Poets ars we Pins Sah ara Herik ta ih i AR a LAD ‘ : stress ele ee ee Historic, archived document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. aa ¥ a 2-\A0S 35165 i ae Koes \1-24 : eS LE aa} ze ie ac = _— ae > ae a ‘ — ’ Ag oe Book number aS en : te OF ee” AL ily i PET TTT 1 | ( Sedatalalenlalaal iia” br die oo pi AAse: bd al te Ware, F hs Sede PAULA MAR lil a sobee sot weet a 44 KA, A ae af™ SNA cierto renee MEET wees vv weiter rent) og “VOR UUORETV\ ORG mantr Lay i] ge att 7 wi’ AL behehP ee Schl te Al abd fe] < a Le AANA Ay emotes we ads oy ‘ ds ae v5 / . LY ASTRA \ jrwree ee: wel, MAC BROS 2 er Why yy" vaertysey” TTT MM yy iy} Saale: -_. 14] ] a) a hd aT Pt LLP Laniihibieenhiies een seater < a | md ys 4 abd edes ' ar : | a ey SE > C ny PAG 1 iene yout Rl Adhd rer ie Wy PELL LLL PTT 4 oe 1 partis SBebrbcg arte Th ates qi oN 4) SO 7 err revyre rt MATT] ee eyeeeeane oA fe Syth TOUTE PUSLOVe ETAT Enea yey SIN NYRR ad vi aoe nT tet Meet } War eETe eee UMN on atte parted Wavy Bie www hbk ayereenrn ern 4 AAJ * ieee yee? nh Vey iP : Vey, wiv tf as ote ie ° ed as we pie ’ v A 4 4 \' wey w » wy *~ IGN ee: Re frThe er” qe im Hy nS wit wy vay Nee Ft WW wh jabs Ary “\ Sy Tv ha why POON UM A ! iggustsitT WL) ET PART TTT Se Soe aleve eae LUA Ovureg be stan yest raf i 1 PAA | NUS ey MY owing fF a ua) | 7 : 1 he be Pee bb “% Seedy bh Aree Men only veh ih Oa meen =e sade h My in ) he op, Aah oll: TERE * iPr = wee wr Pett ‘on - A * vanity = Ld Vy “he = £ 2% “ Se ON Oe 40" Nase ve yf ‘ THR Se Sgr ee MLL LTT Rerwwytht Ma Ula Mn wa Letali cee sd ig’ 3 wn ee ty WH r od 4 132 yeh ht i i (ee Fi ~ Ray ey an = j 5 y wv ; Wy hd Tah vo eee ah dud asf va! yey MALL Wh bh ‘ wey” , Mgr ste y hy Wy MAT ES | \ ree i ‘ ots be arate . 7 Ae we ee a s yw wr terhy 79 ery" “vy wer wre al a a were bey erent welt TYEE ELE sett FT a Oe bee ae LAr | | Lal eae vow ON gag ttl a ar * Hi as ‘ STER D. JUD ca ae 4 x i PA Shae a oa of ; ‘ ; Bey, Gin, Pics ae i . = a ae & 5 : t be \ rz x ee a2 Wee PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF L hs Bee a GE ACCRS EE. Aviat) Be, he AS a big A we yh ae eS CHIEF OF BIOLOGICAL SURVEY a eat | be : at ow ASHIN GT ON Se + “GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE Ge ce NG 1902 ~ it a ; 2 o a ae _ Bull. 17, Bioiogical Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE |. Fi@. 1.—DWELLING HOUSE ON BRYAN FARM. FIG. 2.—VIEW OF THE POTOMAC FROM BRYAN HOMESTEAD, SHOWING FEEDING PLACES OF GULLS, DUCKS, AND OTHER WATERFOWL. Mount Vernon in the distance. U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE DIVISION OF BIOLOGICAL SURVEY—BULLETIN No. 17 - } _ ©. HART MERRIAM, Chief + BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM A LOCAL STUDY OF ECONOMIC ORNITHOLOGY BY Severe D. FUDD, Ph. D: ASSISTANT, BIOLOGICAL SURVEY PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF Wie, oh Asien, GE > VIC, sete Ek AL IVE CHIEF OF BIOLOGICAL SURVEY o~ cal cS WG yp ANTALIS SS WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 190% si had ian Ea a Ri hate Wie tt ot Pel ca 301659 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. ——— U. 8S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Washington, D. -C., July 5, 1902. Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith, for publication as Bul- letin 17 of the Biological Survey, a report on the Birds of a Maryland Farm, the same being a local study in economic ornithology by one of my assistants, Dr. Sylvester D. Judd. Acknowledgment is made to the Entomologist for assistance in the determination of some of the insects, as well as for the use of certain illustrations. Respectfully, C. Hart Merriam, Chief, Biological Survey. Hon. JamEs WILSON, a - a Secretary of Agriculture. CONTENTS. k Introduction: 22s ee ees cb Se. i ie aR oes ed eer pate tae tne ees a eee oe ea ae Topography of Bryan farm.-....----- efile Saag at at 3 aio Se ROE ee DisioielemcoiewOlhGs ne 2. a we ee Ss ee eae SE biog mnap eee Open, fieldgis-2 ooo) st. cee ens iee. tL Biggeuliat Se pened - Ol Cover. 5. h06se 2k ee brrds@eleccsimmited distribunon.. 0. 2 eee eS Jefe! Sy(G ANIM SP OCC ST Nr 9511) 7 ee Seepage rao eee gp a a Popoctepey ombunoPriord farm <4 sk a See So eee ale ree eas on eee et ee ee ee ek ee TSE ED Shiv ES a oS Se eee aa Ta ae ee eB Om a eee tre a ee Spee ees Got NS AS Ee eee Se eemcne@nn eae se ee ee ee tere ols Se Mae see EEC eS pA GhitibSis oo es 2 Sole SS ss ee Wei ammOectriCtive INSCCLS. 2) ea. ooo Sh ee eh ee “SPSS HME) SECS ai RIES I EGR ON el gel A a nc OP ee SS CEES A aa es nee ence Pig aha ae ee Ae Ne ae BigmpmeimmCaulinesis. mes Ge eee Ge See ee re enMici itch eee ag ee ee i Wipe etree Ura sI@ OCs ae Sa ae ee Pee POT SUR ee IS St ae eee tae A ae eet ae ene ee per LIE TCER ATES ae ORS eS ae aa ate ee ae Gr Age ere ee eee ce EER Esiip Pag teen TR Leg Car at re a. SP a 2 es ee OT INET SCG OAT 2 ES PES me Sl lela ee eRe ee eae os VO AR I GlesHint Obi ager et Wek eee wera pt ee Ee ee oo Ss STE UT SGS, S ee S g AeOO i 0 ol eg ea ee BERNESE Crs rete ee ay tere as or re ge Weededestrnction=by-native sparrows. 2.0.5. 1 le... 2.2 te ene Weededestructionby-ether bids =: 225... 526222. Sen kee CCC Ne eee ee eee ee ee ee WWitUeme DING eee ea heen Se Se i ee (TPES) & a SSS Ee Ae EI ae ee re ene yg Re era LSUENUT 6 ase) cE es see a a Pigeons and doves Vultures ete ime e — ee Kingletss" sis oe es eo ee = Gnateatehers 2252-22 eee ‘Parushes._ 22> 222 720 (s See eee Vatbl. (Summary .- oo. lc. Shee eee ILLUSTRATIONS. PLATES. Page. Puate I. Fig. 1, Dwelling house on Bryan farm; Fig. 2, View of Potomac from . Bea homestead, showing oe places of gulls, ducks, and other PETS Tip coz Sc Si eee page Eo peepee Frontispiece. II. Map of Bryan farm, where the investigations were carried on ..-.--- 12 Ill. Fig. 1, Bay and hill adjacent to calamus swamp; Fig. 2, Bryan farm from the river, showing shore, bluff, alluvial plain, and forested EUS ae eo a erik SS Ce eer ea la i gene 16 IV. Fig. 1, River bluff in winter, which shelters several native sparrows; Fig. 2, Hog-lot gully, which furnishes shelter, shade, and food for Pee MNT RIOR Pe ere ne eas i ak Me Roa es sce ae eS 16 V. Fig. 1, Weedy old cornfield, lot 3; Fig. yebasture, lode ot 22 ee 24 VI. Fig. 1, Trumpet creeper and phen ciice of river bluff; Fig. 2, Broom- ike Aerie OO Ole = ei ee ee ee 24 VII. Fig. 1, Calamus swamp, the haunt of several marsh-loving birds; Fig. 2, Calamus swamp in winter, showing hill tenanted by blue jays, great horned owls, red-shouldered hawks, and ruifed grouse. - 32 VIII. Fig. 1, Tobacco field of lot 2, where the effect of birds upon an uprising of tobacco worms was studied; Fig. 2, Sweet potatoes and pear orchard, where various investigations were made ......- 32 IX. Food of nestlings and adults of three common birds: Fig. 1, House wren sii 2. bamiaswatlow, Pic.s, Catbird:. 5-520... -.-.<-.s-: 48 X. Fig. 1, Red-tailed hawk; Fig. 2, Short-eared owl .........-..--.--- 48 XI. Fig. 1, Sassafras as a weed in lot 5; Fig. 2, Corn injured by crows... 64 XII. Fig. 1, Cornfield, lot5; Fig. 2, Wheat stubble, lot 3. (The line of trees in the middle ground marks the course of Persimmon Branch) ..-- 64 XIII. Four common seed-destroying sparrows: 1, junco; 2, white-throated Sparrow, o.. 10x sparrow; 4, tree:sparrow.-----=2-s22-:-2--<.--- (2 XIV. Fig. 1, Giant ragweed in garden; Fig. 2, Broom-sedge appropriating VOID 2 oe oe ee ee ey a RE le GD a Po 12 ay niles Op wine tio! 2. W.OOdCOCK= 2. as oo 5. 2 Loos ce eee 80 XVI. Fig. 1, Broom-sedge of lot 2, frequented at night by bobwhites; Fig. 2, Partridge pea overspreading pasture of lot 4, eaten extensively by bobwhites. (The pines in the background were defoliated by thespine/saw-fly-in the spring of 1900). 2.2... 2.222222 ee eee k- 80 XVII. Fig. 1, Bluebird at edge of nest; Fig. 2, Former nesting site of blue- Mind wonukiwmrah bryaniianm. 22.3... 2s.2 <5 2022s lane eee es 96 Fig. ILLUSTRATIONS. TEXT FIGURES. ; ; Page. Le? Meadowlark <<: 2 ee es ere ee le Seen eet? 12 2: Mourning’ dG ye iss sa oe ea ae ae es ee ergs 13 5. Sone-sparrew 2. = se Se eee eee 16 A Gadiair d= SCs Re Fat re Ne ae et a 18 pee Mary liye eae en es are Sore pes tue eR Gee Re 2 Gr PoaCCO WOLD. <-> ioe ee ee ee ee ee at (= Pae-striped fea: beetle 2 eS ee Se ee 30 GS: Rese-chalenn = 225 2 ro ee Sent ee ee 31 Oo Kinabirdas Sooo: =. eee So a ee eee ae et 31 102 (Grasshopper: 2. = tos0 = ean Se ee Re ee een 32 TSS Wey a 8 Eg eee ees eee a se 34 oO. st round=Deethe gk ee ee eee eee ee 37 13.; lehnetimon=thy 2.305 oS ee ee 40 f4--Cutworm-and moth=ses22 253.6 2 ae ee ee ee ee 42 152 Dune-beetle = 2st: Ses ee ee eee 42 16. “Barn swallow 222250 3358 2 Se ae Fee ee pe ee 47 17. Diagram showing proportions of food of common crow -.------------ 48 18. Diagram showing proportions of food of crow blackbird -.-....------ 49 19::Cooper hawks 2 22-5. Se eS Se ee ee ee 51 20: Great hornéd:owl> 2-325 “2 ee 8 ee eee ee 52 21. Melons damaged by crows. ..-....------: ths SS) Se eee ee eee 58 22. Pellet ejected by crow ------ ee eee Et OD a a ee ae eee ee 63 23. Some common seeds found in crow pellets. -........-..------.-.-.-- 64 ZA> GORIMON: CTO We eS ee ee eee ee 65 25; Crow: blackbird s= 225424 3 eee oe ee ee ee eee 67 26-> English sparrow 2 222s 2S aoe ee ee ee 68 21:-Weed seeds commonly eaten by birds =.= =. a ee 71 28.. Field sparrow-.=- 2. iss space = os eee ore eee ee 74 29. Goldfineb 222 52. os 5 ee ee 75 20. Yellow-billed cuckoo: 222 5 ee eee 87 31: -Yellow-belltedosapsuck Gro 3 ese ee 89 oo cl GKCR sitesi ee ee eee Regn See en Se i 90 33: Phoebe... s.2 26. 22.2 Se ee ee ee ee nee 93 SA. Bue Jovy. 5. . =3. 322 Se = ae ee ee 96 oie Gedar: bird: =. 2 se i Se aa gee 99 o0.-. Moek ine bird 5. 29 see sees 8 eo on er a 105 39.. Brown thrasher 225. ee eee oe i es ae eer rae ee ee 106 40. House ‘Wren 2-3. SoS ss ea ee ee ee see 107 AL. sRobin 2b 55s Ae eg a ee reagan ne eine eg 109 BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. I.—_ INTRODUCTION. The principal method used by the Biological Survey in investigat- ing the food habits of birds is examination of the contents of stomachs, the material for which is obtained from all parts of the United States. In the case of each species the separate data accumulated by examining as many stomachs as possible are tabulated and show the food of the bird in question to consist of various proportions of cer- tain elements. This method, combining as it does data from many parts of the country, gives results necessarily somewhat composite, but certainly trustworthy, and shows to what extent a bird eats fruit, grain, or insects, thus furnishing a comprehensive and detailed knowledge of food habits that probably could not be obtained by any other available means. In a study of local conditions, however, general conclusions regard- ing the utility of a bird based on data from perhaps a score or more of States may sometimes require modification. For instance, from a study of the smaller herons from material collected from North, South, East, and West the conclusion would be drawn that they live on food of no economic value and are therefore unimportant species. But a study of these birds in the State of Louisiana alone shows them to be highly useful, for here they prey on crayfish, which, by tunneling through the levees, cause great damage to crops by flood. In similar ways the relations of birds to a certain locality or particular farm can not always be exactly tested by conclusions drawn from a large range of territory. The exact damage to crops is not revealed by stomach examination. A bird may have punctured several grapes in each of a hundred clusters and yet betray to the microscope no sign of its vicious habit. On the other hand, a bird may be con- demned as injurious because it is found to have eaten berries or grain, although, as a matter of fact, it has taken the berries from wild plants and gleaned the grain after harvest. Then, too, the material exam- ined at the Department is not usually accompanied by notes of the available supply of fruits, seeds, and insects present at the places where the birds were collected. Such information would be a sig- nificant supplement to the results of stomach examination. The faults of a fruit-eating bird might be condoned if it were found to rob the garden and orchard only when the thicket and pasture were barren. And the value of birds as insect destroyers in any particular locality 9 10 BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. — can be understood only when one knows just what crops of the region — are infested, and the identity and importance of the pest by which each is chiefly attacked; for only then can one learn which birds select the worst pests and destroy them in the largest proportion. With a view to ascertaining how far local conditions might ne the details of general conclusions based on data from widely separated regions, a study of the food habits of the birds on a particular farm was undertaken. From July 30, 1895, to July 24, 1902, visits were made at frequent intervals and including every month of the year except January. To obtain an idea of the available food supply, the insects, berries, and seeds found on the place were collected; the con- dition of the crops and the insects infesting them were noted; detailed observations of the birds’ food habits were made in the field, and the stomachs of 698 birds were collected and examined, 53 being those of English sparrows and the remainder (645) those of native species. One of the most serious disadvantages attending the work is that from such a limited area one can not examine stomachs enough to get a thorough knowledge of the food of each species, and is often com- pelled to rely, for the general idea of the food, on conclusions drawn from material collected elsewhere. Still, such information, supple- mented by the knowledge gained from local stomach collections and field notes, has made it possible in most cases to determine whether a given species is, on the whole, helpful or harmful to the farm in question. TOPOGRAPHY OF BRYAN FARM. The farm chosen for this investigation is the Bryan farm, at Mar- shall Hall, Md., on the south bank of the Potomac, 15 miles from Washington, directly opposite Mount Vernon, Va. (see PI. I, frontis- piece, fig. 2). The former owner of the farm, Mr. O. N. Bryan, was an enthusiastic collector of birds, nant and Indian imple- ments, and was known to many Washington scientists. On his death, in 1892, his collections were given to the National Museum. ‘The farm passed to his nephew, Mr. George R. Bryan, to whom the author is indebted for permission to conduct these investigations on the place, and for cordial cooperation and uniform courtesy throughout their course. The farm contains about 230 acres, of which 150 is cultivated and most of the remaining 80 covered with timber, principally hard: wood interspersed with pine. The arable land, forming as it does nearly two-thirds of the farm, is all in one tract (see map, Pl. I). Its western limit is a straight line of fence separating it from the next farm; its northern boundary, almost twice as long, is the nearly straight shore of the Potomac River, which here flows from east to west. A small bay, formed by an indentation of the river shore (PI. III, fig. 1), a calamus swamp, 200 yards long (PI. VU, fig. 1), which drains into the bay, and a tract of woodland (Pl. XVI, fig. 2) form ‘se TOPOGRAPHY OF BRYAN FARM. 11 the eastern and southern boundaries. The uncultivated part of the farm consists of timber tracts, tevel except about the swamp, where the land rises on two sides, the eastern rise forming a little wooded hill more than 100 feet above the river (Pl. VU, fig. 2). The cultivated area is a level, alluvial bench extending back from | the river a half mile to foothills (Pl. III, fig. 2). It is divided into five approximately equal lots, two along the southern or woodland boundary and three along the northern or river boundary. A straight line of fence parallel to the river separates the three river lots from the two inland lots. The river tract is rectangular, about three times as long as broad, and extends east—that is, up river—-several hundred yards farther than the inland tract. A bushy draining ditch, which will be designated throughout this paper by the :ocal name Persimmon Branch, stretches lengthwise through the middle of this area from the calamus swamp to the lower or southwest corner of the farm, where it empties into the river by a swampy, timbered outlet. Persimmon Branch is joined not far from its river mouth by a tributary—locally known as Partridge Branch—that drains the western inland lot. The other inland lot has no ditch, and