Warr path) Hiiea SURO pei wha ot Pike Cree et Uh , ih Ee.) ns o09,8 oad . J Pe ke Ot Pe CePA Ropu orate ie eRe Pk ry POMPE ME CPL Rie re eo eae Stat Ger ie Uae) COC er bi ire: Wr i at} He ee dad (yi 8 het ora hed dt et did wi eve Lhe hme iettnes Wot Ba iE A Dead get Pragraalay if be ip by ak En taat teohgrery Set Sekuchohes ‘ £55) ste had Seat Rh 0) Heed PCR eR A) Pa Oh a ea ayy seit Le ji 1} mre) Ue vas aU LYE Ce r Den MP a aA Per atir ye URNS br yeprs rt yie 4 “a | J ; Piet Ne ae he x) : Wit Bi tog Lf A rants) Peal wil OCT win a) wd or He i { ryder Notate a tere Wy eceirtry Pt WM f aT eh eee TAT Pee erred H nyt AP eo wa Ctr Woe eS Aa tid ce Rae) i ri neat be mgt ta “Ty Es i 2et- eyess rat ea ite 3333 esa epics te atest Oh Pyetereny ny Pa ts rs Bae tet rsell tsi) cit nee ry Ebene Ly f° CevR moe: Nierrsretset tet “bey it <4 tn tien a} Led Wap yaentanset cad Webbie hs tet eras tt re} PR ei cl Lig pee eb nte Hy ree A eer hi LPAMnta nan, fash . ean es rt be es ath La ee Pere r yy at a iy) ie eset heealery {82836 Erp a Belated chs 9 iby bake bab. itis i head CT ed Teh taa Talhed. Pebuh.: APE is) { aL Le ald hacer eee Mit YY ni aby it tT | rey ark ti ehat i ty peterson es GTN THAN A rhat ed Reet i . Paneth MUN beh eee? cid Gt eS) rie een MUPeene ett nee bebe ; ott eerie By inthe Eat eb sbacomnetne brs A ts Sige in alr y Lit hyd ths bb leah ret be eat Ak Pr ibeuee m i WietateL ata i oo i“ dierent UT Et huh eb rhAs/ ba dal wH % Uy 1 nt ohn \ Pa et 4 aT Mi huntec tt anRi el bork Hide ea tye a tf Le Uentabhaer tune eet Pah henry I I er) > enh peer cern bale sip = aL Re HC) Cie Pe eeu ro ety ee Coe ee | Wey ed TAA a hhe 4 pert en Lhe a “ J Por bes Rs ho iy merpr i Ce iY Se 9 O54 ee J ST ALIA URL PLL Le Para rea rie Hoe Wai bh ahr atgedea at aren inaytes Vea ee Seracw erator rt Phy bara edamame Hod Pier eer ye re} BF fe Peery e Cerra nr }. C mee ee . dae by Cau) bey Dei ful J sg4 ath i Hy hi ry Pl sey fv) ah) | ant Bene t Ci x Uo aT rere Lo | aie + he “hyd ee) +) rhe iM) Uh ee Prt ha Sarre sero ar rath yf i ener bert DERM Ck ie Ie) b bt dade Be HSE bia ttyl i Uy 4 reer ee nee be ) phy tit ey pi ened Lee bes Horas Loa) ede | at Bren yeh hy Pb UPR tee et ne (ee bE adai Ae Li) Pines SOUR wae} 4 4 ha ruta ea be oth : CRPUICMO RURAL mee Cera cs RCM Cec nc ae er pre ri doh ; . PUL Ca es on Pare Vivetaratate Cn hiogort SMITHSONIAN NST Bw LON A RN ees. ere MUSEUM O F NAT URAL Hrs bo RY MAIMO@HTIMEG MOrrurirev ene eee el ae Op A a © 9 eR mere Muy aeu M 7 9 xo TAM C. p. roweorum C. p. mersi —- J AD Ri Cok, a lactthyrvren Painting by John A. Ruthven SUBSPECIES OF SMITH'’S LONGSPUR Calcarius pictus UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN) 237 i Life Histories of North American Cardinals, Grosbeaks, Buntings, Towhees, Finches, Sparrows, and Allies Order Passeriformes: Family Fringillidae PART THREE Genera Zonotrichia through Emberiza Literature Cited and Index ARTHUR CLEVELAND BENT and COLLABORATORS Compiled and Edited by Outver L. Austin, JR. Florida State Museum, University of Florida Research Associate, Smithsonian Institution SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION PRESS WASHINGTON, D.C. 1968 Publication of the United States National Museum The scientific publications of the United States National Museum include two series, Proceedings of the United States National Museum and United States National Museum Bulletin. In these series are published original articles and monographs dealing with the collections and work of the Museum and setting forth newly acquired facts in the fields of Anthropology, Biology, Geology, History, and Technology. Copies of each publication are distributed to libraries and scientific organizations and to specialists and others interested in the different subjects. The Proceedings, begun in 1878, are intended for the publication, in separate form, of shorter papers. These are gathered in volumes, octavo in size, with the publication of each paper recorded in the table of contents of the volume. In the Bulletin series, the first of which was issued in 1875, appear longer, separate publications consisting of monographs (occasionally in several parts) and volumes in which are collected works on related subjects. Bulletins are either octavo or quarto in size, depending on the needs of the presentation. Since 1902 papers relating to the botanical collections of the Museum have been published in the Bulletin series under the heading Contributions from the United States National Herbarium. Since 1959, in Bulletins titled ““Contributions from the Museum of History and Technology,” have been gathered shorter papers relating to the collections and research of that museum. This work forms number 237, parts 1-3, of the Bulletin series. FRANK A, TAYLOR, Director, United States National Museum. NorE ON THE FRONTISPIECE: The A.O.U. Check-List Committee has not as yet assessed the validity of the three races of Smith’s longspur proposed in 1961. For further details of recent investigations see page 1634.—O.L.A.,Jr. U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON : 1968 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price $8.25 per set of 3 books (paper cover) - Sold only in sets. Contents PART THREE Family Fringillidae: Cardinals, grosbeaks, buntings, towhees, finches, and sparrows—Continued Zonotrichia querula: Harris’ sparrow . Habits Distribution . Zonotrichia leucophrys ones ulin: Masters qihicecercumeds sparrow . Habits Distribution . eee erik aa atin: We Tie Ge es gods 5 Zonotrichia leurophrys dale Nuttall’s white-crowned sparrow . Habits Distribution . Zonotrichia leucophrys fame: (Gamer S erintecronued oe ; Habits Distribution . Zonotrichia leucophrys tnd Wountatn rai crowned mone ; Habits Distribution . Zonotrichia leucophrys Pugelenste: ‘Punet ‘Sound white: érowneds spar- OW. Habits Distribution . Zonotrichia airicapilla: @oltienserowned Eero: Habits Distribution . Zonotrichia atbicollis: Wihite-thvoated spuerewe Habits Distribution . Passerella iliaca: Fox Seem 3 Passerella iliaca iliaca: Eastern fox sparrow Habits Distribution . Passerella iliaca zaboria: Maile fox See Habits Distribution . ; Passerella iliaca pte Winecis fox, sparrow . Habits Distribution . ; Passerella iliaca: Fox oe a eeeen pApetal Paeoacies : Habits Distribution . : : Passerella iliaca: Fox eee neeena aunt epeaceics Habits Distribution . Melospiza lincolnii ae: Taincolw $s sparrow Habits Distribution . Page 1249 1249 1271 1273 1273 1287 1292 1292 1323 1324 1324 1336 1338 1338 1343 1344 1344 1351 1352 1352 1363 1364 1364 1387 1392 1395 1395 1411 1415 1415 1417 1418 1418 1418 1419 1419 1422 1424 1424 1431 1434 1434 1463 VI U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 237 Family Fringillidae: Cardinals, grosbeaks, buntings, towhees, finches, and sparrows—Continued Melospiza lincolnii alticola: Montane Lincoln’s sparrow Habits Distribution . REE ee re Se oe eS SLCC a Melospiza lincolnit gracilis: Northwestern (Forbush’s) Lincoln’s sparrow . Habits Distribution . ere 3 Melospiza georgiana aor nta: Northen Enea ao : Habits Distribution . eM ears Melospiza georgiana georgiana: Wooutheat: swamp sparrow . Habits Distribution . ey sic Melospiza georgiana picregton Conceal plain Sha sparrow . Habits Distribution . é Melospiza melodia: Song apeeeat ‘ EM ds Melospiza melodia melodia: Eastern song on ‘ Habits Distribution . ey ate Melospiza melodia atlas ‘Aetanitie: song sparrow. Habits Distribution . oe en Melospiza melodia phonies Risen peEe song sparrow . Habits Distribution . ‘ Melospiza melodia juddi: Dakota song sparrow . Habits Distribution . aa yantaw:- ley age Melospiza melodia montana: Mounatin song sparrow . Habits Distribution . «LEO Melospiza melodia Be ncaie: {Mellowhetde or irate song sparrow . Habits Distribution . ect Melospiza melodia merrilii: — il’s g song sparrow . Habits Distribution . ogee Melospiza melodia fisher Me: Susaae song sparrow . Habits Distribution . ee tout Melospiza melodia: Bonet sparrow, SR staepeeies Habits Distribution . ORs Melospiza melodia rufina: Sboty song sparrow Habits Distribution . ‘ De ete cer er Melospiza melodia baopotnen Be song sparrow Habits Distribution . PART 3 Page 1467 1467 1471 1472 1472 1473 1474 1474 1474 1475 1475 1486 1490 1490 1490 1491 1492 1492 1509 1512 1512 1513 1513 1513 1522 1523 1523 1524 1525 1525 1527 1527 1527 1529 1529 1529 1531 1531 1531 1533 1533 1533 1539 1540 1540 1541 1541 1541 1545 CONTENTS Family Fringillidae: Cardinals, grosbeaks, buntings, towhees, finches, and sparrows—Continued Melospiza melodia cleonensis: Mendocino song sparrow. . Habits Distribution . Ey 8S ag ERR as Melospiza melodia gouldii: Marin song sparrow . Habits Distribution . : Melospiza melodia: Song sparrow, San pai Gisss ee evans i sai species Habits Distribution . Pt keg, Seu a vs Melospiza melodia riaillvaraie Modesto song sparrow Habits Distribution . SA TUR econ ils, “cesta te ce acs Melospiza melodia Resmaneiss Heermann’s song sparrow . Habits Distribution . WP en eee yee teat Melospiza melodia cooperi: San Diego song sparrow . Habits : Distribution . ... ft SPs Melospiza melodia: Song sparrow, Pacific nna aabeneeies 3 Habits Distribution . Sea iti, Cone Melospiza melodia fallaz: areebti song sparrow . Habits Distribution . : etECEP Ay Yah Cae Melospiza melodia saltonis: Tiesaet song sparrow . Habits Distribution . Se oa aioe heiyttens Melospiza melodia rivularis: Biowh’ 8 song sparrow . Habits Distribution . : Rhynchophanes mccownit: eon 8 ieeacuer Habits Distribution . : Calcarius lapponicus Peeen ee Ghee Paniand iene ‘ Habits Distribution . Calcarius lapponicus “abetenaies Atanica ‘onesie : Habits Distribution . ‘ Calcarius pictus: Smith’s feneeoee ; Habits Distribution . : Calcarius ornatus: Gtiontmieeolared oaeenur : Habits Distribution . : Plectrophenaz nivalis heels anov aeetigy Habits Distribution . VII Page 1545 1545 1545 1546 1546 1547 1547 1547 1553 1553 1553 1554 1554 1554 1555 1555 1555 1556 1557 1557 1558 1559 1559 1561 1562 1562 1562 1563 1563 1563 1564 1564 1596 1597 1597 1606 1608 1608 1627 1628 1628 1633 1635 1635 1651 1652 1652 1673 VIII U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM: BULLETIN 237 PART 8 Family Fringillidae: Cardinals, grosbeaks, buntings, towhees, finches, and sparrows—Continued Page Plectrophenaz nivalis townsendi: Pribilof snow bunting. . . . .. . 1675 Mabits. <5. p23. 5 3 Pa hee fe fon a of tide lone Distribution . . . on %. erenldiaietGt ; L677 Plectrophenax hyperborens MeKay 8 bunting AZ hevnny srateh ieee nena l Ole Habita® .).27 60-4 oe reas tu @ Nis 12> ayes 2) pee rel Maa Distribution... . 5. As eee te MEI OSU! Emberiza rustica latifascia: aster n ctic bontine ss uitislane -ebmontane LOS IEVAIDIGS e920. spe costes sons wy seco Sa GUE ee ty wen he Ate oe) gee OSH Distribution <> <0! es Mace a. Ga) Sele eee a, © guage BLOS4 Witerature’ Cited "ss we. ao ap eget ae Gk LS eo BS ia or eaeiene Meeteeee ed @hOSe MY AGKS ei ers? AS ge: hee, he ar Deen One og Sree eer Se reat ee eee ee OO HARRIS’ SPARROW 1249 ZONOTRICHIA QUERULA (Nuttall) Harris’ Sparrow PLATE 68 Contributed by A. MarcuEeriITE BAUMGARTNER HAasits It was on a crisp June day in 1933 among the stunted spruces and the reindeer moss of the timberline at Churchill on Hudson Bay that I made the acquaintance of my first Harris’ sparrow. I was captivated at once by the bold black hood and pink bill, the plaintive, melodious, two-toned whistle, and the shy, gentle ways of this large handsome sparrow of the middle west. A bird of mystery, I was in the heart of its breeding grounds where that veteran explorer, Edward A. Preble, had discovered young just out of the nest in 1900, and where George M. Sutton had found and described the eggs for the first time in 1930. By 1933 not a dozen men had seen the nest and beautiful speckled blue-green eggs of these elusive creatures. It was a great satisfaction