Anas americana, 184.
boschas, 93, 94, 184.
carolinensis, 12, 184.
cyanoptera, 184.
discors, 184.
fulvigula, 274.
obscura, 184.
penelope, 339.
strepera, 184.
Ancylochilus subarquatus, 315.
Anhinga, 184.
Anhinga anhinga, 188.
Ani, Groove-billed, 1go.
Anser albifrons gambeli, 12, 185.
hutchinsi, 69.
Anthony, A. W., winter plumage
of Leucosticte australis, 257.
Anthus pensilvanicus 13, 297.
spraguei, 65, 265, 297.
Antrostomus carolinensis, 303.
vociferus, I9I.
Aphelocoma californica hypoleu-
cus, 335.
insularis, 329.
sieberii arizona, 20.
woodhousei, 20, 290.
Aquila chrysaétos, 75, 91, 341.
Archibuteo ferrugineus, 91, 189.
lagopus, 12.
Ardea abba, 324.
alba, 324.
brunnescens, 327.
(Butorides) virescens, 327.
cerulea, 136, 138, 142, 180,
185, 214, 220, 281, 325.
candidissima, 136, 138, 142,
143, 185, 214, 215, 217, 220,
222, 247, 280, 281, 282, 324.
cubensis, 325.
cyanirostris, 328.
egretta, 78, 136, 138, 142, 143,
159, 214, 215, 217, 247, 324,
339-
Index.
[October
Ardea herodias, 16, 136, 185, 214,
215, 219, 220, 281, 283, 323,
329.
leuce, 324.
leucogastra, 327.
leucogastra var. leucoprym-
na, 327.
ludoviciana, 327.
occidentalis, 159, 324.
pealei, 138, 144, 214, 215, 218.
rufa, 137, 138, 139, 143, 144,
214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 221,
280, 281, 325, 335-
rufescens, 325, 335.
ruficollis tricolor, 138, 142,
143, 215, 220.
tricolor. 327, 328.
tricolor ruficollis, 136, 139,
180, 181, 214, 216, 280, 281,
282, 327. 328%
virescens, 96, 129, 136, 180,
181, 215, 280, 303, 326.
wardi, 143, 272.
wurdemannii, 324.
wuerdemanni, 159, 272.
Arenaria calidris, 315.
interpres, 16, 87, 219, 231.
melanocephala, 12, 329.
Arremon nigrirostris, 150.
Asio accipitrinus, 12, 189, 264.
wilsonianus, 189.
Audubonia occidentalis, 324.
Auk, Razor-billed, 158.
Avocet, 185.
Aythya affinis, 184.
americana, 94, 184.
collaris, 24, 185.
marila nearctica, 141.
vallisneria, 184.
BaGG, E., see Ralph, W. L.
Bailey, H. B., the Brown Thrush
laying in the nest of the Wood
Thrush, 78.
Baird, S. F., occurrence of Cory’s
Shearwater (Puffinus borealis)
and several species of Jaegers in
large numbers in the vicinity of
Gay Head, Mass., during the
autumn of 1886, 71.
Baldpate, 184.
Barrows, W. B., the sense of smell
in Cathartes aura, 172; a protest,
357°
Bartramia longicauda, 12, 186,
19.
hetnane C. W., scarcity of adult
birds in autumn, 79; additional
notes on the birds of Pueblo
County, Colorado, 120; additions
1887.]
to the avi-fauna of Bayou Sara,
LLa., 299.
Bellona cristata, 96.
Bird, Cardinal, 338.
Frigate, 136.
Man-o’-War, 139, 141, 214,
2160, 210, 221, 222,270, 201-
Rice, 59, 341.
Whale, 1.
Bittern, 185.
Least, 185, 338.
Blacicus flaviventris, 251.
martinicensis, 96.
Blackbird, Bicolored, 22.
Boat-tailed, 277.
Brewer’s, 23, 76, 291.
Red-winged, 241, 290, 302.
Rusty, 15.
Yellow-headed, 22, 256, 266,
290.
Blake, BW Te, summer birds of
Santa Cruz Island, California,
328.
Blakiston, J. W., notice of his
‘Water-Birds of Japan,’ 250.
Bluebird, 133, 299, 301.
Eastern, 211.
Mountain, 299.
Western, 299.
Bobolink, 15, 59, 139; 331, 333, 339)
Oo
340-
Bob-white, 9, 129, 246.
Masked, 159.
Texan, 9, 24, 186.
Bonasa umbellus, 103, 129, 246, 338,
42.
semen togata, 15, 16.
Botaurus exilis, 87, 185, 338.
lentiginosus, 185.
Brachyramphus brevirostris, 65.
hypoleucus, 87, 93.
marmoratus, 65, 87.
perdix, 65.
Brambling, 163.
Brant, Black, 185.
Branta bernicla, 264.
canadensis, 185.
canadensis minima, 12.
nigricans, 87, 185.
Brewster, W., the Golden Eagle in
eastern Massachusetts, 75; the
Black Gyrfalcon ( Falco rustico-
lus obsoletus) in eastern Maine,
75; three new forms of North
American birds, 145; the Com-
mon Murre (Ura ftrozile) and
the Razor-billed Auk (Alca tor-
da) on the New England coast,
Index.
363
158; further notes on the Masked
Bob-white (Colinus ridgway?),
159; capture of a third specimen
of the Short-tailed Hawk (Buteo
brachyurus) in Florida, 160; a
third New England specimen of
Swainson’s Hawk (Bufeo swatn-
sont), 160; capture of a Fish Crow
(Corvus osstfragus) at Wareham,
Massachusetts, 162; the Redpolls
of Massachusetts, 163; an over-
looked specimen of Bachman’s
Warbler, 165; discovery of the
nest and eggs of the Western
Warbler (Dendroica occtdenta-
dis), 166; Hummingbirds feeding
their young on insects, 255;
‘scarcity of adult birds in au-
tumn,’ 268.
Brooks, W. E., notice of his papers
on the genus Acanthzs, 63.
Browne, F. C., the New England
Glossy Ibises of 1850, 97; the
Clapper Rail again in Massachu-
setts, 344.
Bryant, W. E., Prranga rubriceps
and Tringa fuscicollis in Califor-
nia, 78; notice of his ‘Additions
to the Ornithology of Guadeloupe
Island,’ 154.
Bubo virginianus, 67, 128, 129, 247.
virginianus subarcticus, 190.
Buffle-head, 185.
Bunting, Black-throated, 294.
Indigo, 131, 293, 302.
Lark, 205, 294.
Lazuli, 205.
Painted, 293.
Snow, 67.
Buteo abbreviatus, 188.
albicaudatus, 26, 188.
borealis, 39, 241, 247.
borealis calurus, 188.
brachyurus, 160.
harlani, 304.
latissimus, 40, 66, 96, 332-
lineatus, 188, 241.
pennsylvanicus, 40.
swainsoni, 91, 160, 189.
Butorides brunnescens, 327.
virescens, 326.
Buzzard, Mexican, 222.
Turkey, 51, 92, 173, 209, 210,
340-
CALAMOSPIZA melanocorys, 205,
204.
Calcarius lapponicus, 12, 347.
ornatus, 77, 199.
304
Campephilus imperialis, 161.
principalis, 68, 338.
Campylorhynchus bruneicapillus,
Calidris arenaria, 219, 276, 278, 279,
315s 350:
Callipepla elegans bensoni, 156.
squamata, 186, 187.
squamata castanogastris, 25.
Canvas-back, 184.
Caprimulgus europzus, 81.
Caracara, Audubon’s, 27, 189.
Cardinal, 131, 244, 293.
Arizona, 204.
Texan, 204, 293.
Cardinalis cardinalis, 131, 244, 293,
302, 338.
cardinalis superbus, 204.
Carduelis elegans, 339.
Carpodacus cassini, 88, 197.
frontalis, 124, 197, 335-
frontalis rhodocolpus,
mexicanus frontalis, 335.
mexicanus ruberrimus, 336.
purpurens, 15, 16, 103, 105,
PTZ 2G e
purpureus californicus, 196,
199.
Catbird, 132, 244, 297, 300.
Catharista atrata, 25, 51, 188, 214,
303.
Cathartes atratus, 51, 52.
aura, 50). $15. 126, 272, 188,
209, 210, 214, 303, 340.
Catophtrophorus speculiferus, 316.
Catoptrophorus semipalmatus, 316.
Cedarbird, 302.
Ceophleus pileatus, 68, 104, 128,
130, 248.
Cepphus columba, 86, 93, 328.
Cepphus perdix, 65.
Cerchneis carribcearum, 46.
isabellina, 44.
leucophrys, 45.
sparveria, 44.
sparverioides. 45.
sparverius, 44.
Cerorhinca monocerata, 93. .
Certhia familiaris americana, 88,
106, 123, 244, 298.
Certhiola martinica, 95.
tricolor, 180, 181.
Ceryle alcyon, 12, 14, 16, 130, 138,
181, 190, 275, 302, 329-
cabanisi, 190.
stictipennis, 96.
Index.
[October
Chadbourne, A. P., a list of the
summer birds of the Presidential
Range of the White Mountains,
Ni He, 100;
Chemepelia passerina, 116.
Chetura, 80, 171.
pelagica, 15, 16, 130, 303.
pelasgica, 104.
vauxli, 92.
Chamea fasciata, 268.
Chamepelia bahamensis, 116, 155.
passerina, 116.
purpurea, 155.
trochila. 116.
Chamberlain, M., the Florida Gal-
linule in Nova Scotia, 253; the
Baltimore Oriole (lceferus galbu-
Za), in Nova Scotia 256;. the
Song Sparrow in New Brunswick
in winter, 260; the Sharp-tailed
Sparrow (Ammodramus cauda-
cutus) in a fresh-water marsh,
261; nesting of the Hudsonian
Chickadee (Parus hudsonicus),
261; new species of winter birds
in New Brunswick, 264.
Chapman, F. M., additional cap-
tures of Helminthophila leuco-
bronchialis, 348.
Charadrius (A®gialitis) vociferus,
228.
dominicus, 78, 186, 227.
fulvus var. virginiacus, 227.
helveticus, 228.
marmoratus, 227.
melodus, 230.
mexicanus, 231.
pluvialis, 227.
pluvialis americanus, 227.
semipalmatus, 229.
squatarola, 219, 227, 274, 279.
virginiacus, 227.
virginianus, 227.
vociferus, 228.
wilsonius, 228.
Charitonetta albeola, 185.
Chat, Long-tailed. 296.
Yellow-breasted,132, 296, 302,
Chelidon erythrogaster, 13, 15, 16,
294, 309; 330-
erythrogastra, 304.
namiyei, 250.
Chen hyperborea, 185, 264.
Chewink, 302.
Chickadee, 107, 298.
Chickadee, Black-cappea, 15, 102.
Carolina, 133, 245, 298, 301-
1887.]
Chickadee Hudsonian, 15, 107, 261.
Hudson’s Bay, 102.
Chicken, Mother Carey’s, 5.
Prairie, 67.
Chlorcenas inornata, 110.
Chondestes grammacus, 133, 241,
Piiite
grammacus
251, 291.
Chordeiles acutipennis texensis, 81.
texensis, 27, 92, 191.
virginianus, 15, 16, 68, 130,
_303-
virginianus henryi, 86, 299.
Chuck-will’s-widow, 303. |
Cinclocerthia gutturalis, 95.
Cinclus mexicanus, 86.
Circus cyaneus, 38.
cyaneus var. hudsonius, 38.
hudsonicus, 38. |
hudsomius, 12; 16, 38, 121,
188, 246.
Cistothorus palustris, 93, 298.
Clarke, H. L., the Canada Jay in
southern Vermont in summer, |
256.
Clarke, W. E., occurrence of Age-
latus phaniceus (L.) on the west |
coast of England, 162.
Clivicola riparia, 15, 16, 294.
Coale, H. K., description of a new
subspecies of Junco from New
Mexico, 330; ornithological curi-
osities,—a Hawk with nine toes,
anda Bobolink with spurs on its |
wings, 331.
