etoetite etetst Nit ae % 3: RS ; ties alates hit ete "s relly ez oe $e a ieee cS > > cs ise abe sche nt % f ee si iN : me ome oe ae aes if ie acs : ‘ % “ects , “eee ‘ oe o Me ine eee 3 a Babe a ty “s eee Rt See an % “ % % “ iss oo eh 8) “, aS th % => she “ Si x a ey % = a, rey se See, x — ih ag ey ce ELSES, < oe eK ceeae $, nop abt se, ‘ o> Oxy SINAN eb he - 2% a ~ We. *, v6, = irmoa ee, te ce rae, : eee. Ny Seo > - es oy esti este 5 es % 25 a ~ rae is ae Sc ex ‘S, oo os a5, 3 “ 5 es ms 4 a cet Ss sot eSco Te ie eS <] Sch hs <3 , ate ts 29) $44 S 5 > ne ats 5Pet 5: 3) sere eyes 5 ‘6 $5 >> 28565 + gaa Sesh coco iRiet 27350. ate ef Sg ie sales Sestcthe Tes ts street theo 3 % >! eS ty. > 32 ‘s cs ef 23 545 Sede > Stats? ies CORE eSesg ies ¢ . aes eset Ses se} <4 in ‘St tees 1 bch 5 C ‘i * +e so ts SS +3 ae <5 % 202 » es es $2 is te > eee 33>) Soe +6 sea34 25) $3 SS aes 35 4 of} Ooe> $6 hes 9 33 of. * ee ‘ : Sek che o548 $ $e .S eS 3 . 3 3 i a eretate: Se8 ESLER state Hee ee seaherece? Cher aes a et eehet sas + >, . cece + > e ee “ PO ‘ “ ‘Sa pe ed Ris ct a EO PRN ae ee *. a Lise ara oe Des ‘ Sooo Sx 5 Fy f a Pee I SPR 4 2 eee es ets . 2 byes ES cs Sas RRM Te CT) SeSe5 Bt ate Cert "sto: 3 Coes Ace RRO Roe Se ee ee eee con ngg ye Fy OS et Ser ee DR Ras ge eS ° : ‘ ~ ie A = eo 4 ® er ~ > >e 7 a i Cabs ° > S py g ie? . ee = J . SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION. UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. SPECIAL BULLETIN. LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS, FROM THE PARROTS TO THE GRACKLES, WITLH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THEIR BREEDING HABITS AND EGGS, CHARLES BENDIRE, CAPTAIN AND BREVET Magor, U.S. A. (Retired). Honorary Curator of the Department of Odlogy, U.S. National Museum, Member of the American Ornithologists’ Union. WITH SEVEN LITHOGRAPHIC PLATES. WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 1895. ADVERTISEMENT: This work (Special Bulletin No. 8) is one of a series of papers intended to illustrate the collections belonging to, or placed in charge of, the Smithsonian Institution, and deposited in the United States National Museum. It supple- ments Special Bulletin No. 1, by the same author, which containes descriptions of the breeding habits and eggs of the gallinaceous. birds, pigeons, doves, and birds of prey. The publications of the National Museum consist of two series—the Bulletin and the Proceedings. A small edition of each paper in the Proceedings is dis- tributed in pamphlet form to specialists in advance of the publication of the bound volume. The Bulletin is issued only in volumes. Most of the volumes hitherto published have been octavos, but a quarto form has been adopted for works of the size and character of the present Bulletin. The Bulletin of the United States National Museum, the publication of which was commenced in 1875, consists of elaborate papers based upon the collections of the Museum, reports of expeditions, ete. The Proceedings are intended to facilitate the prompt publication of freshly acquired facts relating to biology, anthropology, and geology, descriptions of restricted groups of animals and plants, discussions of particular questions relative to the synonymy of species, and the diaries of minor expeditions. Other papers of more general popular interest are printed in the appendix to the annual report. Papers intended for publication in the Proceedings and Bulletin of the United States National Museum are referred to the advisory committee on publications, composed as follows: Frederick W. True (chairman), R. Edward Earll (editor), James E. Benedict. Otis T. Mason. Leonhard Stejneger, and Lester F. Ward. S. P. LAnGuey, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. Wasuinaton, D. C., June 10, 1895. IIL ABE OE CONTENTS. PSITTACEOUS BIRDS. Family Psrrractpae. Parrots, Paroquets, ete. 1. Conurus carolinensis, Linnieus..---.-.--------- CarolinayParoquety (ele) By onl) eee aaa tat ie a=t = PICARIAN BIRDS. Family Cucutipa. The Cuckoos, Anis, ete. 2. Crotophaga ani, Winnzeus-------.----.----___- Whe Ate (Eee ehh OG) eae aetna eta a ere oe 3. Crotophaga sulcirostris, Swainson... --------- Grooved-billed Ani (PI. I, Fig. 7)------.----------- 4, Geococeyx californianus, Lesson ..------------ Roa dekinmme rs (ee lem tal Ow) pees ee 53 Coceyznsiminor,-Gmielin----=----- s--- -------- Manrrove CUCKOO mse seh ene ae een as ae ere =e 6. Coceyzus minor maynardi, Ridgway ..---- ---- Maynard’s Cuckoo 7. Coceyzus americanus, Linneus ..----.-------- Yellow-billed Cuckoo (PI. V, Fig. 1)-------------- 8. Coceyzus americanus occidentalis, Ridgway... California Cuckoo (PI. V, Fig. 2)----------------- 9. Coceyzus erythrophthalmus, Wilson. ---- ------ Black-billed Cuckoo (Pl. V, Figs. 3 and 4)-...---- 10. Cuculus canorus telephonus, Heine. --...----. Siberians CUck00eeseesr= ss ae cieiecee aa ee Family TROGONID.Z. ‘Trogons. 11. Trogon ambiguus, Gould ...---.-.--.--------- Coppery-balled iro gone. cates eeataes eee) Family ALCEDINID.E. Kingfishers. ize Cenyleralcyon lin cet pete atoll alealte a Beltedikonphsheri(e yl whi ond) nema ste sale se= 13. Ceryle americana septentrionalis, Sharp ---- --- Mexan Kan ehsher (Pe Tee oA) ene ee lee ae 14) Ceryle)torquata, Lannteus=----.--------------- Ringed Kingfisher ---------- - =< 222-55. =~ 2-2 PICINE BIRDS. Family Prcip. Woodpeckers. 15. Campephilus principalis, Linnwus -.-----. ---- Ivory-billed Woodpecker... ....-..-...-----.----- 16. Dryobates villosus, Linneus..-...-.---------- Hanya Woodpecker sectesne ceo ase e anette eee 17. Dryobates villosus lencomelas, Boddiwrt-. ~~~ -- Northern Hairy Woodpecker. .--.----=.--.-..---- 18. Dryobates villosus audubonii, Swainson. ....-. Southern Hairy Woodpecker. -----..------------- 19. Dryobates villosus harrisii, Audubon. .....---. Harris’s Woodpecker-......-..---.--------------- 20. Dryobates villosus hyloscopus, Cabanis.....-. Cabanis’s Woodpecker-.-...-...-.-----.------------ 21. Dryobates pubescens, Linnwus-.-.---..-------- Downy Woodpecker (PI. 1, Fig. 24)...-..----.----- 29. Dryobates pubescens gairdnerii, Audubon. ---- Gaindiier/siWioodpecker= see saeees sere ae ai 23. Dryobates pubescens oreacus, Batchelder. ---- Babcheldenjs) Woodpecker na seeeeeereee =e = a= 24, Dryobates borealis, Vieillot.-.--.......-..-..- Red-cockaded Woodpecker..---.---.-----.------- 25. Dryobates scalaris bairdi, Sclater.........---- BYU Ke NSCS Oe soe cose natabanoSoocscsas Saas 26. Dryobates sealaris lucasanus, Xantus..---.---- Stan casnvMO0dpeCkeremer eter =< eete sete saree as ZieWryobatesuttalli, Gamibel -22---/5------- ---= Nihal aRWrootipe cher mearsem steers te ieee tae 28. Dryobates/anizonm, Harpitt.-2---.---.--.- ---- ATIZ ON daVVOOCPCOKe Neem sm aise mts eet tle ta 29. Xenopicus albolarvatus, Cassin . ..-..--------- White-headed Woodpecker....-.--...-.-----.---- 30. Picoides arcticus, Swainson. ...-....---------- Arctic Three-toed Woodpecker..--.-...-.-------- ol.ePicoides;americanus, Brelini.-.-.----- ---- --== American Three-toed Woodpecker. -....-----.----- 32. Picoides americanus alascensis, Nelson... .--- Alaskan Three-toed Woodpecker. ..--..----.----- 33. Picoides americanus dorsalis, Baird. .--..------ Alpine Three-toed Woodpecker. -.-...------------- 34. Sphyrapicus varius, Linneus-....-.......-.-. Yellow-bellied Sapsucker.........-.--.-.-..------ 35. Sphyrapicus varius nuchalis, Baird...-...----- Red-naped Sapsucker.-----..---6.5...s----e---- VI TABLE OF CONTENTS. 36. Sphyrapicus ruber, Gmelin....---.-...--..-.-. Red-breasted)Sapsncker-<._-. s-sc-eseacess ones cee 37. Sphyrapicus thyroideus, Cassin .....-...-.-.... Williamson’s Sapsucker...-..........-.....-.---- 38. Ceophlaus pileatus, Linnieus. .....-..---.---. Pileated Woodpecker (P1.1, Fig.5)-..........--.. 39. Melanerpes erythrocephalus, Linnwus.--.-.--... Red-headed Woodpecker............--...-..-.--.- 40. Melanerpes formicivorus bairdi, Ridg@way--..-- Californian Woodpecker. ..... 2... ..- oe 41. Melanerpes formicivorus angustifrons, Baird .. Narrow-fronted Woodpecker..-..........--.------ 42. Melanerpes torquatus, Wilson. ....-.---------- awisis Woodpecker =~ sce ose eae eeeae eee 43. Melanerpes carolinus, Linneus............--.. Red-bellied Woodpecker................--.------ 44. Melanerpes aurifrons, Wagler .......--...--.-- Golden-fronted Woodpecker..........--....------ 45. Melanerpes uropygialis, Baird ........-..--.-- Gila. Woodpecker=- 2-2. ocaen ee eee ee eee 46. Colaptes auratus, Linneus-....-......-.-.<..- I Bees ORR S ana aosAaacaaumbaocdcD Ones Sas 47, ‘Colaptes' cater, Gmelin: 2. -s.e-.--2-- ones Retl-shatted (lickers. tee ascent es 48. Colaptes cafer saturatior, Ridgway.....-...--- Northwestern) Bickers) sesseeeee ee ee 49. Colaptes chrysoides, Malherbe.......-......-- GildedPlicker. 2). <2 225s 2 see eee ee eee eee 50. Colaptes rufipileus, Ridgway......-..-..--..-.-. Guadalupe: Plicker>:oce5- cam cece nen eneee eee MACROCHIRINE BIRDS. Family CAPRIMULGID.&. Goatsuckers, ete. . Antrostomns carolinensis, Gmelin .....-...---- Chuck-will’s-widow (PIL. I, Figs. 8, 9)..........-.. . Antrostomus vociferus, Wilson......-.-------- Whip-poor-will (PI. 1, Figs. 10, 11) . Antrostomus vociferus macromystax, Wagler.. Stephens’s Whip-poor-will ........-..........---- » Phalenoptilnusmuttalli; Audubon. =. =e see RO OL= walla (ky) elk, wir One}: e eae ee a . Phalenoptilus nuttalli nitidus, Brewster...... Frosted Poor-will................-.2--- <- the waters of some pond or lake, gliding swiftly along in all kinds of serpentine skimming close to the ground or over evrations with the utmost grace and ease, and no matter how limited the space may be and how numerous the birds, none will ever get in the way of each other; all their movements seem to be accomplished in the most harmonious manner. The Nighthawk is a social bird while on the wing, and I have seen fully a hundred at one time hawking over a small mountain meadow or a pond, and they certainly seemed to enjoy each other’s company. While on the wing their querulous and squeaky call note, sounding like ‘“‘eh-eek, xh-eek” or “speek- speek,” is repeated at different intervals. Mr. W. E. Grover describes this note as a sharp, mowing ‘“‘mueike,” and it is also said to resemble the word “beard,” uttered in a whisper. When disturbed while sitting on its eges it usually utters a low, purring or chuckling sound; and during early spring the male frequently tie ee ee THE NIGHTHAWK. 165 descends rapidly from high above, the vibration caused by the air passing through the primaries producing a peculiar booming sound which has been compared to that made by blowing through the bunghole of an empty barrel; this comes perhaps as near to it as it can be described. It is amazing to see what perfect control these birds have over themselves during this peculiar performance ; descending as they do almost with the rapidity of a lightning flash, one would think they could not possibly arrest their downward course in time to prevent being dashed to the ground; but at the proper moment, by : single reverse movement of their wings, they rise in a gradual curve, to resume their flight or repeat the same performance. This aerial play seems to be principally confined to the mating and breeding season. I have never observed it later in the year. On the eround, however, the Nighthawk does not show to such good adyan- tage and its movements hee are slow, unsteady, and evidently more or less laborious. Its food consists mainly of insects, such as flies and mosquitoes, small beetles, grasshoppers, crickets, and the smaller night-flying moths, and I believe that all are caught on the wing. It must be considered as an eminently useful and beneficial bird and deserves the fullest protection. Unfortunately, however, the Nighthawk is considered as a legitimate game bird in certain sections, and many are killed yearly for food, as well as for sport, simply to show the gunner’s skill in marksmanship; and the good they do through the destruction of millions of troublesome insects is entirely lost sight of. Its favorite haunts are the edges of forests and clearings, burnt tracts, meadow lands along river bottoms, and cultivated fields, as well as the flat mansard roofs in many of our larger cities, to which it is undoubtedly attracted by the large amount of food readily obtainable in such localities, especially about electric lights, and also the convenient and-secure nesting sites affor ded on the gravel-covered surfaces of the roots, which may be found everywhere in abundance. During the heat of the day the Nighthawk may be found resting on horizontal limbs of trees, on fence rails, the flat surface of some lichen-covered rock, on stone walls, old logs, chimney tops, and on railroad tracks. When perched on the limb of a tree, a log, or a fence rail, it always sits lengthwise, and excepting during the mating and breeding season I have rarely seen one on the ground. Strictly speaking, the Nighthawk is not a forest bird, as it only frequents their outskirts, or extensive clearings and burnt tracts, while it avoids the denser and heavier growth of timber. It does not object to sunshine like the Whip- poor-will and the Chuck-will’s-widow, and apparently is not affected by the light im the way they are. In New England and most of the other Northern States nidification rarely commences before the first week in June (more often during the second), and continues well into July. The earliest date I know of on which its eges have been taken is May 27 in southern Michigan; the latest, July 19 in southern Pennsylvania. In the more southern parts of its range it usually nests in the first half of May, and young are occasionally found by the end of this month. Like the rest of the Caprimulgide, the Nighthawk makes no nest, but deposits its 166 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. two eges on the bare ground, frequently in very exposed situations, sometimes on some little elevation, or in slight depressions on flat rocks, between the rows in corn or potato fields, in pastures, on gravel bars, and cinder piles near fur- naces, and within recent years they also nest more and more frequently on the flat, gravel-covered roofs of houses in our larger cities. They undoubtedly find such nesting sites very convenient and secure, but the intense heat to which the eggs and young are necessarily exposed during the day must be something fearful, and I have no doubt that some of the latter perish, and that not a few of the eggs become addled, from this cause. In favorite localities the Night- hawk breeds occasionally in small colonies, and several pairs may be found breeding in close proximity to each other. I believe, as a rule, only a single brood is raised in a season, but if the first set of eges is taken, a second one will be laid about a week after, which consists occasionally of only a single ege. The Nighthawk was quite common along the borders of the open pine forests near Fort Klamath, Oregon, and all the nests found here were placed close to the edge of the perpendicular rim rock which skirts Klamath Valley toward the east. The eges were invariably laid within a foot of the edge, and I presume such places were selected for protective purposes to lessen the danger of their being stepped on by eattle or horses. These birds always pick out a dry and well-drained spot in which to lay their eggs, and if discovered on the nest, the parent attempts by all the well-known tactics of ground-breeding birds to draw the intruder away from the spot, fluttermg in front of him, just out of reach, uttering at times low cries of distress, ete. Occasionally the eges or young are removed quite a little distance by the parent, but this habit is by no means universal. A nest examined by me on June 14, 1893, in Herkimer County, New York, was found in a slight natural depression on a well-drained fern-covered side hill, in an old clearing, close to a small lake. The eggs laid on the bare ground about an inch or more apart, which seems to be their usual position, the ends pointing in the same direction; when covered, each rests against opposite sides of the breast of the parent and is held in place by the wings. I purposely flushed this bird several times to note her actions. It allowed me to approach her within a couple of feet each time before flying off, and then it only retired a short distance, alighting on a prostrate old log close by, remaining perfectly silent. About five minutes after I left, it returned and settled again on the eges while I was still in plain view. I flushed her again shortly afterwards, and she repeated the same performance; but the third time she uttered a low, purring noise as she flew, probably a note of protest. I was in hopes that she might try to remove her eggs and I would have a chance to observe how this was done, but she failed to gratify my wishes. The male did not put in an appearance during the two hours spent in watching the nest. As nearly as I can ascertain, incubation lasts about sixteen days, and both sexes assist in this duty. The young are fairly well covered with gray down when first hatched; they grow rapidly, and while small one of the parents is always close by. THE NIGHTHAWK. 167 Only two eggs are laid to a set (on alternate days) and incubation begins with the first one deposited. The shell is strong, close-grained, and generally moderately glossy; in shape they vary from elliptical ovate to elliptical oval, the former prevailing in the majority, one end being a trifle smaller than the other. Their ground color is quite variable, and ranges from a pale creamy white through different shades of cream, olive buff, and olive gray, and they are pro- fusely blotched and speckled with different shades of slate black, drab and lilac gray, and tawny olive, mixed with lighter shades of pearl gray, lav- , smoke ender, and plumbeous. In some specimens the markings are fine and uniform in size, almost obscuring the ground color; in others they are less numerous, but large and prominent. There is an endless variation in their markings. Searcely any two sets resemble each other closely, and I consider the egg of the Nighthawk one of the most difficult ones known to me to describe satisfactorily, The average measurement of eighty-one specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 29.97 by 21.84 millimetres, or 1.18 by 0.86 inches. The largest egg of this series measures 33.53 by 22.86 millimetres, or 1.32 by 0.90 inches; the smallest, 27.68 by 20.57 millimetres, or 1.09 by 0.81 inches. The type specimen, No. 9813 (Pl. 3, Fig. 1), from a set of two taken near Dubuque, Iowa, on May 28, 1865, by the Messrs. Blackburn, represents one of the larger and heavier marked specimens. No. 24968 (PI. 3, Fig. 2), Ralph collection, from a set of two taken by Dr. William L. Ralph in Herkimer County, New York, on June 24, 1891, represents a small specimen with an olive-gray ground color and rather dark markings; while No. 20457 (PL. 3, Fig. 3), like- wise from a set of two, Bendire collection, was taken by the writer near Fort Klamath Oregon, on July 6, 1882, and represents one of the lighter-colored types. 59. Chordeiles virginianus henryi (Cassi). WESTERN NIGHTHAWK. Chordeiles henryi CASstn, Illustrations of the Birds of California, Texas, etc., I, 1855, 235, Chordeiles virginianus var. henryi COUES, Key, 1872, 181. (B 115, © 267a, BR 357a, C 400, U 4204.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western North America; north to central British Columbia to about latitude 55° and through the prairie districts of southern Alberta, Assiniboia, and western Manitoba; east in the United States to western Minnesota, Lowa, northern and central Illinois, Kansas, the Indian Territory, western and southern Texas; south over the table-lands of Mexico, and in winter through Central America, over the greater part of South America to Patagonia. The Western Nighthawk, a lighter-colored subspecies than the preceding, is a common summer resident throughout a considerable portion of western North America, but its range is likewise a rather irregular one. On the whole, it is more of a prairie bird than the former, but it is by no means confined to the plains alone; it appears to be equally at home on the more open, barren 168 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. mountain ranges throughout the West, where it is found as a summer resident up to altitudes of 10,000 feet. None of these birds appear to winter within the limits of the United States. It usually makes its appearance along our southern border about April 1, and returns to its winter haunts again late in September. Occasionally a few stragglers may arrive somewhat earlier in the spring, as Mr. H. P. Lawrence writes me: “I am sure I heard the ery of a Nighthawk at Olympia, Washington, on March 29, 1890. They are common here in the summer. I have often seen them take dust baths im the evening in the paths near an adjacent cottage.” Mr. R. MacFarlane reports this subspecies as a common summer resident in the vicinity of Forts St. James and St. George, in the interior of British Columbia, in about latitude 55°, and he sent two sets of egos and a skin from there to the United States National Museum collection in 1889. These points mark, as far as known, the northern limits of its range. I know it to be common throughout the sagebrush plains and the prairie regions of northern Washington, Idaho, and Montana, and there is no doubt that it also occurs in similar regions throughout eastern Alberta, Assiniboia, and western Manitoba; it is likely to be found farther north as well. The eastern limits of its range extend well into Minnesota, Iowa, northern and central Mlinois, where it is the prevailing form found throughout the prairie regions of these States. It is also common throughout the middle and western portions of Kansas, the Indian Territory, and southwestern Texas. Along our southern border it appears to be rather rare, and I observed but very few of these birds in the lower valleys and desert regions in southern Arizona. Here they appear to be mainly con- fined to the barren mountain ranges, and only breed sparingly at the lower . altitudes. Dr. Edgar A. Mearns reports it, however, to be the common form of Nighthawk in the Animas Valley, near the international boundary line, in southwestern New Mexico, and he took a set of eggs here on July 3, 1892, which are now in the United States National Museum collection. In his inter- esting paper, ‘Observations on the Avifauna of portions of Arizona,” the Doctor makes the following remarks on this subspecies: “T have never known this species to infringe on the territory of the Texan Nighthawk during the breeding season; each keeps to its own ground, the latter being confined to the region below the pines, and the former residmg in the pines and spruces, breeding in great numbers in these limited areas. A single migrant was taken at Fort Verde on May 9, 1885. Two fresh eggs were taken at Flagstaff on June 18, 1887, in a level place, bestrewn with volcanic scoria, beneath the pines. In our summer camp, near the summit of the Mogollon Mountains, a small beetle was annoyingly abundant, flying into our tents m great numbers during the day and swarming around our log fires at night. As the twilight gathered, hundreds of these Nighthawks appeared upon the scene, preying upon the troublesome insects. Careless of our presence at the fires and of the noisy hilarity of camp, they flitted through the smoke with astonish- ing freedom from diffidence, capturing myriads of the hated beetles as they passed and repassed above, between, and around us, until their flickering forms THE WESTERN NIGHTHAWK. 