to renew their acquaintance in 1939 when we moved to the heart of their winter range in Oklahoma. Although they migrate through the plains states in enormous numbers and have been banded by the thousands in spring and fall, they are still birds of mystery. Only a handful have been studied through a winter, and none over a period of years. Perhaps it was a designing fate, certainly a happy coincidence, that led us after several years in town, to establish our permanent home on an acreage near Stillwater where Harris’ sparrows shared our lawn and picnic place, our weedy chicken yard, and the brushy ravine that wound through our little pasture. These birds of mystery became our closest neighbors, constant guests at our winter feeding trays, and regular visitors to our banding traps. From its earliest history Harris’ Sparrow has been surrounded by an aura of excitement and drama. Because its distribution is re- stricted to the center of the continent, not until 1834 did the eager eyes of science view it for the first time. Harry Harris (1919) relates in fascinating detail how two separate parties of explorers discovered the species within two weeks and a few miles of one another. On an expedition headed westward across Missouri with John K. Townsend, Thomas Nuttall (1840) collected a bird on Apr. 28, 1834, that he subsequently named the “Mourning Finch,” Fringilla querula. On May 13th the same year, Maximilian, Prince of Wied (1841), returning from an exploration of the upper Missouri River, likewise encountered the migrating flocks of these large handsome sparrows in southeastern 1250 U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 237 PART 3 Nebraska. He collected specimens that he described in his account of the trip as Fringilla comata. Each of these men delayed publishing his discoveries, Nuttall for 6 years, Maximilian for 7 years. Meanwhile John James Audubon completed the Elephant Folio of his epochal “Birds of America” without this interesting species. Traveling up the Missouri by steamship in 1843, Audubon and his companion, Edward Harris, saw the bird for the first time near Fort Leavenworth, Kans. Harris collected specimens and Audubon, unaware that it had already been discovered and named twice, described it in the octavo edition of his “Birds of America” (1843) as Fringilla harrisii in honor of his “excellent and constant friend.” While the priority of Nuttall’s specific name querula is clearly established, his singularly appropriate “mourning finch’? was superceded through usage by Audubon’s vernacular name. Little was learned during the next 40 years of the distribution or the life history of these elusive birds. Believed originally to nest in the type area, it was soon realized that the birds found there were migrants. The careful work of Wells W. Cooke (1884) established the eastern limit of their range in the United States and its center roughly paralleling the 96th meridian, but its western and southern boundaries remained vague. The wealth of faunal and local studies of the ensuing three-quarters of a century have defined the normal winter range more precisely and showed stragglers dispersing widely into almost every state of the Union. The summer home of the Harris’ sparrow remained mere conjecture until Edward A. Preble (1902) found it breeding at Churchill. Preble (1908b) also found it in 1903 along the eastern shore of Great Bear Lake ‘in a habitat precisely similar to its chosen nesting ground on Hudson Bay. All indications therefore point to the conclusion that its principal breeding grounds are in the strip of stunted timber extending for 800 miles between Hudson Bay and Great Bear Lake, along the northern border of the transcontinental forest.” Ernest Thompson Seton (1908) verified Preble’s conclusions when he found the species common from Great Slave Lake northward to the edge of the Barren Grounds, and discovered a nest with young almost ready to leave on August 5th. Other explorers in the North have added testimony, but without extending the birds’ known breeding range. Spring.—During spring migration Harris’ sparrows spread out over a wide area that includes most of the central United States. The species then occurs regularly, though sparingly, from northern Illinois and southern Wisconsin to eastern Colorado, Montana, and eastern Alberta east of the Continental Divide. William Youngworth HARRIS’ SPARROW 1251 (1959) notes that these birds were found originally only in the upper Missouri River valley, but that during the past 60 years they have spread eastward and are now regular, though uncommon, migrants down the upper Mississippi River valley as well. The northward movement begins in the southern parts of the winter range in late February and early March, surges into Nebraska and Iowa by mid-March, and into southeastern South Dakota by late March (Youngworth, 1959). Then occurs a pause first noted by Cooke (1913) before the birds move on into the Dakotas and Min- nesota in late April and May (Swenk and Stevens, 1929). Thus no appreciable migration is evident beyond the winter range until May. As Orin A. Stevens (1957) notes: “In the spring Harris’ Sparrows reach Fargo, North Dakota about May 7 * * * and are present about two weeks. It seems evident that both their arrival and length of stay are delayed by cold weather, and that their de- parture is hastened by a warm wave. They are restless and there are few repeat records of individual birds.” In their detailed study of the species, Myron H. Swenk and Orin A. Stevens (1929) note: “The vanguard arrives with remarkable uni- formity during the first week in May or shortly thereafter at points over an area extending from the Dakotas to Minnesota and Manitoba. The passage of the vanguard across Saskatchewan, Alberta, and Northwest Territory to the breeding grounds of the species is made during the last half of May, though it is probably the middle of June