Coccothraustes vespertina, 196, 256,
257°
Coccyzus americanus, 190, 263, 264,
303.
americanus occidentalis, 335.
erythrophthalmus, 190, 263.
maynardi, 335.
minor, 96, 180, 221.
sp.?, 16.
Colaptes auratus, 16.66, 68,91, 191,
242, 264, 303, 346, 355.
cafer, 124, 191, 329.
Colinus cubanensis, 223, 224, 225.
graysoni, 74, 160.
ridgwayi, 69, 74, 159. |
virginianus, 9, 129, 224, 246. |
virginianus cubanensis, 336.
strigatus, 199,
virginianus: floridanus, 225, |
283.
virginianus texanus, 9, 24,
186.
Columba caniceps, 118.
Index.
365
Columba caribbza, r1o.
carolinensis, 112.
(Chamepelia) passerina, 116.
corensis, 96, 109.
cristata, 117.
cyanocephala, 120.
frontalis, 111.
(Geotrygon) martinica, 119.
(Geotrygon) montana, 119.
(Goura) passerina, 116.
imbricata, 1og.
inornata, I1o.
jamaicensis, 111.
leucocephala, 108, 180.
leucoptera, 115.
macroura, I12.
martinica, I1g.
migratoria, 113.
montana, 118, rig.
monticolor, 109.
mystacea, 117.
passerina, 116, 155.
portoricensis, 109.
rufina, I10.
(Zenadura) carolinensis, 113.
zenaida, 113.
(Zenaida) martinicana, 114.
Columbigallina passerina, 96, 116,
183.
passerina pallescens, 336.
Colymbus auritus, 247.
Compsothlypis americana, 18o, 301.
Contopus borealis, 18, 88, 192, 335.
pertinax, 19, 264.
richardsoni, 19, 193.
virens, 130, 192.
Conurus carolinensis, 68. 303.
Cooper, J. G., additions to the birds
of Ventura County, Cal., 85.
Cooperastur gundlachi, 4o.
Coot, 185, 303.
Cormorant, 280, 282.
Baird’s, 329.
Brandt’s, 329.
Double-crested, 184, 253.
Blonida, .126,), 147,205, 219;
274, 281.
Corvus americanus, 15, 16, 21, 86,
g2, 104, 130, 290.
americanus hesperus, 335-
carnivorus, 335.
caurinus, 86, 92.
corax carnivorus, 335.
corax principalis, 335.
corax sinuatus, 12, 15, 16, 21,
92, 290, 329-
cryptoleucus, 21, 290.
ossifragus, 138, 162, 214.
306
Cory, C. B., a new Vireo from
Grand Cayman, West Indies, 6;
the birds of the West Indies, in-
cluding the Bahama Islands, the
Greater and the Lesser Antilles,
excepting the Islands of Tobago
and Trinidad, 37, 108, 223, 311;
notice of his paper on birds from
several little-known islands of
the West Indies, 66; description
of a new species of Rhamphocin-
clus from St. Lucia, West Indies,
94; a list of the birds collected
by Mr. W. B. Richardson, in the
Island of Martinique, West Indies,
95; more news of Ardea wuerde-
mannt, 159; descriptions of six
supposed new species of birds
from the Islands of Old Provi-
dence and St. Andrews, Carib-
bean Sea, 177; a list of the birds
taken by Mr. Robert Henderson,
in the Islands of Old Providence
and St. Andrews, Caribbean Sea,
during the winter of 1886-87,
180; description of a new Eue-
thia from Old Providence Island,
245.
Coturnix dactylisonans, 67.
Cowbird, 241, 248, 264, 290.
Dwarf, 22, 290.
Cox, P., Jr., rare birds of north-
eastern New Brunswick, 205.
Crane, Sandhill, 141, 185.
Whooping, 185.
Creaker, 73.
Creeper, Black-and-white, 244, 353.
Brown, 106, 244, 298.
Crossbill, 13.
American, 105, 287.
American Red, 242.
Mexican, 197.
Red, 287.
Crotophaga ani, 96.
sulcirostris, 190.
Crow, 15.
American, 21, 104, 130, 290.
Carrion, 188, 303.
Clark’s, 341.
Fish, 138, 162, 214.
Cuckoo, Black-billed, 190.
Mangrove, 221.
Yellow-billed, 190, 303.
Cupidonia cupido, 67.
Curlew, 247.
Long-billed, 186.
Pinks) 222%
White, 140.
Index.
[October
Cyanocephalus cyanocephalus, 21.
Cyanocitta cristata, 16, 103, 104,
128, 130, 213, 289, 303.
stelleri, 20.
stelleri annectens, 336.
stelleri frontalis, 86.
stelleri macrolopha, 124.
Cyclorhis flaviventris yucatanen-
sis, 156.
Cymindis boliviensis, 48.
cuculoides, 48.
pucherani, 48.
uncinatus, 47, 48.
vitticaudus, 48.
wilsonii, 47.
Cypseli, 8o.
Cypselus apus, 171.
Crytonyx montezume, 186.
DAFILA acuta, 12, 184.
Daption capensis, 4, 5, 6.
Davison, J. L., Ardea egretta in
Niagara County, N. Y., 159; birds
laying their eggs in the nests of
other birds, 263.
Demiegretta ludoviciana, 327.
pealii, 325.
rufa, 325.
ruficollis, 327.
Dendragapus canadensis, 12, 15,
16, 103.
obscurus, 88.
Dendrochelidon mystacea, 171.
Dendrocygna autumnalis, 185,
fulva, 88, 185.
Dendroica xstiva, 13, 16, 94, 264,
296, 297 301.
zstiva morcomi, 251.
auduboni, 125, 296.
blackburniz, 103, 106, 128,
132, 183, 269, 301.
cerulea, 128, 132, 296, 306.
cerulescens, 102, 106, 128,
132, 251.
castanea, 103, 106, 269.
chrysoparia, 296.
coronata, 13, 15, 16, 103, 106,
180, 269, 296, 306.
discolor, 134, 135, 221.
dominica, 7, 165.
dominica albilora, 166, 301.
dugesi, 251.
flavida, 179, 181.
gracie, 86.
maculosa, 15, 16, 269.
nigrescens, 86.
occidentalis, 86, 166.
palmarum, 180.
palmarum hypochrysea, 241.
1887. }
Dendroica pensylvanica, 128, 132,
306.
rufigula, 95-
striata, 13, 102, 103, 106, 248.
tigrina, 221.
townsendi, 183, 296, 297-
vigorsii, 128, 132, 301-
virens, 15, 16, 102, 106, 128,
132, 165, 296.
Dickcissel, 205, 304-
Dimigretta rufa, 325.
Diomedea culminata, 3.
exulans, I, 2, 3, 5,6
melanophrys, 3-
Dolichonyx oryzivorus, 15; 16, 59>
Pe 331, 333> 339s 34% 34!
0.
Dove, Carolina, 303.
Ground, 183.
Mourning, 129, 187, 264, 329.
Dowitcher, 185.
Dryobates arizone, 335-
nuttallii, 156, 251-
pubescens, 16, 104, 130, 190,
242, 303-
pubescens gairdneri, 124, 156.
scalaris, 190, 335-
scalaris bairdi, 335-
stricklandi, 335-
villosus, 16, 104, I21, 128,
130, 304.
villosus auduboni, 242.
villosus harrisi, 121.
Duck, Black, 184.
Eider, 69, 341-
Florida, 274-
Little Scaup, 184.
Ring-necked, 24, 185.
Ruddy, 184.
Wood, 184.
Dunlin, 186.
Dutcher, W., Megalestris skua, 158.
Dwight, J., Jr., summer birds of the
Bras d’Or region of Cape Breton
Island, Nova Scotia, 13; a new
race of the Sharp-tailed Sparrow
(Ammodramus caudacutus), 232.
EAGLe, Bald, 15, 189, 329, 339» 349
341.
Golden, 75, 341:
Ectopistes migratorius, 113, 187,
339-
Egret, American, 78, 217, 247, 280,
281
Great White, 214, 339-
Little White, 142, 143-
Muffled-jawed, 218.
Peale’s, 214, 215-
Index.
367
Egret, Reddish, 137, 139, 143, 214,
215, 216, 217, 218, 221, 280,
281.
White, 67, 142.
Egretta cerulea, 326.
candidissima, 325-
luce, 324.
nivea, 326.
ruficollis, 327.
Elainea cinerescens, 18o.
martinica, 7, 96, 181.
Elanoides forficatus, 46, 304.
Elanus leucurus, 188.
Empidochanes furcatus, 66.
Empidonax acadicus, 303.
brunneus, 66.
difficilis, 19, 92, 329
flaviventris, 16, 103, 104, 269,
304. ;
hammondi, 19, 86, 193.
minimus, 193.
obscurus, 19, 85, 92, 183, 193-
pusillus, 19, 92, 193.
pusillus traillii, 9, 16, 193-
salvini, 66.
Engyptila collaris, 112.
jamaicensis, DLt, 170;
neoxena, 179, ISI.
wellsi, I1I, 251.
Ereunetes himantopus, 312.
occidentalis, 186, 313-
petrificatus, 313.
pusillus, 12, 16, 313.
Erismatura rubida, 185-
Erithacus rubecula, 163.
Eudocimus albus, 321.
ruber, 321.
Euetheia bicolor, 96, 180, 181, 245-
grandior, 245.
olivacea, 7-
Eulampis holosericeus, 96.
jugularis, 96.
Euligia bartramia, 319.
Euphonia flavifrons, 95.
Eupsychortyx sonninii, 225.
FALCINELLUSerythrorhynchus, 322.
ordil, 322.
Falco esalon, 345-
anatum, 43.
anthracinus, 42.
borealis, 39-
candicans, 63-
caribbearum, 96.
carolinensis, 38.
cayennensis, 38.
cheriway, 50.
columbarius, 12, 43, 91, 96;
103, 189, 241.
368
Falco communis, 43.
communis, var. anatum, 43.
dominicensis, 44.
forficatus, 46.
furcatus, 46.
hudsonius, 38.
isabellinus, 44.
latissimus, 4o.
leucophrys, 45.
mexicanus, 91, 183.
noveboracensis, 44.
peregrinus, 43.
peregrinus anatum, 43, 9I,
340-
richardsonii, 341.
rusticolus obsoletus, 75.
sparverioides, 45.
sparverius, 16, 43, 44, 103,
124, 128, 129, 189, 241, 338,
339:
sparverius dominicensis, 45.
sparverius isabellinus, 44, 45.
sparverius sparverioides, 45.
sparverius, var. dominicen-
sis, 45.
(Tinnunculus) sparverioides,
45°
(Tinnunculus) sparverius,
uncinatus, 48.
velox, 42.
vitticaudus, 48.
Falcon, Lanier, 341.
Peregrine, 340.
Prairie, 183.
Ferrari-Perez, F., notice of his cat-
alogue of Mexican birds, 65.
Finch, Bachman’s, 302.
California Purple, 196.
Cassin’s Purple, 197.
Crimson House, 330.
Grass, 241, 259.
House, 197.
Lark, 133.
Pine, 199, 284.
Purple, 15, 103, 105, 212, 291.
Western Lark, 201.
Fishhawk, 275.
Flamingo, 72, 185.
Flicker, 191, 242, 264, 303, 329.
Red- shafted, 191.
Flint, W., the metric system, 357.
Florida cerulea, 326.
Flycatcher, Acadian, 303.
Arizona Crested, 17.
Ash-throated, £8, 192.
Baird’s, 19, 329.
Coues’s, 19.
Index.
[October
Flycatcher, eianeweier 192, 303.
Hammond’s, 19, 193.
Least, 293.
Little, 19, 193.
Olivaceous, 18.°
Olive-sided, 18, 192.
Scissor-tailed, 192.
Traill’s, 9, 193.
Vermilion, Ig.
Wright’s, 19, 183, 193.°'
Yellow-bellied, 103, 104, 304.