169 were as familiar as the stirring of the pine boughs overhead, and the fanning of their wings almost as little heeded. A couple of young, recently hatched, were found near the camp on July 27, 1887, showing that two broods are reared the same year, or that its season of reproduction is quite protracted. The voice of this species is quite unlike that of Chordeiles texensis.”' In southern California it is a somewhat rare summer resident, but in the middle and northern portions of this State it is not uncommon. In the lower Rio Grande Valley, throughout western Texas, the Plains, and the Great Basin regions it seems to be generally distributed, and appears to be equally at home in the hottest desert districts—like Death Valley, for instance, below sea level— as on the higher mountain summits in the Sierra Neyadas and the Rocky moun- tains. I found the Western Nighthawk fairly common in the vicinity of all the military Posts where I have been stationed in the West, and I have uot observed the slightest difference in its general habits. call notes. etc. from those of its eastern relatives. In the lower Rio Grande Valley, in Texas, nidification commences occa- sionally in the last week in April and lasts well into July, and here two broods are undoubtedly raised in a season, while in the more northern portions I believe one is the rule, and here eggs are rarely found before the middle of June, and frequently not before the first week in July. Its nesting habits are also similar; it breeds in corresponding situations, excepting, as far as I know, the flat roofs of houses. I have not yet heard of their breeding on housetops in any part of theirrange. A set of eggs of this subspecies was found by me on July 3, 1875, in the foothills of the Blue Mountains, some 6 miles northeast of Camp Harney, Oregon, laid among some pebbles on the bare ground under a little sage bush. The sitting bird allowed me almost to touch it, and was very reluctant to abandon its eggs, which were but slightly incubated. On my approach, it ruftled its feathers and emitted a hissing sound, resembling somewhat the spitting of a ‘at when mad. heir favorite nesting places in that vicinity were the crests of gravelly ridges, always selecting a well-drained spot, where the rains could not chill the young or eggs. Bare, rocky table-lands are also frequently resorted to for similar purposes, and less often the flat tops of bowlders. Extensive burnt tracts also furnish favorite abiding places for them in the more northern portions of their range; in fact, in such localities they are fully as abundant as on the more open sagebrush plains. They are very devoted parents. Mr. W. G. Smith, of Loveland, Colorado, writes me: “I had one swoop down several times ata dog that used to accompany me, finally driving it away. 1 think the bird had a nest close by and resorted to this means to protect its young or sitting mate.” The eggs of the Western Nighthawk, both in shape and markings, are scarcely distinguishable from those of the eastern bird, and the same description will answer for both; on the whole, however, the lighter-colored types seem to predominate over the darker ones. The eges figured of the preceding species will also answer for this, and the single ege figured of this subspecies can like- wise be matched among the series of the former. ‘The Auk, Vol. VII, 1890, pp. 254, 255, 170 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. The average measurement of a series of sixty-three eggs in the United States National Museum collection is also practically the same, being 29.97 by 21.61 millimetres, or 1.18 by 0.85 inches. The largest egg of the series meas- ures 32.51 by 22.86 millimetres, or 1.28 by 0.90 inches; the smallest, 27.43 by 20.83 millimetres, or 1.08 by 0.82 inches. The type specimen selected, No. 26125 (PL 3, Fig. 4), from a set of two eges, was taken by Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, in the Animas Valley, near San Luis Springs, New Mexico, on July 3, 1892, and represents a very finely and profusely marked specimen, in which the ground color is not very readily perceptible. 60. Chordeiles virginianus chapmani (SENNETT’). FLORIDA NIGHTHAWK. (Chordeiles popetue) chapmant (SENNETT MS.) Coues, Auk, V, January, 1888, 37. Chordeiles virginianus chapmani Scorr, Auk, V, April, 1888, 186. (B —; C —; R 357), C 401, U 420d.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Florida and the Gulf coast; west to southern Texas; in winter south to the Bahama Islands and through eastern Mexico to Central America. Casually north to North Carolina (Macon). The range of the Florida Nighthawk, also commonly called “ Bull-bat” or simply “Bat,” a somewhat smaller and darker-colored bird than the common Nighthawk, is confined, as far as known, to Florida and the Gulf coast west- ward to southern Texas. I have no positive breeding records from outside of Florida, but it is more than likely that it breeds along the entire Gulf coast as far west at least as Aransas County, Texas. Mr. H. P. Attwater kindly sent me several skins taken near Rockport, in the above county (fall specimens), which are undoubtedly referable to this subspecies. There is also a skin in the United States National Museum collection taken by Dr. Elliott Coues near Fort Macon, North Carolina, on June 10, 1869, and I have no doubt that it will yet be found as a regular summer visitor along the south Atlantic coast of Georgia and South Carolina. There is not sufficient material available, excepting from Florida, to enable me to define its breeding range more definitely outside of this State. The Florida Nighthawk is only a summer resident of the United States, usually arriving from its winter haunts in the south about the middle of April and returning again late in October. Mr. Attwater informs me that this Night- hawk remains later in the fall in the vicinity of Rockport than the Western Nighthawk, and that its favorite haunts there are the oak openings, while the latter more often frequents the open prairie. Its general habits, call notes, food, ete., seem to be similar to the two preceding species in almost every respect. Mr. W. E. D. Scott describes a young bird, apparently five or six days old, as follows: “The down is dirty white beneath, and on all other parts is the same dirty white, mixed with spots THE FLORIDA NIGHTHAWK. 1G of black, giving the bird an appearance above not unlike the young of .2yia- litis wilsonia, save that the down is longer.”? Mr. Frank M. Chapman, in his ‘List of Birds Observed at Gainesville, Florida,” speaking of this subspecies, states: ‘“Bull-bat or (as it is more com- monly termed) ‘Bat’ shooting is here a popular pastime, great numbers being killed for food, and in August, when the birds have gathered in flocks, favorite fields may be occupied at nightfall by as many as a dozen gunners.”* Dr. William L. Ralph has taken several nests and eges, with the parents, in Putnam County, Florida, which are now in the United States National Museum collection. Here, during the breeding season at least, the Florida Nighthawk frequents mainly low, flat pine woods, especially such as have recently been burnt over, the eggs generally lying on the bare ground. Sandy soil seems to be preferred for nesting places. One set of eggs was found by him under a small orange tree in an orange grove on the side of a sandy hill; three others were taken in flat pine woods, and in one instance the eggs laid on a few frag- ments of charcoal left where a fallen tree had been partly burnt, between the remaining part of the tree and the stump, about 3 feet from each. Nidifieation appears to be at its height in Putnam County, Florida, during May, and prob- ably two broods are raised in a season. The eggs of the Florida Nighthawk resemble those of the two preceding species closely, both in shape and in their ground color; but the markings, as a rule, are much darker and bolder, and the eggs are also somewhat smaller. The difference between them and those of their near relative, Chordeiles virginianus minor, is still greater, the latter being on the whole much lighter colored than those of the Western Nighthawk, resembling the eggs of Chordeiles terensis far more in this respect. The average measurement of fifteen specimens in the United States National Museum collection, all from Florida, is 29.03 by 20.89 millimetres, or about 1.14 by 0.82 inches. The largest egg measures 30.94 by 20.57 millimetres, or 1.22 by 0.81 inches; the smallest, 27.43 by 20.32 millimetres, or 1.08 by 0.80 inches. Of the type specimens, both from the Ralph collection, No. 24969 (PL. 8, Fig. 5), from a set of two eggs taken near San Mateo, Florida, on May 9, 1885, represents one of the finer-marked examples, while No. 25823 (PL. 3, Fig. 6), also from a set of two taken near Tomoka, Florida, on May 8, 1892, shows one of the darker-colored patterns. ‘The Auk, Vol. V, 1888, p. 186. 2 [bid., p. 272. 172 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. 61. Chordeiles acutipennis texensis Lawrence. TEXAN NIGHTHAWK. . Chordeiles acutipennis var. texensis BAIRD, BREWER, and RipGway, History of North American Birds, II, 1874, 406. (Cf. Hartert, Catalogue Birds British Museum, X VI, 192, 616.) (B 116, C 268, R 358, C 402, U 421.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Southwestern United States, from southern and western Texas, southern New Mexico, and Arizona; north to latitude 88° in California (to San Joaquin and Stanislaus counties), southern Nevada, and southern Utah; east (casually ?) to southwestern Louisiana; south to Lower California and over the table-lands of north- ern Mexico; in winter to Costa Rica and Veragua, Central America. Within the last few years the range of the Texan Nighthawk in the United States has been greatly extended, In California it is now known to occur as far north as San Joaquin and Stanislaus counties, in about latitude 38°, Mr. L. Belding having observed about a dozen of these birds on June 5, 1891, at Knight’s Ferry, in the latter county, and one of these was secured by him. East of the Sierra Nevadas this species was met with by Dr. C. Hart Merriam and other members of his exploring party as far north as Bishop, in Inyo County, California, as well as at several points in southern Nevada and in the lower Santa Clara Valley, in Utah. In the latter valley Dr. Merriam found it breeding near St. George, securing a set of fresh eggs on May 13, 1891. It appears to be generally distributed throughout the arid desert regions of Arizona, and it is common in suitable localities throughout this Territory as well as through the southern portions of New Mexico, and it is also an abundant summer resident in the southern and western portions of Texas. Mr. E. A. McIhenny has taken it in southwestern Louisiana, where it probably occurs only as a strageler. It also appears. to be generally distributed throughout the greater part of Lower California. Some of the habits of the Texan Nighthawk, the smallest representative of this genus found within the United States, are very similar to those of its some- what larger relative, the Western Nighthawk. Like the last-named species, it is a very sociable bird at times; in suitable localities, for instance on the bottom lands bordering some of the larger streams within its range, it is very abundant, and I never saw so many Nighthawks anywhere as I did of this species one evening while camped near a slough close to the Gila River, while in route from Fort Yuma to old Fort McDowell, southwestern Arizona, in July, 1871. There were certainly several hundred making their evening meal on the numerous insects which abounded in that vicinity. Its flight is equally as graceful as that of the other Nighthawks, but it rarely soars as high as the former, and generally skims just over the tops of the bushes or close to the surface of the water. In fact, I have repeatedly seen them touch the surface, as if drinking or THE TEXAN NIGHTHAWEK. ie catching insects, probably the latter. The ordinary call note uttered by it while on the wing, however, is quite different; it is still more squeaky than that of the Nighthawk, not so loud, and reminds me somewhat of the sounds made by a very young kitten in distress. It apparently does not indulge in the peculiar aérial performances, causing the booming sounds made by the other members of this genus so frequently heard during the mating and breeding season; and it is also more crepuscular, and unless accidentally flushed is rarely seen flying about in the daytime. Dr. James C. Merrill, United States Army, in his “List of Birds Observed in the Vicinity of Fort Brown, Texas,” writes of this species as follows: “(Common summer visitor, arriving early in April. While Chordeiles vir- ginianus henry? is usually found about prairies at some distance from houses, the present species is most plentiful just outside of Brownsville, and [ have found several sets of eggs within the fort. These are usually deposited in exposed situations, among sparse chaparral, on ground baked almost as hard as brick by the intense heat of the sun. One set of eggs was placed on a small piece of tin, within a foot or two of a frequented path. The female sits close, and when flushed flies a few feet and speedily returns to its eggs. They make no attempt to decoy an intruder away. I have ridden up to within five feet of a female on her eggs, dismounted, tied my horse, and put my hand on the bird before she would move. This species is more strictly crepuscular than Chordeiles virgin- ianus henryi or Chordeiles virginianus, and is very seldom seen on the wing during the day. The notes are a mewing call, and a very curious call that is with difficulty described. It is somewhat like the distant and very rapid tap- ping of a large Woodpecker, accompanied by a humming sound, and it is almost impossible to tell in what direction or at what distance the bird is that makes the noise. Both these notes are uttered on the wing or on the ground, and by both sexes.”! In some respects its habits resemble those of the Poor-will more than the Nighthawks. I have more than once seen several of these birds alight on the bare ground in front of my camp on Rillito Creek, near Tucson, Arizona, after sundown, and watched them hopping after insects or dusting themselves. They were very tame, often allowing me to walk to within four feet of them, when they would only fly a few yards and resume their feeding again. The Texan Nighthawk usually arrives along the southern border of its range in the United States about the first week in April, and returns south again in the latter part of October. Throughout the more southern portions of its habitat it undoubtedly raises two broods in a season. The earliest breeding records I‘ have (April 27 and 28) are from the lower Rio Grande Valley, in Texas; the latest (one of my own) is August 6, 1872, when I found a strongly incubated set of ege@s near Tucson, Arizona. Like the other members of the Caprimulgide, the Texan Nighthawk makes no nest, but deposits its two eges on the bare ground, where they are fully ‘Proceedings United States National Museum, Vol. I, 1878, p. 146. 174 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. exposed to the rays of the sun, or near the base of some desert shrub, which at best furnishes but little protection from the intense heat, and I have found its eges on the parched gravelly mesas of southern Arizona, miles from the nearest water. Their favorite breeding resorts here are the dry, barren table-lands, the sides of canyons, and the crests of rocky hills. Although not absolutely certain, I believe the two eggs are deposited on alternate days, and incubation begins with the first egg laid) They are exceedingly difficult to detect on account of their similarity in color to their general surroundings, which usually harmonize very closely. The shell is strong, close grained, and rather glossy, while in shape the eggs are more variable than those of our other Nighthawks, ranging from oval to elliptical oval, and again to elliptical ovate. The ground color varies from pale gray (a sort of clay color) to pale creamy white, with a faint pinkish tint. This latter phase of coloration is rather unusual however. The whole surface is minutely marbled, speckled, or rather peppered, with fine dots of different shades of grays, lilac, and a few darker and coarser markings of fawn color, slate, and drab. Occasionally a specimen is found which, to the naked eye, appears entirely unmarked; but on more careful examination a few dark spots, mere pin points, can readily be noticed. They are much lighter colored than the average eggs of our other Nighthawks, and readily distinguished from these on this account, as well as from their smaller size. The average measurement of fifty-five specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 26.84 by 19.61 millimetres, or about 1.06 by 0.77 inches. The largest ege of this series measures 29.72 by 21.08 millimetres, or 1.17 by 0.83 inches; the smallest, 23.11 by 18.03 millimetres, or 0.91 by 0.71 inch. Of the type specimens (all selected from sets of two) No. 24210 (PL. 3, Fig. 7), taken by Dr. C. Hart Merriam, on May 13, 1891, near St. George, Utah, represents an egg with a light ground color, and a peculiar and rare style of markings. No. 24312 (PI. 8, Fig. 8), collected near Brownsville, Texas, on May 8, 1891, shows one of the darker and heavier marked styles. No. 25299 (Pl. 3, Fig. 9), from the same locality, taken May 16, 1892, represents a very uniform and evenly colored specimen, while No. 26351 (Pl. 3, Fig. 10), likewise from the same locality, taken May 8, 1892, represents about an average-colored egg of this species. The last three types are from the Ralph collection. THE BLACK SWIFT. 175 Family MICROPODID. Swirts. 62. Cypseloides niger (Guertin). BLACK SWIFT. Hirundo nigra GMELIN, Systema Nature, I, ii, 1788, 1025. Cypseloides niger SCLATER, Proceedings Zoological Society, June 27, 1865, 615. (B 108, C 270, R 350, C 404, U 422. GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Mountains of western North America, mainly on the Pacific coast; north to British Columbia; east to eastern Washington, Nevada, and Colorado; south to California; and in winter, through Lower California and Mexico to Costa Rica, Central America (and the West India Islands?).! The range of the Black Swift, also known as “Cloud Swift,” is still rather impertectly defined. As far as yet known it has only been observed in the Rocky Mountain region in Colorado, where it seems to be mainly confined to San Juan County, in the southwestern part of the State. Mr. A. W. Anthony writes me: “Here I found the Black Swift very abundant in the summer of 1883, nesting in all of the highest crags, but never in places accessible to any- thing not provided with wings About Silverton, Colorado, a large colony had taken’ possession of a very eel cliff, making their appearance about June 20; during most of the day they could be seen cruising about over the vy alley ata height of from 1,000 to 2,000 feet, but toward evening or at the approach of a BLO er they deerended frequently to within 100 feet of the ground. At such times an occasional shot was to be had at some unwary strageler, and a series of about twenty was taken between June 25 and July 10. Females shot between July 5 and 10 contained ova nearly ready to deposit. 2 Dr. A. K. Fisher tells me that he saw a number of these birds about the cliffs near Trinidad, in Las Animas County, Colorado, about the middle of July, 1892. Mr. Robert Ridgway met with it in Nevada, where several hamdied were observed one morning hovering over the Carson River, below Fort Churchill, and he also found the remains of one on the Truckee River, near Pyramid Lake.” The Black Swift undoubtedly occurs also in suitable Totaling in the inter- vening regions, the mountains of Utah, for instance. Throughout the Sierra Nevadas, the Cascade Mountains, and ihe coast ranges of California, Oregon, WwW Bene ton. and British Columbia, it appears to be more generally distributed than in the more eastern portions of its range, and wherever high perpendicular cliffs are found one may reasonably hope to meet with flocks of this large Swift. They are eaveutlhy social birds, and are rarely seen singly even during the Although the West ima: m Swift, AN ia pe of Cypseloides niger, is, eine to the American ‘Omithel ogists’ Union check list, considered identical with our bird, I believe the larger size of the latter, especially the marked difference in the length of the wing and its somewhat paler coloration, is sufficient reason for separating the two, as had been done by Dr. Elliott Coues, and more recently by Mr. Ernest Hartert, in vol. 16, pp. 494, 495, Catalogue of Birds in the British Museum. TI find the average Wing measurements of the nine West Indian specimens to which I had access to be 6.09 inche 8, while that of fifteen North Amer- ican skins is 6.55 inches, and I consider it well entitled to subspecific rank, * History of North American Birds, Vol. II, 1874, p. 430. 176 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. breeding season. They usually arrive from their winter homes in Central Amer- ica during the latter part of April or the beginning of May, and return south again in September. They breed throughout their summer range, and probably only a single brood is raised in a season, as they nest rather late. The only locality where I have observed this species was on the upper Columbia River, opposite Lake Chelan, Washington, in July, 1879. Here quite a colony nested in a high perpendicular cliff on the south side of and about a mile back from the river, and numbers of them flew to and from the valley below, where they were feeding. The day was a cloudy one, and a slow, drizzling rain was falling nearly the entire time I was there; this caused the birds to fly low, and they were easily identified. They evidently had young, and the twitterings of the latter could readily be heard as soon as a bird entered one of the numerous crevices in the cliff above. This was utterly inaccessible, being fully 300 feet high and almost perpendicular; and without suitable ropes to lower one from above it was both useless and impracticable to make an attempt to reach the nests. These were evidently placed well back in the fissures, as nothing bearing a resemblance to one was visible from either above or below. In this locality I believe fresh eggs may be looked for about June 25. Dr. C. Hart Merriam’s exploring parties found the Black Swift fairly com- mon in various localities in Inyo County, California, during June, 1891, and a number of specimens were secured there. Dr. A. K. Fisher, in his Report on the Ornithology of the Death Valley Expedition of 1891, makes the following remarks on this species: “The Black Swift was first observed at Owens Lake, near Keeler, California, where a number were seen flying back and forth over the salt meadows on May 31. On June 2 twenty or more were seen feeding over the same meadows, and five specimens were collected. From the condi- tion of the ovaries of the female secured it was evident that the eggs had been laid. When the flock left the marsh it rose high in the air, and went in the direction of the cliffs in the Inyo Mountains, near Cerro Gordo, where a colony evidently was breeding.” ’ Mr. F. Stephens writes me: ‘Mr. R. B. Herron has taken this species in the San Bernardino Mountains, California, where they appeared to be breeding. They were flying in behind a waterfall that poured over a perpendicular cliff, and he found one drowned in the basin at the foot of the fall.” Mr. 8. F. Rathbun, of Seattle, Washington, informs me that the Black Swift is quite abundant at Lake Samish, three miles east of the north end of Lake Washington. ‘The shores of the lake are well settled, but the birds evidently find Samish a good feeding ground. His earliest record of the arrival of this species there is May 15. Mr. Rollo H. Beck, while hunting near the rocky coast of Monterey County, California, in the summer of 1894, shot a female Black Swift on June 29, containing a nearly developed egg in the oviduct, which he thinks would have been laid next day and would probably have com- pleted a set, as the remaining eges were very small. The shell was not formed ‘North American Fauna, No. 7, 1893, p. 54. THE BLACK SWIFT. Neceds yet, and he had no means of measuring it at hand. It resembled the egg of a Chimney Swift in shape, but was somewhat larger. The food of the Black Swift consists entirely of insects, which are caught on the wing, and its flight is, if possible, still more graceful and rapid than that of the Chimney Swift. It is a rather silent bird, and seldom utters any call notes while on the wing or when feeding. I believe it rarely, if ever, lights on the ground. As yet there is nothing positively known about the construction of the nest of this species, and the eggs still remain unknown. I am aware that an account of the finding of the supposed nest and eggs has been published in “The Auk” (Vol. V, 1888, pp. 424, 425), but I am quite positive that this is a case of misidentification. I visited the same region in May, 1894, and found the Western Martin, Progne subis hesperia, not uncommon in that very locality, and the nest and eggs described as those of the Black Swift are unquestionably referable to this subspecies. 