before the migration of all the birds is completed.” Banding records show that some, at least, of the Harris’ sparrows follow the same migration routes in spring and fall and in consecutive seasons, with occasionally the same stopovers. Other individuals, recovered from 25 to 100 miles on either side of their place of banding during a subsequent migration, manifestly shifted their migration path. Repeat records at banding stations (Swenk and Stevens, 1929) show that individuals may remain at given stopovers from 1 to 5 days during spring migration, averaging 1.5 days. In fall the periods are considerably longer, averaging 7 or 8 days, sometimes a month. The speed at which Harris’ sparrows migrate in spring is indicated by several recoveries in the Bird Banding files. A bird banded at Aberdeen, S. Dak., May 9, 1933, was recovered 325 miles away at Winnipeg, Man., 5 days later, having averaged 65 miles per day. Another banded at Ipswich, S. Dak., May 7, 1940, was taken 370 miles northward at Lake Manitoba 8 days later, having averaged 46 miles per day. Nesting.—Almost a century after the discovery of Harris’ sparrow on the Missouri prairies, the eggs of this handsome bird were still unknown to science. While a nest with young and fledglings just out 1252 U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 237 PART 3 of the nest had been collected and the breeding range roughly estab- lished, the region was virtually inaccessible during the nesting season. Completion of the railway to Fort Churchill opened a new world to ornithological exploration, and in 1930 Percy A. Taverner (Taverner and Sutton, 1934) found the birds common at the edge of timber a few miles south of the townsite. First noted on May 28, the birds became common by June 6. He found no eggs, but collected a nest: with young on June 27. He last noted the species on September 5. In 1931 two parties visited the Churchill area with the primary aim of finding the eggs of the Harris’ sparrow. Most of the following information is summarized from the full and fascinating account by John B. Semple and George M. Sutton (1932) whose party discovered the first nest with eggs. On their way northward they observed Harris’ sparrows in numbers at The Pas, Manitoba, 500 miles south of Churchill, on May 23. The train then preceded the migration and went from spring back to winter. On arrival at Churchill May 25 they found 2 feet of snow on the level and drifts 20 feet deep; temperatures ranged from 28° F. to about 60° F. during the day. They first observed Harris’ sparrows there on May 27. Though the males were in full song, females collected showed unenlarged ovaries. During late May and early June they saw numbers of birds daily on the barrens along the river, several miles from spruce timber; these they subsequently termed migrants on their way to more north- westerly regions. Of the nesting habitat at timberline they write: ‘We found the birds most common at the edges of the woodlands, in clearings near the railway track, and in the bushy margins of burned-over areas. As a rule but one pair of birds lived in a given patch of spruces or tamaracks; but sometimes two or three pairs inhabited the same narrow tongue of forest. “By June 7, we had at least thirty pairs more or less definitely located in an area of five square miles; we had not, however, wit- nessed a single action indicative of nest building.”’ In an atmosphere tense with keen but friendly competition, both between the two parties and the men within each group, the birds continued to act indecisively. The weather continued backward and the search continued fruitless. Semple and Sutton (1932) continue: We watched certain pairs by the hour, and found them so amazingly non- commital about what we supposed to be their ‘‘territory” that we began to wonder whether we were anywhere near the actual nesting grounds. The birds would feed together for long periods in the morning, walking along among the moss and grass; kicking vigorously, like Fox Sparrows, through leaves and debris; then mount the low bushes, wipe their bills quickly, and fly to some far-distant part of the woodlands, where it was often impossible to find them. Sometimes, indeed, they became mildly excited at our presence; whereupon they would begin weenking loudly; but they usually soon lost interest, wiped their bills, shook them- HARRIS’ SPARROW 1253 selves, and dashed off, leaving us to wonder where their nest could be. Frequently we found them feeding in tamarack trees; they appeared to be eating the buds. They were very graceful in their movements, climbing about on the slender, outermost twigs, and bowing this way and that like crossbills. Sometimes a single bird would fly suddenly from the ground under a bush, as if it had just come froma nest. Such a bird usually sought a rather high perch, often the top of a dead spruce near-by, where it would give itself over to a spasm of alarm notes, loud enough to summon all the yammering Lesser Yellow-legs from miles around; then it would dart away, to beseen no more. The habit of the birds, when frightened from the ground, of flying to rather high perches was characteristic. By mid-June, all the birds we observed in the woodlands appeared to be mated. At this season the males so frequently sang in a chorus that it was sometimes difficult to separate a single song from the medley which sounded through the woods. * * * * * * On June 15, a bird carrying a wisp of dry grass was observed to go to the ground somewhere near the base of a large spruce stump in a grove of live spruce trees which grew near a small lake and on rather high ground. Though a prolonged search was made, the nest was not found. We were torn, that evening, between high enthusiasm and frank exasperation, for we knew that there must be a nest somewhere in the vicinity and we also knew we had not found it! To George Miksch Sutton of the Carnegie Museum-Cornell Uni- versity party fell the honor and good fortune of discovering the first nest. He later describes (1936) in his inimitable style the per- sonal feelings of an ornithologist at such a moment: “As I knelt to examine the nest a thrill the like of which I had never felt before passed through me. And I talked aloud! ‘Here!’ I said. ‘Here in this beautiful place!’ At my fingertips lay treasures that were beyond price. Mine was Man’s first glimpse of the eggs of the Harris’s Sparrow, in the lovely bird’s wilderness home.” Returning to the Semple and Sutton (1932) account: The circumstances of the finding were these: After watching a certain pair of birds for a time, the junior author started across a wet, open spruce woods, bound for an area a mile distant which the birds were known to frequent. Just as he entered a clump of comparatively tall spruce trees, he noticed a Harris’s Sparrow picking at its belly with its beak, as if it had just come froma nest. He watched the bird for a time without moving, and then deliberately and quietly retraced his steps, marking the spot carefully.’ After about fifteen minutes he returned briskly, walked noisily through the water, the mossy mounds, and bushes, and, just as he was about to set foot upon the crest of one of the water-bound hum- mocks—he flushed the bird. The nest was less than twelve inches from his foot. The bird flew directly from the nest, without any attempt at feigning injury; it perched on a dead spruce bough about twenty yards away, where it wiped its bill. It gave no alarm note. The bird, a female, was collected at once, to make identification certain. The nest, like that found by Ernest Thompson Seton (1908), was lined with grass, and in appearance and location resembled that of a White-throated Sparrow. It was placed a little to the southward of the top of a mossy, shrub-covered, water-girt mound in a cool, shadowy spot, about thirty yards from the edge of a clump of rather tall spruce trees. It was about thirteen inches above the brown 1254 U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 237 PART 3 water which surrounded the mound. The foundation material was largely moss, with a few leaves, slender weed stalks, and grasses; the lining was entirely of grass. The cup was 1% inches deep and 234 inches in diameter, as measured in the field. The walls were rather thin, for the moss into which the nest was built was very deep and soft. The eggs were sheltered from above by a few sprigs of Narrow-leaved Labrador Tea which were then in bud. The male bird was not seen. The clump of trees where this nest was found was in the forest about two miles back from the edge of the Barren Grounds; the woods were open, how- ever, and the mossy, grassy spaces between the patches of trees had much the appearance of tundra. During the next 3 weeks they found nine additional nests which they describe as follows: ‘“The nests were built chiefly of grass, with a lining of finer grass (no hair, feathers, or plant down of any sort) and were situated usually in mossy hummocks among the stunted spruce trees, often on a small ‘island,’ under some sort of low shrub, and on a sheltered, southern exposure.” Frank L. Farley of Camrose, Alberta, who led the Canadian party and spent many subsequent summers in the Churchill region recorded similar observations. Quoting from a letter he wrote to Mr. Bent in July 1937: “T found three good sets of Harris sparrows and got onto some of their secrets. JI had formerly searched in the woods for their nests, but this year learned that they invariably nest in open growths, but always near enough a good-sized spruce tree so as to use it as a look- out for intruders. On the tops, or in the tops of these, they peer out at you as you approach, always thinking they are entirely hidden in the branches. We found the 3 nests all within 100 feet of good- sized lakes and all nests were under dwarf trees, one under a small tamarack 2 feet high, the second under a little spruce 2 feet high, and the third under a pretty little arctic willow shrub, not more than 2 feet high. We found one of the nests nearly a mile from any fair sized spruce woods. If one can find both birds, neither on the nest, it is a good bet that if one watches long enough you will see the bird drop to the ground from its look-out spruce, and then after waiting for 10 minutes, you may be able to flush it within 100 feet of the tree. The birds flush at very close quarters; my three all left hurriedly when I approached within 3 feet of the nests. The nest is always sunken into the ground and is bulky, made of coarse rootlets and last year’s heavy grass stems for an outer covering, lined with fine grasses. I have never seen a feather used as lining as the Lapland Longspur and Horned Larks do. In some of the nests small pieces of moss are placed in the outer lining. After the birds know that the nest has been found, they both disappear not to return while you are near. They are the most secretive of any of the small birds I know and do not like the presence of humans near their summer homes.” HARRIS’ SPARROW 1255 Because of the secretive nature of these shy birds, neither these first parties nor subsequent visitors to the area were ab!e to observe details of courtship, nest building, or length of incubation. Of birds collected as they flushed from the nest, all were females. In some cases only one bird was found near the nest; in other instances the male bird was on guard in the tip of a nearby spruce and gave the alarm. At Nest 4 with four eggs, (Semple and Sutton, 1932), a female flushed at 5 feet was found, upon dissection, to contain a fully formed egg in the oviduct, indicating a tendency to set before the full clutch is deposited. During early incubation the females flushed off at 3 to 10 feet, and refused to return as long as intruders remained in the area. Later the birds returned in half an hour or so. Olin