Fox, W. H., Vireo solitar tus alticola
in Tennessee, 164. ©
Fregata aquila, 137, 139, 141, 180,
TOL, 204, 200; 219,02202208
279, 281.
Fringilla montifringilla, 163.
oregona, 330.
Fulica americana, 185, 303-
Fulmar, Giant, 3.
Southern, 4:
Fulmarus glacialis glupischa, 87.
glacialoides, 4, 87.
GADWALL, 184. ;
Galeoscoptes carolinensis, 132, 181,
a) 444s A075 SOD:
Gallinago celestis, 163:
delicata, 16, 96, 121, 185, 303,
S570. Ae f
media wilsoni, 311.
wilsoni, 311.
Gallinula galeata, 72, 253.
Gallinule, Florida, 72, 253.
Gambetta flavipes, 317.
melanoleuca, 317.
Garzetta candidissima, 325.
Gavia alba, 339
_ Gelochelidon nilotica, 133-
Geococcyx californianus, 190, 254.
Geothlypis agilis, 106.
formosa, 302.
macgillivrayi, 86, 296.
philadelphia, 106, 296.
restricta, 155.
trichas, 16, 132, 302.
trichas occidentalis, 296.
Geotrygon caniceps, 118.
cristata, 117.
martinica, 119.
montana, 96, 118.
mystacea, 96, I17.
sylvatica, I17.
'Glottis melanoleuca, 317.
Gnatcatcher, Blue-gray, 133, 298,
301.
Godwit, Hudsonian, 341.
Goldfinch, 15, 264.
American, 105, 131, 197, 291.
1887. |
Goldfinch, Arizona, 198.
Arkansas, 198, 291.
European, 339-
Lawrence’s, 199.
Goney, 3.
Goodale, J. L., occurrence of Ca/l-
carius ornatus in Maine, 77; addi-
tional occurrences of the Connec-
ticut Warbler in Maine, 77.
Goose, American White-fronted,
185.
Canada, 185.
Lesser Snow, 185.
Goshawk, Western, 183, 188.
Goss, N. S., additions to the cata-
logue of the birds of Kansas, 7;
what constitutes a full set of
eggs?, 167; Merganser america-
nus breeding in New Mexico, 344;
Ictinia misstssippiensts and ct gt-
alitis nivosa nesting in southern
central Kansas, 344.
Goura jamaicensis, III.
Grackle, Boat-tailed, 346.
Bronzed, 131, 291, 302.
Purple, 69, 302.
Grebe, Carolina, 247.
Crested, 68.
Horned, 247.
Pied-billed, 8, 184.
Green, M. M., occurrence of Phala-
ropus lobatus at Syracuse, Noe,
73; central New York notes, 350.
Grosbeak, Black-headed, 205, 293.
Blue, 205, 293, 296.
Cardinal, 302.
Evening, 196, 256, 257-
Pine, 13, 104, 212.
Rose-breasted, 15.
Grouse, Canada, I5, 103.
Pinnated, 340.
Ruffed, 15, 103, 129, 246, 338,
342.
Grus americanus, 185.
canadensis, 12, 264.
mexicana, 86, 141, 185.
Guara alba, 137, 138, 139, 141, 214,
279, 281, 283, 321.
rubra, 321.
Guillemot, Pigeon, 328.
Guiraca cerulea, 205, 293, 296.
cerulea eurhyncha, 336.
Gull, American Herring, 274.
Heermann’s, 329.
Herring, 14.
Ivory, 339-
Laughing, 137, 139, 273, 274:
Ring-billed, 274.
Western, 329.
Index.
369
Gyrfalcon, 13, 341.
Black, 75.
Hasta ludoviciana, 15, 16.
melanocephala, 205, 293.
Hzmatopus bachmani, 329.
palliatus, 230, 273.
Halizétus leucocephalus, 15, 16,
159; 189, 329; 339) 340 341:
Harporhynchus bendirei, 68.
curvirostris palmeri, 68.
rufus, 78, 263, 300.
Harrier, Marsh, 188.
Hawk, American Sparrow, 129, 188.
Broad-winged, 66, 332-
Cooper’s, 103, 188.
Harlan’s, 304.
Harris’s, 26.
Marsh, 246.
Pigeon, 103, 188, 241.
Red-shouldered, 188, 241.
Red-tailed, 241, 247.
Sharp-shinned, 103, 188, 264.
Short-tailed, 160.
Sparrow, 103, 338, 339-
Swainson’s, 160, 189.
White-tailed, 26, 188.
Zone-tailed, 188.
Hay, O. P., the Red-headed Wood-
pecker a hoarder, 193.
Helinaia swainsoni, 37, 68, 263, 300,
_ 395) 347:
Helminthophila, 307.
Helminthophila bachmani, 35, 165,
262, 308, 310, 348.
carbonata, 310.
celata, 37, 123, 296, 307, 309,
300:
celata lutescens, 93, 296, 307,
7332
chrysoptera, 308, 309, 310,
ono:
lawrencei, 308, 310.
leucobronchialis,
348, 349-
luciz, 307.
peregrina, 106, 296, 306, 307,
399) 352) 353-
pinus, 308, 309, 310, 348.
ruficapilla, 105, 307, 309.
ruficapilla gutturalis, 88, 295,
297,
virginie, 307.
Helmitherus vermivorus, 37, 128,
132, 305;
Hemipalama minor, 313.
semipalmata, 313.
Hen, Cape, 3.
Lesser Prairie, 187.
Prairie, 67.
308, 310,
37°
Henshaw, H. W., the Lapland
Longspur about Washington, D.
C., 347-
Herodias czrulea, 326.
candidissima, 325.
egretta, 324.
luce, 324.
ludoviciana, 327.
occidentalis, 324.
pealii, 325.
rufescens, 325.
ruficollis, 327.
virescens, 326.
Heron, Great Blue, 185, 214,
220, 281, 283, 329.
Green, 129, 280.
Little, 185.
Little Blue, 214, 281.
Little Green, 303.
Louisiana, 139, 214, 216, 280,
281, 282.
Night, 264, 281.
Snowy, 185, 214, 217, 222, 247,
281, 282.
Herpetotherus sociabilis, 47.
Hesperocichla nevia, 13, 86.
Heteractitis incanus, 87, 329.
Himantopus mexicanus, 87, 231.
nigricollis, 231.
Hirundo pacifica, 80.
riparia, 8o.
rustica, 8o.
urbica, 8o.
Hummingbird, Black-chinned, 192.
Ruby-throated, 130, Ig1, 242,
303.
Rufous, 329.
Hummer, Black-chinned, 183.
Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis,
184, 273, 282.
Hypomorphnus gundlachi, 42.
Hypomorphus gundlachi, 42.
Hypotriorchis columbarius, 43.
Hypsipetes pryeri, 250.
Isis, Black Egyptian, 253.
Glossy, 97, 253-
White, 137. 138, 139, 141, 214,
2479, 281, 283.
Ibis alba, 321.
falcinella,g7, 99, 100, 253, 321.
guarauna, 98, 100.
ordii, 98.
rubra, 321.
thalassina, 100.
Icoturus namiyei, 250.
Icteria virens, 132, 296, 302.
virens longicauda, 296.
Icterus bonana, 96.
219,
Index.
[October
Icterus bullocki, 23, 124, 290.
cucullatus nelsoni, 22, 23.
galbula, 246, 248, 256, 302.
lawrenceii, 178, 181.
parisorum, 22.
spurius, 290, 302.
Ictinia mississippiensis, 188, 344.
Jays 2132
Jay, Arizona, 20.
Blue, 103, 104, 128, 130, 289,
303.
Canada, 103, 104, 256.
Island, 329.
Long-crested, 20.
Pifion, 21.
Woodhouse’s, 20, 183, 290.
Jones, H. E., et al., notice of their
‘Illustrations of the nests andeggs
of birds of Ohio’, 150.
Junco aikeni, 122, 123.
annectens, 122, 123, 200, 201.
caniceps 201, 202.
cinereus, 201.
cinereus dorsalis, 201, 202.
cinereus palliatus, 201, 202.
hyemalis, 13, 15, 16, 102, 103,
105, 122, 200, 201, 243, 244,
202.)4e Tr
hyemalis carolinensis, 242,
243-
hyemalis connectens, 122.
hyemalis oregonus, 123, 125,
200, 201, 292, 330, 331.
hyemalis shufeldti, 330, 331.
oregonus, 122.
Junco, 102, 103.
Carolina, 242.
Oregon, 292.
Slate-colored, 15, 105, 292.
KESTRIL, American, 341.
Killdeer, 129, 186.
Kingbird, 15, 69, 130, 192, 303.
Akansas, 16, 192.
Cassin’s, 17.
Gray, 141, 277.
Kingfisher, 14, 138, 275, 302.
Belted, 130, 190, 329.
Texan, 190.
Kinglet, Golden-crested, 245.
Golden-crowned, 15, 103, 107,
298, 350.
Ruby-crowned, 241, 298, 306.
Kite, Mississippi, 188, 344.
Swallow-tailed, 304.
White-tailed, 188.
Knot, 276, 278, 279.
Kumlien, L., the Merlin (Falco
@salon) in Greenland, 345.
1887.]
Lacopus lagopus, 12.
Lampornis hendersoni, 177, 180.
Langdon, F. W., August birds of
the Chilhowee Mountains, Ten-
nessee, 125.
Lanius borealis, 13.
ludovicianus excubitorides,
77> 123, 294, 330.
ludovicianus gambeli, 336.
Lark, Desert Horned, 193.
Horned, 329, 347.
Meadow, 242, 290, 302, 342.
Mexican Horned, 20.
Prairie Horned, 255.
Sprague’s, 65.
Western Meadow, 22, 290.
Lark-Sparrow, 241.
Larus argentatus smithsonianus,
14, 274.
atricilla, 137, 139, 222, 273,
274.
cachinnans, 86.
delawarensis, 274.
glaucus, 12.
heermanni, 329.
leucopterus, 12.
occidentalis, 329.
philadelphia, 12, 16.
Lawrence, G. N., the rediscovery of
Bachman’s Warbler, Helmintho-
phila bachmanni (Aud.), in the
United States, 35; additional
specimens of Bachman’s and
Swainson’s Warblers obtained by
Mr. Chas. S. Galbraith in the
spring of 1887, 262. See also
Wells, J. G
Lawrence, R. B., the Canadian
Warbler breeding in Pike County,
Pa., 349.
Leptodon uncinatus, 48.
Leptodon wilsoni, 47.
Leptoptila jamaicensis, 111.
Leucosticte australis, 257.
tephrocotis, 258.
Limnodramus griseus, 312.
Limosa fedoa, 316.
hemastica, 316, 341.
hudsonica, 316.
scolopacea, 312.
Lloyd, W., birds of Tom Green and
Concho Counties, Texas, 181,
289.
Longspur, Chestnut-collared, 199.
Lapland, 347.
McCown’s, 201.
Loomis, L. M., on an addition to
the ornithology ofSouth Carolina,
Index.
371
76; remarks on four examples of
the Yellow-throated Warbler from
Chester County, S. C., 165;
Otocoris alfestris praticola in
Chester County, South Carolina,
255; another addition to the avi-
fauna of South Carolina, 261;
Flelinata swainsonit near Chester
Gaus: C., 347.
Loon, 184, 247.
Lophodytes cucullatus, 184.
Loxia curvirostra minor, 105, 242,
287.
curvirostra stricklandi, 197.
Loxigilla noctis, 95.
Lucas, F. A., notes of a bird catcher,
1; Classification of the Macro-
chires, 170.
MACROCHIRES, 80, 170.
Macrorhamphus griseus, 185, 219,
279, 312.
scolopaceus, 312.
Macrotarsus nigricollis, 231.
Majaqueus equinoctialis, 3.
Mallard, 184.
Margarops albiventris, 251.
densirostris, 95.
montanus, 95.
Marsh-tit, British, 64.
Martin, Purple, 131, 294, 302.