63. Cheetura pelagica (Linnxus). CHIMNEY SWIFT. Hirundo pelagica LINN BUS, Systema Nature, ed. 10, I, 1758, 192. Chetura pelasgia STEPHENS, General Zoology, XLII, part ii, 1825, 76. (B 109, C 271, BR 351, C 405, U 423.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Eastern North America; north in the southern portions of the Dominion of Canada to about latitude 50°; in the interior, in northwestern Manitoba 9 to about latitude 52° 50’ and probably still farther; west in the United States to eastern North and South Dakota, eastern Nebraska and Kansas, the Indian Territory, and Texas; south in winter to Jalapa, Vera Cruz, Cozumel Island, and Yucatan, Mexico, and probably still farther. The breeding range of the Chimney Swift, also known as “Chimney Swallow” and “Chimney Sweep,” is coextensive with its distribution in the Dominion of Canada and the United States, it being only a summer visitor, spending the winter in a milder climate. It usually re-enters the United States from the south in the latter part of March or early in April, and its return migration from its more northern breeding grounds begins early in September, while in our Middle States it lingers sometimes well into October. The north- ernmost record for this species which I have been able to find is Swan Lake, in northwestern Manitoba, where Prof. J. Macoun met with it on July 8, 1881. Its western range appears to be gradually extending, and at present includes D about the eastern half of the States of North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, the Indian Territory, and Texas. It is an eminently social bird, and with the settlement of the country has changed its nesting habits very mate- rially. Formerly the Chimney Swift nested exclusively in hollow tree trunks; now it generally uses chimneys for such purposes, and less often the interior of barns and other outbuildings, attaching its nest to the rough, unplaned boards inside, on the gable end and near the peak of the roof. 16896—No, 3——12 178 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. In a letter from Dr. William L. Ralph, dated San Mateo, Florida, May 19, 1895, he says: “One of my men brought me the eggs of a Chimney Swift that he said he took from a nest attached to the sides of a well, 4 feet below the sur- face of the ground. He says they often nest in such places in this vicinity.” I consider this as a very unusual nesting site for this species. The Chimney Swift is both diurnal and crepuscular in its habits, and spends a good deal of time on the wing. In appearance while flying it resembles a bat more than a bird, and its long, attenuated, saber-shaped wings look entirely out of proportion to its short, stubby body. During the mating season the Chimney Swift is particularly active, and small parties may be seen chasing each other throughout the day, and even after the birds are paired they are nearly always seen in parties of three or more, pursuing each other in a good- natured way, uttering at the same time almost continuously their twittering and sharp-sounding call notes of ‘“zig-zig,” or “tzig-tzig,” rapidly repeated for minutes at a time. Few birds appear to be more sociable and more devoted to each other than the Chimney Swift, and as they consume an immense number of insect pests, and do absolutely no harm, they deserve our fullest protection. Their focd consists entirely of insects, such as small beetles, flies, mosquitoes, ete. Mr. Otto Widmann, of Old Orchard, Missouri, who is well known as one of our most painstaking and reliable ornithologists and a close observer, has kindly furnished me with the following observations on the nesting habits of this species. He writes: “On the flat roof of my tower I set up a wooden shaft, 18 inches square and.6 feet high, for Swifts. It was ready for occupancy April 18, 1891, and was entered by a Swift the next day. I had the pleasure of seeing one pair build a nest and raise a brood in the shaft in 1891 and again in 1892. My experience, thus restricted to two seasons, is too limited to be of much value, but some points are so much at variance with current statements that I consider them worthy of your notice. “Tt is stated that the Swift makes two broods south of Pennsylvania. This is very improbable, since the successful rearing of a brood of Swifts takes not less than two months, which is much longer than the authors who make the statement allow for the process. “Although the first Swifts appear in our latitude (38° 40’) as early as the beginning of April, and are seen to pair and select a chimney soon after their arrival, the species is too much dependent on continuously warm weather for a regular food supply to begin nest building before the second week in May. “Nest building, too, takes more time than is generally supposed. Many birds can build in rainy weather; some even choose such times, and one reason for the preference of the early morning hours for building is certainly the cir- cumstance that most of the material used has the necessary pliability only when in a moist state With our Swift it is quite different; he can not proceed with his structure while the atmosphere remains saturated with moisture; his secre- THE CHIMNEY SWIFT. 179 tion is not a cement, but a glue, which hardens by drying, and our warm days in early summer are generally accompanied by more or less rain. “Tt took my Swifts two days to lay the foundation; that is, to besmear the wall and fasten thereto the first few sticks. On the tenth day, when the first ege was laid, the nest was only half done, 2 inches wide, 24 long, and only one- half inch deep. This was May 24. In the evening the egg was lying under the nest, on the bottom of the shaft. On the next day a second egg was lying on the bottom. Then came a cold, rainy day and no egg was laid. After this they went on building and laying until May 30, when four eggs were in the-nest and its dimensions were now 3 by 34 inches and 1 inch deep. Incubation lasted until June 18, when one egg was hatched in the forenoon and the other three in the afternoon. “The young remained in the shaft until July 17, after which they were brought back by the parents several nights, and then roosted elsewhere in the neighborhood. During the first week the blind and almost naked young were placed so that the four heads came together in the center of the nest and the anal regions were near to its rim; this arrangement is important for the cleanli- ness of the home, since the parents do not seem to trouble themselves with removing the excrement. The second week, when the young were fast outgrow- ing the little home, a different arrangement was necessary; all four heads were now lying flat against the shaft, the anterior part of the body covering and_pro- tecting the base of the nest and the posterior part protruding over its rim. At the beginning of the third week I was greatly astonished to find my young Swifts gone; the nest was empty and no Swift to be seen in the shaft. I was still wondering what had become of them when the parent came to feed. Young Swifts are very noisy when fed, and I was glad to hear that they were still inside; all four were huddling side by side, hanging on the wall immediately below the nest and entirely hidden from view above. At the beginning of the fourth week I was still more surprised when, bending my head over the shaft, ‘the youngsters jumped right against my face with a strong, hissing noise, which I believe must be a very effective means of frightening unsuspecting visitors. The fourth week was spent entirely inside the shaft, hanging against its sides, but not higher up than the nest, that is, 34 feet from the mouth; so the clamber- ing up to the top of the chimney does not seem to be the style any more. ‘Last year’s experience was essentially the same, with the following varia- tions: May being rainy throughout, they did not begin to build until the first week of June. They attached the nest to the same spot where the nest of the previous year had been washed off, and deposited five eggs, all of which were hatched and all five young brought up. Three left the shaft for the first time on August 1, and the others the next day. The whole process occupied eight weeks and two days, which is six days less than in 1891, in consequence of the more favorable weather while building. The family roosted in the shaft until October 14, when the last left. “Taking all together, my observations may, in brief, be set forth as follows: In spite of preceding favorable weather, the Swift of St. Louis County, Missouri, 180 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. does not begin nest building before the second week of May, and unfavorable weather may delay it until the Ist of June. Only a small quantity of glue is secreted daily, and therefore the completion of the entire structure requires about eighteen days. After two-fifths of the nest is completed (the work of one week) the laying of eggs begins. The process of construction may be retarded by cool weather (lack of food) and by continued rains (softening of glue). The bird can control the laying of eggs; can discontinue for one or more days, if she thinks necessary. Incubation begins before the last egg is laid and lasts eighteen days. The setting parent shields the structure by habitually covering its base with the breast and pressing the head against the wall above. After the young are eight days old they arrange themselves in the same manner. When the sitting bird is disturbed, it at first seeks to frighten the intruder by fluttering and then hides below the nest. The young, when a fortnight old, also hide under the nest, where they can not be seen from above. When three weeks old, they flutter and try to frighten the intruder with a hissing noise, and always remain 2 to 3 feet below the mouth of the chimney (shaft), where they are fed by the parents. The young do not leave the chimney before they are four weeks old. Under the most favorable conditions a late brood can not be brought to a suc- cessful end in less than fifty-eight (five eggs) to sixty (six eggs) days, while an early brood (begun the middle of May) may consume from sixty-five to seventy days.” In a subsequent letter, dated August 20, 1894, Mr. Widmann writes me as follows: ‘Another season confirmed my former statements in regard to the breeding habits of the Swifts. The pair began building and laying at the regular time; but after the second ege was laid, on May 23, some misfortune happened, and next day the eggs were found on the floor below, and no more were laid until June 10, when laying began anew. Within eight days (June 10 to 17, inclusive) five eggs were laid. On the 14th, after the third egg had been laid, the bird began to set. On the 24th one ege had rolled out, leaving four in the nest. July 1, on the eighteenth day of incubation, the eggs began to hatch, but the last of the four young did not leave the shell until July 38. This bird remained much behind in development, while one of the three others always kept a little in advance. ‘The latter left the shaft for the first time July 26, but the youngest did not get ready to go out until August 7, a difference of eleven days. “The event of a young Swift leaving the chimney for the first time is made known all over the neighborhood by great excitement and noise. While the species for some weeks before have been quiet and inconspicuous, great activity and noise is suddenly noticed, and numbers are seen chasing through the air. This indicates the event, and it occurred for the first time again on July 17 being the first young raised in the neighborhood. It was particularly noticed that the young Swift is entirely naked when it leaves the shell, and not only the eyes but also the ears are, or appear to be, closed for the first few days. The eyes open by degrees. The best developed specimen of the four had the eyes open for occasional brief THE CHIMNEY SWIFT. 181 periods on July 11, while two others had them partly open, and the eyes of the smailest remained entirely closed until about the 15th. In the ease of the young- est bird, which was a very weak creature at first and could not swallow all the parent put in its throat, I saw minute winged insects crawl out of its mouth. This shows that some of the insects are still alive when brought, and accounts for the peculiar mouth-cleaning motions after feeding. What the misfortune was that befell the first eggs, and why they made a pause of seventeen days before laying again, Ido not know. It was not the weather, but it may possibly have been the Red-headed Woodpeckers and Flickers, which did a great deal of drumming and playing about the shaft in those days.” While at Wilmurt, New York, in June, 1892, I found a nest of the Chim- ney Swift attached to a board in a hayloft, about 2 feet from the peak of the roof. One of the birds was setting on the nest, which was a very small one, while its mate hung against the side of one of the boards, about a foot below and a little to the right of the nest. The male assists in incubation. I saw one of these birds, at a subsequent visit, fly in the loft while I was there, hook himself to the board below the nest, and shortly afterwards he uttered a low twitter; the one on the nest left at once on hearing the note, and flew out, ‘while the newcomer perched on the rim of the nest and rearranged the eggs first before covering them. It changed its position twice before it seemed suited; at least one-half of its length projected outside of the nest, and it is certainly puzzling to know how they manage to rear a family of four or five young in so small a space. Their semicircular, half-saucer-shaped nest is a most interesting structure, and varies considerably in size and depth, as well as in the manner in which it is attached to the wall or board to which it is glued. Some are exceedingly shallow, barely one-fourth inch in depth, while others are nearly an inch deep, and also much more roomy. An average nest is about 3 inches in outer diameter by 2 inches in width. One of the handsomest specimens I have ever seen was taken by Mr. C. J. Pennock, at Kennett Square, Pennsylvania, on June 16, 1887, and presented to me. This measures 45 inches in outer diameter by 3 inches in width, and the outer edges, where attached to the wall, are carried completely around on the top, so that it can be hung upon a peg, like a wall pocket; this naturally gave it much more strength, by increasing the surface which is glued to the wall, and lessened the chances of its becoming detached. The nests are entirely built up of small dry twigs, averaging from one-tenth to one-sixteenth inch in diameter and from 1 to 24 inches in length. One or two somewhat longer twigs project usually from the side, possibly to be used as a perch while the young are being fed. The amount of saliva used to glue them together also varies greatly in different specimens; in some this is very plainly perceptible, and occasionally forms a thin coating on the inside of the nest; in others hardly a trace can be seen, but nevertheless the twigs hold well together. There is no inner lining of any kind used, the eggs lying on the bare twigs. The latter are gathered on 182 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. the wing, the bird breaking them off with its beak while flying past. Before the country was well settled the Chimney Swift built in hollow trees, attaching its nest to the inside walls, and in sparsely settled regions it does so still to some extent; but now, wherever they can avail themselves of an unused chimney, no matter of what material it is constructed, they do so, both for nesting and roosting purposes. It seems to me that they are gradually changing again more and more from the chimney to the inside of barns and outhouses, attaching their nests to the sides of rough, unplaned boards, near the roof. Such sites are more protected from storms, and certainly much cleaner, and the birds appear to have found this out, and act accordingly. Several pairs frequently nest in company, and it is amusing to see them, after circling over the top of the chimney, suddenly drop down perpendicu- larly, often from considerable heights, and disappear within. Hundreds are known to roost in the taller chimneys of some abandoned factories in many of our large cities. I have also seen it stated that this species occasionally nests in chimneys which are in use, but no such instance has come under my own observations. Throughout the more northern portions of its range the Chim- ney Swift rarely commences laying before the second week in June; four or five eggs are generally laid to a set (rarely six) and usually an egg is deposited each day. In chimneys the nests are ordinarily glued to the sides, from 5 to 12 feet below the top. Few birds are more devoted to their young than the Chimney Swift, and instances have been recorded where the parent was seen to enter chimneys in burning houses, even after the entire roof was a mass of flames, preferring to perish with its offspring rather than to forsake them. I have recently seen in ‘Forest and Stream” (September 15, 1894, p. 224), another most remarkable proof of affection for its young; want of space prevents me from quoting it entire. The writer states that fully a month after the Chimney Swifts had departed on their southern migration he heard a familiar twitter in the chimney, and taking out the old-fashioned fireboard found a full-grown bird lying upon the hearth. Looking more closely, he discovered that it was fastened by a horsehair wrapped around its leg to the nest, which had fallen down with it. He says: “His anxious mother, who had cast in her lot with him, to remain and to die with him, for the time of insects was about gone, came into the chimney and actually waited beside me while I snipped the strong hair and released him. It was an hour or more before he gained the use of his legs and learned what his mother was teaching him by flying up and down in the chimney, and then they both started on their lonesome flight to the far south.” This instance certainly shows a tender side of bird nature, and such instances are far more common than they appear to be, if we could only see them. The young are fed by regurgitation. The eggs of the Chimney Swift are pure white in color and unspotted; they are cylindrical ovate in shape; the shell is fine grained, rather thin, and moderately glossy. THE CHIMNEY SWIFT. 183 The average measurement of fifty-six eggs in the United States National Museum collection is 20.09 by 13.22 millimetres, or 0.79 by 0.52 inch. The larg- est ege@ of the series measures 21.34 by 13.72 millimetres, or 0.84 by 0.54 inch; the smallest, 17.53 by 13.72 millimetres, or 0.69 by 0.54 inch. The type specimen, No. 24019 (PL. 1, Fig. 25), from a set of four eggs, was taken by Mr. J. C. Pennock, near Kennett Square, Pennsylvania, on June 16, 1887, and represents about an average egg of this species. 64. Chzetura vauxii (Townsenp). VAUX’S SWIFT. Cypselus vauxii TOWNSEND, Journal Academy Natural Sciences, Phila., VIII, 1839, 148. Chetura vauxii DE Kay, Zoology of New York, II, 1844, 36. (B 110, C 272, R 352, C 406, U 424.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western North America; chiefly west of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade mountains; north in British Columbia to about latitude 52° and probably farther; east to western Montana and southern Arizona; south to northern Lower Cali- fornia, and in winter through Mexico to Honduras, Central America, Vaux’s, or the “Oregon” Swift, a somewhat smaller and paler-colored bird than the preceding, is principally confined to the Pacific Coast regions, and appears to be much rarer and more sporadically distributed in the interior, east of the Sierra Nevadas, and in the Cascade mountains of California, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia. The most northern record I have been able to find is one by Mr. Samuel N. Rhoads, published in the ‘ Proceedings of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, 1893” (p. 44), where he reports seeing this species near Lac la Hache, British Columbia, on July 1, 1892. He also met with it at Goldstream, on Vancouver Island, on May 13. It reaches the eastern limits of its range, as far as it at present known, in western Montana, where Mr. C. P. Streator took a specimen at Silver, in Missoula County, on June 25, 1891. Mr. W. E. D. Scott met with it early in October, 1884, on the San Pedro slope of the Santa Catalina Mountains, in southern Arizona, at an altitude of from 3,000 to 4,000 feet." These birds were probably migrating. Mr. F. Stephens observed it daily, and secured a specimen at Olancha, California, on the eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevadas, in the latter part of May, 1891. He believes they were migrating.’ The limits of its breeding range are not well defined as yet. Mr. F. Stephens considers it only a migrant in southern California. The only breeding records I have are both from Santa Cruz County, in this State, in about lati- tude 37°, and it appears reasonable to suppose that it breeds from there north- ward. But very few nests and eges of Vaux’s Swift have, as far as I am aware, found their way into collections. It possibly breeds also in the more moun- ? Birds of the Death Valley Expedition, North American Fauna, No. 7, 1893, p. 55. 