part of it is often wet; the side toward the swamp washes badly during heavy rains. It has been found convenient to designate these lots by numbers, the three along the river being numbered 1, 2, and 3 and the others 4 and 5 (see map, ei. If). The farm meets the river in a precipitous, tree-fringed bluff from 20 to 30 feet high, which at low tide has a strip of sandy shore (P!. IV, fio. 1). All the buildings but one stand at intervals on a road running along the brink of the bluff. In the middle of the river front of lot 1 are the house, surrounded by a yard with a paling fence and shaded by great locusts, and a horse barn with its corn house (see Pl. I, frontis- piece, fig. 1). In lot 2, touching the line dividing it from lot 1, isa cow barn, and at the middle of lot 2 is a negro cabin. A storage barn stands several hundred yards south of the cabin, at the northwest cor- ner of lot 4 (see map, Pl. II). The staple products of the farm are corn, wheat, and tobacco in irregular rotation with timothy, which furnishes the winter supply for some half dozen cows and about as many horses. In recent years market gardening has been attempted on a small scale, in the light, sandy part of lot 3, between Persimmon Branch and the river. It is seldom that even two-thirds of the five lots is under cultivation at once. Of the remaining third or more, 5 to 10 acres is usually devoted to timothy, and the rest is worn-out mowing lands and weedy old corn- fields (Pl. V, fig. 1). Broom-sedge, which in spring makes good pas- _ turage but later is refused by stock, comes into these cornfields after the first year, and, in time, into the timothy fields (Pl. XIV, fig. 3). Of the cultivated area, as much as 30 acres is sometimes devoted to corn. A smaller acreage is given to wheat, and still less to tobacco BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. | . (Pl. VUI, fig. 1), which, however, is the most steady in price, and during good years the most profitable crop. Vegetables, strawber- _ - vies, pears, grapes, and quinces are grown in an inclosed kitchen garden adjoining the dooryard on its upper side. Beyond is a hog lot of several acres, with a small wooded gully leading down to the river and affording shade to the dozen or more hogs that range there (PI. IV, fig. 2). | as DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS. After. this preliminary account of the topography and the products of the farm we may consider the birds and their relation to the crops. The whole farm with its arable land, river shore, steep bluff, and low calamus swamp bordered on one side by the high hill and on another by the extent of level forest, presents conditions so varied as to attract many different kinds of birds. The actual distribution of the various species is of great importance. Other things being equal, those that live on the arable land, and thus have the best opportunity to check the work of injurious plants and insects, may be expected to do the greatest good, while such as frequent ‘only the swamp or the remote woodland have little effect on crops. BIRDS THAT FEED IN OPEN FIELDS. Meadowlark.—The meadowlark (fig. 1) is a good example of species Fic. 1.—Meadowlark. of the former class. It was found breeding in all the lots, usually ina timothy field or an old weedy corntield (Pl. V, fig. 1), and was present in numbers sufficient to do much good. In late summer flocks of 20 were often seen, and in November usually more than twice that num- ber. These birds in their feeding completely covered the open parts of the lots, and came fearlessly up to the barns and foraged within a stone’s throw of the house. Bull. 17, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE Il. 1 \ XY SNS wm A P SSSmarshal Hall 0 - IG e Wharf BRAN RNR MARSHALL HALL, MD. SCALE OF FEET 0 200 400 600 1" eo : \ ON BONEN a hy | EXPLANATION OF | | CONVENTIONAL SIGNS USED. a SE es -sTreams 9! SS FENCES. ve MONTAG R ee Se ke DINE. BOOS ee OAK AAAAAG.....-...- WILLOW. ied oe tae Gcitegeee 2 2 WAU REIS at aust SWAMP OR MARSH. Sr ----ROAD. MAP OF BRYAN FARM, WHERE THE INVESTIGATIONS WERE CARRIED ON. DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS. is Grasshopper Sparrow.—The grasshopper sparrow is even more exclu- sively a bird of the open land than the meadowlark, for it seldom flies up from the fields to perch in trees. During the period of obser- vation it happened to breed for the most part in lots 1, 2, and 38, choosing timothy fields or pastures (Pl. V, fig. 2), or weedy, briery cornfields. It was often seen feeding in lot 5, but was seldom observed in lot 4, probably because the rotation of crops in that lot did not happen to provide favorable grass land. Bobwhite.—The bobwhite—the quail of the North and the partridge of the South—is also a bird of theopen, though it has the habit of flying to cover when alarmed. Bobwhites were frequently found in coveys of a dozen or more in lots 4 and 5. On being flushed they sought shelter in the neighboring oak woods, where they spent much time, especially in fall and winter. In summer they lived chiefly in the open lots of the farm, where they nested. From the time that corn was 3 feet high until it was cut, they used it for cover. They were not as closely confined to grass land as the grasshopper sparrows, but foraged in every lot, and appeared to come in closer contact with crops than did any other species on the farm. Mourning Dove-—Among the birds of the first class may also be included mourning doves (fig. 2) and crows, which, though not nest- meter ja o> ins seid OYA ESF Fic. 2,—Mourning doye. (The background of this picture is typical of the Bryan farm.) ing on the arable land, were always to be seen feeding there. The doves nested in small pines in the more open parts of the adjacent woods. As their food is weed seed and waste grain gleaned on stubble- 14 | =o BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. fields, they avoided fields of timothy and nico ee and areas sider oe cultivation and foraged in waste corn land and on wheat stub- ble, where, for a time after harvest, they obtained wheat and, later, abandon, oe of ragweed. They were often observed in lots 2 a 3 feeding on the seeds of oxalis, spurge, and other weeds that grew among old cornstalks, and in fall worked among the rank weedy growths that overran the truck land between Persimmon Branch and the river; but they were more often seen in lot 4, which was near the woods where they nested, and which furnished them wheat stubble or new corn stubble with their favorite pigeon-grass. At harvest time and later the flock of doves numbered a score or more. Their feed- ing grounds changed from time to time according to the rotation of crops. They did not approach the buildings with as much confidence as did the meadowlarks and the bobwhites, and thus lost some effec- tiveness as weed-seed destroyers. Crows.— Both the fish crow and the common crow occurred on the farm, but the latter species was much the more abundant. Crows nested in the scrub pines (Pinus virginiana) which grow among the white oaks and red oaks bounding lot 4, and bred also in the woods across the calamus swamp, where, in addition to the trees just mentioned, there is a sprinkling of cedar, sycamore, and holly. Their favorite feeding grounds in spring were newly plowed fields where May-beetles and cutworms were to be found. Even when such fields were close to buildings the crows, though usually shyer than the doves, watched for opportunities to visit them, and many times were noticed in the early morning stalking along the furrows, sometimes within a few rods of the cabin, cow barn, and storage barn. As they did not often enter the timothy fields, which were tenanted by meadowlarks and grass- hopper sparrows, and as these, on the other hand, were seldom seen on plowed land and among the hoed crops where the crows constantly foraged, the work of the latter was, in a measure, complementary to that of the former. Blackbirds.—The crow blackbird, although it did not nest on the farm, was a frequent visitor. During the breeding season its favorite haunt was the cherry trees along the river bluff, but in spring and fall it foraged in flocks over all the lots of the farm. Sometimes with this bird, but more often in separate flocks, the rusty grackle visited the farm during migration. At this time also, the cowbird, often in large flocks, appeared in the open fields and helped to reduce the weed-seed harvest; but during the breeding season the species was limited to sev- eral pairs, which were generally to be seen walking about the pastures at the heels of the stock. Other birds.—The robin, though not breeding at Marshall Hall, was abundant in spring and fall, and might be found foraging out in the centers of the largest fields. The goldfinch showed the same fondness DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS. — 15 for the open and was often observed feeding far afield in flocks of from 100 to 300. Of the birds of the open, that fed far out in all the five lots and did not depend on adjacent cover, there remain but two to be mentioned, the vesper sparrow and the savanna sparrow, which visited the farm only during migration, but helped, nevertheless, in the valuable work of destroying weed seeds. BIRDS THAT DEPEND ON COVER. Cover furnished by farm.—Other species, mainly sparrows, though occurring on the arable area, fed less generally out in the centers of the fields, and depended on protecting cover. This was afforded in part by an osage orange hedge which bounds three sides of lot 2, and by blackberry bushes and cedar and sassafras trees along fence rows. Excellent cover was furnished, also, by a narrow belt of locusts, cedars, and cultivated cherry trees along the edge of the river bluff, and by a tangle of blackberry, honeysuckle, smilax, wild grape, bittersweet, and trumpet creeper that grows under the trees and in many places covers the face of the bluff (Pl. VI, fig. 1). Other good cover, nesting sites, and feeding grounds are afforded by the trees and bushes around the house, by the forested gully of the hog lot (Pl. IV, fig. 2), and by - the timbered outlets and bushy upper courses of Persimmon Branch and Partridge Branch. (The course of Persimmon Branch near the outlet can be seen in PI. XII, fig. 2.) To the thickets of the hedge- rows and streams is due the presence on the arable land of many species that would not live on unwatered and wholly cleared farms. Field Sparrow.—The field sparrow, which appears so often in the open that it may almost be grouped with the preceding class, is found, on observation, to be dependent on cover. But it is a bird of the broom-sedge and briers, and its presence is not conditional on the neighborhood of large trees, water, or buildings, as is that of some other sparrows. Its nesting sites included each side of Persimmon Branch, the broom-sedge and dewberry tangle of the high part of the hog lot (PI. VI, fig. 2), and the crest of the bluff overlooking the swamp. After the young were fledged small flocks of two or more families followed the branches, hedgerows, .brush piles, and fence rows all about the arable part of the farm, even finding their way along a rail fence to tobacco seed beds in the woods. The field sparrows avoided timothy, but foraged far out in weedy old cornfields where the stalks remained standing, and when new corn had tasseled they fed under its shelter. They were found with most certainty, however, in waste grounds bearing little but broom-sedge and briers. Chipping Sparrow.—The chipping sparrow, the field sparrow’s con- gener, in conformity to its semidomestic habits, nested in the door yard, the kitchen garden, the adjacent orchard, and cedar trees near the storage barn. It was characteristic of roadside and rail fence and foraged in cropped pastures and among hoed crops. sparrow, it sought cover, not in bushes, but in trees : olated as in orchards. On account of these habits its work is more or less com-_ plementary to that of the field sparrow. Neither species was noticed — “4 feeding to any important extent in standing timothy, the habitat of the grasshopper sparrow, but they both destroyed weed seeds and insects over a large part of the farm, even out in the center of lot 4 far from cover. In August and September they fed together in loose flocks along fence rows. At this time there were nearly a hundred of the two species, the chipping sparrow being the more numerous. Song Sparrow.—The song sparrow (fig. 3) is a bush bird, which, though feeding on the ground, is generally too cautious to venture far afield. It is essentially a bird of the waterways, and bred in the undergrowth along Persimmon Branch and the river, in the hog-lot gully, and about the calamus swamp; yet, like the chipping sparrow, | 7 | it came with confi- dence up to all the buildings. It for- aged over the gar- den and dooryard several rods wide extending from the house to the mouth of Persimmon Branch. In _ feed- ing here it usually avoided the open parts of newly plowed fields, but ran. amid corn, wheat, tobacco, truck, and timothy, and, as will appear later, did considerable good in this way. It spent much time along the river shore, however, and thus wasted opportunities for protecting crops. In summer it was less abundant than the chipping sparrow or the field sparrow, but after the breeding season it came down from the North in great flocks and did good work among weeds. Fic. 3.—Song sparrow. Other native sparrows.—I'ox sparrows, and many tree sparrows, Juncos, and white-throated sparrows also come down from the North in the fall. The fox sparrows are cover loving birds, and frequented the tangle of the river front and Persimmon Branch, seldom venturing more than a rod into the fields. The whitethroats usually associate with song sparrows, and were found all along hedgerows and water- ways. ‘The tree sparrows associate with field sparrows, and like them preferred broom-sedge fields, though they, too, often followed the and along a strip — eee ee) eit Bull. 17, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. ‘PLATE III. 2.—BRYAN FARM FROM THE RIVER, SHOWING SHORE, BLUFF, ALLUVIAL PLAIN, AND FORESTED HILLs. Bull. 17, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. Fig. 1.—RIVER BLUFF IN WINTER, WHICH SHELTERS SEVERAL SPECIES OF NATIVE SPARROWS. FIG. 2.—Ho@ LOT GULLY, WHICH FURNISHES SHELTER, SHADE, AND FOoD FOR MANY BiRDS. Bea, wiih ie in ‘DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS. | 17 eee and water courses. The juncos are an independent species, taking refuge in large trees as well as in bushes, and foraged far afield, ~ even in bare and exposed situations. English Sparrow.—lIn addition to the native sparrows, the English sparrow occurred on the farm. Its distribution depended solely on suitable nesting holes and available grain. A dozen pairs bred in the crannies of the house, in an old dovecote on the granary, and in the dooryard locusts. At harvest time the flock numbered 100 or more. No part of the farm was too remote for their forays if it yielded them grain, so their feeding grounds varied with the rotation of crops. They were often to be seen, also, gleaning amid poultry and stock at feeding time, and stealing into the corn crib. The presence of this bird had affected the distribution of other species, particularly such as nest in cavities. The bluebird had been driven from the farm, and many of the house wrens that formerly bred about the buildings had had to seek more secluded places. A few pairs of wrens continued, however, to nest near the house in cavities too small to admit the sparrow. Others lived at both mouths of Persimmon Branch and the lower end of the hog-lot gully (Pl. 1V, fig. 2). BIRDS OF LESS LIMITED DISTRIBUTION. Kingbird and Oriole.—About a dozen pairs of kingbirds and orchard orioles were also on the place. Neighbors at nesting time and often associates in their feeding range, they lived together in fruit trees by the house, and were also noted at the negro cabin and on the shore by the calamus swamp. Wherever a kingbird’s nest was discovered, a nest of the oriole was sure to be found in the same or an adjoining tree. Itseemed odd that such a tyrant as the kingbird should tolerate such close proximity. The kingbirds skimmed over all the five lots after insects, occasionally poising on weedstalks and often perching on the highest trees along the river bluff and the hedgerows. The orioles, though not infre- quently seen along fence rows, were generally confined to the trees of the river front, whence, however, they flew out into the adjacent mowing land to pick up insects from the ground. Cedar Bird.