S. Pettingill (Semple and Sutton, 1932) describes ruefully the bird’s behavior at another of the nests as follows: I set up my blind five feet away from the nest and attempted to make photo- graphs. * * * The birds continued to wink, one continuously, during my presence. After 1% hours one of the birds sang for a while a short distance away and re- turned suddenly to continue with the racket. For three hours I remained in the blind. I could see no indication throughout my stay that either parent would approach the nest. Both birds passed from one tree to another around the blind, making this circling a continuous perform- ance. Not once did they drop to the ground nor come any nearer than this particular circle of trees. During the last hour I remained in the blind, the birds were as excited as they were the first hour. Had I been standing there without a blind they probably would have been no more alarmed. I feel sure that if I had left the blind near the nest the birds would have deserted. Arthur A. Allen (1951) comments, ‘‘* * * the bird is so wary that photography is extremely difficult; our single picture of the bird on its nest gave us more trouble than any other. We spent nearly a week getting the bird accustomed to the blind, and then at the first click of the shutter she left and did not return until I gave up after two hours of waiting.” In retrospect, I feel more fortunate than I realized at the time, to have ‘‘caught”’ a single photograph of another of Allen’s nests in the summer of 1934. Possibly because the incuba- tion period was well advanced, this bird returned to her nest within half an hour after the ‘“go-way-ster’’ had departed and the neophyte photographer had endured the 10,000th mosquito. At any rate, it afforded an excellent opportunity to observe these handsome birds at close range, to compare the plumages of the male and his definitely duller mate, and to admire the artistry of their carefully concealed home among the gray-green lichens and sprigs of arctic crowberry. Eggs.—The Harris’ sparrow usually lays from 3 to 5 ovate eggs and they are slightly glossy. The ground may be white or greenish- white, heavily speckled, spotted, and blotched with ‘Natal brown,”’ “Rood’s brown,” ‘“Mar’s brown,” or ‘Trusset.”? One set in the 1256 U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 237 PART 3 Museum of Comparative Zoology is very pale greenish white, heavily marked with spots, blotches, and a few scrawls that practically obscure the ground. Another set is dirty white with fine specklings over the entire egg. In markings and coloring, they are very similar to those of the white-crowned sparrow, but average slightly larger. The measurements of 46 eggs average 22.2 by 16.7 millimeter; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 24.7 by 16.4, 26.6 by 17.8, 20.3 by 16.1, and 21.5 by 15.0 millimeter. Of the 10 nests found in 1931 (Semple and Sutton, 1932),6 contained four eggs or young, 2 contained five, and 2 had three. Farley (corres.) says: “I would say that four eggs is the usual number laid. Of 5 nests found in the last 3 years, 4 nests had 4 eggs and only 1 had 5.” Only one brood is reared in this subarctic setting, though nests de- stroyed by untimely snow storms may be replaced as late as June 18. Young.—The length of the incubation period has only recently been determined by Joseph R. Jehl, Jr., and D. J. T. Russell (1966) who state: “Minimum incubation period for one nest 13% days, computed from laying of fourth to hatching of third egg; the fourth egg did not hatch.”’ Little has been recorded of the development of young Harris’ sparrows beyond descriptions of the plumage. The only observation on nest life that has been indicated is that both parents are in attendance. Perhaps when the life histories of our commoner and more easily-studied summer birds have all been put on record, some intrepid young student will elect to fill in the many remaining gaps in our knowledge of this bird of mystery. Plumages.—Edward A. Preble (1902) first described the juvenal plumage of Harris’ sparrow from those he collected at Fort Churchill on July 24, 1900, as follows: “Upper parts dusky black, the feathers edged with deep buffy and brown, the black predominating on crown, the brown on hind neck, and the black and brown about equally divided on back; outer wing quills edged with deep buffy, inner with brown; tail feathers edged and tipped with whitish; sides of head and lower parts buffy; chest and side streaked with black, which is most conspicious on sides of chest and forms a prominent malar stripe; upper throat grayish white, with fine dusky markings.”’ Margaret M. Nice (1929) notes: “Among Preble’s and Seton’s specimens in the American Museum there are ten birds collected near Great Slave Lake in September. One, taken September 4, is a full grown bird in the nestling plumage. The others all have white chins and throats. Their crowns differ a good deal, but all have a more or less scaled appearance, for the feathers are black centrally, margined with pale grayish buffy; in the least mature birds the effect is predominantly buffy.” HARRIS’ SPARROW 1257 I recall the young birds I saw at Churchill during the summers of 1933 and 1934 as recognizably Harris’ sparrows in a typical young fringillid pattern, streaky dark above, not radically different from the first winter plumage, and heavily streaked below on the throat, chest, sides, and flanks. The lower belly is white. WINTER PLUMAGES.