184 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. tainous parts of northern Lower California. In all of my travels through our Northwestern States I have failed to see this species excepting at Fort Klamath, Oregon, where it was fairly common near Upper Klamath Lake. Dr. James C. Merrill, United States Army, who also met with this species at the same Post, and with whose observations I fully agree, says: ‘While the flight of Vaux’s Swift is usually higher than that of the eastern species and it is generally more difficult to obtain, yet if their habits are closely studied it will be observed that there are times and places where they may be shot without especial difficulty. The height at which they fly depending on that of the insects upon which they feed, they may be most readily secured soon after sunrise; as the day grows warmer and the insects fly higher, they follow them and are soon out of gunshot range for the rest of the day, unless a change in the weather should occur. Had I made a specialty of collecting these Swifts, I could readily have shot several dozen during the season. As observed at Fort Klamath, this bird is not at all crepuscular. The notes differ somewhat from those of Chetura pelagica, though of the same character, and are less frequently uttered.” ' Vaux’s Swift usually reenters the United States from its winter home in Central America about the middle of April, and goes south again during October. Although portions of California where this Swift is known to be a summer resident have been well settled for some time, it does not appear that it has changed its breeding habits to any extent, like the Chimney Swift has in the East, as it still seems to nest entirely in hollow trees, and it is principally due to this reason that so few of the nests and eggs have yet been taken. Mr. A. W. Anthony, in his paper on “Birds of Washington County, Oregon,” writes of Vaux’s Swift as follows: ‘‘Common summer resident; hunts in flocks of fifteen to twenty. A pair were found nesting in a very large stub late in May; the nest, however, was inaccessible. The birds would circle about, fully 200 feet above the stub, until directly over the opening; then, darting down like a flash, would disappear with a sharp twitter.” * A letter received from Mr. Chase Littlejohn, of Redwood City, California, dated August 8, 1893, says: “I took a pair of Swifts in town, birds I had never seen here until last fall, and from their very strong, smoky odor, there can be little doubt that they were living in some chimney, something they are not known to do.” Mr. Littlejohn has since then sent me one of the skins for examination, which proved to be Vaux’s Swift, as he surmised, and it is possible that this species is just beginning to resort to chimneys for nesting purposes. Dr. C. 'T. Cooke writes me from Salem, Oregon, that on May 29, 1891, he discovered one of their roosting and probably also breeding trees in the Wil- lamette Valley—a large, inaccessible, dead, and hollow cottonwood, which also contained a Wood-duck’s nest lower down, but likewise inaccessible. The only egos of Vaux’s Swift I have seen were taken in June, 1874, near Santa Cruz, — ‘DD 1The Auk, Vol. V, 1888, pp. 256, 257. 2? The Auk, Vol. III, 1886, pp. 165, 166. VAUX’S SWIFT. 185 California. The nest is described as composed of small twigs, glued together with the saliva of the bird, and fastened to the side of a burned-out and hollow sycamore tree. It was not lined, and evidently was quite similar to the nest of the Chimney Swift. I have never seen a specimen, and therefore can not give measurements. From three to five eggs are deposited to a set, and only one brood appears to be raised in a season. The eggs resemble those of the Chim- ney Swifts both in shape and color, but they are considerably smaller. The only specimens in the United States National Museum collection measure 18.29 by 12.19, 17.78 by 12.70, and 17.53 by 12.45 millimetres, or 0.72 by 0.48, 0.70 by 0.50, and 0. 69 by 0.49 inch, respectively. The type specimen, No. 21005 (PI. 1, Fig. 26, a single ego), was taken near Santa Cruz, California, in June, 1874, aa presented to the collection by Dr. James C. Merrill, ned States Army. 65. Aéronautes melanoleucus (Bairp). WHITE-THROATED SWIFT. Cypselus melanoleucus BAIRD, Proceedings Academy Natural Sciences, Phila. June, 1854, 118. Aéronautes clmnieuens HARTERT, Catalogue Birds in British Museum, XVI, 1892, 459, (B 107, C 269, R 349, C 403, U 425.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Mountain regions of the western United St: ites; north to Montana; east to western South Dakota (Black Hills), western Nebraska, and Colorado; south through Arizona, New Mexico, western Texas, and Lower California to Guatemala, Central America. The range of the White-throated or “Rock” Swift does not appear to extend nearly as far north in the mountains of the Pacific Coast districts as it does in the Rocky Mountain region, where it is generally distributed, throughout suit- able localities, from southern Arizona and New Mexico northward through Colo- rado and Wyoming to Montana, which, as far as know n, marks the northern limits of its range. Here Mire Rei oo We ‘ieee found this species breeding in small numbers in holes in a limestone cliff on Belt River , about the middle of July, 1881. He says: “A small opening in the rock, which a bird of this species was seen to enter and reappear from several times, I approached near enough to hear a vigorous twittering at each visit of the parent bird, from which I presume the young were well advanced.”! On the Pacific coast in California I have not been able to trace it north of Alameda, Contra Costa, and Mariposa counties, in about latitude 38°, and somewhat farther north in Nevada, where Mr. Robert Ridgway Pane this species extremely numerous in the Ruby Mountains, about the high limestone cliffs, as well as in the East Humboldt range, in about latitude 40°, and less abundantly in the Wasatch Mountains in Utah. I have been unable to find a single record of its capture in either Oregon or W ashington, and this i is the more ‘Bulletin of the Nutt: ul Or nithological Club, vol. 7 7, 1882, p. 123. 186 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. strange as these States abound in suitable cliffs, and the White-throated Swift appears to be the hardiest member of this family found in the United States and winters to some extent within our borders. Throughout the more northern por- tions of its range it is only a summer visitor, but in southern California and Arizona it is found throughout the year. Mr. F. Stephens writes me: “The White-throated Swift is a rather common resident in southern Cali- fornia. In winter it is somewhat less common, and disappears in stormy weather. In the Colorado Desert, however, it is usually common all winter. It breeds in small colonies in cliffs, usually in the lower parts of the mountains, during May and June. On March 28, 1890, at Boregas Spring, on the border of the Colorado Desert, I saw several White-throated Swifts flying in and out of crevices of a sandstone cliff. I succeeded in climbing to one of these crevices, and chopped away a part of the soft sandstone or indurated clay and found two birds, evidently a pair, in the extreme back end of a narrow crevice. ‘They were sitting on a small bunch of short twigs and weed stems, glued together into a nearly solid mass, evidently an old nest. The female, on dissection, proved to be not nearly ready for laying, as the ovaries were in the normal winter condition.” There are numerous records of the occurrence of the White-throated Swift in Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado. I have seen hundreds of these birds near Tucson, Arizona, some throughout nearly every month in the year, and they evidently breed in the vicinity, in the numerous cliffs in the Catalina and Rincon mountains. Mr. W. G. Smith and Mr. A. W. Anthony met with it in Colorado, where it was quite common in suitable localities. The latter writes me: “A few nest in the high cliffs above Silverton, Colorado, with Cypseloides niger. A female was shot by Mr. F. M. Drew on June 20, at an elevation of about 13,000 feet, and upon skinning her an egg was found ready for extrusion, but it was unfortunately broken. A flock of these Swifts were apparently trying to winter at Hatchita, New Mexico, as I saw them constantly as late as Decem- ber 15. At San Diego, California, they winter in abundance, and are frequently seen feeding along the beach north of Point Loma. A colony was also found by me nesting on Coronado Island on May 20, but the nests were inaccessible; they were placed behind loose slabs of rock that had become partly detached from the face of the cliff, and from 20 to 30 feet above the water level. At Guadalupe Island this Swift was very abundant; the ragged, precipitous sides of the island, composed of lava and perforated with thousands of holes and crevices, furnish an abundance of nesting sites, and it is quite probable that this species is resident there throughout the year. At the time of my visit, in May, I found White-throated Swifts everywhere, from the top of the island, at 4,000 feet elevation, to the beach, and birds were constantly seen to enter holes im the crags; but in every case the nests were as inaccessible as it is possible for a nest to be. On May 18 a Swift was seen to enter a hole in the face of a bluff, within 8 feet of its base; even this proved to be as safe as any of the rest, as the nest was found to be out of sight and several feet back, in a narrow erack in the lava. I THE WHITE-THROATED SWIFT. 187 also found it nesting at San Fernando, Lower California, nearly at sea level, and on top of San Pedro Martir, at 10,000 feet elevation, in May.” Messrs. Vernon Bailey and J. A. Loring, while collecting for the United States Department of Agriculture, met with the White-throated Swift in the Wind River and Sweet Water mountains, Wyoming, during August and Sep- tember, 1893, and Mr. J. B. White has taken it at Harrison, Nebraska, which marks the eastern limits of its known range. Its general habits, food, ete., do not aiffer much from those of the other members of this family found within the United States, and, like them, it usually flies high during clear, sunny weather, while on cloudy days, as well as in the early mornings and again about sundown, it hunts lower down, and is then more readily obtained. In its mode of nidification it differs from both the Chimney and Vaux’s Swift, while the Black Swift probably nests in a similar manner. Mr. F. Stephens’s description of its nesting habits are fully con- firmed by more recent observations made by Mr. W. Bb. Judson in Los Angeles County, California, who found a nest of this species during the summer of 1894. He writes me: “It was situated about 80 feet from the top of a large cliff and about 125 feet from the ground, in a cave about 7 feet high, 10 feet wide, and extending some 7 feet in the face of the cliff’ The nest was placed in a small hole in the roof of the cave, almost too small to get my hand in witlrout enlarging it, and extended about a foot up in the rock, and then there was a small cleft in which it was placed. It was so firmly glued to the rock that it could not be pulled off without tearing it to pieces. The materials of which it was constructed felt soft and spongy; there were apparently no sticks or twigs in it, and it was lined with a few feathers.” White-throated Swifts were seen to enter this cave in May, but Mr. Judson did not visit the ‘ocality again until late in summer, by which time the birds had reared their young and left the vicinity. Since the above was written, Mr. Judson has kindly obtained this nest for me, and I am able, therefore, to give a fuller description, as well as measurements of it. Evidently it has been in use during more than one season, as the vege- table matter composing the base of the nest is quite disintegrated; while a number of good-sized feathers, including some of the California and Turkey Vulture, Red-shafted Flicker, and other species, which are mixed throughout the walls of the structure, are in a somewhat better state of preservation. It measures 5 inches in outer diameter by 2 inches in depth. ‘The inner cup is shallow and appears not to have been over three-fourths of an inch deep. Mixed throughout the nesting material are small pieces of the wing coverts of beetles. The skeleton of a young Swift was also found in the nest. The inner lining consists of fine bark fiber and a few feathers, and apparently no twigs enter into its composition; the shafts of the feathers used, evidently took the place of the ordinary small twigs and weed stems. The call notes of this species are rather louder and shriller than those of the Chimney Swift, but otherwise resemble the rattling twitter of the latter. In speaking of their song 188 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. Dr. Fisher says: ‘‘The males uttered at short intervals a series of notes which, when a number joined in the performance, produced a not unpleasant impression.” The eggs of this species still remain among the special desiderata in odlogical collections. I have never seen any, and there are none in the United States National Museum. Mr. Walter E. Bryant gives the following description of them: ‘More than a dozen years ago an imperfect set of five fresh, unblown egos of the White-throated Swift were presented to me by a young man in Contra Costa County, California. They were taken from a nest in a crevice in the back of a tunnel-shaped cave in the side of a cliff, about 20 feet above the base. In color the eggs are pure white, narrowly elliptical in form, but rather smaller at one end. They measured 0.87 by 0.58, 0.88 by 0.53, 0.88 by 0.52, and 0.86 by 0.50 inch (or 22.10 by 13.46, 22.35 by 13.46, 22.35 by 13.21, and 21.84 by 12.70 millimetres); the fifth was too much damaged to measure accurately. The eggs were collected on June 6, 1876.”" From four to five eggs appear to be laid to a set, and probably only a single brood is reared in a season. Family TROCHILIDA. Humminesirps. 66. Eugenes fulgens (Swainson). RIVOLI HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus fulgens SWAINSON, Philosophical Magazine, 1827, 441. Eugenes fulgens GOULD, Monograph of the Trochilide, Part XII, 1856, Pl. 7, and Vol. I, 1861, Pl. 59. (B —, C 274 bis, R 334, C 408, U 426.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Mountains of southeastern Arizona, southwestern New Mexico, and over the table-lands of Mexico; south to Nicaragua, Central America. The Rivoli Hummingbird, also known as “ Refulgent Hummingbird,” gne of the largest as well as one of the handsomest members of this family found within the limits of the United. States, is a moderately common summer resi- dent in suitable localities, but has as yet been obtained only m the mountains near the Mexican border, in southeastern Arizona, and in the extreme south- western corner of New Mexico, in the San Luis range. It was first added to our fauna by Mr. H. W. Henshaw, who took a single specimen in the vicinity of Camp Grant, Arizona, on September 24, 1873; he also met with others in the following year. Since then it has been ascertained to be a summer resident throughout all the higher pine-clad mountains in southeastern Arizona. Mr. F. Stephens met with it in the Santa Rita and Santa Catalina mountains. Dr. A. K. Fisher, Messrs. F. H. Fowler, W. W. Price, and others took specimens in the Chiricahua and Huachuea ranges, while Dr. Edgar A. Mearns obtained it in the ' The Nidiologist, Vol. II, Sept. 1894, pp. 7, 8. THE RIVOLI HUMMINGBIRD. 189 San Luis Mountains, New Mexico. I believe Mr. Henshaw’s record from near Fort Grant still remains the most northern one, and it is not likely that it will be found much beyond latitude 33°. Its range seems to be restricted to the mouutain regions between altitudes of from 5,000 to 10,000 feet, and it breeds throughout its summer range in the United States. Dr. A. K. Fisher has kindly furnished me with the following notes on this handsome Hummingbird: “The Rivoli Hummer was not met with by us in the Chiricahua Mountains until we made camp in the upper part of Ruckers Canyon, among the yellow pines (Pinus ponderosa). On the morning of June 5, 1894, an adult male dashed through the camp, paused a moment over a flower spike of a scarlet Pentstemon, and then disappeared up the canyon as rapidly as it had come. No more were seen until we reached the high mountains at Fly Park. On the evening of June 7, Mr. Fred. H. Fowler killed an adult male, and on the fol- lowing day the writer secured a female and two males, and subsequently others were taken. They were usually found in the more open parts of the forest where fire had killed a portion of the evergreens, and a deciduous undergrowth of aspens and shrubs thrived about the cool springs and little rivulets. A boreal honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata) was abundant and just coming into bloom. All the Hummers in the vicinity, the Rivoli Hummer among them, delighted to glean from the flowers and to sit half concealed among the large leaves of this shrub. If the large Hummer was startled from one of the clumps, it would fly to the lower branches of a neighboring evergreen and settle on a dead twig and remain motionless. They were not very shy and could be approached within 20 feet. “Tt is the opinion of the writer that all the birds seen were migrants, for after the first few days the species became quite rare, and during the three or four days subsequent to June 15 none were seen. Moreover, the testes of all the males secured were still undeveloped. It is probable that they spent a few days after their migration in feeding, and then separated and retired to the more secluded forest to hunt up nesting places. No note was heard.” They are said to be especially fond of hovering about the blossoms of the mescal (Agave americana); these are generally infested by numerous small insects, on which they feed, and, like all our Hummingbirds, they are exceedingly greedy and quarrelsome, chasing each other constantly from one flower stalk to another. Comparatively little is still known aboutsthe breeding habits of this species. Mr. O. C. Poling published an account of its supposed nest and eggs in “The Auk” (Vol. VII, 1890, pp. 402 and 403), but the measurements of the latter, as given by him, show clearly that they can not belong to this bird, and are much more likely to be those of one of the smaller Hummers breeding in the same locality. The Rivoli Hummer is fully as large as the succeeding species, whose eggs are known, and these are considerably larger than the measurements given by Mr. Poling, and there are absolutely identified eggs of the Ruby- throated Hummingbird now in the United States National Museum collection 190 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. which are larger than the supposed eggs of this species. The great difference in the size of these two birds proves conclusively that there must be a mistake either in identification or in the measurements of the eggs as described by him. I am indebted to Mr. W. W. Price for a couple of nests of this species and a broken ege, which, however, is so badly crushed that it is impossible to restore it and give accurate measurements. Both of these nests were taken in the Huachuca Mountains, in southern Arizona. The best preserved one of the two measures 24 inches in outer diameter by 2 inches in depth; its immer diam- eter is 14 by 14 inches in depth. It is composed of soft, silky plant fibers, and is thickly ace exteriorly with small pieces of lichen, and lined with fine down and one or two soft, fluffy feathers, apparently those of a species of Tit- mouse. It resembles the nest of the Ruby-throated Hummingbird very closely in its general make up, but is naturally considerably larger. It was found by Mr. L. Miller on June 22, 1894, at an elevation of about 7,000 feet, saddled on a walnut branch about 10 feet from-the ground, and contained one young nearly able to fly. The other, which is not quite so well preserved, was Foun by Mr. Price in the same mountains on June 4, 1893, placed on a slender branch of a maple over running water, in a deep, narrow canyon, at about 6,000 feet eleva- tion. The male was seen a short distance away from the nest; the female hovered about while the branch was being cut off, and was secured. The single fresh egg the nest contained was accidentally broken. Mr. Price writes me: “ Hugenes fulgens is found all through the pine regions of southern Arizona. It was not rare in the Huachuca and Chiricahua moun- tains, but I have never seen it below 6,500 feet elevation, and I have found it above 9,500 feet. During the flowering season it feeds extensively in the flowers of ihe Agave parryi in the Huachuca Mountains. In the Chiricahuas I have found it early in the mornings in open glades, feeding on the flowers of an iris. It delights in open woods more than in damp ones, as is the habit of the Blue-throat, Celigena clemencia.” There are no eggs of the Rivoli Hummingbird in the Unites States National Museum collection. 67. Coeligena clemenciz Lrsson BLUE-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD. Ornisyma clemencie LESSON, Oiseaux Mouches, 1829, 216, P1. 80. Celigena clemencie LESSON, Index Generai et Senoptnne des Oiseaux du Genre Trochilus, 1832, p. XVIII. (B —, C —, R —, C —, U 427.