—F rom a dozen to a score of cedar birds also frequented the trees along the river, though they did not nest on the farm, and they were often noticed at the ends of Persimmon Branch and in the hog-lot gully. Their distribution appeared to depend on the presence of ripe fruit, such as mulberries, cherries, blackberries, or cedar berries. Catbird.—The most abundant summer bird was without question the catbird (fig. 4). Its usual habitat was practically the same as the song sparrow s—that is tosay,the undergrowth of moist places. But while the 7222—No. 17—02 ae lag! Fent S P a, nak = BIRDS OF A. somewhat open to the sun, the catbird chose tangles of catbrier deeply shaded by overspreading trees. It was therefore numerous in the swampy, forested dells at the extremities of Persimmon Branch (see map, Pl. II), and still more so in the hog-lot gully (Pl. IV, fig. 2), \ \\ Fie, 4.—Catbird. where it found attractive food, consisting of cherries, mulberries, blackberries, and elderberries, besides May-flies, which were abun- dant before the fruit ripened. Here, in one morning, fifteen cat- birds were seen. Like the song sparrow, this species came up to nest about the house. One pair built in a holly by the gate, another near , the horse tub, and two pairs in the garden. All these families fed among the vegetables and moved about under the apple trees and in the dooryard. The catbird is arboreal to the extent of securing prob- ably three-fourths of its food in trees or bushes. Because of this fact, and also because its feeding range does not extend out into fields, it does not appear to have a close relation with crops. Other birds.—One or two pairs of cardinal grosbeaks bred on the river bluff, but more were noticed in the edge of the swamp bordering the arable land. They built chiefly among catbriers, in stunted young scrub pines, and in the tops of fallen oaks. Cardinals were also seen along the wooded parts of Persimmon Branch, and may have bred there. Two pairs of yellow-breasted chats nested close to crops, one in the thick undergrowth of Persimmon Branch and the other in a similar shaded thicket at the northeast corner of lot 4. Indigo birds and brown thrashers nested near the storage barn, phcebes in the cow barn, and swifts in the chimneys of the house. - DISTRIBUTION OF BIRDS. ; 19 BIRDS OF VARIED DISTRIBUTION. The distribution of the birds remaining to be mentioned can not be so definitely limited. Various gulls and ducks were present in the river during the colder months. The least bittern, great blue heron, little blue heron, little green heron, and sora rail occurred in the cala- mus swamp (PI. VII, fig. 1), and the little green heron was also noted feeding all along the river (PI. ILI, fig. 2). Woodcock were found on Persimmon Branch near the river, and were observed at dusk flying into adjacent cornfields. Sandpipers, usually the spotted, but now and then the solitary, were to be seen, particularly at the mouth of the hog-lot gully, teetering along the beach in twos and threes. Various species of hawks, including the broad-winged, red-tailed, red-shouldered, marsh, Cooper, sharpshinned, and sparrow hawks, occurred on the farm. One pair of Cooper hawks bred in the scrub pines on the edge of lot 4. Broad-winged and red-shouldered hawks built on the slope of the wooded hill that rises from the calamus swamp (Pl. VII, fig. 2). Eagles frequently came over from Virginia, and one established a post in a large tree on the bluff just below the negro cabin. Ospreys sometimes passed the farm on fishing ‘trips up and down the river. Several pairs of great horned owls and screech owls built in the woods above the calamus swamp (PI. VI, fig. 2). Turkey buzzards soared over the fields and often fed aiong the shore: some nested beyond the farm in the chestnut stumps of a deep, narrow gully. Kingfishers, which bred in the sandy face of the bluff beyond the farm, fished in the calamus swamp and along the river front. The downy woodpecker foraged in all the fruit trees and nested in the hog-lot gully, at the river mouth of Persimmon Branch (see map, Pl. II), and also in some of the most remote woodland. Flickers, though breeding at Marshall Hall, were most numerous in spring and fall, when they frequently fed in open fields with robins. Sap- suckers were seen in various places during the colder half of the year, very often in the apple orchard by the kitchen garden. The red-headed woodpecker also occurred, but its distribution was very erratic. Night-hawks sometimes appeared in the late afternoon, circling after insects, and whip-poor-wills were frequently heard, though seldom seen. Hummingbirds were seen in various places about the farm dipping into the flowers of the trumpet creeper, persimmon, and tobacco. One nest was discovered on a horizontal bough on a red oak beside Persimmon Branch. Another was found fastened to the limb of a box elder in front of the farmhouse. Two pairs of wood pewees nested in the kitchen garden and the dooryard, and more than a dozen pairs bred in the recesses of the woods. The great crested flycatcher habitually stayed in solitary BIRDS OF ae MARYLAND FARM. PO eee retreats and jonrncegea a over to the hog-lot aie the river - front, and es even the dooryard. Several pairs of blue jays and scarlet tanagers fre- quented the oaks bordering lot 4. Two or three pairs of red-winged blackbirds, that sometimes fed on the cultivated land, nested in the calamus swamp (PI. VII, fig. 1). Purple finches were found during ~ the colder half of the year along the brink of the bluff. Barn swallows | nested in the cow barn one summer, but the individuals usually seen were visitors from other farms, as were also the purple martins, white- bellied swallows, and rough-winged swallows, that mingled with the barn swallows, often in a flock of a hundr ot and skimmed over the field in pursuit of insects. The red-eyed vireo, in summer one of the most abundant species on the farm, built in trees everywhere, but was most numerous in decid- uous woodland. Having strictly arboreal habits, it did not feed among field crops, but protected the foliage of orchard, shade trees, and woods. The white-eyed vireo was found in moist places outside of the culti- vated land and aiso in the woodland about the calamus swamp. The last-named locality sheltered large numbers of migrating warblers in spring and fall. Here at these seasons could be noted the black- throated blue warbler, myrtle warbler, magnolia warbler, black-poll warbler, black-throated green warbler, pine warbler, prairie warbler, oven-bird, the two species of water-thrushes, Wilson’s blackeap, and the Canadian warbler. The yellow warbler built near the house and also in willow swamp land back from the arable area. The redstart nested on the west side of theswamp. The Maryland yellow-throat, rivaling the song sparrow in numbers, frequented all the moist, bushy regions, but often came out into the five lots to feed along the fence rows, and was sometimes seen scurrying among the leaves of tobacco. Half a dozen or more pairs of long-billed marsh wrens had nests in the swamp (Pl. VU, fig. 1). Carolina chickadees nested near the swamp and in the pin oaks of the woods near lots + and 5, and several were seen in the orchard and the hog-lot gully. Tufted titmice were occasionally observed in the neighborhood of the swamp and the same woods. Kinglets of both species occurred in the apple orchards. The hermit thrush, olive-backed thrush, gray-cheeked thrush, and Wilson’s thrush occurred during migration in the oaks bordering lot 4. The wood thrush was found breeding in the forest east of the calamus swamp (Pl. VII, fig. 2), but never came out into the garden or house yard, as it often does in more northern States. TOPOGRAPHY OF HUNGERFORD FARM. In order to study the effect of birds on a greater variety of crops than were grown on the Bryan farm alone, the next two farms, namely, the Marshall farm and the Hungerford farm, which were conveniently situated for the purpose and were kindly placed at my service by the INSECT FOOD. oT owners, were visitéd from time to time. A brief description of the latter, on which most of these subsidiary observations were made, is necessary for a clearer understanding of the results here set forth. It is primarily devoted to truck and fruit, though it produces also wheat, corn, and tobacco. A hedgerow of large cedars cuts it into two parts, each part with its house and barn. The upper section has a swamp fed by a bushy brook and emptying into the river, while the lower section is drained by two ditches merging into one at their river out- let. There is also a timbered dell, shallow and swampy, which extends from the river back into the cultivated fields, and which harbored a colony of breeding crow blackbirds, more than a dozen catbirds, several woodcock, and at least two pairs of cardinals. Along the Hungerford farm the bluff is seldom half so high as on the Bryan farm, and in many places is entirely wanting. II.— INSECT FOOD. In studying data derived from the examination of stomachs collected over areas widely diverse in latitude and longitude the investigator seldom knows exactly what kinds of insects were available for selec- tion at the time the food in the stomachs was obtained, how abundant relatively the various species of insects were, and to what extent, if any, they were injuring crops. He is therefore in some danger of misinterpreting results, especially when he attempts to show how the birds’ insectivorous habits relate to agriculture in specific cases. He may, for instance, commend birds for having fed on a certain pest, when, as a matter of fact, they had found no other food available, or he may condemn them for not having eaten injurious insects when the district from which they came happened to be free from such plagues. For this reason, therefore, a careful study was made of the relative and absolute abundance of the different kinds of insects on the farm at each visit. It may be mentioned here that in recording observa- tions of this kind the calendar date should be supplemented by the biological date, which shows the advancement of the season and is best determined by the condition of the vegetation; but this rule has not always been followed in the present report. CRANE-FLIES. The most interesting visits were, naturally, those made when insects were most numerous. Crane-flies appeared every year, but during 1900 were unusually abundant. The farm was visited on April 22 of that year when the forests were bare and the fields brown. Peach, plum, and pear were in bloom, but the apple was not yet out. Crane- flies were seen everywhere, but were thickest in the grass land of lot 1, where they fairly swarmed on the ground and flew into one’s eyes, aes}. BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. | nose, and mouth. No birds were collected, for it was evident that all were feeding on crane-flies, which formed the only abundant supply of insect food. Several species of sparrows, including song sparrows, white-throated sparrows, and chipping sparrows, were observed greed- ily eating them. A pair of kingbirds left their perch onan apple-tree spray every now and then to snap up the insects, and a Maryland yel- low-throat, several meadowlarks,.and a pair of bobwhites feasted on the swarming prey. These insects fly feebly and are easily caught; and since there is hardly an insectivorous bird that is not known to take them, it seems safe to conclude that when they are abundant they are eaten in great numbers. Coming as they do in the spring, when other food is scarce, they are a boon to birds. They supply both the newly arrived species and those that are about to journey to their northern nesting grounds. The destruction of crane-flies by birds is a benefit to the farmer, as they are injurious to grain and grass. Their larve, repulsive, leathery-looking objects, feed underground, largety on roots. Crane-flies are said to do great damage in Europe, but are much less important in this country. MAY-FLIES. Of all the insects on the farm, the May-fly (fig. 5), during the period of its aerial! life, is undoubtedly the most abundant and the most con- spicuous. The respective numbers of other spe- cies fluctuate greatly from year to year, but the myriads of this plague are nearly always constant. Fortunately the life of the adult lasts only from a few hours to two days. As a water nymph, how- ever, the insect lives from one to three years. | When the locust trees are dropping their blos- 7 soms, usually about the middle of May, the i \ nymphs rise to the surface of the Potomac, trans- Set coe (rom: Torii Anto adults, and flutter to the shore. The suddenness with which they appear and their vex- atious numbers may be understood from a description of the conditions that prevailed at Marshall Hall from the 18th to the 15th of May, 1900. On the morning of the 13th not a May-fiy was to be seen. In the late afternoon several were noticed along the shore. On the 14th many came up from the river and flew around the house, and on the morn- ing of the 15th thousands were found clinging to the porch. They soon spread all over the farm, or, more strictly speaking, were blown over it. The air was full of them. After a walk of a hundred yards along the bluff in lot 38, I found 67 clinging to me. They covered the cedar trees beside the river, turning the dark green of the foliage to a distinct gray. They frightened the horses so badly by alighting on them that plowing was suspended for several days. They swarmed into the house and made meal-times almost unendurable. Thiscondition INSECT FOOD. _ : ya seldom lasts more than a week or two. Soon the dead bodies of the short-lived creatures are cast up all along the shore in windrows several inches high, and then there is a marked decrease in their abundance about the farm. They occur, however, though in constantly dimin- ishing numbers, throughout June and even into July. At their flood tide they furnish most of the food of practically all the birds of the farm, even including barnyard fowls. They are soft, entirely edible, and highly nutritious, owing to the fact that the females are heavy with eggs. Any bird, no matter how clumsy, can capture them as they make their aimless, blundering flights, or fall helplessly from contact with objects in their way. It was interesting to see the methods by which different birds procured them. A green heron, three spotted sandpipers, several song sparrows, and a dozen crow blackbirds frequented the beach, picking up insect after insect. Woodpeckers and at times Carolina chickadees snapped them up from tree trunks in the apple orchard or the hog-lot gully. The parula warbler, the yellow warbler, and one or two other warblers, with the white-eyed vireo and the red-eyed vireo, gathered them from among leafy boughs. The redstart darted out and caught its share of the quarry onthe wing. Some species fed in a lazy, sated manner. Thus in the top of a cedar that was gray with the insects, five crows sat for half an hour slowly choking them down. A pair of red-winged black- birds and several blackpoll warblers later visited the same tree to feed. Such flycatchers as the phcebe, the wood pewee, the kingbird, and the great crested flycatcher stood nervously at their sentry posts, every now and then rising to hover and snap upavictim. The kingbird had another, more interesting method of feeding. Perched in the dead top of a tree, it would make a dash into one of the lateral boughs of an adjacent locust that was so heavily laden with May-flies that the tips of the branchlets drooped under the weight, dislodge hundreds of the insects, snap up several as they fluttered out, and then return to its perch. Over and over it played this game, apparently with keen zest. I watched a similar, though less adroit, performance by a female catbird that spent a long time gathering food for her young from a maple in the dooryard. Every few minutes she would take a short flight and drop on the end of a slender bough; then from the scores of May-flies shaken out she would, by clumsy efforts, generally manage to catch one. A hen with her brood of eleven chicks derived the chief profit from the bird’s industry, and remained for two hours gobbling up the manna that rained from the maple tree. English sparrows also shook the insects from the branches and captured them on the wing. A flock of a dozen cedar birds pursued them through the air, appearing to swim rather than fly, and reminding one of a lazy sunfish dawdling after a baited hook. At other times, possibly when they were more