Maynard, C. J., notice of his de-
scriptions of new birds from the
Bahamas, 155.
McArthur, A., a bird scare, 351.
MclIlwraith, T., notices of his ‘Birds
of Ontario’, 255, 246.
Meadowlark, 76.
Megalestris skua, 158.
Megascops asio, 67, 128, 129.
asio maccallii, 190.
elegans, 250.
japonicus, 250.
Melanerpes aurifrons, I91.
carolinus, I91, 303.
erythrocephalus, 121, 130,
I9I, 193, 242, 303.
formicivorus, 194.
formicivorus bairdi, 345.
torquatus, 183, I9I.
Meleagris gallopavo, 129, 340.
gallopavo mexicana, 186.
Melopelia leucoptera, 115, 116, 180.
Melospiza fasciata, 16, 105, 259, 260,
261, 293.
fasciata fallax, 203.
fasciata montana, 125, 204,
fasciata samuelis, 93.
georgiana, 16, 264, 293, 302.
372
Melospiza lincolni, 93, 125, 204, 293.
Merganseramericanus, 184, 247, 344.
serrator, 12, 264.
Merganser, American, 184, 247, 344.
Hooded, 184.
Merlin, 335.
American, 341.
Merriam, C. H., another specimen
of Bachman’s Warbler (Helmin-
thophila bachmanz), 262.
Merula migratoria, 13, 15, 16, 67,
108, 133, 213, 245, 264, 298.
migratoria propinqua, 125, 208.
Micropalama himantopus, 186, 264,
Sued
Micropus melanoleucus, 170.
Milvulus forficatus, 192.
Mimus gilvus, 95.
magnirostris, 178, 181.
polyglottus, 297, 300.
Minor Ornithological Publications,
66, 337:
Mniotilta varia, 15, 16,
181, 244, 295, 301, 353:
Mockingbird, 297, 300.
Molly-Hawk, 3.
Molly-Mawk, 3.
Molothrus zneus, 335.
ater, 241, 248, 264, 290.
ater obscurus, 22, 290.
Morphnus urubitinga, 42.
Morris, R. O., occurrence of the
Florida Gallinule at Springfield,
Mass., 72; the Double-crested
Cormorant near Springfield,
Mass., 253.
Murre, Briinnich’s, 158.
Common, 158.
Myadestes townsendi, 86, 125, 169.
Myiadestes genibarbis, 95.
Myiarchus cinerascens, 18, 192.
coalei, 156.
crinitus, 192, 303.
lawrencei olivaceus, 18.
mexicanus magister, 17.
NAUCLERUS furcatus, 46.
Nisus cooperi var. gundlachi, 4o.
fringilloides, 41.
fuscus, 41.
fuscus var. fringilloides, 41.
gundlachi, 4o.
pileatus, 4o.
Nighthawk, 15, 68, 130, 303.
Texan, 27, Igl.
Western, 299.
Nonpareil, 290, 302.
Numenius borealis, 320.
hudsonicus, 264, 320.
128, 132,
Index.
[October
Numenius longirostris, 186, 320.
tahitiensis, 12.
Numida meleagris, 223.
Nutcracker, Clarke’s, 255, 256.
Nuthatch, Red-breasted, 107.
White-breasted, 133, 298.
Nyctala acadica, 67, 88, 161, 341.
Nyctea nyctea, 13, 341.
Nyctiardea violacea, 96.
Nycticorax nycticorax nevius, 136,
264, 281.
violaceus, 136, 281,
OCEANITES oceanicus, 68, 87, 341.
Oceanodroma leucorhoa, 68.
melania, 87.
Ochthodromus wilsonius, 229.
Ocniscus brunnescens, 327.
virescens, 327.
(Edicnemus dominicensis, 226.
Oidemia americana, 87.
perspicillata, 87.
Olor buccinator, 185.
columbianus, 12.
Olphe-Galliard, L., notice of his
‘Contributions a la faune ornitho-
logique de l’Europe Occidentale,’
336.
Oporornis agilis, 78.
Oreopeleia martinica, 119.
martinicana, 11g.
Oriole, Arizona Hooded, 23.
Baltimore, 246, 248, 256, 302.
Bullock’s, 23, 290.
Orchard, 290, 302.
Scott’s, 22.
Oroscoptes montanus, 86, 297.
Ortalida ruficauda, 223.
Ortyx cubanensis, 224.
cubensis, 224.
sonninii, 225.
virginianus, 223, 224.
virginianus var. cubanensis,
224.
Osprey, 299.
American, 104, 189.
Ossifraga gigantea, 3.
Otocoris alpestris, 255, 347-
alpestris arenicola, 124, 193.
alpestris chrysolema, 20, 124.
alpestris praticola, 255.
alpestris subsp. ?, 329.
Oven-bird, 132, 248, 296.
Owl, Acadian, 67.
American Barn, 189.
American Long-eared, 189.
Barn, 339.
Barred, 189, 277.
Burrowing, 189.
/
1887. ]
Owl, Great Horned, 67, 127, 129, 247.
Hawk, 13.
Saw-whet, 161.
Screech, 67, 129.
Short-eared, 189.
Snowy, 13, 341.
Texan Screech, rgo.
Western Horned, 1go.
Oxyechus vociferus, 228.
Oyster-catcher, American, 273.
Black, 329.
PANDION carolinensis, 38.
haliaétus, 38.
haliaétus carolinensis, 12, 38,
91, 104, 189, 275, 299.
ridgwayi, I55.
Parabuteo unicinctus harrisi, 26.
Parakeet, Carolina, 68, 303.
Pardalotus affinis, 249.
assimilis, 249.
ornatus, 249.
Paroquet, 257.
Partridge, Massena, 187.
Scaled, 187.
Parus atricapillus, 15, 16, 102, 107,
133, 298,
atricapillus occidentalis, 86.
atricapillus septentrionalis,
123°
atricristatus, 28, 298.
atricristatus castaneifrons, 28.
bicolor, 29; 30; 133; 245, 301-
bicolor texensis, 29.
britannicus, 65.
carolinensis, 133, 245, 298,
301.
gambeli, 88, 123, 125.
hudsonicus, 13, 15, 16, 102,
107, 261.
palustris dresseri, 64.
stoneyi, 336.
Passer domesticus, 60, 68, 131, 304,
338, 360.
Passerella iliaca, 13. 67.
iliaca unalaschkensis, 93.
Passerina amoena, 205.
ciris, 290, 293, 302.
cyanea, 131, 293, 302.
versicolor pulchra, 336.
Patagicenas caribza, IIo.
corensis, 109.
leucocephala, 109.
Pelecanus californicus, 87, 329.
erythrorhynchus, 67, 184, 273,
274.
fuscus, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141,
PUR ZNO 20S PetO.. 222, 2/73)
279, 280, 281.
Index.
373
Pelican, Brown, 136, 137, 138, 139,
I4I, 215, 216, 218, 219, 222,
273, 279, 280, 281.
California Brown, 329.
White, 67, 184, 273, 274.
Pelidna pectoralis, 314.
pusilla, 313, 314.
schinzii, 314.
Perdix sonninii, 225.
Pericrocotus tegimz, 250.
Perisoreus canadensis, 103, 104, 256.
canadensis fumifrons, 12.
Perissura carolinensis, 112.
Peristera jamaicensis, 111.
montana, 118.
Petrel, Leach’s, 68.
Stormy, 5, 6.
Wilson’s, 68.
Petrochelidon lunifrons, 15, 16, 123,
294, 304, 309- ;
Peucea estivalis bachmanii, 292,
302.
arizone, 336.
carpalis, 203.
cassini, 292.
mexicanus, 336.
ruficeps, 93.
ruficeps boucardi, 203.
Pewee, 247.
Western Wood, 1g, 193.
Wood, 130, 192.
Phebetria fuliginosa, 3.
Phainopepla nitens, 86.
Phalacrocorax dilophus, 253.
dilophus floridanus, 136, 141,
184, 215, 219, 274, 280, 281,
282.
pelagicus albociliatus, 93.
pelagicus resplendens, 329.
penicillatus, 329.
Phalznoptilus nuttalli, 86, 147, 148,
Il.
ieieaili californicus, 336.
nuttalli nitidus, 147, 148.
Phalarope, Northern, 73, 78.
Wilson’s, 8, 73, 185.
Phalaropus lobatus, 73, 78. go.
tricolor, 8, 185.
Phillips, C. L., egg-laying extraor-
dinary in Colaftes auratus,
b 346.
Philohela minor, 67, 73, 185, 241,
311.
Pheebe, 192.”
Black, 18, 102, 329.
Say’s, 18, 192.
Pheenicopterus ruber, 72, 185, 323-
Phyacophilus solitarius, 318.
374
Phyllopseustes borealis, 13.
Pica pica hudsonica, 124.
rustica, 62.
Picicorvus columbianus, 88,
256, 341.
Picoides americanus, 104.
Picolaptes rikeri, 156.
Picus minor 62.
villosus, 303.
Piceon, Capes 4495.10:
Passenger, 187.
Pindar, L. O., occurrence of the
Evening Grosbeak in Fulton
County, Kentucky, 257.
Pinicola enucleator, 14, 104, 212,
535:
enucleator canadensis, 335.
enucleator kadiaka, 336.
Pintail, 184.
Pipilo aberti, 204.
chlorurus, 204, 293.
2553
erythrophthalmus, 131, 248,
293, 302.
fuscus mesoleucus, 123, 204,
293.
maculatus arcticus, 125, 264,
293.
maculatus megalonyx, 204,
264, 330.
Pipit, American, 297.
Sprague’s, 297.
Piranga erythromelas,
304.
ludoviciana, 294.
rubra, 131, 294, 302.
rubra cooperi, 88.
rubriceps, 78.
Platalea ajaja, 322.
ajuga, 322.
Platt, F., notice of his ‘List of the
Birds of Meriden, Conn.,’ 154.
Plectrophenax nivalis, 67.
nivalis townsendi, 336.
Plegadis autumnalis, 97, 253, 321.
falcinellus, 322.
guarauna, 100, 322.
Pleske, T., notice of his ‘ Ueber-
sicht der Saiugethiere und Végel
‘der Kola-Halbinsel,’ 61.
Plover, American Golden, 78.
Black-bellied, 186, 218, 279.
Golden, 186.
Mountain, 186.
Snowy, 8, 60, 344.
Wilson’s, 137, 274, 276.
Podicipes cristatus, 68.
Podilymbus podiceps, 8, 184.
Peecilornis sparverioides, 45.
131, 294,
Index.
[October
Peecilornis sparverius, 44.
Polioptila cerulea, 7,131, 295, 298,
301.
plumbea, 88.
Polyborus auduboni, 50.
brasiliensis, 50.
cheriway, 27, 50, 189, 222.
tharus, 50.
vulgaris, 50.
Poocetes gramineus, 241, 242, 247,
248, 259, 260, 291.
gramineus confinis, 86, 199,
259, 260, 291.
gramineus var. confinis, 260.
Poor-will, 1gr.
Frosted, 147.
Porzana carolina, go, 185, 339.
noveboracensis, 247, 339.
Prion turtur, 1.
Progne cryptoleuca, 336.
subis, 131, 294, 302,
Protonotaria citrea, 37, 164, 304.
Ptycorhamphus aleuticus, 86, 93.
Publications received, 69, 156, 251,
342-
Puffinus auduboni, 181.
borealis, 71.
creatopus, 87.
major, 71.
stricklandi, 71, 87.
Pyrocephalus rubineus mexicanus,
IQ, 92.
Pyrrhuloxia sinuata, 204, 293, 347.
sinuata beckhami, 347.
sinuata peninsule, 347.
Pyrrhuloxia, Arizona, 347.
St. Lucas, 347.
QualIL, Blue, 186, 187.
Florida, 283.
Migratory, 67.
Quiscalus inflexirostris, 96.
major, 277, 346.
purpureus, 69, 302.
quiscula, 131.
quiscula zeneus,
303.