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Mountains of southeastern Arizona, southwestern New Mexico, and the table-lands of Mexico; south to Guerrero and Oaxaca. The geographical range of the Blue-throated Hummingbird, also sometimes ealled “Blue-throated Casique,” a slightly larger species than the preceding, is very similar, and, like the Rivoli Hummer, it is only a summer resident in the THE BLUE-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD. 191 United States, and breeds wherever found. As far as known it arrives within our borders early in May, and returns south again about the beginning of October. This large and rather dull-colored Baer was first added to our fauna by Mr. F. Stephens, who secured an adult male in the Santa Catalina Mountains on May 14, 1884. Since then it has been taken by Mr. E. W. Nelson in the Santa Rita Mountains; by Dr. A. K. Fisher, Messrs. W. W. Price, F. H. Fowler, and others, in both the Chiricahua and Huachuca mountains, in south- eastern Arizona, and by Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, in the San Luis Mountains, in southwestern New Mexico. Like the preceding, it is a mountain-loving species, frequenting similar regions; and, judging from the number of specimens that have been taken within our borders, it appears to be more common than the Rivoli Hummer. Dr. A. K. Fisher has kindly furnished me with the following notes: “The Blue-throated Hummingbird was common in the higher Chiricahua Mountains, where it was observed at Fly Park during the early part of June, 1894, Like the Rivoli Hummer, it was very partial to the flowers of the shrubby honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata), among which six were secured June 8 and three on June 10. It is probable the flowers attract large numbers of insects, which in their turn attract the birds, for the gullets of the Hummers secured were filled with them. On several occasions the male was heard to utter a simple little song, consisting of three or four syllables, which were repeated at short intervals. While delivering this song the bird sat upright, with head more or less thrown back. No signs of mating were observed, and the genitalia of the specimens secured were undeveloped. From June 10 to June 15 the species became gradually rarer, and it is probable they had dispersed among the wilder parts of the mountains, preparatory to nesting.” I am also indebted to Mr. E. W. Nelson for the little we know relating to the nesting habits of the Blue-throated Hummingbird. He writes me as follows: “Caligena clemencia is a sparingly distributed summer resident of all the mountain regions of south central Mexico, between 7,500 and 12,000 feet. The sy are rather quiet birds, often found perched on the tips of ie maguey leaves In the forests of pines of the higher slopes they are not often seen except as they dash by among the trees. On the 9th of September, 1893, a nest contain- ing two eges was found at an altitude of 11,500 feet on the north slope of the hue of Toluca, in the State of Mexico. At this time the nights had already become quite frosty here. The nest was built in the fork of a small shrub, growing out of the face of a cliff about 30 feet above its base, on the side of a canyon, in the pine and fir forest. The nest was discovered by seeing the parent approach its vicinity. She flew quietly close up to the nest, and then, turning so that she faced out from the cliff and away from the nest, she moved backward several inches and_ settled lightly on the eggs. She was easily alarmed, darting away through the forest, and was not seen again. The nest was nearly inaccessible, and one egg was thrown out and broken in securing it.” This nest, No. 26332, United States National Museum collection, now before me, is a handsome and rather bulky structure, which is apparently composed 192 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. entirely of fine mosses, the whole evenly quilted together into a smooth, homo- geneous mass, and bound firmly together with silk from cocoons and spiders’ webs. It is saddled in a tripronged fork of a small twig, the three stems being incorporated in the walls of the nest, holding it firmly in position, the main stem being only one-twelfth of an inch in diameter. It measures 23 inches in outer diameter by 3 inches in depth; the inner cup is 14 inches in diameter by three- fourths of an inch deep. The walls of the nest are three-fourths of an inch thick, and the inner cup appears very small for the large size of the nest. It looks like a warm and cozy structure, and it needs to be so. As the eggs were only slightly incubated when found, the young would probably have hatched by September 20, and would scarcely have been large enough to leave the nest before October 12, by which time one might reasonably look for snowstorms at such an altitude. There is but very little inner lining, not enough to hide the moss, which looks to me like the down from willow catkins. ‘Two eggs are laid to a set, and probably two broods are raised in a season. The single egg before me is elliptical oval in shape, dull white in color. The shell is close-grained and shows no luster. It measures 16.26 by 9.91 millimetres, or 0.64 by 0.39 inch. As there is but a trifling difference in the size of most of our Hummingbirds’ eggs, and apparently none in their shape and color, I have, therefore, only figured the egg of a single species. The type specimen, No. 26332 (not figured), was taken by Mr. KE. W. Nelson on September 9, 1893, as already described. 68. Trochilus colubris Linnzus. RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus colubris LINN BUS, Systema Nature, ed. 10, I, 1758, 120. (B 101, C 275, R 335, C 409, U 428.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Eastern North America; north in the more southern parts of the Dominion of Canada to about latitude 52°, in the interior in the Northwest Territory to about latitude 57° and probably still farther; west in the United States to eastern North and South Dakota, eastern Nebraska and Kansas, the Indian Territory and Texas; south in winter to the West India Islands and through eastern Mexico to Veragua, Central America. Casually to Labrador. The Ruby-throated or Northern Hummingbird, the sole representative of this family in eastern North America, is only a summer visitor in the Dominion of Canada and throughout the greater part of its range in the United States, except- ing the southern portions of the Florida peninsula, where it winters to some extent. By far the greater number of these birds, however, migrate farther south, spending the winter in some of the West Incia Islands, while others pass through eastern Mexico into Central America, as far south as Veragua. It usually arrives along our southern border in the latter part of March, and moves leisurely northward, rarely reaching the more northern States before the middle of May, or about the time the early and hardier flowers begin to THE RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD. 193 blossom, and it usually goes south again about the latter part of September, the males preceding the females, I believe, in both migrations. Its breeding range is coextensive with its geographical distribution. Along the Atlantie coast it has been met with by Mr. Lucien M. Turner as far north as Davis Inlet, Labrador, in latitude 55° 87’, but this may have been only a casual straggler, as few birds of this species appear to breed north of latitude 52°. In the interior, in the so-called fur countries, it reaches farther north, however. Sir John Richardson met it here up to the fifty-seventh parallel, which appears to be the northernmost known limits of its range; but it is quite possible that it reaches still higher latitudes. None of the numerous gentlemen connected with the Hudson Bay Company, interested in ornithological investigations in the far north, appear to have met with it in the lower Mackenzie basin or along the shores of Great Slave Lake. Westward its range extends well into the eastern borders of the Great Plains; it is a fairly common summer resident here in suitable localities, in eastern Saskatchewan, and in Manitoba, as well as throughout the eastern parts of North and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, the Indian Territory, and about the eastern half of Texas. In many parts of Florida it seems to be a rather rare breeder, but north of this State it is mostly a common summer resident. The Ruby-throated Hummingbird prefers rather open and cultivated country, interspersed here and there with mixed or deciduous woods overrun with flowering masses of vines and creepers, extensive orchards, etc., and it is not at all adverse to taking up its home in flower gardens, in close proximity to man. Its flight is extremely swift, and the rapid motions of its wings in passing back and forth from one cluster of flowers to another causes a humming or buzzing sound, from which the numerous members of this family derive their name of Hummingbirds. -Notwithstanding the very small size of most of our Hummers, they are all extremely pugnacious, especially the males, and are constantly quar- reling and chasing each other, as well as other birds, some of which are many times larger than themselves. Mr. Manly Hardy writes me that he once saw a male Ruby-throat chasing a Robin out of his garden and following it up until lost to sight. There appears to be considerable difference of opinion among various observers regarding the nature of their food, some contending that this consists principally of nectar sipped from flowers, as well as the sweet sap of certain trees, to which they help themselves at the drinking places of the Yellow-bellied Sapsucker, Sphyrapicus varius, while others, myself included, believe that they subsist mainly on minute insects and small spiders, the latter forming quite an important article of food with them. Mr. Edwin H. Eames, of Bridgeport, Con- necticut, mentions finding sixteen young spiders of uniform size in the throat of a young Hummingbird which was about two days oid.’ 'The Auk, Vol. VII, 1890, pp. 286-288. I also refer the reader to Mr. Frederick A. Lucas’s interest- ing paper in the same periodical (Vol. X, 1893, pp. 311-315), and to another by the same author, ‘‘On the structure of the tongue in Hummingbirds,” in the ‘“‘ Proceedings of the United States National Museum” (Vol. XIV, 1891, pp. 169-172), all of which bear on this subject, but want of space prevents me from quoting them. 16896—No., 3 13 194 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. That our Hummingbirds live to some extent on the sap of certain trees is undoubtedly true, but that they could exist for any length of time on such food alone is very questionable, to say the least. They are particularly fond of the sap of the sugar maple, and only slightly less so of that of different species of oak, bireh, poplar, sycamore, and willow, as well as of the nectar secreted in the flowers of the lilac, honeysuckle, jasmine, begonia, horse chestnut, and many others Mr. E. A. MeIlhenny writes me from Avery, Louisiana: “It is quite a com- mon occurrence here for the Ruby-throated Hummer to get drunk on the nectar of the flowers of the china tree (Melia azedarach). It sometimes imbibes so much of the nectar that it becomes stupefied and falls from the tree, when it can be readily taken in the hand, and offers no resistance. I have also taken them by putting a little brandy and honey in honeysuckle and jasmine blossoms; they readily take this, and become so intoxicated that they are easily caught.” While stationed at the former cavalry depot at St. Louis, Missouri, in 1873~74, I occupied a set of quarters that were completely overrun with large trumpet vines (Tecoma radicans), and when these were in bloom the place fairly swarmed with Ruby-throats. They were exceedingly inquisitive, and often poised themselves before an open window and looked in my rooms full of curiosity, their bright little eyes sparkling like black beads. I have caught several, while busily engaged sipping nectar in these large, showy flowers, by simply placing my hand over them, and while so imprisoned they never moved, and feigned death, but as soon as I opened my hand they were off like a flash. They seem to be especially partial to anything red. Mr. Manly Hardy writes: ‘I was once camping on one of the many islands along the coast of Maine during a dense fog, which had held us prisoners for several days, as it was so thick aha we could not find our way. We had been living on lobsters, and lots of their red shells lay near the fire in front of our tent, when suddenly a Hummer came out of the fog and darted down at the ges moving from one to another, seemingly loath to leave them.” ~ W.N. Clute, of Binghamton, New York, writes: ‘The swamp thistle ree muticum), which blooms in August, seems to have great attractions for the Ruby-throated Hummingbirds. I have seen more than a hundred birds about these plants in the course of an hour. Since it has been stated that the bee gets pollen but not honey from the thistle, it would appear that these birds visit these flowers for insects. There is scarcely a flower that contains so many minute insects as a thistle head. Examine one with a lens and it will be found to contain many insects that can hardly be seen with the unaided eye, and if the Ruby-throat eats insects at all, these are the ones it would take; and because the larger ones remained the observer might conclude that none were eaten. The jewel weed (Impatiens) also receives much of their attention, and nowhere do I find these birds so abundant as about these two flowers.” I could quote considerable more testimony showing that the Hummingbirds live to a great extent on minute spiders and insects, but consider it unnecessary. Hummingbirds are readily tamed and make interesting pets, but do not seem to THE RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD. 195 live long in captivity. Something seems to be lacking, probably the required quantity of insects which they are able to obtain in a wild state, and sirup alone does not appear to enable them to survive such changed conditions for any leneth of time. All of our Hummingbirds are very fond of bathing, and I have seen one fly repeatedly through the spray of a fountain in one of the numerous parks in Washington, District of Columbia. Mr. Otto Widmann, of Old Orchard, Missouri, has kindly furnished me with the following notes on this species: “While in the St. Francis region, Missouri, I was not a little surprised to meet, on the forenoon of May 10, a great number of Ruby-throats in the garb of the female, but with beautiful red throats, in shape exactly like the patch of the male, but the color a plain solferino, without any metallic or golden hue. At first I did not know what to make of it, until I found out that the pollen of Asculus pavia, the red shrub buckeye, is of the identical color and stains the fingers with solferino at the touch. These Ruby-throats were a wandering army oD of females; among the large number of birds present only a few (one or two, I think) males were seen, and they were probably summer sojourners in these woods. Next day I visited the same forest again at the same hour, but all the female Hummers were gone. “The first Hummers appear in St. Louis County about the last week in April, but in southeast Missouri (Pemiscot County) I found them already present on April 11, 1893. Male Hummers do not become numerous in St. Louis County before May 5, and females about May 12. Fresh eggs are to be looked for about the ist of June. Southward migration is well under way by the middle of September, when Hummers are very plentiful. After the 1st of Octo- ber they are less frequently seen, but the last ones do not leave us before October 11 or 12. Migration in this species has much in common with that of the Swift, from which fact I conclude that their insect food may be somewhat similar, and that both species may feed on nearly related insects. A peculiarity of the Ruby-throat, which I have only once seen mentioned in print, is the pendu- lum play of the male Hummer. In time it coincides with the period of sexual excitement; it begins here about May 12, with the arrival of the bulk of the females, and lasts until incubation has commenced. In this play the bird is swinging to and fro, as if suspended from a fixed point; it describes one-fourth of a circle, and travels about a rod. This pendulum movement is continued about a dozen times, the bird emitting chirps all the time.” Shortly after their arrival in the spring they are continually chasing each other about; considerable of this is undoubtedly done in play, but occasionally they act like perfect little furies, and try to injure each other as much as pos- sible. At such times they utter rather shrill, squealing sounds, like ‘“chic-we- we-a,” which are frequently and rapidly repeated; at other times they utter low, chippering sounds that can only be heard when close by, intermixed now and then with a somewhat louder chirp. After one has driven its rival away it generally returns to one of its favorite perches, some little dry twig of a shrub or tree, from where it commands a good outlook, and commences at once to 196 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. rearrange and smooth out its plumage, usually beginning with the primaries, which are dexterously passed through its bill by raising and extending the wing ona level with the head. It is rarely seen entirely at rest for any length of time, and, when not busy preening its feathers, it darts about fram one place to another. Although such a small, tiny creature, it is full of energy, and never seems to tire. During the mating season the male is very devoted to his mate, following her constantly about, and fiercely attacks any rival that may approach too near her. In our Southern States nidification begins usually about the first week in May, occasionally a little earlier or later, according to the season, and corre- spondinely later in the more northern portions of its range. A suitable nesting site having been selected (and this appears to be an easy task), preparations for building are soon begun. During this time the male may frequently be noticed indulging in the pendulum play already described, and both sexes will frequently dart straight up into the air for some 50 feet, and as quickly drop down again in the vicinity of the chosen nesting site. The nest is generally saddled on a horizontal or a somewhat drooping limb of a tree, about half an inch or a little more in thickness, or it may be placed at the junction of a little fork where one side of the nest is supported by one of the branches, and less often in bushes or vines, varying from 6 to 50 feet high, usually from 10 to 20 feet from the eround. Its favorite breeding resorts are second-growth timber along river blufts, hillsides, the borders of forests, in shade trees along country roads, orchards, gardens, etc. I believe the different species of oak, where they are found, are preferred for nesting sites to all other trees, while hickory, tulip, poplar, maple, horse-chestnut, beech, sycamore, dogwood, black gum, buckeye, birch, appie, pear, orange, pine, red cedar, and other trees, rose bushes, and creeping vines are also more or less used. In the Adirondacks, in New York, I believe birch trees are the favorites. I have seen one of its nests saddled on the top of and between two old pine cones, on a slender, dry limb, which I consider a rather unusual nesting site for this species. The nest of our Ruby-throated Hummingbird is one of the most exquisite pieces of bird architecture to be found anywhere. The circular foundation is composed of bits of lichens, mixed with fine vegetable fibers, which are appar- ently firmly glued to the twig on which the nest is saddled, presumably with saliva secreted by the bird for this purpose, and the structure is built upon this, the inner portions of it being composed of soft, downy plant fibers, such as the silky down of different species of willows and poplars, that found on the young and wnexpanded leaves of the oaks and various kinds of ferns (J’tlices), especially that from the young stalks of the common brake (Pteris aquilina), the silky down of the milkweed (Asclepias), and similar materials from other sources. After these have been well worked together in a sort of vegetable felt, the outer walls of the nest are profusely covered with a coating of bits of lichens obtained from the trunks and limbs of trees in the vicinity, and then are firmly fastened in place with spider webs, giving the nest the appearance of a small, lichen- covered knot, which for this reason is rather difficult to detect. In nearly every THE RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD. 197 instance the nest is placed so that its contents are protected from above by thie leaves of the tree or a limb directly over it, and it is rare to find one in a per- fectly open and unsheltered situation. The location of the beautiful little structure certainly shows considerable intelligence on the part of the builder. The nests vary somewhat in size and bulk, according to the thickness of the limb or twig on which they are saddled. An average-sized specimen measures about 1$ inches in outer diameter by 14 inches indepth. The inner cup is about an inch in width by five-eighths of an inch in depth. I believe that the female performs about all the labor required in the construction of the nest, the male simply following her around while she is gathering the necessary materials and protecting her, although he may occasionally assist to some extent. As nearly as I can judge, it takes about ten days to complete the structure. Mr. H. W. Flint, of New Haven, Connecticut, sends me the following interesting note on this subject: “On May 30, 1890, I noticed an interesting fact in connection with this species. I was watching a Downy Woodpecker excavating a home in the top of a lofty maple on the edge of heavy timber, when suddenly a male Hummer, closely followed by his mate, darted toward the trunk of a large oak, at the height of at least 35 feet from the ground, and were immediately attacked by some kind of beetle, which attempted to drive them from the tree. The birds would, after an apparent struggle with the beetle, cling to the trunk of the tree a moment, pull off a bit of lichen, and then suddenly leave the spot like a flash. I watched this pair over two hours before I succeeded in locating the nest, which was at least 10 rods distant, and each time they returned to the tree the beetle met them and fought them off, frequently driving them from the trunk after they had succeeded in alighting. The male showed great anger, and his sharp, rapid chirping was almost incessant while in the vicinity of the tree. The beetle did not attempt to follow the birds, but tried to prevent their alighting upon or approaching the tree. I was very much interested, and can not now understand what was the cause of the antagonism existing between them. The nest, which I afterwards secured, was beautifully decorated, and the eggs somewhat incu- bated, usually the case where the nest is well covered, as much of the exterior decoration is done after the eggs are laid, and even after the young are hatched.” In the Southern States fresh eges may be looked for during the first two weeks in May, in the vicinity of Washington, District of Columbia, about June 10, and in New England and our Northern States:in the latter part of this month or during the first half of July. Two eggs are laid to a set, one every other day, and these are frequently deposited before the nest is more than half completed, the female finishing it gradually after incubation has commenced, and sometimes adding additional lichens on the outside, even after the young have been hatched. Incubation lasts about fourteen days, and the female not only attends to this duty alone, but also appears to care for the young exclusively, which are large enough to leave the nest in about sixteen days. They are born blind, and do not open their eyes until they are about a week old. As soon as incubation commences the male appears to lose all interest in his spouse for the time being, 198 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. and lets her attend to her family duties alone, leading an easy, careless life in the meantime. Although I have watched several nests of Hummingbirds containing young for hours at a time, I have never yet seen a male feeding them. They grow amazingly fast, and when about ten days old they are about as large as the parents. Their bills, however, grow proportionally much slower than their bodies. The young are fed by regurgitation. I have satisfied myself fully on this point, and have seen the female insert her bill almost for its full length in the throat of the nestlings, and watched her, with the aid of a strong glass, doing so repeatedly. When not in search of food she broods the young or sits on the rim-of the nest preening her feathers. I believe two broods are frequently raised in a season, occasionally three perhaps, as fresh eggs have been found as late as August 7. An old nest is sometimes occupied for several seasons and remodeled each year; and should the nest and eggs be taken or destroyed, a second and occasionally even a third and fourth attempt at nesting is made within about a week, and sometimes these subsequent nests are built in the same tree again, or in others close by. The birds become very much attached to a locality once chosen for a home, and will return to it from year to year, not infrequently building a new nest on the top of the last year’s one, or alongside of it. ‘The female is very devoted to her young, and will occasionally resent an intruder’s presence by darting at his face. The eggs of the Ruby-throated Hummingbird are pure white in color; the shell is close-grained, rather frail, and without luster. They are mostly elliptical oval in shape, but oceasionally a specimen approaches an elliptical ovate, one end being somewhat smaller than the other. The average measurement of twenty-nine specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 12.95 by 8.50 millimetres, or about 0.51 by 0.33 inch. The largest egg of this series measures 14.48 by 9.14 millimetres, or 0.57 by 0.36 inch; the smallest, 12.19 by 8.38 millimetres, or 0.48 by 0.33 inch. The type specimen, No. 26914 (PI. 1, Fig. 27), from a set of two eggs, was taken by Dr. William L. Ralph, near Holland Patent, New York, on June 21, 1888, and represents an average egg of this species. 