hungry, they caught their prey with an alert- = Jae Pas ye ee of Salles inchs th tree swallow. the bank s swallow, th rough-winged swallow, the barn swallow, and the purple martin appeared to feed on May-flies exclusively. Whenever a kingbird — dashed into a tree these birds would fly by the dozen to the spot and : seize the fluttering, helpless insects that had been dislodged. When, however, a gust of wind drove the May-flies before it, the swallows were seen to best advantage as they circled gracefully after them. Field observations and the examination of stomachs proved that 40 species had eaten May-flies, but this number probably represents only about half the truth. Not many birds were collected at the height of | the insects’ abundance, because even casual observation showed that practically all the birds of the farm, not only the highly insectivorous " & Oe, oe STOR Be Oe OT mek ae Se eee a eh A species, but also the species chiefly frugivorous or granivorous, turned to them for food. The following is the list obtained: Last of birds known to have fed on May-fles. Green heron. Red-winged blackbird. Yellow warbler. Woodcock. Orchard oriole. Black-poll warbler. Spotted sandpiper. Crow blackird. Water-thrush. Yellow-billed cuckoo. English sparrow. Maryland yellow-throat. Black-billed cuckoo. Field sparrow. Yellow-breasted chat. Downy woodpecker. Cardinal. Wilson warbler. Chimney swift. Purple martin. Redstart. Kingbird. Barn swallow. Catbird. Great crested flycatcher. White-bellied swallow. House wren. — Pheebe. Bank swallow. Carolina chickadee. Wood pewee. Rough-winged swallow. Blue-gray gnatcatcher. Blue jay. Cedar bird. Gray-cheeked thrush. Common crow. Red-eyed vireo. Bobolink. Parula warbler. Though May-flies furnish valuable food for fish and do no harm to crops, they are of course a plague when they become so numerous. Broadly considered, however, their consumption by birds is a misfor- tune, for it suspends or prevents the destruction of really injurious insects. At no other time do all birds eat so large a proportion of insect food, for at no other time do they find such a scarcity of other suitable food, and if their attention were not diverted by this easy and palatable prey they might be expected to do the best of their work against insect pests. This unfavorable condition is, however, strictly local, lasts only a few days, and would not occur on areas remote from large bodies of fresh water where the May-fly breeds. INFESTED CROPS. At each visit the crops were inspected for pests, and whenever any crop had suffered appreciably it was regularly watched to see whether birds came to its relief. Stomachs were collected also around the infested fields. Bull. 17, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE V. Fiag. 1.—WEEDY OLD CORNFIELD, LOT 3. Fic. 2.—PasTuReE, LoT 1. <<." 4 = [~* -~ Y iA PLATE VI. (ine Le >) am faa) fons : uw = = a (ee 5 © - aE o WwW Zz Zz E Ze © oc Wl uJ ive xc ea y EK CO) S a < = > 2 a us z ra) S oc WW 3 A rp) aa im zn Ww = = O 9 ra] o kK faa) a WwW | ‘a QO x v) s at ¢ = = = o§ > 7 ue E . >) n os & G 2 re i) [a0] eS Ly = 5 je) Pe ee " a we = oe INSECT FOOD. 3 25 White potatoes—The potato beetle (Doryphora 10-lineata) caused every year considerable injury to white potatoes. During May, 1899, it had destroyed at least half of the foliage of several acres of potatoes about 6 inches high in lot 3. The field was watched for an hour or — two each day for several days, but only three birds were seen in the -patch—a pair of bobwhites, which are noted potato-beetle eaters, sometimes consuming from 50 to 100 at a single meal, and a cardinal, which is a near relative of the rose-breasted grosbeak, probably the the most valuable destroyer of the pest. Unfortunately neither spe- cies could be either observed feeding in the patch or subsequently col- lected. Other birds were very abundant along Persimmon Branch and the river front, but appeared to manifest no interest in potato beetles. From May 28 to May 30, 1896, the potatoes in the kitchen garden, though in fair foliage, had from several to a dozen beetles on each plant. Birds were about the garden all the time. Forty of them, principally catbirds, vireos, house wrens, chipping sparrows, summer warblers, orchard orioles, and flycatchers were collected, but none had eaten the beetles. On the 16th of June, 1901, a large patch of potatoes by the negro cabin in lot 2 was infested. Above it circled a score of swifts and swallows, mainly barn and bank swallows, with a few purple martins. They did not touch the beetles, but caught caddis- flies, which were numerous over the patch. The eaddis-fly, very abundant and regarded by birds as a choice mor- sel, may, like the May-fly, distract their attention from other insects. It usually appears about the last of May or the first of June, and it is greedily eaten by many species, especially by arboreal and aerial feeders. It is a harmless insect, whose larvee lead an aquatic exist- ence. It, too, like the May-fly, would be excessively abundant only near large rivers or lakes. String beans.—At a time when potatoes were suffering in the kitchen garden (May 28-30, 1896), a dozen rows of string beans beside them were ravaged by thousands of bean flea-beetles (Cerotomu tri- Jurcata), but none of the 40 birds collected had preyed on them, a fact possibly due to the presence of caddis-flies. Another uprising of these beetles was observed May 17-20, 1899, but then May-flies were abundant enough to engross the birds’ attention. This beetle is sim- ilar, however, to species that are eaten by many kinds of birds, and, under other circumstances, might perhaps have been destroyed in large numbers. Sweet potatoes.—T'wo tortoise beetles injure sweet potatoes (PI. VIII, fig 2) at Marshall Hall. The more common one (Coptocycla bicolor) has the power to change its color, and at its brightest looks like a drop of molten gold, from which it is generally known as the ‘gold bug.’ During June, 1899, it was especially abundant. On the Mar- shall Hall farm, near a small plot of sweet potatoes that it was injur- 26 ing iets pee kingbirds, wrens, and. chipping sparrows i were collected. None of them had molested it. On the Bryan farm, | a in lot 3, it was so abundant that it killed every plant in a patch of sev- eral acres. The lot was watched foran hour or two for three days, but. no birds were seen coming to the relief of the dying plants. On the Hungerford farm, 24 birds, largely wrens, barn swallows, and cat- birds, were collected near infested plots, and one bird, a catbird, was found to have eaten a tortoise beetle. This fact appears to show that the insect is not unpalatable to catbirds, which might therefore have given some help to the potatoes if cherries had not been so plentiful. Cabbages.—Three pests attacked cabbages—the wavy-striped flea- beetle, the common cabbage worm, and the harlequin cabbage bug. During the middle of June, 1899, the beetle was found in numbers varying from a dozen to a score on each plant of a cabbage patch on the Hungerford place, near the dell where the crow blackbirds breed. No birds were observed among the cabbages. Ten catbirds were col- lected in the dell, but they had fed mostly on May-flies. If these tempting insects had not been present, and if birds had come into the patch, doubtless they would have eaten the beetle, for it is closely aliied to other forms on the farm that are eaten with avidity. The cabbage worm (Pieris rapx) did considerable damage during June and July of 1896 and 1899 in the Bryan kitchen garden. From six to a dozen worms could be found on every cabbage. A few stomachs of catbirds, chipping sparrows, and other species numerous around the garden were collected_but none contained the worms. The patch was carefully watched for five days. Song sparrows, catbirds, and chipping sparrows frequently hopped among the cabbages, but were not seen to eat the worms. This was surprising in the case of the chipping sparrow, for it is known to hop up into cabbage plants and extract the larve. In one instance the kingbird fed on the butterfly of the cabbage worm. The harlequin cabbage bug occurred only once in injurious numbers, and then on the Marshall farm. From 20 to 50 bugs could be counted on each plant. Several field sparrows and grass- hopper sparrows, the only species near the patch, were collected, but had not taken the bugs. Other observations have shown that birds do not like these insects, and consequently can not be depended on to destroy them. ; Lima beans.—-During the last week of June, 1899, the 12-spotted cucumber beetle (Diabrotica 12-punctata) was very abundant on lima beans, though not injuring them seriously. Twenty birds were col- lected close by, half of them chipping sparrows and the others king- birds, house wrens, and goldfinches. None had eaten the beetles. The bobwhite and the white-eyed vireo, which feed on them, were not at hand. INSECT FOOD. WT Peas.—Next to the beans was a patch of peas so ravaged by the pea plant-louse that the crop was a total loss. Only one of the 20 birds had eaten it—a chipping sparrow. It was somewhat surprising to find even one, for the various species of plant-lice are seldom utilized by birds for food, but later it was learned that the chipping sparrow had elsewhere been found preying on the pea plant-louse. This insect has only recently become known to science. It suddenly made its appear- ance along the Atlantic coast and occasioned a loss of $3,000,000 in the first season.4 | Melons.—Melons at times suffered badly from insects. In lot 4, not far from the woods, a patch of watermelons in the critical stage of growth, when the first leaf had appeared between the thick, nutritious cotyledons, was ravaged by three species of leaf-beetles—Dabrotica 12-punctata, D. vittata, and Systena elongata. ‘There were from six to a dozen beetles on each plant, and they ate so many of the cotyle- dons that practically the whole piece had to be replanted. When they were most abundant the patch was watched for several hours on June 15, 1899, and again on June 16, but no birds came to its aid. Birds are known to eat these three insects at times, but the remoteness of the melon field from water courses, hedgerows, and other cover attractive to the most abundant species may explain their failure to do so in this case. At the same date (June 15, 1899) Diabrotica vittata was found on canteloupes in blossom on the Hungerford farm, but although there were from 12 to 20 insects on each plant, they appeared to be doing little harm. The patch was observed for an hour in the late afternoon, and three field sparrows, the only birds near it, were collected, but none of these insects were found in their stomachs. Tobacco.—During the last of August and first of September, 1899, tobacco was grown on the Bryan farm in lot 2 near the negro cabin (PL VII, fig. 1), and also on the other two farms. The entire crop was Fie. 6.—Tobacco-worm (after Howard; loaned by Division of Entomology). - damaged by worms (fig. 6) to the extent of 50 percent of its value, in spite of the fact that men, women, and children turned out to pick worms every day for two weeks. When the pests were most abund- ant (August 28-31) an effort was made to learn whether birds were joining in the war against them. Field sparrows and chipping spar- rows spent considerable time hopping among the plants, a song sparrow “Circular 43 (2d. series), Div. Entomology, Dept. Agr., p. 3, 1901. 28 BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. and several wrens went into the field often, and two Maryland yellow- throats scurried among the leaves. Forty birds were killed in the vicinity of tobacco fields. They comprised, for the most part, the several species of native sparrows that breed on the farm, including also a few wrens, meadowlarks, flycatchers, and others. Not one of the 40 had fed on tobacco worms, although observations on the farm at other times had shown that birds eat them as well as other-sphinx eaterpillars. Bobwhites and vireos take them, but were not-repre- sented in the collection. The chipping sparrow had eaten them at other times, the English sparrow had been seen picking them from the plants, and the crow is known to be an habitual ‘wormer.’ In June, 1900, an old crow and five young stayed near tobacco in lot 1 for tendays. In the early morning and late afternoon the youngsters would sit clamoring on the fence, while the mother bird brought them worms from the field. By way of summary it may be stated that while the observations made to determine whether or not the birds of the farm were protect- ing field crops from insects yielded in the main negative results, they do not lead to the conclusion that birds are of no service. They do indicate, however, that birds are not to be depended on to check uprisings of insect pests, and that insecticides should be used freely and repeatedly. In case of this farm it is probable that the super- abundance of May-flies and caddis-flies diverted the birds’ attention from pests to the hordes of harmless insects. The pea plant-louse is a new species, unfamiliar to birds, which, however, seldom eat plant-lice. The potato beetle, though unpalatable and avoided by many birds, is eaten with relish by the bobwhite. Had an especial effort been made to collect this bird in infested fields, it would probably have been found to be doing much to reduce the numbers of the pest. Tobacco worms have also been attacked by the bobwhite as well as by the crow, English sparrow, and chipping sparrow; and it is likely that when these worms are small many species of birds feed on them. INFESTED TREES AND SHRUBS. Fall webworm.—The next group of observations concerns insects that attack trees and shrubs. The fall webworm occurred regularly at Marshall Hall. It was most often found on willow, black walnut, mulberry, apple, and pear trees. At a time when it was not especially abundant 62 birds, largely catbirds, sparrows, orioles, warblers, and flycatchers, were collected. One of the orioles, a male Baltimore, had eaten webworms. During the middle of June, 1899, webworms defoli- ated parts of apple and pear trees. A number of stomachs were col- lected and the trees were closely watched, but nothing gave evidence that the pest was being destroyed. During the last of August, 1896, it was so abundant that it defoliated all the willows of the hog- lot gully and fairly festooned the branches with webs. The trees were INSECT FOOD. 29 watched for three hours, August 23. Catbirds and vireos, though numerous, did not molest the larve, but a pair of yellow-billed cuckoos — continually extracted them from the webs. The destruction of this insect is an habitual practice with the cuckoo. Ina single stomach of the species examined by Professor Beal there were 325 of the larve. ~ Saw-flies—In August, 1896, also, the willow saw-fly (Peronus) — was defoliating the willows farther up the gully. No birds were observed preying on it, though the cuckoo is known to relish saw-fly larvee, sixty of which were found in a cuckoo’s stomach examined by Professor Beal. The cornel bushes of the same gully were almost every year stripped by the larve of another saw-fly ({/arpiphorus varianus). On July 30, 1895, they covered every large bush, and later they devoured all the foliage. A dozen catbirds and several birds of other species were constantly near the bushes, but evidently did not touch the insects. A repetition of these circumstances was noted August 2, 1896. An interesting outbreak of the pine saw-fly (Lophyrus) occurred May 17, 1900, in which hardly a dozen pine trees in the woods adjoining lot 4 escaped attack. In the areas of woodland where the insects had finished their work the trees cast no shade and appeared to be dead. In places where the larve were feeding their dropping excreta made a continuous patter like that of falling rain. From the infested district 34 birds were collected, com- prising the following species: Great crested flycatcher, wood pewee, blue jay, crow, scarlet tanager, red-eyed vireo, white-eyed vireo, magnolia warbler, black-poll warbler, oven-bird, chat, Canadian war- bler, redstart, gray-cheeked thrush, and olive-backed thrush. Seven birds, including the black-poll warbler, the red-eyed vireo, and the gray-cheeked thrush, had eaten the insect. Since it has not yet been found practicable to protect forest trees by means of insecticides, such services as birds render among these pests ought to be appreciated. Plant-lice—The fact that plant-lice are not selected by birds has been mentioned in the notes on the pea plant-louse. It was illus- trated in the case of a large plant-louse (Zachnus) that was noticed on an old willow in the hog-lot gully August 23, 1896. The tree was infested by so many of the insects that its limbs were more or less covered with the honeydew that exuded from their honey tubes, but none of the numerous birds of the neighborhood manifested the slightest interest in the matter. Locust Leaf-mining Beetle —In the summer of 1895 a destructive out- break of the locust leaf-mining beetles (Odontota dorsalis) turned all the locusts of the farm as brown as if they had been scorched by fire, ruining the verdure of the river bluff. On July 30, 1895, when adult beetles were swarming on the locusts of the hog-lot gully, catbirds were observed to be spending a good deal of time amid the browned foliage. Thirteen were collected and nine were found to have eaten vy Fe 30 . BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. _ the destructive beetles. One bird contained no fewer than18. From 1896 to 1902, inclusive, the beetles did not again ruin the foliage, though _ they were present every year, and at times in early summer were so- numerous that a scourge was feared. In 1896 the trees farther up the river, however, were turned brown, showing that the escape of those - at Marshall Hall was not due to climatic conditions unfavorable to the insects; therefore it is possible that the birds were, at least to some extent, responsible for it. Forty-six birds from the following 21 species, taken during different years, had eaten the locust leaf-mining beetle: List of birds whose stomachs contained locust leaf-mining beetles. Catbird. Red-eyed vireo. Great crested flycatcher. Chipping sparrow. Warbling vireo. Wood pewee. Field sparrow. Yellow warbler. Pheebe. Song sparrow. Orchard oriole. Yellow-billed cuckoo. Towhee. Baltimore oriole. Cedar bird. Cardinal. Scarlet tanager. - Carolina wren. English sparrow. Kingbird. Junco. Moreover, when most of these birds were collected, the beetles were not numerous. All the common species, especially the arboreal feed- ers, ate them eagerly whenever they were to be had. CERTAIN DESTRUCTIVE INSECTS. Flea-beetles.