—Three typical plumages occur in Harris’ sparrows during their stay in the United States: (1) The white-throated, buffy immature with crown feathers broadly margined with buff and wide, buffy, superciliary stripe giving the bird an overall brownish cast. (2) The black-throated darker adult with crown wider and blacker, and the feathers less conspicuously margined with gray or buff, giving a sharper contrast above and below. (3) The full breeding plumage with complete black hood, gray cheeks, and dark postauricular spot acquired by a partial molt of all birds during March and April. (As characteristic of the genus and most of the family, the flight feathers and rectrices are replaced only in the complete postnuptial molt.) Between these three typical plumages occurs a wide variety of intergradations, some almost impossible to catalogue as adult or immature. Crown feathers may be broadly margined over the entire crown, lightly margined, partially at forehead or rear, or almost solid black. White throats may be flecked, blotched, or patched with black; black throats may be flecked or patched with white until it is difficult to say which is the basic color. A number of birds have the black throat partially or broadly separated from the dark chest patch by a white band. ; Considerable attention has been given these “intermediate” plumages. Robert Ridgway (1901) suggests that the birds with broadly margined crown feathers and a mixture of black and white in the throat and chin might be in their second winter, in a 3-year progression toward fully adult plumage. Swenk and Stevens (1929) elaborate on this theory, noting that about 80 percent of the migrating individuals in October and November exhibit these characteristics. Mrs. Nice (1929a) expresses surprise at the relatively small pro- portion of “black-hooded birds” in the wintering flocks at Norman, Okla. She raises the question as to the age at which this characteristic may be retained throughout the year and exhorts banders to solve the riddle. While operating banding stations near Stillwater, Okla., P. J. Park (1936), C. E. Harkins (1937), and G. M. Steelman and K. E. Herde (1937) consecutively made detailed observations of plum- ages and the prenuptial molt. They accept the 3-year age sequence theory, but while their work carefully details the progression of the plumages through a season, the few return records of birds from previous years are insufficient to substantiate any such conclusions. 646-737—68—pt. 3——2 1258 U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 237 PART 3 My own studies at Stillwater, Okla., over an 18-year period indicate that much of this variation and intergradation in winter plumages is due to sheer individual variation, some to minor sex differences. Between February 1948 and May 1965, I banded at Stillwater a total of 1,722 Harris’ sparrows, of which 121 individuals (50 banded as adults, 66 as immatures) returned a total of 204 times from 1 to 6 years after banding. Observations on their plumages may be sum- marized as follows: Crown.—Adult birds (the 50 banded as adults and all returning birds) showed no consistent sequence from year to year in the amount of edging on the crown feathers or the amount of black, unveiled crown. Some birds banded as immatures returned the following winter (R—-1) with crowns only lightly edged with gray and as much as half jet black. Others returned consistently year after year (R-1-2-3-4) with a heavy veiling over the crown and only a small black area on the forehead. Some varied from winter to winter from heavy to light and vice versa. SuPERCILIARY sTRIPE.—None of the returns had the broad, buffy “eyebrows” almost meeting on the forehead that characterize the first winter plumage. Turoat.—Birds whose throats were more than half white, with black flecks, blotches, or patches, usually showed the buffy “eyebrows”’ and were designated immatures. Adult birds with basically black throats displayed four throat patterns as follows: (1) Throat finely flecked black and white (“salt and pepper”). (2) Throat black with white blotches or patches. (3) Broad or partial white band separating black of throat and chest. (4) Typical adult all-black throat. These patterns occured indiscriminately in R-1 birds banded as immatures and in 6-year olds, in very small females (?) and very large males (?). Lores.—Kach fall I described in my records a number of birds as conspicuously big and black, or with lores, as well as throat and crown black, almost approximating the black hood of the breeding plumage. Of eight returns so described, all but one had been banded as adults and must have been in at least their third winter. Yet one banded in immature plumage showed the black hood early in the winter of his first return. In other cases I noted R-2 and R-3 birds with buffy lores, so that this appearance of the black hood cannot be associated consistently with old birds. My records show that, far more often than not, individual birds retained their particular adult pattern from year to year, through one or more returns. They show no evidence whatever of a 3-year se- quence of plumage patterns from first winter to full adult. A single adult bird at Stillwater exhibited a reversal to its immature plumage in the second winter. Banded as an immature Dec. 2, 1962, HARRIS’ SPARROW 1259 I described it on its R-1 return Feb. 13, 1964, as: ‘“Typically immature plumage—crown heavily veiled, eye-line wide and buffy, throat white with only a few flecky lines radiating down from the dark chin, breast dark splotched, tail heavily frayed but white edging showing slightly.” Victor Vacin has written me of a single similar “puzzler”? among his 306 return records. Mo.tt.