69. Trochilus alexandri Bourcrer and Mutsanr. BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus alecandri BOURCIER and MuULSANT, Annales Societé d’Agriculture de Lyon, LX, 1846, 330. (B 102, © 276, R 336, C 410, U 429.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western North America; from the Pacific coast to the Rocky Mountains; north to southern British Columbia, on both sides of the Cascades and southern Alberta 2; east to western Montana, western Colorado, New Mexico, and western Texas; south through California and Arizona into northern Mexico; in winter to Lower California, the valley of Mexico, and the State of Guerrero, Mexico. The Black-chinned Hummingbird, also known as the ‘‘Purple-throated” and “ Alexandre’s” Hummingbird, is rather irregularly distributed throughout the western United States, and, while exceedingly abundant in some localities, in THE BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD. 199 others, apparently equally well suited, it is comparatively rare. It has not yet been recorded, so far as I am aware, from any point west of the Cascade Moun- tains in Oregon and Washington, and, in fact, it must be considered as rather rare throughout the eastern portion of these States and Idaho. Mr. John Fannin, curator of the Provincial Museum at Victoria, British Columbia, in his “Cheek List of British Columbia Birds,” says: “Confined to the mainland; both slopes of the Cascades.” Mr. R. 8. Williams took a single specimen at Columbia Falls, Montana, on May 27, 1893, and a few others were seen subsequently. He writes me: “In this State they do not appear to breed east of the Rocky Mountains.” Mr. Frank M. Drew records it from Colorado, where it has been observed up to 6,000 feet, and Mr. C. F. Morrison, in a list of birds of La Plata County, in the same State, reports it as common and breeding, saying: “A nest shown me contained three eges.”! There are specimens in the United States National Museum collection from New Mexico, Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, and Texas. In the latter State Mr. H. P. Attwater has found it nesting at San Antonio, and Mr. William Lloyd in Tom Green and Concho counties, which places mark about the eastern limits of its breeding range. It is only a summer visitor in the United States and British Columbia, and breeds wherever found. Throughout the greater portions of Arizona, southern Utah, and southern and southeastern California it breeds abundantly, and is apparently as much at home in the hot valleys bordering the Colorado Desert as in the higher Sierra Nevadas, where Lieut. H. C. Benson, Fourth Cavalry, United States Army, took four of its nests and eges on May 29, 1892, in the Sequoia National Park, at an altitude of over 9,000 feet; while in semitropical San Diego County, California, judging from the number of breed- ing records I have, it is, if anything, still more common. Mr. F’. Stephens writes me: “TI have taken the nest and egos of the Black- chinned Hummingbird near Fort Bayard, New Mexico, in 1876, where this species is rather common, and it is an abundant summer resident of southern valifornia, below the pine zone. I have also found a set of egos of this species near San Bernardino, California, laid in a nest of the House Finch, Carpodacus mexicanus frontalis. No lining had been added, or any other changes made; the bird evidently was in haste to lay, her nest, perhaps, having been suddenly destroyed.” The general habits of the Black-chinned Hummingbird are very similar to those of the eastern Ruby-throat. Ordinarily it makes its appearance along our southern border early in March, returning south about the 1st of October. Its call notes and actions during the mating season resemble those of the former, and, like it, the bulk of its food consists of minute insects. Mr. R. H. Lawrence writes me: “On June 18 and 19, 1894, in Los Angeles County, California, the Black-chinned as well as Anna’s and Costa’s Humming- birds were very common in a little tract of wild tobacco, Nicotiana glauca, of 'The Ornithologist and Oologist, Vol. XIII, 1888, p. 107. 200 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. about 24 acres in extent, situated at the southern slope of a swale or draw on Angelano Heights. These trees bear clusters of slender, yellow, tube- shaped flowers, and are from 12 to 20 feet in height; the tract is known as ‘Hummer’s Patch.’ I saw from seventy to eighty Hummingbirds here in less than two hours, during the hottest part of the day. Many are killed by the boys with spring and air guns in pure wantonness. No nests were found, and males appeared to be more abundant than females. I also found these three species very common in the dry wash of Saw-Pit River, in the same county. Here they were attracted by a bright red flower (Delphiniwm cardinalis) growing on a clean, slender, juicy stalk, from 2 to 6 feet high This plant was abundantly scattered among the low bushes of a level tract of a few acres, and appeared to be a favorite feeding place for different species.” In the vicinity of Tucson, Arizona, where this species is common, I have frequently seen it feeding in the flowers of the mescal (Agave americana), as well as in those of several species of yuccas, undoubtedly attracted by the numerous small insects harbored by them. Two nests, with young, probably three or four days old, were found by me saddled on willow branches, on the banks of Rillito Creek, on May 30, 1872, one 4, the other 7 feet from the ground. In southern California nidification commences ordinarily about the latter part of April or the beginning of May, but I have seen it stated that a set of eges has been found near Los Angeles, California, as early as February 6, possibly a misidentification, the nest really belonging to Calypte anna, which is well known to occasionally breed this early. Throughout the greater part of their range, however, it rarely begins laying before May 1, and the season is at its height through this month, while second or possibly third sets are found up to the latter part of July, and occasionally still later. The nest is readily distinguishable from that of the Ruby-throated Hummingbird by not being covered on the outside with lichens. It is composed of plant down, varying in color from white to buff; the latter is obtained from the under side of the young leaves of the sycamore, the former probably from willows, milkweed, or thistles. These materials are well worked together, and the outside of the nest is thickly coated with spider web. In an occasional specimen a small leaf or two, or a few flower blossoms of the oak are worked in the outer walls. Ina specimen from Marfa, Texas, the outside is well covered with small flower spikes, the male aments of a species of oak, hiding the inner lining completely. A beautiful nest now before me, taken by Mr. F. Stephens, near Owens Lake, Inyo County, California, No. 24329, United States National Museum collection, is mainly composed of white willow down, mixed on the outside with a few small leaves and the scales from the willow buds; these are firmly held in place by an abundance of spider weh, with which it is also securely attached to the little fork in which it is saddled. The outer diameter of this nest is about 13 inches by 1 inch in depth; the inner cup is 1 inch in diameter by five- eighths of an inch deep; and while some specimens before me are a trifle lar: ger, others are considerably smaller. Nests taken in the Sequoia National Park, in THE BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD. 201 Tulare County, California, have perceptibly thicker walls than those from the warmer lowlands, and are also correspondingly larger. The nests are either saddled on a small, drooping branch or on a fork, one or two of the smaller twigs composing this usually being incorporated in the walls and holding it securely in place. Many of the nests resemble small, fine sponges, and are equally elastic, readily regaining their shape after being squeezed together. They are generally placed from 4 to 8 feet from the ground, mostly in the shrubbery found near small creeks or springs, and frequently their nests overhang the water or the dry creek bed. Alders, cottonwoods, oak, sycamore, laurel, and willows are most often selected for nesting sites, as well as young orchards, especially apple and orange trees, where they are available. In the more southern portions of the range of the Black-chinned Hum- mingbird fresh eggs are occasionally found by May 1, and as late as the beginning of August. Although most of our Hummingbirds invariably lay but two eggs to a set, nests of this species now and then contain three, all evidently laid by the same female, and such instances do not appear to be especially rare. Three such cases have come to my knowledge within the last few years. Dr. C. Hart Merriam found a set of three in the lower Santa Clara Valley, Utah, in May, 1891. Mr. F. Stephens took another at Olancha, Inyo County, California, on May 16, 1891, which is now in the United States National Museum collec- tion, and Mr. Fred. H. Fowler obtained still another near Fort Bowie, Arizona, in the spring of 1893. The eggs of the Black-chinned Hummingbird resemble those of the Ruby- throat in shape and color, but average a trifle smaller. The average measurement of fifty-three specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 12.67 by 8.31 millimetres, or about 0.50 by 0.33 inch. The largest egg of the series measures 13.72 by 8.64 millimetres, or 0.54 by 0.34 inch; the smallest, 11.94 by 8.13 millimetres, or 0.47 by 0.32 inch. The type specimen, No. 24257 (not figured), from a set of three eggs, was taken by Mr. F. Stephens, on May 16, 1891, near Olancha, Inyo County, Cali- fornia, the nest bemg saddled on a small twig of an apple tree in a young orchard, about 7 feet from the ground. 70. Trochilus violajugulum Jrrrries. VIOLET-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus violajugulum JEFFRIES, Auk, V, April, 1888, 168. (B —, C —, R —, C —, U 429.1.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Southern California (Santa Barbara County). The Violet-throated Hummingbird was first described by the late J. Amory Jeffries in “The Auk” (Vol. V, 1888, pp. 168, 169), from a specimen, a male, shot near Santa Barbara, California, on April 5, 1883, and the type, I believe, still remains unique. Nothing whatever is known regarding its habits or the extent of its range. It appears to be a pertectly good species, and was probably a strageler from the south. 202 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. 71. Calypte costz (Bourcirr). COSTA’S HUMMINGBIRD. Ornismya coste BOURCIER, Revue Zoologique, ii, 1839, 294. Calypte coste GOULD, Monograph of the Trochilide, Part XI, 1856, and Vol. I1I,1861, P1. 134. (B 106, C 280, R 337, C 415, U 430.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western North America; north to southern California, southern Nevada, and southwestern Utah; east to western and through southern Arizona to southwestern New Mexico; south to Lower California and northwestern Mexico to Mazatlan, Sinaloa, Mexico. The northern limits of the range of Costa’s Hummingbird have recently been considerably extended, and it is now known to be a common summer resident in southeastern California, at least as far north as Owens Valley, Inyo County, in about latitude 86° 20’; it reaches a slightly higher latitude in southern Nevada, while the northernmost point of its range, as far as known, is to be found in the extreme southwestern corner of Utah, on the eastern slopes of the Beaverdam Mountains, where Dr. C. Hart Merriam found it common among the junipers, somewhat north of the thirty-seventh parallel.’ On the west coast of California it has as yet only been taken as far north as Ventura County, and it is evidently rare there. In Arizona it seems to be distributed over the western half of the territory, as well as over most of the southern sections. Its breeding range is coextensive with its geographical dis- t= tribution in the United States. The majority of Costa’s Hummingbirds appear to be only summer residents within the United States. Mr. W. W. Price, a careful and reliable observer, states, however, that it winters in limited numbers in southern California; and the fact that he found a nest of this Hummingbird containing young as early as January 28, 1887, near Riverside, in San Bernardino County, seems to confirm this, and I have no doubt that other species also winter in suitable localities in the Colorado Desert, in the vicinity of the few springs and water holes found there. Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, found this Hummer quite common at Tinachas, in southwestern Arizona, near the head of the Gulf of California, between February 16 and 21, 1894, and collected a number of specimens there. Its general habits do not differ much from those of the other members of this family found within our borders, excepting that it is somewhat more of a desert-loving species, and it seems to show a special preference for the few water holes and springs in the barren mountain ranges in southeastern California east of the Sierra Nevadas. In such localities it appears to be far more common than in the better watered and more fertile portions of the southwestern parts of the State. Dr. A. K. Fisher says: ‘“Costa’s Hummingbird is the common species of the desert valleys and mountains of southern California and Nevada. * * * In the Argus Range, California, the species was very common at Maturango ‘North American Fauna, No. 7, 1895, pp. 56-58. COSTA’S HUMMINGBIRD. 203 Spring, and in Shepherd Canyon, where several nests were found in low bushes along the edges of the canyon. * * * At Coso the species was also very abundant, and several of its nests were found. Various kinds of plants were used as nesting sites, though the branching cactus (Opuntia echinocarpa) was most commonly chosen. Usually the structure was placed on the top of a lower branch, a foot or so from the ground, and under an overhanging mass of thick, spiny branches, which formed a protection for the parent bird from the sun and weather as well as its enemies. At Coso one of these Hummers was seen on a bright moonlight evening hovering about a bunch of flowers, and was heard again later in the same night. * * * Just at daylight, on the morning of June 25, before the shadow had risen out of Wild Rose Canyon, a Costa’s Hemmananiaal came and hovered within a foot of our camp fire, prob- ably mistaking it, from the distance, for a bunch of bright-colored flowers. — It was observed on several occasions that any bright- tolored object placed in a conspicuous position attracted this bird.”* Mr. F. Stephens writes me regarding Costa’s Hummer as follows: “I have found this species breeding in a gulch at the edge of the river bottom near the Gila River, New Mexico, a few miles below old Fort West. In this case I saw the male assisting in building the nest. I distinetly saw him fly to a spider web and gather it in or on his bill while on the wing. He appeared to be winding it about his bill, but I can not be certain of this. When no more of the web was left in sight, he flew a few yards across the gulch, and I saw he was busy at the nest, which I had not seen before. The date was about the end of May, 1876. In southern California this species breeds on the desert side as early as February, but on the coast side not until May. They range and nest up into the pines, but are most common in the foothills. They prefer certain canyons for nesting, and I know at least one canyon where I could be reasonably certain of getting half a dozen or more sets in two hours’ search in the latter part of May. The nests of this species are not as compactly built as those of Trochilus alexandri Mr. R. H. Lawrence writes me from Los Angeles, California, as follows: “On May 21, 1893, I found a half-finished nest of what I took to be Calypte coste, with the female working on it. On the 25th, at 9 a. m., it contained one egg, and on May 26, at dusk, it held two. On June 9 the eggs were still unhatched; the young hatched on the 11th. On June 23, 1894, in the mouth of Saw-Pit Canyon, I found a nest of this Hummer on the end of the lower branch of a sycamore. It was about 4 feet from the ground and near running water, well hidden under a thick canopy of sycamore leaves, which came down to within 2 inches of it, so close as to several times give the female some trouble to perch upon the nest. The nest was placed on the forks of a branch, ana made of the down of sycamore leaves and of cobwebs. It held two very young birds. On June 25 | again visited it, and waited to see the mother feed the young ones. I finally found I could stand within 4 feet of the nest, and removed several of the leaves of the canopy for a better view. It was then ‘North American Fauna, No. 7, 1895, pp. 56-58. 204 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. about 12.45 p.m.; the day was warm. The parent’s trips were not frequent. She fed the young by touching the point of her bill to the tips and sides of the bills of her youngsters, as if to urge or invite them to stir and open their mouths, not inserting her bill over one-fifth or one-fourth of its length. Once she thrust it down half its length into the throat of one nestling, who then clung to it to the very last moment of its withdrawal, apparently reluctant to let the very smallest particle of the regurgitated food miss its way or remain on the parent’s bill. The performance was rather ludicrous, as both old and young, especially the youngsters, went through many wriggling and squirming motions. The parent certainly once, upon returning to the nest, brooded the young ones for a little while, and then fed one before leaving the nest. It was interesting to watch the female raise her crown feathers when settled into a more comfort- able position in the nest, and then, upon being alarmed by me, flatten the feathers down, her eyes sparkling with fright. If I winked an eye she was startled, as 1 stood so near. Once, upon her return, settling down to brood the youngsters, she kept up for some moments a kind of paddling motion, as if she were giving them a little massage treatment. Her respiration was very rapid after this exertion. Life with these atoms of sensitiveness must be at white heat always. The young were lying side by side, but headed in opposite direc- tions. Both had voided excrement in one ease, but the parent did not remove either deposit while I was there. Except for this and a piece of eggshell, the nest appeared clean. The young had a narrow strip of long hairs down the center of their backs. Their skins were a dark, dirty brown; bills were very short, tipped with a point, and light colored; eyes were shut. No male parent was seen. The nest and contents were left undisturbed for future observations, if it is possible to visit it soon again.” Mr. A. W. Anthony found Costa’s Hummingbird common in Lower Califor- nia, and writes me: ‘Just before I left the higher benches of the San Pedro Martir Mountains, on May 29, 1893, Calypte anna became rather common, and Calypte coste still more so; both showed signs of early breeding. Valley birds had raised one or more broods by that time. Could it be that these had bred in lower altitudes before coming here?” Mr. Anthony’s surmise that these birds might have already reared one or even two broods in the lower and_ hotter valley 1 regions is undoubtedly correct, as Mr. Walter E. Bryant, in his paper on the ‘Birds of Lower California,” mentions finding a nest of this species on Santa Margarita Island, on January 17, 1888. This was placed on an almost leafless branch, 3 feet high, far from the water, and contained large young. Mr. B. T. Gault, in a recent letter says: “It may be a peculiarity of Hummers in general, but I found these birds to be exceedingly tame; indeed, it was almost impossible to keep them off their nests after they had been frightened from them; the female would persist in alighting on the nest even when an attempt was being made to sever the twig on which it was placed from the larger branch. Their extreme disregard for the presence of man was a little ahead of anything I had expected to see.”? IF ora more detailed account of the nesting habits of Gone Vs RTI refer vine reader to ve Gault’s article in The Auk, Vol. II, 1885, pp. 309-311. COSTA’S HUMMINGBIRD. 205 In Inyo County, California, Costa’s Hummer seems to be very commonly found about the flowers of the squaw cabbage, a species of Stanleya, also about wild rose, plum, or cherry bushes (Prunus) growing in the canyons, as well as about other shrubs and plants found in these desert regions. Nidification com- mences sometimes early in January; several of its nests and eggs have been taken in Los Angeles County, California, in February; throughout the greater portion of its range, however, it is at its height during April and May, and at least two broods are regularly raised in a season. Considering the small size of most of our Hummingbirds, sixteen days, or even fourteen only, appears to be an unusually long time to be required to hatch such a small egg, and it seems to be entirely out of proportion when compared with many larger birds, and in this respect this family shows its close relationship to the Swifts (Cypseli), where incubation lasts still longer. The nests of Costa’s Hummingbird do not compare favorably in architee- tural beauty with those of the preceding species; the materials used are not so thoroughly felted or quilted together, and the inner cup has ordinarily a rather slovenly appearance. It is externally composed of plant down or fine shreds of plant fiber; the outer walls are thatched more or less profusely, in different specimens before me, with bits of gray lichens, fine shreds of bark, and small dry leaves, and these are securely fastened in place by spider web and _ silk obtained from cocoons. The inside is lined with plant down, and occasionally with finely shredded plant fibers and small, fluffy feathers. In some examples feathers are very prominent among the inner lining. An average specimen measures 13 inches in outer diameter by 1 inch in depth. The inner cup is about seven-eighths of an inch in diameter by one-half inch in depth. They are usually placed in low situations, from 1 to 6 feet from the ground, rarely higher, although Mr. W. E. D. Scott records one taken on May 5, 1882, near Riverside, in southern Arizona, from the extremity of a cottonwood branch 35 feet from the ground. In the desert regions of southeastern California various cacti, the different species of sage (Artenisia) and greasewood bushes (Larrea), while in the canyons ash, sycamore, scrub oak, palo verde, cottonwoods, and willows, furnish their favorite nesting sites. The eggs resemble those of the preceding species in shape and color, but they are somewhat smaller. The average measurement of twenty-three specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 12.19 by 7.87 millimetres, or 0.48 by 0.31 inch. The largest egg measures 12.95 by 8.13 millimetres, or 0.51 by 0.32 inch; the smallest, 11.68 by 7.62 millimetres, or 0.46 by 0.30 inch. The type specimen, No. 24250 (not figured), from a set of two eges, was taken by Dr. A. K. Fisher in Shepherd Canyon, in the Argus Mountains, California, on May 7, 1891, and the nest from which these eges were obtained was placed on a little fork of a greasewood bush, 2 feet from the ground, very poorly built, and probably an old one from the previous year. 206 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. 