RAGSDALE, G. H., change of winter
habitat in the Grass Finch, 259.
Rail, Clapper, 344.
King, 299.
Sora, 185.
Virginia, 67.
Yellow, 247.
Rallus coryi, 155.
elegans, 299.
longirostris crepitans, 344.
obsoletus, 90.
virginianus, 16, 67, 90, 124.
201, 302;
1887.]
Ralph, W. L., and Bagg, E., notice
of their ‘Annotated List of the
Birds of Oneida County, N. Y.,’
154.
Raven, 15, 92, 188.
American, 21, 290, 329.
White-necked, 21, 290.
Recurvirostra americana. 185, 232.
Red-head, 184.
Redpoll, Southern, 32.
Redstart, 247, 297, 301, 353-
American, 132.
Black, 163.
Red-tail, Western, 188.
Redwing, 163.
Regerhinus uncinatus, 47, 48.
wilsoni, 47.
Regulus calendula, 123, 241, 298,
306.
satrapa, 15, 16, 103, 107, 245,
298, 306, 350. ‘
satrapa olivaceus, 86.
Rhamphocinclus sancte-luciz, 94.
Rhyacophilus solitarius, 318.
Rhyncophanes mccowniil, 291.
Ricebird, 340, 360.
Ridgway, R., notice of his ‘Descrip-
tion of a melanistic specimen of
Buteo latissimus (Wils.),’ 66; no-
tice of his papers on the species of
the genus Emfpzdonax, 66; a sin-
gularly marked specimen of SAhy-
rapicus thyroideus, 75; notice of
his ‘Nomenclature of Colors for
Naturalists, and Compendium of
useful knowledge for Ornitholo-
gists,’ 152; notice of his descrip-
tions of new species of American
birds, etc., 156; the Imperial
Woodpecker (Campephilus tm-
perialts) in Northern Sonora, 161 ;
the Coppery-tailed Trogon (7 vro-
gon ambiguus) breeding in south-
ern Arizona, 161; Clarke’s Nut-
cracker (Prczcorvus columbianus)
in the Bristol Bay region, Alaska,
255; Clarke’s Nutcracker from
the Kowak River, Alaska, 256;
Yellow-headed Blackbird (Xan-
thocephalus xanthocephalus) in
Maine, 256; note on Sfzzella
monticola ochracea, Brewst., 258;
‘notice of his ‘Manual of North
American Birds,’ 333; description
of two new races of Pyrrhuloxia
stnuata Bonap., 347; on the cor-
rect subspecific title of Baird’s
Index.
375
Wren (No. 719 4, A. O. U. Check
List), 349.
Ridgway Ornithological
notice of ‘Bulletin’ of, 251.
Ring Ouzel, Alpine, 249.
Northern, 249.
Rives, W.C.. Jr., Wilson’s Phala-
rope in Rhode Island, 73.
Road-runner, Igo.
Robin, 215, (67; 133, 163; 213; 245;
264, 298.
Western, 208.
Rosthramus sociabilis, 47.
Rostrhamus hamatus, 47.
sociabilis, 47.
uncinatus, 48.
Rough-leg, Ferrugineous, 189.
Rupornis magnirostris, 39.
ridgwayi, 38.
Rusticola minor, 311.
Ruticilla titys, 163.
Rynchops nigra, 137, 274.
SAGE, J. H., another specimen of
the Prothonotary Warbler in
Massachusetts, 164; the Middle-
town, Conn., Glossy Ibis of 1850,
253-
Salpinctes obsoletus, 123, 297.
Saltator guadeloupensis, 95.
Sanderling, 276, 279, 350.
Sandpiper, Baird’s, 186.
Bartramian, 186.
Black-bellied, 276.
Buft-breasted, 186.
Least, 186. ,
Pectoral, 186.
Red-backed, 276, 279.
Solitary, 129, 186, 241, 303.
Spotted, 14, 129, 186, 303,
Club,
340.
Stilt, 186.
Western, 186.
Sapsucker, Williamson’s, Igr.
Saunders, W. E., Mcllwraith’s
‘Birds of Ontario,’ 246.
Sayles, I., the sense of smell in
Cathartes aura, 51.
Sayornis nigricans, 18, 192, 329.
pheebe, 192, 247, 264.
saya, 18, 192.
Sclater, P. L., notice of his cata-
logue of the Corebide, Tana-
grid and Icteride, 149.
Scolecophagus carolinus,
16, 264.
cyanocephalus, 23, 76, 124,
264, 291.
Te. 15;
376 Index. [October
Scolopax alba, 321.
borealis, 320.
delicata, 311.
fedoa, 316.
flavipes, 317.
gallinago, 311.
grisea, 312.
hemastica, 316.
melanoleucus, 317.
minor, 311.
semipalmata, 146, 316.
wilsoni, 311.
Scott, W. E. D., on the avi-fauna of
Pinal County, with remarks on
some birds of Pima and Gila
Counties, Arizona, with annota-
tions by J. A. Allen, 16, 196; some
rare Florida birds, 133; the
present condition of some of the
bird rookeries of the Gulf coast of
Florida, 135, 213, 273; another
Bachman’s Warbler in Florida,
348.
Seiurus aurocapillus, 132, 180, 248,
296, 301, 352, 253-
motacilla, 180, 248.
noveboracensis, 7, 13, 95,
180, 181, 248, 269, 306.
noveboracensis notabilis, 180.
Selasphorus floressil, 339.
Sennett, G. B., some undescribed
plumages of North American
birds, 24; descriptions of two
new subspecies of Titmice from
Texas, 28; observations in West-
ern North Carolina mountains in
1886, 240.
Setophaga ruticilla, 16, 95, 132, 247,
297, 301, 353-
Shearwater, Cory’s, 71.
Shoveller, 184.
Shrike, 77.
White-rumped, 294, 330.
Shufeldt, R. W., classification of
the Macrochires, 80; notice of
his list of his scientific writings,
155; the camera and field orni-
thology, 168; Geococcyx califor-
nianus —a correction, 254; indi-
vidual variation in the skeletons
of birds, and other matters, 265 ;
notes on Melanerpes formict-
vorus bairdi in New Mexico,
345; the dermo-tensor patagii
muscle, 353.
Sialia arctica, 125, 299.
mexicana, 125, 299.
sialis, 133, 211, 299, 301.
Siskin, Pine, 105.
Sitta amurensis clara, 249.
canadensis, 107, 269.
carolinensis, 133, 298.
pygmea, 88.
Skimmer, Black, 137, 274.
Skua, Giant, I.
Smith, H. M., the range of Quis-
calus major, 346.
Snipe, 163.
Wilson’s, 185, 303, 337-
Somateria dresseri, 341.
mollissima, 335.
mollissima borealis, 335.
Sparrow, Acadian Sharp-tailed, 233.
Bachman’s, 292.
Baird’s, 291.
Belding’s Marsh, 251.
Bell’s, 203.
Black-chinned, 200.
Black-throated, 202, 292.
Brewer’s, 292.
Cassin’s, 292.
Chipping, 15, 131, 292, 304.
Chippy, 247, 248.
Clay-colored, 200, 292.
Desert Song, 203.
English, 60, 68, 338, 360.
European House, 131, 304.
Field, 131, 248, 292, 304.
Fox, 67.
Grasshopper, 248, 304.
Harris’s, 122, 291.
Henslow’s, 350.
House, 360.
Intermediate, 200, 292.
Lincoln’s, 204, 293-
Mountain Song, 204.
Rufous-winged, 203.
Savannah, 237, 259, 302.
Sharp-tailed, 232, 260.
Song, 105, 259. 260, 293-
Swamp, 239, 293, 302.
Texas Field, 292.
sree t22-
Vesper, 242, 247, 248, 291.
Western Chipping, 200, 292,
330.
Western Grasshopper, 199,
291.
Western Lark, 199.
Western Savanna, 199, 291.
Western Tree, 10, 299.
Western Vesper, 199, 291.
White-crowned, 200, 24T,
292.
White-throated, 15, 67, 102,
103, 105, 122, 302.
1887.]
Spatula clypeata, 184.
Speotyto cunicularia hypogza, Igo.
Sphyrapicus ruber, gr.
thyroideus, 75, 191.
varius, 16, 181, 242.
Spinus lawrencei, 199.
pinus, 88, 105, 124, 199, 284.
psaltria, 124, 198, 291.
psaltria arizone, 198.
psaltria mexicanus, 198.
trISt1S; 115,16, 105,, 124, 137,
197, 264, 291.
Spiza americana, 180, 205, 251, 294,
i 304.
Spizella atrigularis, 200.
breweri, 93, 292.
monticola, 11, 122, 258, 259.
monticola ochracea, 10, 12,
122, 258, 299.
pallida, 93, 200, 292.
pusilla, 131, 248, 259,
304.
pusilla arenacea, 292.
socialis, 15, 16, 131, 247, 248,
264, 292, 304.
292,
socialis arizonz, 124, 200,
292, 295, 330.
Spoonbill, Roseate, 137, 138, 215,
274, 280, 281, 304.
Squatarola helvetica, 186, 228.
Starnoenas cyanocephala, 120.
Steganopus tricolor, 73.
Stejneger, L., further notes on the
genus Acanthis, 30; notice of his
paper on the Japanese Woodpeck-
ers, 63; notice of his paper on the
British Marsh-Tit, 64; notice of
his paper, ‘On Brachyramphus
perdix and its nearest Allies’ 65;
supplementary notes on the genus
Acanthts, 144; notice of his paper
‘On the status of Synxthliboram-
phus wumizusume as a North
American bird,’ 155 ; classification
of the Macrochires, 170; notice of
his paper on the species of Par-
dalotus, 249; notice of his paper on
Turdus alpestris and T. torgua-
tus, 249; notice of his review of
Japanese birds, 249; the ‘Proceed-
ings’ of the U. S. National
Museum, 270.
Stelgidopteryx serripennis, 248, 302,
04.
Stercorarius parasiticus, 71.
pomarinus, 71.
Sterna anostheta, 96.
antillarum, 138, 274, 276, 277
Index.
STE
Sterna forsteri, 139, 274, 278, 279.
fuliginosa, 24.
havelli, 278.
hirundo, 274, 278, 350.
maxima, 137, 138, 139, 274,
278, 329.
paradisza, 12, 14, 16.
sandvicensis acuflavida, 274,
276, 278, 279, 282.
Stone, W.,a migration of Hawks
at Germantown, Pa., 161.
Strepsilas interpres, 231, 276.
Strix pratincola, 189, 339.
Sturnella magna, 76, 242, 290, 302,
342:
magna neglecta, 22, 290.
neglecta, 124.
Sula piscator, 181.
Surnia ulula, 13.
Swallow, Bank, 15, 294.
Barn, 15, 294, 304, 309, 330.
Cliff, 15, 294, 304, 309.
Rough-winged, 248, 302.
Tree, 304.
Violet-green, 294.
White-bellied, rs.
Swan, Trumpeter, 185.
Swift, Chimney, 15, 104, 130, 303.
Sylvania canadensis, 102, 106, 128,
132, 269, 297, 349-
mitrata, 128, 132, 300, 305.
pusilla, 13, 16, 269, 297.
pusilla pileolata, 123.
Symphemia atlantica, 147.
semipalmata, 91, 137, 138,
145, 146, 147, 276, 316.
semipalmata inornata, 145,
146.
Synthliboramphus antiquus, 155.
wumizusume, I55.
Syrnium nebulosum, 189, 277.
nebulosum alleni, 190,
occidentale, 88.
TACHYCINETA bicolor, 13,
I7I, 304.
thalassina, 170, I71, 265, 294.
Tanager, Louisiana, 294.
Scarlet, 131, 294, 304.
Summer, 131, 294, 302.
Tantalus falcinellus, 321.
loculator, 90, 320.
mexicanus, 99, 253.
ruber, 321.
Tattler, Wandering, 329.
Teal, Blue-winged, 184.
Cinnamon, 184.
Green-winged, 184.
Tern, Arctic, 14.