—Reference has already been made to the injury done to melons by the flea-beetle (Systena elongata). Its congener, the pale- striped flea-beetle (Systena blanda—tig. 7) is also abundant on the farm and one or the other has been found harmful to corn, melons, and beans. — Else- where they have attacked fruit trees and tomatoes. Fortunately, however, they appeared to form the natural beetle food of several ground-feeding spe- cles of birds and were sought for even when they were very scarce. They were seen in the stomachs of 28 birds, including the savanna, the grasshop- per, the chipping, the song, the field, and the white- Fic. 7.—Pale-striped flea- throated sparrows, the crow, the crow blackbird, pees i eee the bobolink, the meadowlark, the house wren, and loaned by Division of the Maryland yellow-throat. Systena blanda was map ean ta found on ragweed in a field of ripe standing wheat, June 16, 1898. Eleven chipping sparrows that had been flying into the field were shot. None had taken wheat and eight had fed on the beetles, destroying in all 73. The smallest number found in a single stomach was 5, the largest 14. Feet ire Re MMe en ee orcs Ee eS lg ea SO | SG © answer roop.) & , Rose-chafer.—During the last week of May, 1896, the rose-chafer | (fig. 8) was present in such numbers that 100 individuals were counted / on one rosebush and three times that number on an adjacent blossom- Fic. 8.—Rose-chafer (after Riley; loaned by the Division of Entomology). ing elder. Of 62 birds collected during this outbreak, only 3—2 king- birds and a cardinal—had destroyed rose-chafers. This result was not expected, because May-flies and other tempting insects were not com- Bs ‘ ap N= Fie. 9.—Kingbird. mon then, and because rose-chafers have no disagreeable secretions like those of potato-beetles and the two diabroticas, but are relatives of the May-beetle and the dung-beetles, which are highly relished by many birds. The he kinghirds (fig. | | : for rose-chafers, as these two, the only 0 ones coll C ss € and 20 of the insects respectively. Mies ie = ‘May-beetle—May-beetles attract only the ee species; their heed shells offer too much resistance to small birds. During their ‘season— May and June—292 bird stomachs were examined, but May-beetles were found in only 16. These stomachs were from birds of the fol- lowing ten species: Brown thrasher, orchard oriole, phcebe, catbird, gray-cheeked thrush, blue jay, crow, crow blackbird, screech owl, and broad-winged hawk. This record is far below a fair average, for at the time it was made the beetles were rare; moreover, the two famous beetle-eaters, the crow and the crow blackbird, were represented only by a single individual of each kind. Cutworms.—Similarly unfavorable conditions attended the destruc- tion of cutworms (fig. 14), though these insects are obtainable for a longer period and are edible for small as well as large birds. No seri- ous outbreak of this pest occurred. Had there been one, birds would have been found combating it, for all species that are in the slightest degree insectivorous and feed at all on the ground show a marked liking for cutworms. 7 Grasshoppers.— Grasshoppers (fig. 10) when abundant are to the bird what bread is to man. They were, however, comparatively rare at Fic. =10: —Grasshopper (after Riley; loaned by Division of Entomology). Marshall Hall; therefore only 71 of the 645 native birds collected had eaten them, though most of these had made them the major part of their food. The list of species eating them is as follows: List of birds examined whose stomachs contained grasshoppers. Bobwhite. Orchard oriole. Cardinal. Kingbird. Crow blackbird. Maryland yellow-throat. Great crested flycatcher. Savanna sparrow. Catbird. Blue jay. Grasshopper sparrow. Carolina wren. Common crow. Henslow sparrow. House wren. Cowbird. Chipping sparrow. Brown creeper. Red-winged blackbird. Field sparrow. Robin. Meadowlark. Song sparrow. Bluebird. Had grasshoppers been abundant the birds would undoubtedly haye destroyed them in large numbers. Their scarcity may possibly be due to the abundance of birds at Marshall Halli. Ants.— Whenever temperature allowed any insects to occur in appre- ciable numbers, ants were abundant, and at times they were the most Bull. 17, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE Vil. r FIG. 1.—CALAMUS SWAMP, THE HAUNT OF SEVERAL MARSH- LOVING BIRDS. FiG. 2.—CALAMUS SWAMP IN WINTER, SHOWING HILL TENANTED By BLUE JAYS, GREAT HORNED OWLS, RED-SHOULDERED HAWKS, AND RUFFED GROUSE. Bull. 17, Biological Survey, U. S. Dept of Agriculture. PLATE VIII. Fic. 1.—TOBACCO FIELD OF LOT 2, WHERE THE EFFECT OF BIRDS UPON AN UPRISING OF TOBACCO WORMS WAS STUDIED. Fig. 2.—SWEET POTATOES AND PEAR ORCHARD, WHERE VARIOUS INVESTIGATIONS WERE MADE. 1 RG ah I sah ae ip : 5 - rhese two weevils are also relished by blackbirds, meadowlarks, crows, catbirds, and other species. Bill bugs (Spheno- INSECT FOOD. 85 phorus parvulis) also are often taken, but the small clover weevil (Sitones hispidulus) is destroyed most frequently of all. The spar- rows and other terrestrial-feeding species and all the aerial feeders consume this little pest in great numbers. The rice weevil (Calandra oryzd) was found in the stomachs of two marsh wrens collected in the wild rice of the swamp September 7, 1896, and the injurious cab- bage curculio (Ceutorhynchus rapx) had been eaten by three rough- winged swallows taken July 9, 1898. Among other weevils destroyed by Marshall Hall birds may be mentioned Apion, Baris, Centrinus, Macrops, Tanymecus, and Tyloderma. The weevil-eating birds numbered 166 of the 645 collected, and were divided among the subjoined 44 species: List of birds examined whose stomachs contained weevils. Downy woodpecker. Henslow sparrow. Yellow warbler. Chimney swiit. White-throated sparrow. Magnolia warbler. Great crested flycatcher. Chipping sparrow. Black-poll warbler. Wood pewee. Field sparrow. Oven-bird. Blue jay. Junco. Water-thrush. Common crow. Song sparrow. Maryland yellow-throat: Bobolink. Towhee. Chat. Cowbird. Cardinal. Catbird. Red-winged blackbird. Barn swallow. House wren. Meadowlark. White-bellied swallow. Long-billed marsh wren. Orchard oriole. Bank swallow. Brown creeper. Rusty blackbird. Rough-winged swallow. Carolina chickadee. Crow blackbird. Red-eyed vireo. Gray-cheeked thrush. Savanna sparrow. Warbling vireo. Robin. Grasshopper sparrow. White-eyed vireo. It seems strange that so many birds should have eaten weevils, for the insects were never sufficiently abundant to be conspicuous, seldom, indeed, affording the collector a dozen specimens without diligent use of the sweep net. Moreover, they harmonize so admirably with their surroundings that birds do well to find them at all. Many aerial feeders, it is true, capture them on the wing, but a large number of eround-feeding species take them from the ground despite their pro- tective coloration. The inference is that birds find them dainty mor- sels, which pay for close seeking. Sucha relish is not easily explained, for weevils appear scarcely more edible than little stones; but it is a fortunate circumstance, for they are dangerous pests, not easily con- trolled by insecticides. Oak scale.—An unexpected and somewhat suggestive habit dis- covered at Marshall Hall was the feeding of certain species on scale insects. Of the 22 vireos and arboreal warblers collected during the pine saw-fly invasion previously referred to, 10 had preyed on an oak scale (Aermes). This insect does not occur on fruit trees, but its destruction suggested desirable possibilities in cases where scales of 36 BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. the orchard were present, notably in the case of the San José scale, which in many places has threatened to ruin certain horticultural interests. Unobtainable insects.—There are several insects that would probably be palatable to birds if their habits did not render them unobtainable. During the summer of 1898 a grain moth caused a loss of 50 percent of the corn in the crib. The only birds that entered the building were English sparrows, which prefer grain to insects, and therefore prob- ably did not destroy the larve. In 1900 tobacco was affected by a stalk-borer, the larva of a crambid moth, and in 1898 corn suffered severely from the corn stalk-borer (Diatrea saccharalis), but the seclusive habits of these two larve prevented the possibility .of their destruction by birds. Certain kinds of flies, though palatable, are too alert to be caught. This proved to be the case with house-flies, stable- flies, bluebottle blow-flies, and horse-flies, particularly the banded- winged form (Chrysops). The last-mentioned flies were so numerous that they greatly annoyed both man and beast. The kingbird, the barn swallow, and the bank swallow frequently caught them, and in single instances Acadian flycatchers, catbirds, song sparrows, and chipping sparrows had eaten them. USEFUL INSECTS. In addition to injurious and neutral insects, certain species that are useful to man contribute to the food of birds. They consist for the most part of various kinds of bees, and numerous species of wasps and beetles that prey on insect pests. Honey bee.—Birds are often accused of eating honey bees. The kingbird is most frequently mentioned in this complaint, and his nick- name of ‘bee bird’ or ‘bee martin’ attests the common belief about him. It 1s true that he is often guilty of the charge, but as he selects the worthless drones and does not molest the workers, his habit is not injurious to bee keepers. During 1895 and 1896 two hives of bees within 30 feet of two kingbirds’ nests were not meddled with at all. A good deal has been written about the destruction by birds of use- ful predaceous and parasitic insects that serve to keep insect pests in check, and the assertion has been made that even though birds feed on pests, they destroy so many of these useful species that they over- balance by this injury the good which they accomplish. Special attention was given to this subject. Whenever any useful insect was abundant at Marshall Hall the relation of the birds to it was particularly noted. Soldier-beetles.— W ith the exception of rose-chafers the useful soldier- beetle (Chauliognathus pennsylvanicus) was the most conspicuous ae INSECT FOOD. 37 species present May 28-30, 1896, after May-flies had become compara- tively scarce. The soldier-beetles were in the grass, on blossoms, on the foliage of bushes and trees, and in the air, yet of the 62 birds collected, representing 19 species, only 3, namely, 2 wood pewees and a phoebe, had eaten them. At other times (June, 1898 and 1899), when the beetles were abundant, more than a hundred birds, including nearly all the common species on the farm, were collected, and only a chat, 2 catbirds, and 2 kingbirds (June, 1898) had eaten them. Experiments with several kinds of caged birds have shown that the species is dis- tasteful, probably on account of its pungent and disagreeable flavor. Fireflies —Another useful predaceous beetle of the same family, having a similarly repulsive taste, is a firefly, Photinus. In June it sometimes, even during daylight, outnumbered the soldier-beetle, but it was never found in stomachs of Marshall Hall birds. Tiger-beetles.—The useful tiger-beetle, a ferocious predatory insect, - represented at Marshall Hall by several species, was never so numer- ous as the soldier-beetle or the firefly, but was often seen by the dozen, especially about the middle of April, in the sandy road along the bluff. It has no unpleasant flavor and must rely on its alertness to save it from enemies. When danger threatens, it springs into the air and flies swiftly away. Only the quickest birds have any chance of catch- ing it. A few birds, mainly swallows and flycatchers, secure it occa- sionally. Of the 645 birds examined only a phebe, a kingbird, a ereat crested flycatcher, and a crow blackbird had eaten it. Ground-beetles.— With ground-beetles (Carabide, fig. 12), which as a class are regarded as predatory, the case was differ- ent. Most birds eat them, some species largely. Ground-beetles are numerous in spring, then be- come less conspicuous, but appear later in large numbers. Their period of greatest abundance in the five years was April 10-14, 1899, when, with the exception of ants, they were the most noticeable insects on the farm. The smaller kinds (Anésodac- tylus agricola, A. rusticus, Casnonia, Amara, and a small //arpalus) predominated. Most of the birds “(icy Ritey: loaned collected then were sparrows, which had eaten very _ by Division of Ento- few of the beetles. At the same time the larvee of | ™°°%”: a large ground-beetle (//arpalus caliginosus) were fairly abundant, and 4 of the 8 robins collected had destroyed them. During mid- summer (especially 1898 and 1899) the large Carabide (//arpalus caliginosus and LH. pennsylvanicus) fairly swarmed after dark and were attracted to lights in hosts. They were seldom seen during the day, but crows, blackbirds, catbirds, meadowlarks, and others frequently extracted them from their hiding places. Three meadowlarks (August Fia. 12.—Ground-beetle 38 BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. | 29, 1898) had made the bulk of their food of them. The genus is not exclusively carnivorous, for it has been known to feed on seeds of grasses and weeds, and recently (1900) has been discovered eating strawberry seeds to a harmful extent. One grower at Leechburg, Pa., lost on a quarter-acre patch $350 in three nights through their depredations.* The nature of the injury has so far made remedial methods impracticable; consequently the predatory habit of birds is valuable in this case. There is an increasing tendency to doubt the utility of ground- beetles as a class. A European species (Zabrus gibbus) is a notorious erain pest, and an American species (Agonoderus pallipes) has recently been ascertained to feed sometimes on newly planted corn. Professor Forbes has shown that the food habits of ground-beetles vary with the structure of their jaws, species with sharp-curved jaws being ‘arnivorous, while those with blunt jaws are decidedly vegetarian. Only a few—probably less than half a dozen—of the Marshall Hall birds examined had destroyed the more carnivorous species. It is probable, therefore, that birds do no appreciable harm in their rela- tion to ground-beetles, but may even do some good by reducing the numbers of such species as have vegetarian habits and occasionally become pests. The following is a list of the different ground-beetles found in the stomachs collected: Amara, Anisodactylus agricola, A. rusticus, Bembidium, Cratacanthus dubius, Chlenius xstivus, Harpalus caliginosus, IT. pennsylvanicus, and several smaller species of Har- palus. ‘These had been eaten by 82 birds of the following 35 different species: Last of birds examined whose stomachs contained ground-beetles. Woodcock. Rusty blackbird. Louisiana water-thrush. Spotted sandpiper. Crow blackbird. Maryland yellow-throat. 