72. Calypte anna (Lesson) ANNA’S HUMMINGBIRD. Ornismya anna LESSON, Supplement des Oiseaux Mouches, 1831, 115, Pl. 7. Calypte anna GOULD, Monograph of the Trochilide, Pt. XI, 1856, Pl.5; and Vol. IIT, 1861, Pl, 135. (B 105, C 279, R 338, C 415, U 431.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western North America; north through southern and middle California to about latitude 41°; east to the Sierra Nevada; south to northern Lower California and Cerros Island, and through southern Arizona; in winter to northern Mexico, Casually? to Guadalupe Island, Mexico. The breeding range of Anna’s Hummingbird, one of the handsomest species found in the United States, appears to be a rather restricted one, and, as far as known at present, seems to be confined to those regions of California situated between the coast and the Sierra Nevadas, and to the northern half of Lower Cali- fornia. Quite a number of these birds winter regularly in southern California, while others pass, during their fall migration, through southern Arizona, and likely also through southwestern New Mexico, en route to their winter haunts in north- ern Mexico. Mr. H. W. Henshaw met with Anna’s Hummingbird in the vicinity of Camp Grant, Arizona, during the last week of September, 1873, while they were evidently migrating, and Mr. W. E. D. Scott obtained a single specimen in the Santa Catalina Mountains, in the same territory, on October 1, 1883. If it should prove to be a summer resident in Arizona, its nests and eggs must be looked for in the canyons of the mountains at altitudes of from 5,000 to 7,000 feet. It usually returns to its breeding grounds very early in the spring. Its general habits, food, ete., resemble those of the other species already rather fully described, and the breeding season begins occasionally in February and lasts into July, during which time two, if not three broods are raised. Mr. Charles A. Allen, of Nicasio, California, writes me: ‘“‘The male Anna’s Hummingbird has a very nice little song; it may often be seen perched on some prominent twig or a telegraph wire singing away for dear life. Its simple little lay sounds like ‘te-uit, te-uit, te-wieu, wieu, wieu,’ repeated over and over again, and when angry it utters a very harsh, rasping screech. In this vicinity it is migratory, usually arriving about the second week in February.” Mr. F. Stephens sent me the following notes on this species: ‘When I first oO fo} came to California I confused the females of this species with those of T'rochilus alexandri, and thought that Calypte anna was a summer resident in the valleys. Others appear to have made the same mistake. My present belief is that Calypte anna seldom or never breeds below the pine region of the mountains of southern California, except possibly immediately along the coast, and of this I have no certain knowledge. I do know the species is found, though rather rarely, in the pines in May and June. It is an abundant winter resident in the valleys. ANNA’S HUMMINGBIRD. 207 Lately (September 27, 1892, at San Diego) I heard the son It was harsher than the song of Trochilus alexandri or Calypte coste and could be heard further.” Mr. Rollo H. Beck, of Berryessa, California, says: ‘“‘Anna’s Hummingbird is a common summer resident here, and a few remain through the winter. I often @ of this species. notice these birds hunting for spiders among the evergreen trees near my home; they frequently visit the flowers about the houses in the valleys, and they also have an abundance of wild ones to select from in the hills, from the time they arrive in the spring until they leave in the fall. In March, when the Australian or blue gum trees begin to blossom, this Hummer and the Rufus are very numer- ous, chasing each other from tree to tree all day long; all the time uttering their notes of defiance or hatred. Although somewhat larger in size than the Rufus, I believe the latter generally gets the best of it.” Mr. A. W. Anthony has kindly sent me the following notes on Calypte anna: “A nest of this species was found at San Quentin, Lower California, in a cholla cactus growing within a few feet of the bay. A piece of cotton was pushed down over the eggs to prevent their rolling out, and nest and all trans- ferred to a box in my game bag. Upon arriving at my tent, an hour later, I was somewhat disgusted to find one of the eggs pipped, and realizing the difficulty of making a presentable specimen of it, was on the point of throwing it away, when a movement on the part of the tiny creature within the shell suggested to my mind that I hatch the egg and find out for myself how baby Hummingbirds come into the world. So far there was but a pin point broken, the rest of the shell bemg intact; and it was several minutes before the warmth of my hand, aided by my breath, produced another movement upon the part of the prospective Hummer; first a feeble struggle, followed by an interval of rest; another squirm, and the point of the bill came in view and was withdrawn; after a moment’s rest a new system was adopted, which consisted of turning around in the shell from right to left, and cutting a clean, smooth opening with the sharp, horny tip on the upper mandible; this operation was evidently hard work, and required all the strength of the little mite, and frequent rests were necessary to recruit. Sometimes an interval of twisting seemed to accomplish nothing, and it would look as if all its struggles would be in vain, and I wondered whether the parent would not render a little much-needed assistance at this stage; but after an interval of rest the work would be continued with renewed vigor and another millimetre cut toward the outer world. The cutting was all done in the same direction, and after about ten minutes I was obliged to turn the egg over in my hand in order to watch the proceedings, as by that time the opening had been cut about half way around, bringing the chick’s bill nearly underneath and in the palm of my hand. When the shell had been cut four-fifths around, the chick succeeded in getting one claw hooked over the edge of the break, and by one or two vigorous pushes broke the remaining shell, leaving in my hand two nearly equal parts of what had been a Hummingbird’s egg, and a squirming something that bore no semblance whatever to one of the peerless members of 208 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN RIBDS. the genus Calypte. The entire operation of hatching, from the time I discovered that the egg was pipped, consumed about fifteen minutes. “In Lower California the nesting season extended from January to June, and perhaps longer. One of the nests found by me near my camp at Valladares, Lower California, was built within 8 feet of a blacksmith’s forge, where the smoke constantly obscured nest, bird, and all; but the structure was finished and the eggs laid in spite of the noise and contusion.” Besides spiders, small insects, ete., and the nectar of different kinds of flow- ers, Anna’s Hummingbird is said to be extremely fond of the sap of the willow (Salix lariolepis), and it has also been observed hovering about the punctures made by the Red-breasted Sapsucker (Sphyrapicus ruber) in fruit orchards. Nidification, as already stated, begins very early in California, occasionally in January, but more often in February, and, as a rv ule, but few of the first nests are found. The second sets find their way into collections more frequently, however, and the season for these is at its height in April or the first half of May. At this time they retire farther into the foothills and nest mostly among the shrubbery along the numerous small creeks found in the canyons of the mountains, following up the flowers, in which they find a considerable portion of their daily food, endl which usually bloom somewhat later in such localities. The nests of Anna’s Hummingbird also differ somewhat from those of the previously described species in their general make-up, and can in most cases be readily distinguished from them. The inner walls are likewise composed of various kinds of plant down, that found on the under side of the leaves of sycamore being perhaps most frequently used, while willow and thistle down enters less often into their composition. Some of the early nests are almost entirely composed of the flowers of the Eucalyptus, the Australian gum tree. The outer walls are covered with soft green tree mosses and lichens, ceneimall: the former, and these are held firmly in place by spider webs and cocoons. The inner cup is lined with fine plant down and a few soft, fluffy feathers (apparently those of the female) and occasionally with fur. A well-preserved, average- sized specimen, taken near Santa Cruz, California, on May 14, 1872, measures about 18 inches in outer diameter by 14 inches in height; the inner cup is 1 inch in diameter by five-eighths of an inch in depth; while one kindly sent me by Mr. C. Barlow, of Santa Clara, California, taken by him on February 11, 1894, containing two slightly incubated eggs, has much thicker walls and is profusely lined with soft feathers of the Western Bluebird. It was saddled on a hori- zontal twig of a cypress about half an inch thick and 15 feet from the ground. He writes: “This was the first Anna’s Hummingbird’s nest found by me in 1894. On the same day several pairs were seen andl one pair was found to be building on the remains of a last year’s nest, which contained fresh eggs on February 21. At this season of the year it is usually rainy; the sun generally rises bright, but is soon obscured by clouds. I noticed that a large majority of these early nests were built on the east side of the trees, which appeured to me as being done perhaps so as to catch the rays of the sun while it shone for per- ANNA’S HUMMINGBIRD. 209 haps an hour. Later on the nests were built almost anywhere. As a rule, the ‘early Hummers here build in cypress (often called ‘cedar’) trees, and the nests are usually lined with feathers. I suppose this is due to the lack of vegetable down, which is plentiful later, for I have never found a late nest lined with feathers. A nest found on February 22 was lined with red cow hair and looked quite odd. Other of these early nests were lined with Western Bluebird’s or Western Robin’s feathers, while one contained a large feather of some Owl.” The nests are most often placed on low branches or twigs overhanging water courses, in sycamore, maple, cottonwood, alder, or sumach trees or bushes, at no great distance from the water; and again they may be found in cypress, fo) Australian blue gum, elder, box elder, and in orchard trees, such as orange, peach, and plum. In Lower California Mr. A. W. Anthony found it also nesting in cholla cactus. Nests are sometimes placed within a foot of the ground, and others fully 35 feet up, the average being from 8 to 15 feet. They may be saddled on a small, drooping limb, or placed in the forks of small twigs; in either case they are substantially built structures and well secured to their surroundings. Only two eggs are laid to a set, and these, like all Hummingbird’s eggs, are dull white in color and elliptical oval in shape. Incubation lasts from four- teen to sixteen days, and the male does not assist in this duty. The average measurement of twenty-four specimens is 13.29 by 8.76 milli- metres, or about 0.52 by 0.34 inch. The largest egg measures 14.22 by 8.89 millimetres, or 0.56 by 0.35 inch; the smallest, 12.70 by 8.38 millimetres, or 0.50 by 0.33 inch. The type specimen, No, 21748 (not figured), from a set of two egos, Ben- dire collection, was taken by Mr. William A. Cooper, near Santa Cruz, Cali- fornia, on May 14, 1872. 73. Selasphorus floresii Gou.p. FLORESV’'S HUMMINGBIRD. Selasphorus floresii GOULD, Monograph of the Trochilidw, Pt. XXIII, September 1, 1861, Pl. 10; and Vol. 3, 1861, PJ. 139. (Oe RO Use) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Southwestern Mexico, Jalisco, and Oaxaca; accidental to California. Floresi's Hummingbird or Flame-bearer, an exquisitely plumaged species, can be considered only as an accidental straggler within the borders of the United States, and still remains very rare in collections. It was obtained at Bolanos, Oaxaca, Mexico, in 1845, and remained unique for some time. More recently it has been reported from the State of Jalisco, and Mr. Walter E. Bryant found a specimen in a taxidermist’s shop in San Francisco, California, 16896 —No, 3——14 210 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. which had been mounted as a hat bird; he was assured that it had been killed near that city, which entitles it to a place in our fauna.’ Nothing appears to be known as yet regarding the life history of this hand- some species. 74. Selasphorus platycercus (Swarnson). BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus platycercus SWAINSON, Philosophical Magazine, I, 1827, 441. Selasphorus platycercus BONAPARTE, Conspectus Avium, I, 1850, p. 82. (B 104, C 278, R 339, C 413, U 432.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Mountain regions of western North America; north in the United States to Wyoming and Idaho; east to the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains and adjacent ranges in Colorado and New Mexico; west to the Sierra Nevada and western Arizona, as well as in the intervening regions; south through Arizona, southern New Mex- ico, and western Texas, over the Mexican tablelands to Guatemala, Central America. The Broad-tailed or Rocky Mountain Hummingbird is pretty generally distributed throughout the various mountain systems between the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains and the Sierra Nevadas. It can only be considered as a summer resident in the United States, retiring over the table-lands of Mexico southward to Guatemala in winter. It usually makes its appearance along our southern border in Arizona and New Mexico early in March, and returns south in the latter part of September or the begining of October. As far as yet known, it reaches the northern limits of its range in southern Wyoming and Idaho, and is an exceedingly abundant species throughout the mountains of Nevada, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona. The Sierra Nevadas seem to form the western boundary of its range, and it apparently does not occur west of these mountains in California. In June, 1876, while en route from Camp MeDermit, Nevada, to Camp Harney, Oregon, I observed several Hummingbirds among the willows beside a little brook along the southern slopes of Steen’s Mountain, in southern Oregon, which I am almost certain belonged to this species, but not being prepared for collecting, I was unable to secure speci- mens. Dr. C. Hart Merriam records a specimen taken at Big Butte, Idaho, which is located in about the same latitude, on July 19, 1890, and I have no doubt that its range will yet be extended into southeastern Oregon. I also met with this species as a rare summer resident in the foothills of the Santa Catalina Mountains, in southern Arizona, and obtained a single nest containing two nearly fresh eggs, placed on a small cottonwood twig in a canyon, about 3 feet from the ground, at an altitude of about 4,800 feet, on June 11, 1872. It did not appear to breed in the valley of Rillito Creek. In eastern Colorado it appears to be the only representative of this family, and is exceedingly abundant. Mr. W. G. Smith writes me from Larimer County, in this State: “‘The Broad-tailed Hummer is common in the mountains from ! Forest and Stream, Vol. 26, p. 426. THE BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD. 211 7,000 feet up to timber line, nesting almost everywhere between these points; and a large pine tree seems to answer equally well for a nesting site as a small bush. In trees the nest is frequently saddled on a large limb, but it is more often placed in low bushes, particularly on willow branches overhanging water. The male has a curious habit of flying up almost perpendicularly, 100 feet or more, in the vicinity of the selected nesting site, and he frequently repeats this performance three or four times in succession before alighting on some dead limb. The female is very loath to leave her eggs, and if driven off will return again directly, even though the intruder’s hand is placed within a few inches of the nest.” As far as my limited observations go, all of our Hummingbirds indulge in this perpendicular flight during the nesting season, and not a few of the nests were found by me while watching these birds go through this performance, which is not alone confined to the male; the female also does it. On the first arrival of this species in the spring it is comparatively common in the lower foothills and valleys, and unquestionably breeds here. By the time the young are large enough to leave the nest the majority of the flowers have ceased blooming, and as the country begins to dry up more and more these Humming- birds retire to higher altitudes in the mountain parks, where everything is now as green and bright looking as it was in the lower valleys two or three months earlier. Here they raise their second broods under nearly similar conditions as the first; the former are by this time well able to take care of themselves and can be seen frolicking about everywhere. These vertical migrations, if they can be called such, frequently account for the entire disappearance of certain species in summer from localities where they may have been exceedingly numerous a couple of months earlier, and the gradual diminution or actual scarcity of the food supply plainly accounts for the sudden change in their habitat. Mr. Robert Ridgway writes: “The flight of this Hummingbird is unusually rapid, and that of the male is accompanied by a curious screeching buzz while it is followed through an undulating course. Long before the author of this curious sound was detected its source was a mystery tous. This shrill, sereech- ing note is heard only when the bird is passing rapidly through the air, for when hovering among the flowers its flight is accompanied by only the usual mufiled hum common to all the species of the family.”? According to Dr. C. Hart Merriam, the Broad-tailed Hummer is very abun- dant in the balsam belt and the upper parts of the pine belt in the San Francisco Mountain region in Arizona. In “North America Fauna,” No. 8, 1890 (p. 98), he says: “A nest containing two nearly fledged young was found on the limb of a Douglas fir, about 4 feet from the ground, July 31. The principal food plant of this Hummingbird is the beautiful scarlet trumpet flower of Pentstemon barbatus torreyt. During the latter part of August and early September, after it had ceased flowering, these birds were most often seen in the beds of the large Blue Larkspur (Delphinium scopulorum). They wake up early in the morning 'U. S. Geological Explorations of the 40th Parallel, 1877, p. 561. PH LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. and go to water at daylight, no matter how cold the weather is. During the month of August, and particularly the first half of the month, when the morn- ings were often frosty, hundreds of them came to the spring to drink and bathe at break of day. They were like a swarm of bees, buzzing about one’s head and darting to and fro in every direction. The air was full of them. They would drop down to the water, dip their feet and bellies, and rise and shoot away as if propelled by an unseen power. They would often dart at the face of an intruder as if bent on piercing the eye with their needle-like bill, and then poise for a moment almost within reach before turning, when they were again lost in the busy throng. Whether this act was prompted by curiosity or resentment I was not able to ascertain. Several were seen at the summit of the mountain during the latter part of August. They were found also at the Grand Canyon of the Colorado September 12 to 15. They began to leave the moun- tain during the first week in September, and none were seen after the middle of the month.” The flowers of the Scrophularia, Ocotilla, Agave americana, and numerous others, have great attractions for them owing to the quantities of small insects which they harbor. In the more southern portions of their range nidification commences late in April or the beginning of May, but most of these early sets are generally overlooked, while the second sets are usually laid about the first two weeks in June, and nesting continues throughout July in portions of their range. Mr. Robert Ridgway obtained two nests of this species with eggs in Parley’s Park, Utah, on July 23, 1869; they were placed in willows growing beside a stream. Nests from different localities vary considerably in make-up as well as in size. Nests saddled on good-sized limbs, like those often found in the moun- tains of Colorado, are occasionally almost as large again as others placed on small twigs. One now before me, from the Ralph collection, taken by Mr. William G. Smith, at Pinewood, Colorado, on June 23, 1892, measures 2 inches in outer diameter by 12 inches in depth, while one taken by Mr. Ridgway, in Parley’s Park, Utah, on July 23, 1869, measures only 13 by 1 inch outside measurement. The difference in size of the inner cups of these two nests is even more noticeable, the former measuring 1 inch by three-fourths of an inch, the latter three-fourths by one-half of an inch. While the walls of both of these nests are mainly composed of willow or cottonwood down, their outer covering is entirely dissimilar. The outside of the larger one is profusely covered with small bits of lichens, like the nest of the Ruby-throat; the smaller one is deco- rated with shreds of bark, fine leaves, and dry plant fibers, resembling more the nests of Costa’s Hummingbird in this respect. The radical difference in the appearance of the nests is far greater than my simple description would indicate, and the specimens themselves must be seen to have this difference fully appre- ‘ciated. There is no doubt whatever of the correct identification of both, but their nests evidently vary greatly in different localities, and while frequently one can form a pretty good guess as to what species certain Hummingbirds’ THE BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD. Zileey nests belong, in this instance at least it would be impossible to form a correct idea from the nest and eggs alone, without obtaining the parent. The inner lining appears to be composed entirely of willow or cottonwood down, and none of the specimens before me contain even a single feather. The outer covering or thatching is firmly secured to the walls of the nest with spider webs or silk from cocoons. The majority of the nests of the Broad-tailed Hummingbird are placed on low, horizontal branches of willows, alders, cottonwoods, ete., at no great height from the ground, or overhanging small mountain streams, while others are saddled on boughs or limbs of pine, fir, spruce, or aspens, from 4 to 15 feet from the ground, rarely higher. Occasionally a nest may be placed on a curled-up piece of bark or on a splinter of a broken limb. The length of ineu- bation is probably the same as that of our other species about which somewhat more is known, and two if not three broods are regularly raised in a season. The eges, two in number, resemble those of the Ruby-throat in every respect, but are a trifle shorter. The average measurement of fifteen specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 12.70 by 8.33 millimetres, or about 0.50 by 0.33 inch, The largest egg measures 13.21 by 8.38 millimetres, or 0.52 by 0.33 inch; the smallest, 12.19 by 8.13 millimetres, or 0.48 by 0.32 inch. The type specimen, No. 26793 (not figured), from a set of two egos, Ralph collection, was taken in Estes Park, Colorado, on June 10, 1892. The nest was placed in the forks of a willow twig, 4 feet from the ground, near the banks of a little mountain brook. 