Dos ry
378
Tern, Black, 184.
Cabot’s, 274, 276, 278, 279.
Common, 350.
Forster’s, 139, 278, 279.
Gull-billed, 133.
Least, 138, 276, 277.
Royal, 137, 138, 139, 329-
Sooty, 24.
Tetrao virginianus, 224.
Thalassoica antarctica, 4.
Thalurania bicolor, 96.
Thompson, E. E., occurrence of the
Evening Grosbeak ( Coccothraus-
tes vespertina) at Toronto, Can-
ada, 256.
Thorne, P. M., additions to Mr.
Drew’s list of the birds of Colo-
rado, 264.
Thrasher, Bendire’s, 68.
Brown, 300.
Palmer’s, 68. |
Sage, 297.
Thrush, Audubon’s Hermit, 298.
Bicknell’s 102, 103, 107.
Brown, 78, 263.
Dwarf Hermit, 298.
Golden-crowned, 301, 352, |
353: |
Gray-cheeked, 248, 306. |
Hermit, 15, 102, 107, 108, 298, |
306, 352, 353-
Missel, 163.
Olive-backed, 11,
248, 298.
Swainson’s, 107.
Water, 306. — |
Wood, 78, 133, 263, 300.
Thryothorus albinucha, 350.
bairdi, 350.
bewicki, 265, 350.
bewicki bairdi, 297, 350.
bewickii leucogaster, 349.
bewickii murinus, 350.
bewickii spilurus, 330, 350.
102, 107,
Index.
bewickii var. leucogaster
B4oy Boos
ludovicianus, 133, 265, 297
301.
martinicensis, 95.
murinus, 350.
Thurber, E. C., Helminthophila
leucobronchialis in New Jersey,
349: ;
Tinnunculus antillarum, 46.
carriboearum, 46.
dominicensis, 44.
isabellinus, 44.
leucophrys, 45.
[October
Tinnunculus phalzna, 44.
sparverioides, 45.
sparverius, 44, 45.
sparverius var. antillarum,
46.
sparverius var. dominicensis,
#5-08)
sparverius var. isabellinus,
44-
Titmouse, Black-crested, 28, 208.
Chestnut-fronted, 28.
Texan Tufted, 29.
Tufted, 133, 245, 301.
Todd, L. M., a Song Sparrow win-
tering in eastern Maine, 260; on
the westerly trend of certain fall
migrants in eastern Maine, 351.
Totanus chloropygius, 318.
crassirostris, 146, 147.
flavipes, 12, 16.
himantopus, 312.
longicauda, 319.
macularius, 318.
melanoleucus, 186, 317.
semipalmatus, 316.
solitarius, 91, 128, 129, 186,
241, 303, 318.
speculiferus, 147.
vociferus, 317.
Towhee, 131, 248, 293.
Arctic, 293.
Cafion, 293.
Green-tailed, 293.
Spurred, 330.
Townsend, C. H., list of the mid-
summer birds of the Kowak
River, Northern Alaska, 11.
Treat, W. E., capture of three rare
birds near Hartford, Conn., 78;
Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus
in Connecticut, 256; Sf#zzella
pusilla wintering near Hartford,
Conn., 259.
Tree-duck, Black-bellied, 185.
Fulvous, 185.
Treron permagna, 250.
Tringa alpina, 186, 219.
alpina pacifica, 276, 279.
arenaria, 315.
autumnalis, 321.
bairdii, 186.
bonapartei, 315.
canutus, 88, 219, 276, 279,
315+.
ferruginea, 315.
fuscicollis, 78, 314.
helvetica, 227.
himantopus, 312.
1887- |
Tringa interpres, 231.
longicauda, 319.
macularia, 318.
maculata, 73, 96, 186, 314.
maculosa, 314.
maritima, 341.
minutilla, 12, 16, 186, 2109,
argon
pectoralis, 314.
pusilla, 313, 314.
rufescens, 319.
schinzii, 314.
semipalmata, 313.
solitaria, 318.
squatarola, 227.
subruficollis, 319.
temminckii, 314.
wilsoni, 314.
Tringites rufescens, 319.
Tringoides bartramius, 319.
macularius, 318.
Trochilus alexandri, 86, 183, 192.
calliope, 88.
colubris, 130, I91, 242, 303.
coste, 86.
rufus, 329.
Troglodytes aédon, 3c6, 353.
aédon parkmanii, 208.
hiemalis, 103, 106, 244.
hiemalis pacificus, 93.
leucogastra, 349.
parvulus, 163.
Trotter, S., the significance of cer-
tain phases in the genus Hel-
minthophila, 307.
Tryngites subruficollis, 186, 319.
Turdus aliciz, 13, 248, 261, 306.
aliciz bicknelli, 102, 103, 107,
108, 261.
alpestris, 60, 249.
aonalaschke, 2098.
aonalaschkz auduboni, 124,
208.
aonalaschke pallasii, 15, 16,
102, I07, 108, 265, 298, 306,
352 353:
fuscescens, 107, 265.
iliacus, 163.
mustelinus, 67, 78, 133, 263,
300.
swainsoni, 269.
torquatus, 60, 249.
ustulatus, 94.
ustulatus swainsonii, 11, 88,
102, 107, 108, 125, 248, 208.
viscivorus, 163.
Turkey, Mexican, 187.
caswax, Wild, 129, 340.
Index.
379
Turnstone, 276. ,
Black, 329.
Turtur leucoptera, 115.
risoria, 120.
Tympanuchus americanus, 340.
pallidicinctus, 187.
Tyrannus dominicensis, 7, 141, 277.
tyrannus, 15, 16, 69, 130, 180,
192, 303, 354, 356.
verticalis, 16, 122, 192.
vociferans, 17, 122.
Uri lomvia, 158.
troile californica, 86.
troille, 158.
Urinator adamsii, 12.
imber, 184, 247.
lumme, 12, 87.
Uropsila leucogastra, 350.
Urubitinga anthracina, 42.
VANELLUS squatarolus, 227.
Vireo altiloquus barbatulus, 133,
216, 219.
approximans, I8o.
atricapillus, 295.
belli, 93, 264, 295, 296.
calidris, 95.
calidris barbatulus, 7.
caymanensis, 7.
flavifrons, 131, 304.
flavifrons alticola, 128.
gilvus, 295, 302.
gilvus swainsoni, 336.
huttoni, 93.
noveboracensis, 132, 149, 181,
295, 302.
noveboracensis maynardi,
148.
olivaceus, 16, 102, 105, 131,
247, 264, 295, 302.
philadelphicus, 105.
solitarius, 164, 251.
solitarius alticola, 131, 164.
solitarius cassini, 88.
solitarius plumbeus, 88.
Vireo, Bell’s, 295, 296.
Black-capped, 295.
Black-whiskered, 216,
133;
219.
Key West, 148.
Mountain Solitary, 131.
Red-eyed, 102, 105, 131, 247,
295, 302.
Warbling, 295, 302.
White-eyed, 132, 295, 302.
Yellow-throated, 131, 304.
Vireosylvia canescens, 178 181.
grandior, 18o.
Vultur atratus, 51.
380
Vultur aura, 506
Vulture, 303.
Black, 25, 188.
Turkey, 129, 188.
WARBLER, Audubon’s, 2096.
Bachman’s, 35, 36, 165, 262,
263, 348.
Bay-breasted, 103, 106.
Black-and-white, 15, 128, 132,
295, 301.
Blackburnian, 103, 106, 128,
132, e159,120L.
Black-poll, 102, 103, 106, 248.
Black-throated Blue, 102, 106,
128, 132.
Black-throated Green, 15,
102, 106, 128, 132, 296.
Blue Golden-winged, 308.
Blue-winged Yellow, 308.
Blue Yellow-backed, 301.
Calaveras, 295.
Canadian, 102, 106, 128, 132,
297, 349.
Cape May, 221.
Cerulean, 128, 132, 296, 306.
Chestnut-sided, 128, 132, 306,
353:
Connecticut, 77, 106.
Golden, 297.
Golden-cheeked, 296.
Hooded, 128, 132, 300, 304.
Kentucky, 302.
Lutescent, 330.
Macgillivray’s, 296.
Magnolia, 15.
Mourning, 106, 296.
Myrtle, 15, 296, 306.
Nashville, 105, 297.
Orange-crowned, 37, 296, 297,
350.
Pines 132; 301.
Praifie, 33;
Prothonotary, 37, 164, 304.
Summet, 264.
Swainson’s, 37, 68, 262, 263,
300, 305, 347-
Sycamore, 301.
Tennessee, 106, 263, 296, 306,
352 353:
Townsend’s, 183, 296, 297.
Western, 166.
Wilson’s, 297.
Worm-eating, 37, 128, 132,
O5.
Yellow, 296, 301.
Yellow Palm, 241.
Yellow-rumped, 103, 106.
Yellow-throated, 165.
Index.
[October
Water-thrush, 248.
Louisiana, 248.
Waxwing, 259.
Cedar, 105, 131, 244, 294.
Wayne, A. T., Phenicopterus
ruber as a South Carolina bird, °
72; the American Crossbill (Loxza
curvirostra minor) in large num-
bers near Charleston, S.C., 287.
Webster, F.S.,a fern-eating Wood-
cock, 73; capture of the Razor-
billed Auk at Norfolk, Virginia,
158; the Saw-whet Owl in the
District of Columbia, 161.
Wells, J. G., notice of his catalogue
of the birds of Grenada, West
Indies, 250.
Whip-poor-will, 191.
Whyte, J., object of the Shrike in
impaling its prey, 77.
Willet, 137, 138, 145, 276.
Western, 145.
Woodcock, American, 67, 73, 185.
Woodpecker, American Three-toed,
104.
Downy, 104, 130, 190, 242,
303.
Gairdner’s, 156.
Golden-winged, 66, 68.
Hairy, 104, 130, 242, 304.
Imperial, 161.
Ivory-billed, 68, 338.
Lewis’s, 183, 191.
Nuttall’s, 156, 251.
Pileated, 68, 104, 128, 130,
248.
Red-bellied, 191, 303.
Red-headed, 130, 191,
AD 202.
Texan, 190.
Yellow-bellied, 242.
Yellow-naped, To1.
Wren, 163.
Baird’s, 297, 349.
Bewick’s, 349...
Cactus, 297.
Carolina, 133, 297, 301.
House, 306, 353.
Long-billed Marsh, 208.
Parkman’s, 208.
Rock, 297.
Winter, 103, 106, 244.
XANTHOCEPHALUS xanthocephalus,
22, 256, 266, 267, 290, 356.
Xenopicus albolarvatus, 88.
YELLOW-LEGS, Greater, 186.
Yellow-throat, Maryland, 132, 239,
302.
193,
1887.] Index. 38 I
Yellow-throat, Western, 296. Zenaidura carolinensis, 112.
ZENAIDA amabilis, 113. macroura, I12, 121, 129, 187,
leucoptera, 116. 264, 303, 329.
martinicana, 114. Zonotrichia albicollis, 157 16, 67,
montana, I1g. 1O2 TOS MIOS L226 302s
richardsoni, 7, 114. intermedia, 12, 124, 200, 292.
rubripes, I15. leucophrys, 200, 241, 292.
spadicea, 7, I14. querula, 122, 291.
ERRATA. —
Page 57, last line, for ‘‘Professor Baird” read Mr. Ridgway.
‘* 1728, last line, for ‘‘ Vireo flavifrons alticola” read Vireo solitarius al-
ticola. Q
‘* 138, line 13; page 142, line 8; page 143, line 5; page 215, line 14;
and page 220, line 36, for ‘‘A. ruficollrs tricolor” read A. tri-
color ruficollis.
*« 783, line 16 from bottom, for ‘‘about 240” read 253.
‘* 245, lines 13 and 16, for ‘‘Huethia” read Euethera.
‘¢ 271, line 4 from bottom, for ‘‘Mrs. Robert E. Stuart” read Mrs.
Robert L. Stuart.
*« 276, footnote, for ‘‘page 22” read page 222.