30bwhite. Savanna sparrow. Chat. Downy woodpecker. Grasshopper sparrow. Mockingbird. Flicker. Henslow sparrow. Catbird. Kingbird. White-throated sparrow. Brown thrasher. Great crested flycatcher. | Chipping sparrow. House wren. Phoebe. Junco. Gray-cheeked thrush. Blue jay. Song sparrow. Olive-backed thrush. Crow. Towhee. Robin. Red-winged blackbird. Cardinal. Bluebird. ~ Meadowlark. Water-thrush. Ladybirds.—The most useful of all beetles are'the members of the family Coccinellidee, commonly known as ladybirds, which with their larvee are voracious feeders on insect pests. Only three of the Mar- shall Hall birds—a long-billed marsh wren, a song sparrow, and an Knglish sparrow—were found to have destroyed these valuable insects. @Bull. Cornell Univ. Agric. Expt. Sta., p. 150, 1901. RAS Wei NT yet - es ate aA. ee ’ pigs ie 21+ 1," >! ‘ Lge g ~ INSECT FOOD. . 39 The particular species eaten was in each case ippodamia maculata. It was not noticeably abundant at the time it was taken, but during August, 1896, it was the most conspicuous insect on the farm. Then, however, it was not molested. Ladybirds of another. species ( Cocci- nella 9-notata) werevery numerous when the pea plant-louse was mak- ing havoc, and appeared on every pea vine greedily devouring the plant-lice. It was, fortunately, quite free from attack by birds. Indeed, ladybirds appear to be distasteful to birds. I have offered them to a dozen different caged birds, and they have always been refused. Flies.—Beneficial diptera, such as the predatory robber-flies and the parasitic tachinid and syrphid flies, are too alert to be caught by any birds except flycatchers and swallows, and even these secure them rarely. During June and July, when robber-flies were plentiful, birds were not found disturbing them. Syrphid flies were so numer- ous during the last of August, 1899, that several would alight on my camera whenever it- was set down, but a score of birds collected then had not made use of them as food. Bees” and wasps.—The most abundant and conspicuous of the useful insects are bees and the flower-fertilizing species of wasps. Of the 645 native birds collected only 31, representing 20 species, had eaten bees. It is interesting to note that the offenders were largely either warblers or aerial feeders. The list is appended: List of birds examined whose stomachs contained bees and wasps. Chimney swiit. Song sparrow. Yellow warbler. Ruby-throated humming- Scarlet tanager. Black-poll warbler. bird. Purple martin. Water-thrush. Kingbird. White-bellied swallow. Maryland yellow-throat. Rusty blackbird. Bank swallow. Canadian warbler. Henslow sparrow. Rough-winged swallow. Catbird. Chipping sparrow. Red-eyed vireo. Carolina chickadee. Practically all the bees eaten were small species of the family Andrenide, mainly Andrena and Flalictus; the larger species are seldom taken. During May, 1900, bumblebees and carpenter bees con- egregated in such numbers around locust trees white with grape-like clusters that from sunrise to sunset a deep, continued hum arose as from a hive; and when fruit trees were in blossom bees swarmed about them also: but in both cases observation failed to discover any con- sumption of the insects by birds. Blossoming persimmon trees alive with bees were watched for several hours, but only one bird, a hum- mingbird, visited them. No arculate wasps, except certain species of the family Scoliide, become food for birds; indeed, less than half a dozen of all the birds @Exclusive of the honey bee, which is considered separately (see p. 36). 40 BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. collected had taken these species. Others, such as Vespa, Polistes, Pompilus, Pelopeus, Monobia, and Ammophila, were collectively abundant on frequent occasions, but so far as observation went no birds preyed on them. That birds feed extensively on parasitic wasps is indisputable; but the harm thus done is less than might be supposed, for the usefulness of such wasps is In Inverse ratio to their size, and birds seldom select the smallest forms, such as Braconide and Chalcidide. Ninety-seven of the Marshall Hall birds, representing the following 36 species, had eaten parasitic Hymenoptera. Tist of birds examined whose stomachs contained parasitic wasps. Bobwhite Baltimore oriole. Warbling vireo. Downy woodpecker Grasshopper sparrow. White-eyed vireo. Chimney swiit. Chipping sparrow. Yellow warbler. Kingbird. Field sparrow. Magnolia warbler. Great crested flycatcher Song sparrow. Black-poll warbler. Pheebe. Scarlet tanager. Louisiana water-thrush. Wood pewee. Summer tanager. Maryland yellow-throat. Blue jay. Purple martin. Chat. Bobolink. Barn swallow. Redstart. Red-winged blackbird. White-bellied swallow. Catbird. Meadowlark. Bank swallow. Long-billed marsh wren. Orchard oriole. Red-eyed vireo. Olive-backed thrush. In this mischief the flycatchers are py all means the greatest offenders, the swallows next, and, less generally but still noticeably, the warblers next. Of all the flycatchers the wood pewee appeared to be the most active and per- sistent in this destruction. v Parasitic wasps are not usu- OSs ~: Fee Sa ally so alert and swift as e— many other insects; there- fore they are easy victims. Most of the class are ichneu- mon flies (Ichneumonide fig. 13). Somewhat more than a fifth of the birds that had taken parasitic wasps, however, had fed on a cer- tain black wasp, 7iphia inor- nata, Which is a vigorous enemy of the larva of the May-beetle. These wasps are so common in May and June that it is not unnatural that a good many should fall prey to birds. The only other noticeably abundant parasitic Hymenoptera were some yery large braconids Fra. 13.—Ichneumon fly (after Howard; loaned by Division of Entomology). _ INSECT FOOD. | 4] (Melanobracon), of which at any time during the first part of September, 1896, a dozen could have been collected within a few minutes. Field sparrows and probably other birds consumed them freely, though as a tule parasitic Hymenoptera are eaten only in small numbers. Many of these useful species appear too late in the season to be of much effect. An attempt was made to measure the evil effects of their destruction by observing how far they were parasitizing abundant insect pests, but conditions were unfavorable and adequate results were not obtained. The white grub of the May-beetle was not present in numbers sufficient to furnish evidence. The tobacco worm was par- asitized by braconids to some extent, but even at the time of greatest activity (August, 1898) only one-tenth of 1 percent of the worms were attacked. The question, then, of the degree to which birds offend by preying on these Hymenoptera remains, so far as Marshall Hall is concerned, a doubtful one, spece tie since most of the Species destroyed are not known to i effective parasites. SUMMARY. Considering the insect food of the 645 native birds collectively, we find that the birds were most insectivorous in May, when somewhat more than 90 percent of their food was insects, and that naturally they took the fewest insects in the coldest weather. During the blizzard of February, 1900, however, insects constituted 12 percent of the diet of the 37 birds collected. Throughout the entire time of observation insects and their allies, including a small percentage of spiders and other invertebrates, amounted to 60.41 percent of the total volume of food. They are distributed as follows: Proportion of insects and their allies in food of birds examined. Percent. Vine sg AUR eae ener es, ure eae She ven ue ee eo eS 107 LES: Sicea.e alee Re a ee Se a ce ge 3. 63 UP SGSSE GENS 2 22 5 eee Se ae Pea ee eee eS ee ee 6.51 ES aM OOne tail vIMOMOpLenra 25 2 y6 4 5 oe ee eo 9. 64 Caterpillars, with a few adult Lepidoptera .................._-- 7. 80 Gracsaeppers.and a tew crickets. 25 5... 22 25. See else 4.11 eee ee rn ea be PO Se ey tol oS 18. 62 Wetcee Meamlemn SO Cla eye Se ae eel So et eee 3. 02 SOIC SS) ce SS aa ee a mc ree eee eS 4.48 Miscellaneous invertebrates, mainly crustacea, snails, and myria- OQCUR ES £2 S25 ee 6 ee ee one, Sm are eee . 83 AES ots ao Seg a a ee ele 60. 41 The bugs consisted both of Heteroptera and Homoptera. The Heteroptera included such forms as Podisus, Huschistus, Trichopepla semivittata, Sinea diadema, Thyanta custator, cranes NEPVOSA, Metapodius femoratus, Nezara hilaris, Corizus, Coriscus, Corimelena, Prionidus, Alydus pilosulus, and Alydus eurinus. Vhe Homoptera 1.89 peronk eG of parasitic wasps, while the! remain almost entirely ants. The Lepidoptera were very nearly all een : a lars, though moths were occasionally eaten. The caterpillars com- prised the smooth forms, oftenest cutworms (fig. 14) and others of the family Noctuide, ae with some Geometride and occa-_ sionally an arctiid or a sphingid. The grasshoppers were long- horned grasshoppers (Locustide) and short-horned grasshoppers (Acridide), the latter consisting of such forms as /7/ippiscus, Melano- plus atlanis, Melanoplus femur- rubrum, and Dissosteira carolina, the former largely of such meadow grasshoppers as Azphidium and Scudderia, with an _ occasional katydid. Beetles formed twice as large an element of food as any other order of insects. Ground- beetles (Car abide), generally considered useful, formed 2.10 percent of the food; injurious species, largely weevils (Rhynchophora) and leaf- beetles (Chr ysomelidz), and, to a smaller extent, lamellicorn and longi- eorn beetles, leaf-chafers, click-beetles, and metallic wood-borers (Buprestide), amounted to 13.25 percent; while miscellaneous beetles, largely dung-beetles of the genera Aphodius (fig. 15), Ateendus, and Onthophagus, and beetles of a number ‘of other families, such as the Anthicide, Bruchide, Byrrhide, Histeride, Staphy- linide, and Tenebrionidz, completed the remaining 3.27 percent of the beetle food. The spiders were largely the ground- spiders of the family Lycoside. Spiders are said to do about as much good as harm, and are usually regarded as of no economic importance. . — Beneficial insects (predaceous beetles Fic. 15.—Dung-beetle (Aphodius) (aiter and parasitic wasps) formed 3.97 per- ee ees cent of the food, while injurious insects, principally caterpillars, grasshoppers, and harmful beetles, amounted to 26.80 percent. It will be remembered, however, that what has already been said about the destruction of useful species shows that but a small fraction of the percentage of these insects should really be counted against the birds. Fig. 14.—Cutworm and moth (after Howard; loaned by Division of Entomology). te I nO) Te” eS ela) ee ee ee in dle a | 2 6 ge a FOOD OF NESTLINGS. ss 43 FOOD OF NESTLINGS. The largest consumption of insects is to be credited, not to adult birds, but to young ones in the nest. All land birds at Marshall Hall except birds of prey and doves, whatever be their own diet, feed their young chiefly on insects from the time they are hatched until they leave the nest. Many species rear every season two or three broods of from 3 to 5 each, and so voracious are these wide-mouthed youngsters that the parents can supply their wants only by unremit- ting efforts. Meals often begin before sunrise and continue till after sunset, frequently occurring every two minutes. At first nestlings take considerably more than their own weight of food ina day, and they increase in weight daily from 20 to 50 percent. The number of insects required to supply a season’s host of nestlings must be almost incalculable. Work of other investigators.—One can best study the food of young birds by field observations. Such studies have been pursued by Mrs. Wheelock.’ Dr. Francis H. Herrick,? and Prof. Clarence M. Weed.¢ Professor Weed’s bulletin on the feeding habits of nestling chipping sparrows has already been cited at length in Bulletin 15 of the Biological Survey. Dr. Herrick found young cedar birds fed by their parents on grasshoppers, cicadas, chokecherries, raspberries, and blueberries. A brood of red-eyed vireos were given blackberries, red raspberries, bugs, beetles, larve, katydids, and grasshoppers. Nestling catbirds were nourished with red cherries, strawberries, larvee, moth millers, beetles, and dragon-flies (4schna heros and Libel- lula pulchella). Young bluebirds were fed robber-flies (As7/zs), larvee, crickets, grasshoppers, and katydids. Mrs. Wheelock states that she observed nestling red-headed woodpeckers eating black beetles; that marsh wrens bring May-beetles to their broods; that young robins are fed moths and dragon-flies, and that crows give frogs and nestling birds (English sparrows, song sparrows, and meadowlarks) to their young. Methods of investigation Mrs. Wheelock’s excellent results were obtained in the field by observing the nests 77 s/f, and Dr. Herrick’s by cutting the nests down and placing them in a favorable situation for observation. Both of these methods have been employed at Marshall Hall. The choice of glasses is important. Mrs. Wheelock used binoc- ulars in studying her subjects. These were used at Marshall Hall with the best success in the case of very active shy birds or those in shadow. ip- oR FIG. FiG. 2.—SHORT-EARED OWL. —— tie, wae © ome. ee oe Cee ee ee ee ee me ON lee ea y ee ee Ca tea Sy ae eee ee ee ah a coe tad ae i lacey 9 a" eee ae aie Rey ee i rs | .— + ieiee i ‘ - -KOOD OF NESTLINGS. _ 49 hunt out these insects when they are not abundant ana even when they are rare. At the time of the foregoing observations of orchard orioles, _ house wrens, and grasshopper sparrows, caterpillars and grasshoppers were comparatively scarce; yet the parent birds, though they chose insects for their own eating from more abundant species, hunted far and wide for these rare ones to feed their.young. At Marshall Hall LEPIDOPTERA ORTHOPTERA ORTHOPTERA NEWLY HATCHED HALF GROWN ORTHOPTLRA CRAYFISH MISCELL INVE ANEOUS RTEBRATES SNAILS urns pc) a 7¢ a or. . ee ee rg gah a Se Fic. 18.—Diagram showing proportions of food of crow blackbird (Quiscalus quiscula xneus), young and adult. the protection and encouragement of birds at nesting time is of prime importanee. Adults of the most numerous species on the farm are either highly frugivorous or highly granivorous, hence the insectiy- orous habits of nestlings help considerably to establish the beneficent relation of birds to the farm economy. 7222 No. 17—02——-4 SS ate oe a gh ee oe ee ee a ee Re ES ASE oT Ses we 4 < ee ee ve ae ee TT eS aos eee 2 eee - se eS oe 3 a i [ Len. Va Of Uy Y WY YE WY fe Zo ‘g = “effi, iy ee iii; Yj SLE iE 2 ZA Fie. 30.