—Certain characteristics are acquired gradually through the winter. In immature birds the black fringe of the chin frequently appears during December and January, and Swenk and Stevens (1929) note it in some as early as October and November. In adults the buffy edges of the black loral feathers wear off and leave the bird dark-faced, not too unlike the black hood of the breeding plumage. Dark flecks may appear in the superciliary stripe by early February. The prenuptial molt begins about the middle of March (earliest Mar. 3, 1951) and continues through most of April. By April 25 young and old are indistinguishable in velvet black hoods, gray cheeks, and fresh white feathers of chests and sides. The sequence of this molt is from chin and forehead (if not already black) to throat, crown, nape, and cheeks. New quills may appear in the chest and sides of some birds several weeks in advance of other areas. In first-year birds the superciliary stripe is frequently the last clue to immaturity, remaining a patchy buff and black until April or early May. Last to molt is the postauricular spot, which turns from brown to black. An individual bird completes the molt in about a month. One in- dividual I handled daily throughout the sprmg showed no quills until April 13; by May 9 this bird wore the full black hood, though still in heavy quills. Individuals traced by Mrs. Nice (1929a) at Norman, Okla., and a stray bird at Berkeley, Calif., by Russell H. Pray (1950) followed the same sequence. Young and old pass through the molt at the same time. First signs of molt in the spring have been observed some years in adult birds, in other years in immatures. While an occasional old return may be in full breeding plumage before the end of April, I also have notations on R-1s such as ‘‘molting head, chin, throat” on May 8, and “almost through molt” on May 14. EXTERNAL SEX DIFFERENCES.—Sex differences in plumage and measurements are slight and overlap considerably. In general the largest, stoutest, brightest birds are males and the smallest, most drab are females. The crown tends to be wider in males, narrower in females. A goodly number of intermediates cannot be sexed with certainty by external examination, though familiarity with the species increases awareness of minute differences. On my field cards I have hazarded guesses for as many as possible, resexing at each repeat or return. In some cases “immature females” have returned the next year as large, plump, glossy ‘‘adult males,” but more frequently the 1260 U.S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 237 PART 3 guess has remained consistent. In birds killed by shrikes or found dead, dissection has proved the guess correct more often than not. Male wing and tail measurements average slightly longer than female, and those of adults slightly longer than first-year birds of the same sex, but with too much overlap to be used for certain sex identification. Weights—During three winters at Stillwater, Okla., I weighed birds at the time of banding and at intervals throughout the season on scales accurate to .065 grams. The 754 weights recorded for 200 individuals between November and May reveal definite weight patterns for the species that can be correlated with age, migration, molt, and seasonal temperature. Adult weights showed extremes of 28.4 to 48.8 grams and averaged 36.4 grams; immatures averaged 2 grams lighter at 34.4 grams, with extremes from 26.2 to 44.9. Weights of individual birds varied up to about 3 grams during the course of a day: lightest in the early morning, heaviest at dusk. The seasonal trend was a rise from low weights on arrival in early November to comparative highs during the cold months of January and February, followed by a pronounced drop in March that lasted through April into early May. The May averages increased con- sistently and then soared sharply the last 2 or 3 days before departure. Monthly averages showed adults varying almost 4 grams from a low of 34.9 in March to a 38.8 gram high at departure in May; immature monthly averages varied almost 5 grams from an April low of 32.2 to a departure high of 37.0 grams. Individuals not uncommonly varied as much as 8.0 to 8.5 grams during their stay, more than 20 percent of their average body weight. One small immature (presumably a female) that weighed 28.4 grams when banded Apr. 21, 1950, gained 7.3 grams to 35.7 grams by May 11. She returned the next fall, still classed as small at 32.3 grams. She gained only a gram during January and February, and dropped back to a normal 32.6 through April and the first fortnight of May. Between May 14 and 18 she shot up 5.2 grams to 37.8, a gain of 16 percent in less than a week. Converted into human terms these figures become spectacular—they compare to a woman of 120 pounds putting on another 20 pounds in the week preceding a vacation trip. Food.—Food habits of the Harris’ sparrows during their stay in the United States were thoroughly studied by Sylvester D. Judd (1901), who analyzed the contents of 100 stomachs for the U.S. Biological Survey. He reports that these birds subsist chiefly on vegetable matter, which constitutes 92 percent of the total food; 48 percent of the food is weed seeds including ragweed, smartweed, knotweed, black bindweed, pigweed, lambs’-quarters, gromwell, and HARRIS’ SPARROW 1261 sunflower; 25 percent of the food is the seeds of wild fruits and of various miscellaneous plants; 10 percent is grain, chiefly waste corn, but also including wheat and oats; and 9 percent is grass seed, mainly that of blue-grass, beard-grass, foxtail-grass, and Johnson-grass. The 8 percent of animal matter consists of insects, spiders, and snails, with a marked preference for leaf-hoppers among the insects consti- tuting 2 percent of the total food. Additional animal foods quoted from various sources by Swenk and Stevens (1929) include grass- hoppers, beetles, insect larvae, red ants, black carpenter ants, wire- worms, and moths. Mrs. Nice (1929a) observes that in Oklahoma they feed on poison ivy berries and elm blossoms as well as weed seeds. We also noted this at Stillwater, and found that when the Chinese elm was in bud and bloom in late February, the birds spent considerable time in these trees. In Nebraska they are reported to take corn from the fallen ears in the fall. At feeding stations they may be attracted by almost any small grain—canary and sunflower seed, hemp, millet, grain sorghum, chick- scratch, cracked corn, also occasional suet and crumbs. They have shown no interest whatsoever in wheat.