‘* 318, line to, for ‘‘Phyacophilus” read Rhyacophilus.
For other Zrrata see p. 284.
a ve
. srs | CONTINUATION OF THE {sees
Vol. XII BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB Vol. IV
QA Quarterly Journal of Driithology -
VolIV —JANUARY, 1887— Wo. 1
[poe
NHN Az
Ay Why Ml
SS
PUBLISHED FOR
SEP 12 1904
Union
N, ywtA
Se
The American Ornithologist@’
NEW YORK
i Si FOB Eire
CONTE NAS:
PAGE
Nores OF A BirD CATCHER. By Frederic A. Lucas. . it wre ee 1
A New VIREO FROM GRAND CayMAN, West INDIES. By Charles B. Cory - STs raat 6
ADDITIONS TO THE CATALOGUE OF THE BIRDS OF KANSAS. By WV. S. Goss. . 7
List OF THE MIDSUMMER BIRDS OF THE Kowak RIVER, Nowa ie ALASKA. By Charles
fT. Townsend . 11
SumMMER Brrps or THE Bras p’OR REGION oF Care BRETON ‘ISLAND, Nova Scorta.
By Fonathan Dwight, Fr . 13
ON THE AvVI-FAUNA OF PINAL County, WITH REMARKS ON SOME BIRDS OF PIMA AND
GILA COUNTIES, ARIZONA. By W. E. DD A SCOLP gas : 16
Some UnpescrisebD PLUMAGES OF NortTH AMERICAN Birbs. By George B. Sennett . 24
DescripTions OF Two NEw SUBSPECIES OF TITMICE FROM TEXAS. By George B. Sennett. 28
FurtTHer Nores ON THE GENUS Acanthis. By Leonard Stejneger . 30
THE REDISCOVERY OF BACHMAN’S WARBLER, lees ee roe bachmani (Aud. ‘ IN THE
UNITED States. By George N. Lawrence. . 35
Tue BIirps OF THE WEST INDIES, INCLUDING THE “BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER
AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE ISLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD.
By Charles B. Cory. OS ae ee a ei Pe 37
Tue SENSE OF SMELL IN CATHARTES AURA. “By EA SS AYVLOS fe ata, «ae eed SI
FourtH MEETING OF THE AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGIST’S UNION. . . -. . . . 56
RECENT LITERATURE.—Pleska on the Birds of the Kola Peninsula, 61; W. E. Brooks on the Genus
Acanthis, 63; Stejneger on Ji ipanese Woodpeckers, 63; Stejneger on the British Marsh-Tit, 64;
Stejneger on a ‘Lost Species’ of Murrelet, p. 65; Ferrari-Perez on the Birds of Mexico, 65; Ridg-
Ww ba ona Melanistic Phase of the Broad-winged Hawk, 66; Ridgway on the Species of the Genus
Empidonax, 65; Cory oa Birds from sever: il little-known Islands of the West Indies, 66; Minor
Ornithological Publications, 66; Publications Received, 69.
GENERAL Noves.—Occurrence of Cory’ s Shearwater (Puffinus borealis) and Several Species of
Jaegers in Large Numbers in the Vicinity of Gayhead, Mas:., during the Autumn of 1886, 715
Phenicopterus “ruber as a South Carolina Bird, 72; Occurre.ice «f the Florida Gallinule’ at
Springfield, Mass., 72; Wilson’s Phalarope (Steganopus tricolor) in Rhode Island, 73; Occur-
rence of Phalaropus lobatus at Syracuse, N. Y., 73; A Feru-exting Woodcock, 73; A Further
Note on Colinus ridgwayt, 74; A Black Gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus obsoletus) from Maine, 753
The Golden Eagle in Massachusetts, 75; A’ Singularly marked Specimen ot Sphyrapicus thyrot-
deus, 753 Occurrence of Calcarius ornatus in M: tine, 75; An addition to the Ornithology of South
Carolina, 76; The Object of the Shrike in lmpaling its Prey, 77; Additional Occurrences of the
Connecticut Warbler in Mz line, 77; The Brown Turush laying in the Nest of the Wood Thrush,
78; Capture of Three Rare Birds near Hartford, Conn., 7 48; Piranga rubriceps and Tringa fusct-
collis in etiam Sa 79.
CorRESPONDENCE.—Scarcity of Adult Birds in Autumn, 79; Classification of the Macrochires, So.
Nores AND News.—Ornithologists and Taxidermists, $2; The Ridgway Ornithological Club, 83;
The A. O. U. Committee on Bird Protection, 84; Ornithological Explorations, 84.
“THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’
Union, is conducted as a Magazine of General Ornithology. In general
character it differs ‘little from the late ‘BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL
ORNITHOLOGICAL CLuB,’ of which it forms virtually a Second Series.
‘THe AvK’ is published under the supervision of. Mr. J. A. ALLEN,
Editor-in-Chief, assisted by Dr. ELtiorr Couves. Mr. RoBertT RrpGway, Mr.
WILLIAM BREWSTER, and Mr. MONTAGUE CHAMBERLAIN, Associate-Editors.
Terms :— $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num-
bers, 75 cents. Free to Foreign Members, and to Active and Associate Members
of the A.O.U. not in arrears for dues.
Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publisher,
L.S: FOSTER, 5 PINE SBREED) «NEW: YORK. -N.-Y- Foreign Subssribers
may obtain ‘THe AuK’ through J. VAN VOORST, 1 PATERNOSTER Row,
Lonpon.
All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and
publications for notice, should be sent to J. A. ALLEN, AMERICAN MUSEUM OF
NaturaL History, CENTRAL PARK, NEW YorkK Cliry.
Es
Old
4 Series,
Vol. XII
CONTINUATION OF THE
BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB
‘The Auk
4 Quarterly Fournal of Ornithology
Vol. IV — APRIL, 1887 —
New
Series,
Vol. IV
Wo. 2
7 [pr
WDM
\ py : NS
Hh SX
PUBLISHED FOR
The American Ornitholo
7 NEW YORK
CONTENTS.
PAGE
ADDITIONS TO THE BIRDS.OF VENTURA CouNTY, CALIFORNIA. By F, G. Cooper, M. D. 85
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SPECIES OF RHAMPHOCINCLUS FROM St. Lucta, West INDIEs.
By Charles BuCory oo) fe) oe 0 oie aerial a set oie Eh gs] eens 04
A List oF THE BirpDs COLLECTED By Mr. B. W. RICHARDSON, IN THE ISLAND OF Mar-
TINIQUE, WEST IINDInS. =By Charles oR. (Covyl. fo alas el tee) toy eee 95
Tur NEw ENGLAND G_ossy IBISES OF 1850. By F.C. Browne . . . .. . ate 97
A List OF THE SUMMER BIRDS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL RANGE OF THE WHITE MoTNTAINS,
N. H. By ‘ArthurP.. Chadbourne’. oso 0. ee) ce tek nye ade oe = oe oe
Tue BirDS OF THE WEsT INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER
AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE ISLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD.
By Charles B. Cory 108
ADDITIONAL NOTES ON THE BIRDS OF PUEBLO CouNTY, COLORADO. By Charles Wick-
liffe Beckham Boa ih gee ype Piel SARUM NED, it eit ie Aa Coan el tga a a 120
AvucGust BIRDS OF THE CHILHOWEE MOUNTAINS, TENNESSEE. By F. W. Langdon . . 125
SoME RarRE Fioripa Birps. By W. £. D. Scott : ENA Mat emir a kitts
THE PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GULF COAST OF
FLORIDA: By: Wel D. Scotty.) tor the ew Onan heh, Meee stl ieee [cat ote ain cee
SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ON THE GENUS ACANTHIS. By Leonhard Stejneger. . . . 144
THREE New Forms oF NortH AMERICAN Birps. By William Brewster . . . . 148
RECENT LITERATURE. —Sclater’s Catalogue of the Ca@rebide, Tanagride, and Icteride, 149:
Conclusion of the Great Work on the Nests and Eggs of the Birds of Ohio, 150; Ridgway’s
Nomenclature of Colors and Ornithologists’ Compendium, 152; Bryant on the Ornithology
of Guadalupe Island, 154; .Ralph and Bagg on the Birds of Oneida County, N. Y., 154;
Platt on the Birds of Meriden, Conn., 154; Maynard on ‘Five New Species of Birds from the
Bahamas,’ 155; Shufeldt’s Contributions to Science, 155; Stejneger ‘On the Status of
Synuthliborhamphus wumizusume as a North American Bird,’ 155; Ridgway on New Spe-
cies of American Birds, etc., 156; Publications Received, 156.
GENERAL Notes.— The Common Murre (Uria troille) and the Razor-billed Auk (A/ca torda)
on the New England Coast, 158; Capture of the Razor-billed Auk at Norfolk, Virginia,
158; Megalestris skua, 158; More News of Ardea wuerdemanni, 159; Ardea egretta in
Niagara County, N. Y., 159; Further Notes on the Masked Bob-w..ite (Colinus ridgwayt),
159; Capture of a Third Specimen of the Short-tailed Hawk (Buteo brachyurus) in Flory.
1603; A Third New England Specimen of Swainson’s Hawk (Buteo swainsont), 169; A Mi-
grat on of Hawks at Germantown, Pa., 161; The Saw-whet Owl in the District of Columbia,
161; The Imperial Woodpecker (Campephilus imperialis) in Northern Sonora, 161; The
CopPery-tailed Trogon ( Trogon ambiguus) breeding in Southern Arizona, 161; Capture of a
Fish Crow (Corvus ossifragus) at Wareham, Mass., 162; Occurrence of Age/aius pheniceus
on the West Coast of England, 162; The Redpolls of Massachusetts, 163; Vireo solitarius
alticola in Tennessee, 164; Another Specimen of the Prothonotary Warbler in Massachusetts,
164; An overlooked Specimen of Bachman’s Warbler, 165; Remarks on Four Examples
of the Yellow-throated Warbler from Chester County, S.C., 165; Discovery of the Nest and
. Eggs of the Western Warbler (Dendroica occidentalis), 16€; What Constitutes a Full Set of
Eggs? 167.
CORRESPONDENCE.—The Camera and Field Ornithology, 168; Classification of the.Macrochires,
170; The Sense of Smell in Cathartes aura, 172. ;
Nores AND News. — Obituary— Dr. John M. ‘Wheaton, 174; Economie Ornithology and Mam-
malogy, 174; American Museum of Natural History, 175; Ornithological Publications, 175;
Antedated works on Natural History, 176; Colorado Ornith logy, 175; McIlwraith’s ‘Birds of ~
Ontario,’ 176.
‘THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’
“UNION, is conducted as a Magazine of General Ornithology. In general
character it differs little from the late ‘BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL
ORNITHOLOGICAL CLuB,’ of which it forms virtually a Second Series.
‘THe Auk’ is published under the supervision of Mr. J. A. ALLEN,
Editor-in-Chief, assisted by Dr. Etttiorr Cours. Mr. RoBert RipGway, Mr.
WILLIAM BREWSTER, and Mr. MONTAGUE CHAMBERLAIN, Associate-Editors.
TERMS :— $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num-
bers, 75 cents. Free to Foreign Members, and to Active and Associate Members
of the A.O.U. not in arrears for dues.
Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publisher,
L. S. FOSTER, 5 Pine Street, New York, N. Y. Foreign Subscribers
may obtain ‘THe Auk’ through J. VAN VOORST, 1 PATERNOSTER Row,
LONDON.
All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and
publications for notice, should be sent to J. A. ALLEN, American MUSEUM OF
NATURAL History, CENTRAL PARK, NEW YORK CITy.