—Yellow-billed cuckoo. the mourning-cloak butterfly are often selected by cuckoos, as are also other hairy and spiny caterpillars that other birds avoid. Caterpillars, largely in such forms, make half of the cuckoo’s food, grasshoppers and their allies about a third, and beetles, with small-numbers of mis- cellaneous insects, the remaining sixth. The cuckoo is not abundant on the farm. It is undoubtedly the most useful of the exclusively insectiyorous birds found at Marshall Hall, because of the protection it gives to the foliage of forest and orchard. KINGFISHERS. One pair of kingfishers was seen continually along the shore of lots 1 and 2 (PI. III, fig. 2), and another pair nested in the sandy bluff of the Hungerford farm. The food of the bird has already 88 ; BIRDS OF A. MARYLAND FARM. been mentioned in connection with the piscivorous habits of birds (see p. 53). The stomachs of 5 nestlings were examined. — : WOODPECKERS. The following woodpeckers were noted at Marshall Hall: Downy woodpecker (Dryobates pubescens), Red-headed woodpecker (Melanerpes ery- 13. throcephalus), 1. Yellow-bellied sapsucker (Sphyrapicus va- Red-bellied woodpecker (Melanerpes car- rius), 2. olinus). ; Pileated woodpecker ( Ceophleus pileatus). Flicker ( Colaptes auratus), 2. The stomachs of 13 downy woodpeckers were collected. All con- tained insects and 2 fruit—the berries of smilax and poison ivy. Ants appeared to be the favorite food, having been eaten by all.the birds except one. Beetles and their larve had been eaten by 8 birds. The kinds selected were click-beetles, ground-beetles (Amara), dark- ling-beetles (//elops xreus), and longicorn-beetles (/laphidion). Cat- erpillars, including Catocala, were found in 3 stomachs; miscellaneous insects, principally fly-like insects, in 4; snails in 2, and spiders in 7. Vegetable food amounted to one-fourth of the whole, a proportion probably diminished by the fact that 4 of the stomachs were those of young birds. As the downy woodpecker feeds largely on wood- boring insects and other species that infest tree trunks, it is useful in woodland and orchard. The yellow-bellied sapsucker (fig. 31) is the cause of all the maledic- tions that have been heaped on the woodpecker tribe. It secures a large part of its food by drilling holes in tree trunks to serve as wells for collecting the sap on which it feeds. In examining 81 stomachs of this woodpecker, Professor Beal found that sapwood or alburnum formed 23 percent of their contents, a circumstance that indicates the importance of sap in the economy of this species. Sap itself can not be detected unless the stomach is examined immediately, which is impracticable in the case of stomachs sent to the Department of Agriculture. Several authors have mentioned the fact that this bird kills birches. The following field notes show the manner in which it works injury to apple trees: In the summer of 1895 there was on the Bryan farm a little orchard of 9 apple trees, about twelve years old, that appeared perfectly healthy. In the fall sapsuckers tapped them in many places, and during spring and fall of the next four years they resorted to them regularly for supplies of sap. Observations were made (October 15, 1896) of two sapsuckers in adjoining trees of the orchard. From a point 20 feet distant they were watched for three hours with powerful glasses to see whether they fed to any considerable extent on ants and SPECIES. wf 89 other insects that were running over the tree trunks. In that time one bird seized an ant and the other snapped at some flying insect. One drank sap from the drills 30 and the other 41 times. Later in the day one drilled 2 new holes and the other 5. The holes were made in more or less regular rings about the trunk, one ring close above another, for a distance of 6 to 8 inches. The drills were about a quarter of an inch deep, and penetrated the bark and the outer part of the wood. Fic. 31.—Yellow-bellied sapsucker. In November, 1900, 7 of the 9 trees were dead and the others weres dying. A strip of bark 7 inches long by 2 wide, where the sapsuckers had worked in 1896, was torn off and found to contain 84 drills, an aver- age of 6 to the square inch. Many of them were so close together that the tissue between had broken down, leaving rents in the bark an inch or two long, and in some places almost girdling the tree. The loss >f sap must have been an exhausting drain, but it was not the sole cause of death. Beetles of the flat-headed apple borer, attracted by the Pande nee 9 BIRD 6) A K a “i733 ‘ exuding sap, had -oviposited in ‘the the next 7 having thus gained an entrance, had finished the deadly w tree from borers is very likely to result. In the case of the trees killed at Marshall Hall, galleries made by borers had honeycombed the wood beneath the section of bark riddled by the sapsuckers. Only 2 stomachs of sapsuckers were collected. They were taken during the middle of November, 1899 and 1900, and contained several dung-beetles (Aphodius) and the fruit of woodbine and red cedar. The red-headed woodpecker is not common at Marshall Hall, though it was seen in small numbers every fall. One specimen taken Novem- Fig. 32.—F licker. ber 29, 1900, among the swamp oaks south of lots + and 5, had eaten gall insects (Cynipide) and many bits of the woody tissue of the gall. This woodpecker makes about half its food on vegetable matter, largely mast with some berries, and selects for its insect food chiefly beetles, ants, and grasshoppers. It is, on the whole, useful. The flicker (fig. 32), though nesting on the farm, was common only during migration, when it was seen in flocks of from 6 to 12. A stomach collected in the middle of November, 1899, contained 10 eround-beetles (including Anésodactylus, Harpalus pennsylvanieus, and FPterostichus say/), 5 ants, 1 sow bug, 1 black cricket and skin, and 20 seeds of woodbine berries. The flicker is somewhat more insectiv- Bull. 17, Bioiogical Survey, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. PLATE XVII. Fig. 1.—BLUEBIRD AT EDGE OF NEST WITH GRASSHOPPER IN MOUTH. From photograph by Rey. P. B. Peabody. FiG. 2.—FORMER NESTING SITE OF BLUEBIRDS ON LAWN AT BRYAN FARN. The hole used by the birds may be seen about halfway to the top of the tree against which c the gun is leaning. As in.Piate I Mount Vernon is to be seen in the distance. nob tae ee ea ee eA 3 7 = a 7 oe * a t i ” v r SPECIES. | . 9] - orous than the redhead. Its vegetable food usually consists of a little mast and a good deal of wild fruit. It is less of a woodpecker than any other species of the family, for it is much less arboreal and spends a large part of the time on the ground securing ants with its long sticky tongue. As many as 5,000 ants have been taken from one stomach. So important is this article of diet that it forms three- fourths of the insect food of the species. WHIP-POOR-WILLS, NIGHT-HAWKS, SWIFTS, AND HUMMING- BIRDS. Whip-poor-wills (Antrostomus vociferus) and night-hawks (Chor- deiles virginianus), two exclusively insectivorous species, are highly useful. The former was frequently heard, and the latter was fre- quently seen in late summer as it soared over the farm after ants. The chimney swift (Chetura pelagica) is, as might be expected, wholly insectivorous. Three birds collected July 18, 1898, had caught the following insects on the wing: One small bee (Andrenidee), 3 bugs (Heteroptera), and 34 weevils (Srtones hispidulus). The ruby-throated hummingbird (7rochilus colubris) feeds on insects and the nectar of flowers. During the last of May it visited the flowers of the persimmon, in June the honeysuckle, and later tobacco and the trumpet creeper. A bird that was shot fresh from a trumpet flower had eaten 1 little green bee (Andrenide) and 1 minute spider. FLYCATCHERS. The following species of flycatchers have been noted at Marshall Hall: Scissor-tailed Flycatcher (Muscivora forficata). Noted by Mr. O. N. Bryan. Kingbird (Tyrannus tyrannus), 16. Great crested flycatcher (Myiarchus crinitus), 4. Phoebe (Sayornis phebe), 3. Wood pewee ( Contopus virens), 11. Acadian flycatcher (Hmpidonasx virescens), 1. Sixteen kingbirds were collected from May 28 to July 30. Insects formed (1 percent and fruit 29 percent of their food. The fruit con- sisted of cherries, sassafras, wild and cultivated mulberries, elder, and blackberries. The proportion of insect food was not so large as is typical for the species, a circumstance resulting probably from the readiness with which fruit could be obtained. Beetles constituted 37 percent of the food, grasshoppers and crickets 23 percent, ants and bees 4 percent, parasitic wasps 2 percent, miscellaneous insects, includ- ing caterpillars and bugs, 3 percent, and spiders 2 percent. Among the miscellaneous insects were a stink bug (Hymenarcys nervosa), an assassin bug (Sznea diadema), and a whole cabbage butterfly (Pieris rape). ‘The bees included small wild species (Andrenidz) and drones 99 BIRDS OF A MARYLAND FARM. of honey bees. The parasitic wasps included forms of the families Ichneumonide and Scoliide. Of the beetles, which were by all means the most interesting element of the insect food, ground-beetles (includ- ing Anisodactylus and Cratacanthus dubius) furnished 2 percent, tiger- beetles, soldier-beetles (Chauliognathus pennsylvanicus), and dung- beetles (Atenius and Aphodius) 3 percent, and injurious beetles of the following species 30 percent: Rose-chafer (Macrodactylus subspinosus). Locust leaf-mining beetle ( Odontota dor- Southern June-beetle ( Allorhina nitida). salis) . Shining leaf-chafer (Anomala). Blister-beetle (Hpicautu cinerea). Sad flower-beetle( Huphoria melancholica). Asparagus-beetle ( Crioceris asparagi). Long-horned beetles (including Leptura). Asparagus-beetles and blister-beetles are scarcely ever eaten by other birds and rose-chafers seldom; hence the service rendered by the kingbird in destroying these insects and others of an injurious charac- ter in large numbers makes it one of the most valuable allies of the farmer. Of the remaining flycatchers collected, the wood pewee and the Acadian flycatcher are purely insectivorous, and the phoebe and the great crested flycatcher, though subsisting chiefly on insects, quite often, especially in late summer, vary their fare with fruit. One Acadian flycatcher was collected. It had eaten a spider, a parasitic wasp, a long-horned beetle, a leaf-beetle (Crepidodera), and a banded-winged horsefly (Chrysops). Of 11 wood pewees all had taken beetles, including click-beetles, long- horned beetles (Leptura rubrica), dung-beetles (Onthophagus pennsyl- vanicus), soldier-beetles (Chauliognathus pennsylvanicus), locust leaf- mining’ beetles (Odontota dorsalis) and a related leaf-beetle (/Zemonia nigricornis), and weevils of the species Phytonomus punctatus and Sphenophorus zee. Seven had destroyed parasitic wasps, including Braconide, Evaniidee, Ichneumonide (J/esostenus and others), and Scoliidee (Ziphia inornata); +4 had eaten flies (Chironomus, Sapro- myza vulgaris, Lucilia cesar, and other muscid flies); 1 had taken a moth; and 3 had eaten, respectively, a caddis-fly, a May-beetle, and a spider. Although the wood pewee destroys large numbers of injuri- ous insects, especially beetles, it feeds so eagerly on the useful para- sitic wasps that its scarcity at Marshall Hall was perhaps fortunate for the owners of the farms. Three pheebe (fig. 33) stomachs were collected. Their contents were chiefly beetles of the following kinds: Anisodactylus. Lachnosterna. Cicindela. Odontota dorsalis. Chauliognathus pennsylvanicus. Orsodachna atra. Canthon. Collops quadrimaculatus. Aphodius inquinatus. Lema trilineata. Onthophagus pennsylvanicus. SPECIES. 93 In smaller numbers the birds had eaten flying ants, parasitic wasps, and other wasps, bugs, caddis-flies, and spiders. One had tasted blackberries. Four great crested flycatchers were collected in May. ‘Their stomachs contained May-flies, ants (Camponotus pennsylvanicus and other forms), parasitic wasps (Ichneumonide, Scoliide (77phia) and Evantide), bugs (Huschistus and Nezara hilaris), and beetles (Curculionide, Elateride, Cicindeda sexguttata, Dicerca, and Odontota dorsalis). Despite their i Wah Mi } Ms Dy SAG IY EH LAN ee Lee HAN N\ YZ = iG @. y ‘ ww WY) S22 G4 i y et Mi WE, YF —— yg J WO. AGES: { i AKA Co Va —- . AY RAN Fhe f= a? RN) L= | \ Fic. 33.—Pheebe. taste for parasitic wasps both phoebe and great crested flycatcher are in the main useful on account of the large number of insect pests they destroy. HORNED LARKS. When the horned lark (Otocoris alpestris) occurred at Marshall Hall, as it did occasionally in severe winter weather, it subsisted almost entirely on seeds, largely weed seeds, often with waste grain. (Lanius ludovicianus) near the storage barn has already been men- tioned (see p. 54). The only other field observation was on Octo- ber 23, 1901, when a shrike near the same place was seen to kill a gar- ter snake (#utaznia) 13 inches long. Owing to the small number of shrikes at Marshall Hall no specimens were taken, but in order to investigate the feeding habits some experiments were carried on with a captive bird given me by Mr. William Palmer. The habit the bird has of impaling prey has been the subject of considerable speculation, some writers maintaining that it gibbets its victims alive for the pleasure of watching their death struggles, and others that it slaugh- ters more game ata time than it can eat and hangs up the surplus to provide against a time of want. This theory of prudent foresight may explain why it kills more game than it can eat, but, as the experi- ments showed, it does not touch the real reason why it impales its prey. at . On the day after the shrike in question was captured a dead mouse was offered it. The shrike raised its wings, moved its tail up and down petulantly after the manner of the phcebe, and then seized the mouse and dragged it about for several minutes, trying to wedge it into first one and then another corner of the cage. Failing in this effort, it tried to impale the mouse on the blunt broken end of a branch that had been placed in the cage for a perch, but the body fell to the floor. Then it tried to hold the mouse with its feet and tear it to pieces, but its feet were too weak. A nail was now driven into the cage so as to expose the point. Immediately the shrike impaled its prey, fixing it firmly, and then fell to tearing and eating ravenously. Several days later the nail was removed and a piece of beef was given to the shrike. By dint of hard work it managed to hold the beef with its feet, so that it could bite off pieces; but it much preferred to have me do the holding, when it would perch on my wrist and pull off mouthfuls in rapid succession. These experiments indicate that the shrike is unable to tear to pieces food that is not securely fixed. Hawks can grip their food with their powerful talons and then easily tear it into pieces small enough to be swallowed, but the shrike’s feet have not a sufficiently vigorous clutch to permit this method. A series of experiments in feeding insects to this shrike was also carried out. If the bird was very hungry it did not impale insects. When offered a grasshopper (//ippzscus) at such times, it would clutch it with one foot, and, resting the bend of its leg on the perch, bite off mouthfuls and swallow them. When not very hungry it impaled grasshoppers and caterpillars (Sphinx catalpx). Such prey as the thousand-legs, centipedes (Zithodius), house-flies, and blow-flies (Ca/- SPECIES. _ . 101 liphora vomitoria), and in a single instance, a mourning-cloak butter- fly, it ate at a single gulp, but very large insects, such as tumblebugs (Copris carolina), it always impaled. It refused larve of the mourn- ing-cloak butterfly, the forest tent caterpillar, the fall webworm, and the tussock moth. It would not eat a skin-beetle (Zo), but took with relish May-beetles (Lachnosterna), flower-beetles (Zrichius piger), and long-horned beetles (Jlonohammus). Insects provided with espe- cial protective devices were used in some of the experiments. Drone -and worker honey bees were eaten, but with no apparent relish. The highly flavored cabbage bug (urgantia histrionica) was rejected, but its near relative (Zuschistus), a stink bug, was greedily devoured. The investigation of insect food was concluded with tests by means of cer- tain beetles possessing ill-flavored, highly irritating secretions. ) Ha WH ; E MY \ sS 7? pte) BS ~~ Fic. 39.—Brown thrasher. ~The house wren (Zroglodytes aédon, fig. 40) takes no vegetable food. Twenty stomachs were collected from May to August, inclusive. They Lf Z , LO Fa 7 ~ Z CENA > SN ZEISS = SNSAHY > SS \\ > > SS Fic. 40.—House wren. showed the food to have been distributed as follows: Grasshoppers and crickets, 27 percent; moths, cutworms, measuring worms, and allied he PE OM pee te od by) Ve es” ee - ees eR ey A RE OUER A 27 107 larve, 19 percent; beetles, 11 percent, including Carabide, Ceramby- cide, Tenebrionide, Elateridee (Drasterius), Scarabzeide (Aphodius), Rhynchophora, and Chrysomelidee (Systena elongata, etc.); bugs (true bugs—ineluding IMyodocha serripes—and a few leaf-hoppers), 9 per- cent; ants, 8 percent; May-flies, 2 percent; miscellaneous insects, 2 percent; spiders, 21 percent; and snails, 1 percent. The winter wren (Olbiorchilus hiemalis) was observed hunting for insects and spiders in brush piles, but no stomachs were collected. The long-billed marsh wren (Cistothorus palustris), though like the house wren it eats nothing but insects, can not be expected to help crops because of the remoteness of its marshy habitat. Five birds were collected. Spiders and beetles (Calandra oryza, Donacia, [ippo- damia maculata) formed the major part of their food. The minor part was composed of true bugs, leaf-hoppers, flies, parasitic wasps, and ants. One Carolina wren (Zhryothorus ludovicianus) was collected. It had eaten caterpillars, grasshoppers, and beetles (longicorns and leaf-beetles, including Odontota dorsalis). CREEPERS AND NUTHATCHES. The brown creeper (Certhia familiaris americana) plays a useful part in ridding tree trunks of insect vermin. One stomach was taken. It contained such beetles as Helops xreus and Bruchus hibisci, saw- flies, flying ants, spiders, and seeds of the scrub pine. Two other beneficent gleaners of tree-trunk insects are the nut- hatches (Svtta carolinensis and Sitta canadensis). Both were observed at Marshall Hall, but no specimens were collected. Prof. E. Dwight Sanderson has shown that the white-bellied nuthatch feeds on both seeds and insects. He found it eating ragweed and sunflower seeds, corn, and a very small amount of mast. His observations show it to be very fond of bugs and their eggs, and that it selects most often such Tingitide as Presma cinerea, Reduviide, Coreide, and Jasside. Its beetle food includes Carabide, Elateridae, Scarabeide, and Buprestide. Ants (Myrmicide) are taken in large numbers. It also catches some parasitic wasps (Braconide) and frequently secures stone-flies, dragon-flies, and true flies.@ TITMICE. One tufted titmouse (Parus bicolor) was collected July 9, 1898. It had eaten several blueberries, a longicorn beetle, and a large cutworm. Seven Carolina chickadees (Parus carolinensis) were taken during February, April, July, and August. Vegetable matter—mulberry seeds, pine seeds, and ragweed seeds—was present in four stomachs. All the birds had eaten insects. One had eaten 1 bee (Andrenide), 2 “Auk, Vol. XV, pp. 144-148, 1898. One be the Same See contained katydid eggs and tn ss eggs of the wheel- bug. Between 200 and 300 egos of the fall canker- worm haye been found in the stomach of a black- capped chickadee 4 and 450 eggs of a plant-louse in that of ancther. The eating of insect egos is a characteristic habit of the chickadee, and makes the bird, 4 small as it is, one of the most effective Fase of insect pests. It — is of particular value in the orchard, and every BE oa! would oS do well to encourage it. | 0 KINGLETS. | | 6 ii The golden-crowned kinglet (Regulus satrapa) and the ruby-crow ned Bt > kinglet (Regulus calendula) are useful insectivorous midgets. They | s were observed at Marshall Hall, but were not killed. - a GNATCATCHERS. Three blue-gray gnatcatchers (Polioptila czerulea) were collected. They had eaten longicorn beetles, joint-worm flies, caddis- flies, and - several minute flies (unindentified Diptera). 2 = THRUSHES. The wood thrush (//ylocichla mustelina), Wilson thrush (Hyloctchla fuscescens), hermit thrush (Hyloctchla guttata pallast), gray-cheeked | thrush (Hylocichla alicia), and olive-backed thrush (//ylocichla ustu- — lata swainsoni) were noted at Marshall Hall—the first as a breeding bird, the last four as migrants. ! Three stomachs of the gray- -cheeked thrush were taken May 15, 1900. They contained saw-fly larvee, ants, caterpillars, May aie a ground-beetles, weevils, and scarabzeid beetles (Anomala, Atenius, Lachnosterna, and Serica). Two olive-backed thrushes, also collected: in May, had eaten ants (Camponotus pennsylvanicus), wasps (Ziphia inornata), ground-beetles, darkling-beetles (//elops), and ground-spiders (Lycoside). The robin (Merula migratoria, tig. 41) is seen on the farm only during the colder half of the year. One bird collected in the blizzard of the third week of February, 1900, had fed on smilax berries. Field obser- vations and the examination of stomachs collected elsewhere show that somewhat more than half of the robin’s food is fruit. That which it takes at Marshall Hall, however, consists merely of wild berries. In the second week of April, 1899, 8 birds were collected. Five had eaten eround-beetles, and four, secured in a field that was being plowed, had taken large quantities of the larve of the ground-beetle, //arpalus caliginosus, Which as before stated has lately been found harmful to aes ah a iy isd ‘ ce are NRE Se ok REM ao _ strawberries. The other beetles eaten were darkling-beetles (Opatri- nus), and two clover weevils (Svtones hispidulus and Phytonomus ~ punctatus). One robin had fed on the pupa of a dipterous insect and _two had picked up cocoons of a tineid moth. Several had destroyed cutworms and army worms. ‘Two had eaten 6 cutworms apiece. The robin is abundant and is most useful. It is the scourge of the insects that infest the open cultivated fields of the farm. Unfortu- nately it usually gets little credit for its virtues, is outlawed for vices that it does not possess, and is shot in large numbers for food. Bluebirds (Szalia sialis, Pl. XVII, fig. 1) breed but sparingly at Marshall Hall on account of the persecutions of the English sparrow. By twenties and thirties they visit the farm in spring, autumn, and even winter. Two birds were taken February 20, 1900, and five on the Fie. 41.—Robin. 19th of the previous November. Six of these had eaten fruit, which constituted rather more than half of all the food. It was composed of the berries of bittersweet, woodbine, cedar, sumac, and poison ivy. One had eaten 8 poison ivy berries and 25 cedar berries—apparently a pretty large dose of stimulating drugs. All had eaten insects. Their selection had fallen on such highly flavored species as ground- beetles (arpalus), stink bugs (Pentatomide), and other bugs, includ- ing Alydus pilosulus. One had eaten a dung-beetle (Aphodius). Grasshoppers and crickets had also entered into their fare. Cater- pillars, including bristly Arctiide and cutworms, had been the prey of all. It is a pleasant duty to report that this bird, so popular throughout the land, is, through its excellent work as a destroyer of noxious insects, well worthy the protection and encouragement it receives. t on th pairs with their broods enter it ‘during t 7 : were abundant there until ousted by the English. sparrows, and all about the place. A characteristic nesting spot in an old ‘stump on the front lawn of the house is shown in Pl. XVII, fig. 2. One of the most serious charges that can be brought against the English sparrow is the usurpation of the dooryard homes of these beautiful, gentle, and highly useful birds. VIII.—_ SUMMARY. The following conclusions are drawn sclely with reference to the relationship of birds to the farmers at Marshall Hall; and while to a certain extent they indicate the general relationship a5 birds to agri- cultural interests, yet special conditions, of these particular farms as well as any others, sometimes have a modifying influence that must be _ taken into account. At Marshall Hall the English sparrow, the sharpshinned and Cooper hawks, and the great horned owl are, as everywhere, inimical to the farmers’ interests and should be killed at every opportunity. The sap- sucker punctures orchard trees extensively and should be shot. ‘The study of the crow is unfavorable in results so far as these particular farms are concerned, partly because of special conditions. Its work in removing carrion and destroying insects is serviceable, but it does so much damage to game, poultry, fruit, and grain that it more than counterbalances this good and should be reduced in numbers. The crow blackbird appears to be purely beneficial to these farms during the breeding season and feeds extensively on weed seed during migration, but at the latter time it is very injurious to grain. More detailed observations are necessary to determine its proper status at Marshall Hall. The remaining species probably do more good than harm, and except under unusual conditions should receive encouragement by the owners of the farms. Certain species, such as flycatchers, swallows, and warblers, prey to some extent upon useful parasitic insects, but on the whole the habits of these insectivorous birds are productive of considerable good. Together with the vireos, cuckoos, and wood- peckers (exclusive of the sapsuckers), they are the most valuable con- servators of foliage on the farms. The quail, meadowlark, orchard oriole, mockingbird, house wren, grasshopper sparrow, and chipping sparrow feed on insects of the cultivated fields, particularly during the breeding season, when the nestlings of practically all species eat enormous numbers of caterpillars and grasshoppers. The most evident service is the wholesale destruction of weed seed. Even if birds were useful in no other way, their preservation would ___yirescens, 81. Ardetta exilis, 81. _ Arenaria morinella, 83. _ Asio accipitrinus, 86. __ Astragalinus tristis, 75-76, 97. . Aythya affinis, 80. * americana, 80. ; marila, 80. & _ yallisneria, 80. Baldpate, 80. Beans, lima, 26. string, 25. Bee, honey, 36-37. Bees and wasps, 39-40. Beetle, flea, 25, 26, 30. ground, 37-38. leaf, 26, 27. locust leaf-mining, 29-30. . 3 potato, 25. soldier, 37. tiger, 37. tortoise, 25-26. twelve-spotted cucumber, 26, 27. Birds, distribution, 12-20. Birds eating ants, 34. bees and wasps, 39. blueberries, 61. cherries, 56. elderberries, 60-61. grasshoppers, 32. : : ground-beetles, 38. : locust leaf-mining beetles, 30. a melons, 57-58. . mulberries, 59. parasitic wasps, 40. 1222—No. 17—02 raspberries and blackberries, 60. 8 fortes aad chanhes ‘61. that depend on cover, 15-17. that feed in open fields, 19-15. _| Bittern, least, 81. Blackberries, 60. Blackbird, crow, 14, 47-48, 53, 66-68, 77, 96. red-winged, 95. rusty, 96. Blackbirds, 14, 47, 77. Blueberries, 61. Bluebird, 109-110. Bobolink, 95. Bobwhite, 13, 69-70, 78, 83-85. —— Bonasa umbellus, 85. Braconids, 40-41. Branta canadensis, 80. Bubo virginianus, 52, 86. Buffle-head, 80. Buteo borealis, 85. lineatus, 85, 86. platypterus, 85, 86. Butterfly, cabbage, 87. mourning-cloak, 87, skipper, 87. Buzzard, turkey, 53-54, 85. Cabbage, 26. Cabbage bug, 26. worm, 26. Caddis-fly, 25. Canvas-back, 80. Cardinal, 77, 98. Cardinalis cardinalis, 77, 98. Carpodacus purpureus, WMG: Oke Carrion, 53-54. _ Catbird, 17-18, 47, 104-105. Caterpillars, 48-49. - Cathartes aura, 53-54, 85. - Cedar bird, 17, 99. _ Ceophlceus pileatus, 88. t Certhia familiaris americana, 107. Ceryle alcyon, 87-88. Cheetura pelagica, 91. Charitonetta albeola, &0. Chat, yellow-breasted, 103. Cherries, cultivated, 56. wild, 61. Chickadee, Carolina, 77, 107-108. Chordeiles virginianus, 91. Circus hudsonius, 54, 85, 86. 113 cma virens, 91. ~ Coot, 81. Corn, 36, 38, 6570. ~ Corvus americanus, 14, 47-48, 50, 53, 57-58, 65-66, 94. _._ ossifragus, 14, 94. — Cowbird, 95. ‘Crane-flies, 21-22, ~ ‘Crayfish, 9. ‘Creeper, brown, 107. ‘Crops infested by insects, 24-28. Crossbill, red, 97. white-winged, 97. ‘Crow, 14, 47-48, 50, 53, 57-58, 65-66, 94. fish, 14, 94. Crow blackbird, 14, 47-48, 53, 66-68, 77, 9°. Cuckoo, black-billed, 87. yellow-billed, 87. Cutworms, 382. Cyanocitta cristata, 93-94. Cyanospiza cyanea, 98. Dafila acuta, 80. Dendroica, 104. Dendroica, estiva, 103. ceeruleseens, 103. coronata, 108. discolor, 108. dominiea, 103. maculosa, 103. palmarum hypochrysea, 103. pensylvanica, 103. striata, 103. S vigorsi, 103. virens, 103. Dolichonyx oryzivorus, 96. Doryphora 10-lineatus, 25. Dove, mourning, 13-14, 77-78, 85. Dryobates pubescens, 47, 88. Duck, black, 80. lesser scaup, 80. scaup, 80. wood, 80. Eagle, bald, 50, 85. golden, 85. Ectopistes migratorius, 85. Elderberries, 60-61. Empidonax virescens, 91, 92. Falco sparverius, 85, 86. Finch, purple, 76-77, 97. Fireflies, 37. Fish, 53. Flicker, 88, 90-91. Flies, 36, 39. Flycatcher, acadian, 91, 92. great crested, 91, 93. scissor-tailed, 91. Food, insect, 21. vertebrate, 50-83. Food of nestlings 48. Fruit, 55-65. a Gecthlepts formosa, 10 ens 108. (as teaienes pean, 108. ee Golden-eye, 80. Goldfinch, 75-76, 97. Goose, Canada, 80. Grain, 65-70. Grapes, 57. Grasshoppers, 82, 48-49. Grebe, horned, 79. are =e pied-billed, 79. SR a aro Ground-beetles, 37-38. pe Grouse, ruffed, 85. Gull, herring, 80. ring-billed, 80. Halizetus leucocephalus, 50, 85. Harelda hyemalis, 80. Hawk, broad-winged, 85, 86. Cooper, 50-51, 85. marsh, 54, 85, 86. red-shouldered, 85, 86. red-tailed, 85. tne sharpshinned, 51-52, 85. sparrow, 85, 86. Helmitherus yermiyorus, 103. Helodromas solitarius, 83. Heron, black-crowned night, 81. great blue, 81. green, 81. little blue, 81. snowy, 81. Herons, 9. Hirundo erythrogastra, 46, 98. Hummingbird, ruby-throated, 91. Hydrochelidon nigra surinamensis, 80. Hylocichla alicie, 198. fuscescens, 108. guttata pallasi, 108. mustelina, 108. ustulata swainsoni, 108 Ichneumon flies, 4Q, Ieteria virens, 103. Icterus galbula, 96. spurius, 17, 44-45, 96. Indigo bird, 98. Insect food, 21-42. Insects, destructive, 30-36. proportion contained in bird stomachs, 41. shrubs infested by, 28-30. trees infested by, 28-30. useful, 36-41. Jay, blue, 93-94. Junco, 97. Junco hyemalis, 97. Killdeer, 83. Kingbird, 17, 91-92. Kingfisher, 87-88. eel met 86. Melanerpes carolinus, 88. erythrocephalus, 88, 90. pMnEIoeHs gallo pavo fera, 85. m | Melospiza ear alee. 97. - melodia, 16, 97. lerganser, hooded, 80. ~ red-breasted, 80. _ Merganser serrator, 80. ~ Merula puiy sea 108-109. Mice, 54-55. Mimus polyglottos, 104. Mniotilta varia, 103. Mockingbird, 104. Molothrus ater, 95. : - Moths, 36. _-—s Mulberries, 59-60. 5s Murre, Briinnich, 80. Be Muscivora forficata, 91. Myiarchus crinitus, 91, 93. Nestlings, food, 43-49. © _ Nettion carolinensis, 80. = Night-hawk, 91. Nuthatch, red-breasted, 107. white-breasted, 107. 2) ee Oak seale, 36. Oats, 66, 68, 69. Odontota dorsalis, 29-30. Olbiorchilus hiemalis, 107, Old-squaw, 80. ~ Olor columbianus, 80. Oriole, Baltimore, 96. orchard, 17, 44-45, 96. Osprey, 85. Otocoris alpestris, 93. Oven-bird, 103. Owl, barred, 86. great-horned, 52, 86. screech, 86. short-eared, 86. Pandion haliaétus carolinensis, 85, Parus bicolor, 107. carolinensis, 77, 107-108. Passer domesticus, 17, 68-69. Passerella iliaea, 97. Peas, 27. Nycticorax nycticorax nevyius, 81. edi ie | Poison ivy, 62. “2 "Plant lice, De, 29-39. ee Ber a: : Podilymbus podiceps, 79. 2 5 ieee Oe Polioptila czerulea, 108. Pocecetes gramineus, 97. Porzana carolina, 81. : ae Potato, sweet, 25-26. ape eee ss white, 25. : =] Potato-beetle, 25. Poultry, 50-52. Progne subis, 47, 98. Querquedula discors, 80. Quiscalus quiscula, 14, 47-48, 53, 66-68, 77, 96 Quiscalus quiscula zneus, 77. Rabbits, 55. Rail, sora, 81. - Raspberries, 60. | Redhead, 80. Redstart, 103. Regulus calendula, 108. _ satrapa, 108. Riparia riparia, 46-47, 98. Robin, 108-109. Rose-chafer, 31-32, 87. Sandpiper, solitary, 83. spotted, 83. Sapsucker, yellow-bellied, 88-90. -Sawrflies, 29. Sayornis phoebe, 91, 92-93. Scolecophagus carolinus, 96. Seeds, distribution by birds, 62-65. weed, 70-71. Seeds found in crows’ pellets, 63-64, Seiurus aurocapillus, 103. motacilla, 103. noveboracensis, 103. Setophaga ruticilla, 103. Shovyeller, 80. Shrike, loggerhead, 54, 100-102. Shrubs infested by insects, 28-30. Sialia sialis, 109-110. Siskin, pine, 97. Sitta canadensis, 107. carolinensis, 107. Smilax, 58-59. Snipe, Wilson, 83. Soldier-beetles, 37-38. Sparrow, chipping, 15-16, 97 English, 17, 68-69. field, 15, 97. fox, 97. grasshopper, 13, 44, 97. Henslow, 97. Lincoln, 97. savanna, 97. song, 16, 97. tree, 97. na hirundo, 80. rawhberries, 38, 55-56. rnella magna, 12; 77, 94-95. Swallow, bank, 46-47, 98. barn, 46, 98. rough-winged, 98. white-bellied, 98. Swallows, 99. Swan, whistling, 80. Swift, chimney, 91. Syrnium yarium, 86. Tachycineta bicolor, 98. Tanager, scarlet, 98. summer, 98. Teal, blue-winged, 80. green-winged, 80. Termites, 34. Tern, 80. black, 80. Thrasher, brown, 105-106. Thrush, gray-cheeked, 108. hermit, 108. olive-backed, 108. Wilson, 108. wood, 108. Thryothorus ludovicianus, 107. Tiger-beetles, 37-38. Titmouse, tufted, 107. Tobacco, 27-28, 36. Tobaceo worm, 27-28, 41. Tomatoes, 57. Topography, Bryan farm, 10-20. Hungerford farm, 20-21. Totanus flavipes, 83. Towhee, 98. Toxostoma rufum, 105-106. Trees infested by insects, 28-30. Troglodytes aédon, 45-46, 106-107. Turkey, wild, 85. Turnstone, &. Tyrannus tyrannus, 17, 91-92. Uria lomvia, 80. Vireo gilvus, 102. chestinut-sided,.103; =<" OS Se ea ies hooded, 103. car ck ot Kentucky, 103. : magnolia, 103. myrtle, 103. : northern parula, 103. ¥ palm, 104. pine, 103. prairie, 103. yellow, 103. enter yellow palm, 103. Sit yellow-throated, 103. Wilson, 103. worm-eating, 103. Warblers, 103-104. Wasps, parasitic, 40-41. Wasps and bees, 39-40. Water-thrush, 103. Louisiana, 103. Webworm, fall, 28-29. Weed destruction by native sparrows, 72-75. other birds, 75. Weed seed, 70-71. extent of destruction, 78-79. Weed seed eaten, 71. eaters, 71. Weevils, 34-35. Wheat, 66, 68, 69-70. Whip-poor-will, 91. Wilsonia canadensis, 103. mitrata, 103. pusilla, 103. Woodcock, 82-83. Woodpecker, downy, 47, 88. pileated, 88. red-bellied, 88. red-headed, 88, 90. Wren, Carolina, 107. house, 45-46, 106-107. long-billed marsh, 107. winter, 107. Yellowlegs, &3. Zenaidura macroura, 13-14, 77-78, 85. Zonotrichia albicollis, 97. ie ~ , sy is ead} \ A Loe as ' X eat & - * ®. 2 is : % SS et wp pea - a ae Ge og - oe 3 ype & - ae ve ae: o.. eo aed oe ” a - wate ’ pg oe