Old
| Series, }
Vol. XII
Vol. IV
CONTINUATION OF THE {sere
BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB Vol. IV
QA Quarterly Fournal of Driithology
— JULY, 1887 — Wo. 3
PUBLISHED FOR
The American Ornithologists’
SEP 12 1904
NEW YORK
National NusSS
LS: ros tT Ee
CON TEATS:
or
“PAGE
DESCRIPTIONS OF S1X SUPPOSED NEw SPECIES OF BIRDS FROM THE ISLANDS OF OLD
PROVIDENCE AND ST. ANDREWS, CARIBBEAN SEA. By Charles B. Cory . . . 197
A List oF THE BIRDS TAKEN By Mr. ROBERT TLENDERSON, IN THE ISLANDS OF OLD
PROVIDENCE AND St. ANDREWS, CARIBBEAN SEA. By Charles B. Cory + . . 180
Brrps oF Tom GREEN AND CONCHO COUNTIES, TEXAS. By William Lloyd . . . 181
THE RED-HEADED WOODPECKER A HOARDER. By O. P. Hay oh rer oka hy 193
ON THE AVI-FAUNA OF PINAL COUNTY, WITH REMARKS ON SOME BIRDS OF PIMA AND
G1La CouNnTIES, ARIZONA. By W. £.D. Scott. With Annotations by ¥. A. Allen.
(Continued.) .>.. 2 ees 5 196
RARE Birps oF NORTHEASTERN NEw Brunswick. By Philip Cox, Fr.. . . ». + 205
THE PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GULF COAST OF
FLoripA. By W. £. D. Scott. (Continued.) MY Mer Ey tet ey iat ein Say gt
THe Brirps oF THE West INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA ISLANDS, THE GREATER
AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE ISLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD. :
By ‘Charles B. Corys(Continued,) . ys) fe ey 5 i te ee ee
A NEw Race OF THE SHARP-TAILED SPARROW (Ammodramus caudacutus). By Fonathan
Dwight, Fr. 232
OBSERVATIONS IN WESTERN NortTH CaroLtina MounraIns IN 1886. By George B.
SS EMMCEE ss on A Awe ge yey) e's erage Nol 9 oem et ete Le Jo cote ae ae On 240
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW EvVETHIA FROM OLD PROVIDENCE ISLAND. By Charles B. Cory. 245
RECENT LITERATURE.--The New Canadian Ornithology, 245; McIlwraith’s Birds of Ontario, 246;
Stejneger on the Species of Pardalotus, 249; Stejneger on two European Thrushes, 249; Stej-
neger on Japanese ,jBirds, 249; Blakiston on the Water-Birds of Japan, 250; Wells and Law-
rence on the Birds of Grenada, W. I., 250; Ridgway Ornithological Club, 251; Publications
Received, 251.
GENERAL Notes.—The Double-crested Cormorant near Springfield, Mass., 253; The Florida Gal-
linule in Nova Scotia, 253; The Middletown, Conn., Glossy Ibis of 1850, 253; Geococcyx califor-
nianus—A Correction, 254; Hummingbirds feeding their Young on Insects, 255; Ofocoris
alpestris praticola in Chester County,S. C., 255; Clarke’s Nutcracker (Picicorvus columbianus)
inthe Bristcl Bay Region, Alaska, 255; Clarke’s Nutcracker from the Kowak River, Alaska,
256; The Canada Jay in Southern Vermont in Summer, 256; Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus in
Connecticut, 256; Yellow-headed Blackbird (Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus in Maine, 256;
The Baltimore Oriole ( Zeterus galbula) in Nova Scotia, 256; Occurrence of the Evening Gros-
beak (Cocothraustes vespertina) at Toronto, Canada, 256; Occurrence of the Evening Grosbeak
in Fulton County, Ky., 257; Winter Plumage of Leucosticte australis, 257; Note on Spizella
monticola ochracea Brewst., 258; Spizella pusilla wintering near Hartford, Conn., 259; Change
of Winter Habitat in the Grass Finch, 259; A Song Sparrow wintering in Eastern Maine, 260;
The Song Sparrow in New Brunswick in Winter, 260; Unusual Nesting-sight of the Song Spar-
row, 260; The Sharp-tailed Sparrow (Ammodramus caudacutus) in a Fresh-water Marsh, 261;
Nesting of the Hudsonian Chickadee (Parus hudsonicus), 261; Another Addition to the Avi-
fauna of South Carolina, 261; Another Specimen of Bachman’s Warbler (Z/e/minthophtla
bachmant), 262; Additional Specimens of Bachman’s and Swainson’s Warblers, obtained by
Mr. Chas. S. Galbraith, in the Spring of 1887, 262; Birds laying their Eggs in the Nests of
other Birds, 263; New Species of Winter Birds in New Brunswick, 264; Additions to Mr.
Drew’s List of the Birds of Colorado, 264.
CoORRESPONDENCE.—Individual Variation in the Skeletons of Birds, and’ other Matters, 265;
‘Scarcity of Adult Birds in Autuinn,’ 268; The ‘Proceedings’ of the U. S. National Museum, 270.
Nores AND News. —American Museum of Natural History, 270; The late Dr. WWheaton’s Col-
lection of Birds, 272; Ornithological Publications, 272; Destruction of Herons in Florida, 272.
‘THE AUK,’ published as the,Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’
UNIoN, is conducted as a Magazine of General Ornithology. In general
character it differs little from the late ‘BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL
ORNITHOLOGICAL CLuB,’ of which it forms virtually a Second Series.
‘THe AvuK’ is published under the supervision of Mr. J. A. ALLEN,
Editor-in-Chief, assisted by Dr. ELtiorr Coves, Mr. Ropert RipGway, Mr.
WILLIAM BrEwSTER, and Mr. MONTAGUE CHAMBERLAIN, Associate-Editors.
Terms :— $3.00 a year, including postage, strictly in advance. Single num- ~
bers, 75 cents. Free to Foreign Members, and to Active and Associate Members
of the A.O.U. not in arrears for dues.
Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the publisher,
L. S. FOSTER, 35 PINE STREET, NEw York, N. ¥. Foreign Subscribers
may obtain ‘Tue Aux’ through J. VAN VOORST, 1 PATERNOSTER Row,
Lonpon.
All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and -
publications for notice, should be sent to J. A. ALLEN, AMERICAN MuSEUM OF
NATURAL HistTory, CENTRAL PARK, NEW York CIry.
( a | CONTINUATION OF THE th
Series, Series,
BULLETIN OF THE NUTTALL ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB
‘The Auk
A Quarterly Journal of Orthology
ee acig. 2
Vol. [V — OCTOBER, 1887 — Wo. 4
PUBLISHED FOR
The American Ornithologists’ Union
CONT EM DPS.
PAGE.
TnE PRESENT CONDITION OF SOME OF THE BIRD ROOKERIES OF THE GULF COAST OF
Fioripa. (Concluded.) By W. £. D. Scolt . : . 7 . * : 4 5 = > a
Tue PINE FINCH (Spinus Pinus) BREEDING AT CORNWALL-ON-Hupson, N. Y. By F.
A. Allen . 5 . : . s A 5 : 5 . ee . : : 5 - 284
THe AMERICAN CROSSBILL (Loxla curvirostra minor) IN LARGE NUMBERS NEAR
CHARLESTON, S.C. By Arthur T. Wayne . ° : 3 3 : 5 : : « ) 287
Brrps or TomM GREEN AND CoNcCHO CouUNTIES, TEXAS. (Concluded.) By William
Lloyd . - : “ : j : S : : a : : : “ : ; . 289
ADDITIONS TO THE AviI-FAUNA OF Bayou Sara, La. By Charles Wickliffe Beckham . 299
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CERTAIN PHASES IN THE GENUS HELMINIHOPHILA. By Spencer
Trotter, M. D. “ : . ; x . : 3 - 308
TuHeE BirDS OF THE WEsT INDIES, INCLUDING THE BAHAMA IS! ANDS, THE GeeaTer
AND THE LESSER ANTILLES, EXCEPTING THE ISLANDS OF TOBAGO AND TRINIDAD.
By Charles B. Cory . : : 5 ° F : 5 3 j ° 5 5 2 Bert
SUMMER Brirps oF SANTA Cruz ISLAND, CALIFORNIA. By Eli Whitney Blake, Fr. . 328
DESCRIPTION OF A NEW SUBSPECIES OF JuNcO. By Henry K. Coale >» 330
ORNITHOLOGICAL CurRiosiITIES.—A Hawk witH NINE TOES, AND A BOBOLINK WITH
Spurs ON 1Ts Wincs. By Henry K. Coale 5 ; - : e ; ¢ ; it 337,
RECENT LITERATURE. — Ridgway’s ‘Manual of North American Birds,’ 333; Olphe-Galliard’s
Ornithology of Western Europe, 336; Minor Ornithological Publications, 337; Publications
Received, 342.
GENERAL Notes. — Merganser americanus Breeding in New Mexico, 344; The Clapper Rail
again in Massachusetts, 344; /ctinta mississippiensis and 4 gialitis nivosa nesting in South-
ern Central Kansas. 344; The Merlin (Falco esalon) in Greenland, 345; Notes on Melanerpes
formicivorus batrdi in New Mexico, 345; Egg-laying extraordinary in Colaptes auratus, 346;
The Range of Quiscalus major, 346; The Lapland Longspur about Washington, D. C., 247;
Descriptions of Two New Races of Pyrrhuloxia stnuata Bonap., 347; Helinata swatnsonir
near Chester C. H.,S. C.,347; Another Bachman’s Warbler in Florida, 348; Additional Cap-
tures of Helminthophila leucobronechtalis, 348; Helminthophila leucobronchialis in New Jersey,
349; The Canadian Warbler breeding in Pike County, Pa., 349; On the Correct Subspecific
Title of Baird’s Wren (No. 719, A. O. U. Check-List}, 349; Central New York Notes, 350;
On the Western Trend of Certain Fall Migrants in Eastern Maine, 351; A Bird Scare, 351.
CORRESPONDENCE. — The Dermo-Tensor Patayii Muscle, 352; A Protest, 356; The Metric Sys-
tem, 357-
Notes anp News. — Obituary — Spencer Fullerton Baird, 357; A. O. U. and ‘ Auk’ announce-
ments, 359; Proposed Monument to Audubon, 359: Ornithological Work in Progress, 359:
Annual Report of the Ornithologist to the Department of Agriculture for 1885, 360.
*THE AUK,’ published as the Organ of the AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’
Union, is conducted as » Magazine of General Ornithology. In general
character it differs little from the late ‘BuLLETIN OF THE NUTTALL
ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB,’ of. which it forms virtually a Second Series.
‘THe Auk’ is pv lish’), under the supervision of Mr. J. A. ALLEN
Editor-in-Chief, assisced ! Dr. ELtiorr Coues, Mr. RoBpErT RIDGWAY, * ©
WILLIAM BREWSTER, ar - -MONTAGUE CHAMBERLAIN, Associate-Edit, x
TERMS :— $3.00" ,luding postage, strictly in advance. Sing,° & ;
bers, 75 cents. Fic... gfeign Members, and to Active and Associz!: Ae oD ee
of the A.O.U. not in arrears for dues. ie call
u , “
Subscriptions and Advertisements should be addressed to the biSher,
L. S. FOSTER, 35 Prine STREET, NEw York, N.Y. Foreign *: uscribers
may obtain ‘THe AuK’ through J. VAN VOORST, 1 PATERNOSTER Row,
LONDON.
. All articles and communications intended for publication, and all books and
publications for notice, should be sent to J. A. ALLEN, AmericAN MUSEUM OF
Naturat History, CENTRAL PARK, NEw YorK Cliry.
or a
Li\iea att
ps
N
Dye Aap sea
ite) ae
Mi
ye.
by
; ‘%
ee eee
aon S
re ae
AabAbajhtncnet *ad
a Menn IMMA Bett orane :
nn LA
Bante" i: setae a ay RN 5 Sb SOI A mata?
Sor acest cont iat ratecers notentonentit
E 2
eo seer
merits,
ae BS FS SEU ASE
ADS a KA Aa’ Rg ES
SN AANA ANA AR A RAR A,
fn ; al Lake ae ~
ARP Aye oe oe t ' eo As igs
y ' ; Epi Tie ~ Re
A ey wh panne ennnnnnann ne,