75. Selasphorus rufus (GMeE.in). RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus rufus GMELIN, Systema Naturie, I, i, 1788, 497. Selasphorus rufus GOULD, Monograph of the Trochilidie, IIT, 1852, Pl. 137. (B 103, C 277, R 340, C 411, U 433.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western North America; north through British Columbia to about latitude 61° in southern Alaska; east, in the United States, to the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains from Montana through Colorado to New Mexico, as well as in the intervening regions; south through California, Arizona, southern New Mexico, western Texas, and the table-lands of Mexico; in winter to Vera Cruz and Oaxaca, Mexico, and Lower California. The Rufous Hummingbird, also occasionally called ‘“ Rufous-backed,” ‘Cin- namon,” and “Nootka” Hummingbird, appears to be the most widely distributed species of the Trochilide found on the North American continent, extending at least over 40° of latitude. It reaches somewhat farther north than the Ruby- throated Hummingbird, and appears to be a tolerably common summer resi- dent in southern Alaska, where Dr. T. H. Bean found it nesting in the vicinity of Sitka on June 9. It has also been observed somewhat farther north on the Alaskan coast, in the vicinity of Mount St. Elias, in about latitude 61°; but 214 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. how far it reaches into the interior of this territory is still unknown. In British Columbia it ranges well into the central parts of this province. Mr. R. MacFarlane, to whom we are indebted for so much information regarding North American ornithology in the far north, forwarded a nest and eges;with the parent, to the United States National Museum. These were taken by him in the vicinity of Fort St. James on June 10, 1889, while en route to the Hudson Bay Com- pany’s Post, on Stewart's Lake, in about latitude 54° 40’. It is quite likely that it also reaches the province of Alberta, as it is a moderately common summer resident in northern Idaho, where I found it breeding near Fort Lapwai on June 27, 1871, and Mr. R. S. Williams writes me from Columbia Falls, Montana, that he has found the Rufous Hummer in the valley of the upper Missouri River. Along the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains it appears to occur somewhat irregularly. Mr. Denis Gale writes me that he saw a single specimen of this Hummer in Boulder County, Colorado, while Mr. William G. Smith reports it as rare in Larimer County, but tolerably common in Arapahoe County, in the same State. Mr. Frank M. Drew reports it as breeding in the Rocky Mountains up to altitudes of 10,500 feet, while in the southern Sierra Nevadas it is even common above timber line. In our Northwestern States, in Oregon and Washington, especially west of the Cascades, as well as in some of the mountain regions of California, northern Arizona, and New Mexico, the Rufous Hummingbird is a very common summer resident. I have never seen anything like such numbers of Humming- birds as I met in the vicinity of Fort Klamath, Oregon, about the time this species and the Calliope Hummer passed through there on their spring migra- tion. From the time the wild currant and gooseberry bushes (Ribes) begin to flower (and they grow in great abundance among the open pine woods along all the streams in Klamath Valley) they swarm everywhere, and if they had only stayed quiet long enough to count them, Iam sure as many as a thousand to the acre could have been found here; they remain very abundant as long as these flowers last. I never saw anything like the numbers anywhere else. Their constant buzzing while flying from bush to bush, about each of which as many as a dozer were perhaps already hovering, and the glitter of their brilliant plumage as they flashed by, chasing each other, was a sight long to be remem- bered. Few of this species appeared to remain to breed; at any rate, I failed in finding a single one of their nests here, although I searched carefully for them. At Camp Harney, Oregon, along the southern slopes of the Blue Moun- tains, I found this species a rather rare summer resident along the outskirts of the pine forests. The Rufous Hummer generally reenters our southern border early in March, passing leisurely northward, and commences its winter migration again from the more northern parts of its range about the 1st of September. I do not believe that any remain within our borders throughout the year. In Oregon nidification begins occasionally by the second week in April, and a nest containing slightly incubated eggs was found by Dr. Clinton T. Cooke, near Salem, Oregon, on April 18, 1888, while in middle California it THE RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD, 215 nests now and then nearly a month earlier. A specimen in my collection, taken by Mr. G. H. Ready, at Woods Lagoon, near Santa Cruz, California, contained fresh eggs on March 25, 1875. Throughout the greater part of their range, excepting the more northern portions, the breeding season is at its height during the first two weeks in May and lasts well into July, and two broods are probably raised regularly, excepting perhaps in northern British Columbia and southern Alaska. The nesting habits of the Rufous Hummingbird are very similar to those of the preceding species, and their nesting sites may be looked for in low bushes as well as on horizontal limbs of trees at various distances from the ground. One of the most complete and interesting articles on the life history of this species is that of Mr. H. W. Henshaw, in “The Auk” (Vol. III, 1886, pp. 76-78), who inclines to the belief that the majority of these birds on the upper Pecos Riyer, New Mexico, breed in the upper limbs of the pines, and, although they were exceedingly abundant there, he only found a single nest, and this only after it had been deserted. I am also of the belief that in certain localities they nest farther from the ground than Hummingbirds usually do. The only nest found by me in the West was at Fort Lapwai, Idaho, as already stated. This was saddled on a little.fork of a dry cottonwood twig, overhanging a creek, about 15 feet above the water. fr. A. W. Anthony writes’ me: “I found the Rufous Hummingbird very abundant at Beaverton, Oregon. Here they nested to some extent in oaks, blackberry vines, and on dry roots projecting from upturned trees. One nest hung from the end of a tall fern, while others, drooping over it from above, hid the beautiful structure from all but accidental discovery. Their favorite sites, however, seemed to be the long, trailing vines overhanging embankments and upturned trees. “A number were found in railroad cuts; frequently several nests were situated within a few feet of each other, a slight preference being shown to embankments haying a southern exposure. One nest was found that had been placed on top of a last year’s habitation, a mere rim being built to raise the sides, and a flooring being added to cover up a large pebble that could be plainly felt under the cotton lining. Fresh eggs were found here from May 1 to June 16.” Dr. Clinton T. Cooke found one of their nests, near Salem, Oregon, on a drooping limb of an ash tree, 20 feet from the ground; others were found in waxberry and blackberry bushes. At Table Rock, in the Cascade Mountains, ae were very abundant on July 5, 1887, feeding on a Costelleya, in blossom at the time. Mr. R. H. Lawrence met with the Rufous Hummingbird in various parts of Washington, and writes me that it is very common there. His earliest record was March 9, when they had already reached Ilwaco, in the southwestern part of the State. In southern California this species was noticed by him near Monrovia, on March 8, 1894, and at Duarte he often saw Rufous Hummers flittine about the blossom-laden orange trees, in company with other Hum- mers, in an orchard situated near the foothills. 216 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. According to my observations, this Hummer seems to be especially pugna- cious, and is apparently more than a match for the other species with which it comes in contact, even if a trifle larger than itself. The nests of the Rufous Hummingbird resemble those ef Anna’s very closely in the general make-up, being lined inside with cotton down, while the outside is more or less profusely covered with fine mosses, shreds of bark, and oceasionally a few lichens. An average nest measures 15 inches in outer diameter by 14 inches in depth; the inner cup is about seven-eighths of an inch in width by one-half inch deep. No feathers, however, are used in the inner lining in any of the specimens before me, as is frequently the case in the nests of Anna’s Hummingbirds. Beside the trees, shrubs, ete., already mentioned, they are also occasionally placed in cypress, fir, and other conifers, wild currant, and salmonberry bushes. Mr. Clyde L. Keller, of Salem, Oregon, reports taking a set of three eggs of this species from a nest in a blackberry bush, the only other instance known to me where this number has been found in a Hummingbird’s nest, excepting those recorded under Trochilus alexandri. The eggs resemble those of our other Hummingbirds in color and shape. The average measurement of seventeen specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 12.61 by 8.40 millimetres, or about 0.50 by 0.33 inch. The largest ege measures 13.46 by 8.64 millimetres, or 0.53 by 0.384 inch; the smallest, 11.94 by 8.13 millimetres, or 0.47 by 0.32 inch. The type specimen, No. 21745 (not figured), from a set of two eggs, Ben- dire collection, was taken by the writer near Fort Lapwai, Idaho, on June 27, 1871. 76. Selasphorus alleni Hensnaw. ALLEN’S HUMMINGBIRD. Selasphorus allenti HENSHAW, Bulletin Nuttall Ornithological Club, II, 1877, 53. (B —, C —, R 341, C 412, U 434.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western North America; north to southern British Colum- bia; south through Washington, Oregon, California, and southern Arizona; in winter to northern Mexico and Lower California ?. The range of Allen’s, also known as the ‘‘Green-backed,” Hummingbird is not very well defined as yet; this is mainly caused by its strong resemblance to the preceding species, making it a very difficult matter to distinguish it positively on the wing, and Allen’s Hummingbird is undoubtedly frequently mistaken for the Rufous. Tt appears to be only a summer resident in the United States and sritish Columbia, .and its breeding range is coextensive with its distribution. Allen’s Hummingbird ‘was first discovered by Mr. Charles A. Allen, at Nicasio, California, and was subsequently described by Mr. H. W. Henshaw in the “ Bul- letin of the Nuttall Ornithological Club” (Vol. II, 1877, p. 53). It is apparently not nearly as common as the Rufous Hummingbird, and comparatively few speci- mens have been taken outside of California. Mr. R. H. Lawrence records it ALLEN’S HUMMINGBIRD. DAG from Gray’s Harbor, Washington, as a summer resident, perhaps as common as Selasphorus rufus, and frequenting similar places. He first noticed it on the east Humptulips River, on April 30, 1891, among salmonberry and other flower- ing bushes. He writes me that the Edwards Brothers, taxidermists, of Tacoma, Washington, exhibited a mounted pair of these birds and their young in the nest, taken in that vicinity, at the exposition there in October, 1891. He also met with it in different localities in southern California. On August 11, 1894, he shot an adult female about 600 feet below the summit of Mount Wilson, which he kindly forwarded to the United States National Museum, and it was noticed by him as early as March 8 in the vicinity of Monrovia, California. In southern California it appears to be more a bird of the coast districts than of the interior, and here it is also somewhat irregularly distributed, being fairly abundant in some localities and apparently absent in others. Mr. W. E. D. Scott records a single specimen (an adult male) taken in the Santa Catalina Mountains, in southern Arizona, on July 23, 1884, at an altitude of 4,500 feet. How far south it ranges into Mexico or Lower California during its migrations is still unknown, as no specimens have as far as I have been able to ascertain, yet been obtained from any points in these regions. In its general habits, food, ete., it resembles our other Hummingbirds. Mr. F. Stephens writes me from San Diego County, California: ‘The migrating season of Selasphorus allent in spring is rather brief. Possibly a few of these birds breed in the pine region, as I have taken adults and immature birds there at the end of June.” Mr. Charles A. Allen, who discovered this species, and in whose honor it has been named, writes me: ‘“Allen’s Hummingbird arrives in the vicinity of Nicasio, California, about the middle of February, and commences to nest soon after arrival. The earliest date on which I found one was February 27, 1879; this was then about half finished, when a heavy storm set in which lasted about five days, and I did not visit the locality again until March 8, when the nest was completed and contained two fresh eggs. I have taken their nests as late as July 3, and am well convinced that two broods are raised in a season, at least by all of the earlier breeding birds. They select all sorts of situations and various kinds of trees and bushes to nest in. I have found their nests as low as 10 inches and again as high as 90 feet from the ground. Their courage is beyond question; I once saw two of these little warriors start after a Western Red-tailed Hawk, and they attacked it so vigorously that the Hawk was glad to get out of their way. But these little scamps were even then not satisfied, but helped him along after he had decided to go. Each male seems to claim a particular range, which he occupies for feeding and breeding purposes, and every other bird seen by him encroaching on his preserve is at once so determinedly set upon and harrassed that he is only too glad to beat a hasty retreat. During their quarrels these birds keep up an incessant, sharp chirping, and a harsh, rasping buzzing with their wings, which sounds very different from the low, soft humming they make with these while feeding. Every action and motion at such times indicates 218 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. that they are as mad as can be; the poor Anna Hummers have to get out of their way pretty quickly at any time, but especially when they encroach on their breeding grounds. The males very often have quarrels among themselves, and are then very noisy, while the females are more orderly ra quiet; but even they have occasional little misunderstandings with each other, especially when a pair meet while feeding on the same bush; one generally vacates the prem- ises very quickly, and as soon as she does all becomes quiet again. During the mating and breeding season the male frequently shoots straight up into the air and nearly out of sight, only to turn suddenly and rush headlong down until within a few feet of the ground. The wings during the downward rushes cut the air and cause a sharp, whistling screech, as they descend with frightful veloc- ity, and should they strike anything on their downward course I believe they would be instantly killed.”? All the nests and eges of this species in the United States National Museum were taken by Mr. Allen near Nicasio, California; one of these, now before me, is attached to the side of a small oak limb which turns abruptly at an angle of about 45° directly over the cup of the nest, protecting it above; another is like- wise attached to the side of a small pendant oak twig, its base being supported by a bunch of moss. Some are securely saddled on small twigs of raspberry bushes, and several of these are usually incorporated in the walls of the nest. Occasionally they nest in hedges, on weed stalks, or on bushes overhanging water. The nests are well and compactly built, the inside being lined with vegeta- ble down, while the outer walls are composed of green tree mosses and a few bits of lichens, securely fastened in place with a spider web. Nests built on trees seem to be generally somewhat larger than those found in bushes. The average measurements of one of the former is 14 inches outer diameter and the same in depth; the inner cup is seven-eighths of an inch in width by three- fourths of an inch in depth. On the whole they resemble the nests of Amna’s Hummingbird more than those of the Rufous, and appear to me to be better and more neatly built than either. The eggs of Allen’s Hummingbird resemble those of the other members of this family in color and shape, and are a trifle larger than those of the Rufous Hummingbird. The average measurement of fifteen specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 12.76 by 8.50 millimetres, or about 0.50 by 0.33 inch, The largest egg measures 13.97 by 8.89 millimetres, or 0.55 by 0.35 inch; the smallest, 12.45 by 8.13 millimetres, or 0.49 by 0.32 inch. The type specimen, No. 27009 (not figured), Ralph collection, from a set of two eggs, was taken near Nicasio, Caltoraia, on April 13, 1893. pow) u a very pintere sting account of the hope of this species in ci sale ity can be found in an article by Mrs. C. M. Crowell in the Ornithologist and Odlogist (Vol. 7, 1882, pp. 126-128). THE CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRD. 219 77. Stellula calliope (Goutp). CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus (Calothorax) calliope GouULD, Proceedings Zoological Society, 1847, 11. Stellula calliope GOULD, Introduction to the Trochilidie, 1861, 90. (B —, C 282, R 343, © 417, U 436.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Mountainous regions of western North America; north to British Columbia, Idaho, and Montana; east to the Rocky Mountains; south, through Cal- ifornia, Arizona, and New Mexico, over the table-lands, to the Valley of Mexico and the State of Guerrero, Mexico. The Calliope Hummingbird is the smallest of the Trochilide found within the United States; but, notwithstanding its diminutive size, it is quite hardy, and, on the Pacific Coast at least, it is found 3° or 4° north of our boundary. In British Columbia, according to Mr. John Fannin, it is said to occur on both slopes of the Cascades, and it will undoubtedly yet be recorded from the Proy- ince of Alberta, as it is found both in northern Washington, Idaho, and Montana. I have taken it at Fort Colville, Washington, near the line; and have seen it on Pond d’Oreille Lake, in Idaho; while Dr. C. Hart Merriam took an adult female near Fort Ellis, Montana, on July 3, 1872, where it was undoubtedly breeding. Messrs. Richmond and Knowlton obtained an immature bird on August 12, 1888, at Bear Creek, and Mr. R. 8. Williams records a specimen from Gold Run, in the Belt Mountains, on May 24, 1882; he writes me that he has also observed it near Columbia Falls, thus showing that. this species is pretty generally dis- tributed over the more mountainous and western portions of the State of Montana. These points, according to our present knowledge, mark the northern limits of its known range. I have been unable to find any records of its occurrence in either Wyoming or Colorado; but as it is known to be a summer resident in various parts of both Utah and northern New Mexico, it will probably yet be found along the western slopes of the Rocky Mountains in these two States. It is known to occur in the mountains of California, Arizona, and New Mexico, as well as in suitable localities in the intervening regions, and as already stated extends southward over the table-lands of Mexico. Its breeding range is coex- tensive with its geographical distribution in the United States. The Calliope Hummingbird is a mountain-loving species, and during the breeding season is rarely met with below altitudes of 4,000 feet, and much more frequently between 6,500 to 8,000 feet. Its favorite resorts are the open timber found about the edges of mountain meadows and parks, and the rocky hillsides covered here and there with straggling pines and small aspen groves. Mr. I’. Stephens writes me: “Stellula calliope is a rare summer resident in California, at least as far south as the San Bernardino Mountains, where I found two nests in 1885. Each contained young recently hatched. The first nest was found May 24, in the anyon of the Santa Anna River, at about 3,000 feet alti- tude, which must be exceptionally low. The female was seen on the nest; it was driven off and shot, and the skin preserved, so that the identification is unques- tionable. 220) LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. “The nest was built on an old nest of Trochilus coste, which is normal in com- position and location. The second nest was found June 23, at about 8,000 feet altitude, on the southern side of Mount Grayback, the highest peak of the San Ber- nardino range. It was built on a splinter of a knot, or short, broken branch, pro- jecting from the side of a large cedar, about 20 feet from the eround, and also contained young birds. The parent was shot as she flew from the nest, and preserved. This nest 1s different from the other, and is probably of the normal type. This species is not common even in the migrations.” These are the most southern breeding records of which I have any knowledge. Mr. Charles A. Allen has taken its nests near Nicasio, California, and Mr Charles H. Townsend found it a common summer resident on the McCloud River; the first nest and eges of this species were taken by the late Capt. John Feilner, First Dragoons, United States Army, on June 4, 1859, near Pitt River, Cali- fornia, and these are now in the United States National Museum collection. Captain Feilner, who was an ardent ornithologist and odlogist, was subsequently killed by hostile Indians while in the pursuit of his favorite study. Although the Calliope Hummingbird is quite a common summer resident in suitable localities, its nests and eggs are still comparatively rare in collections. Both Dr. James C. Merrill, United States Army, and the writer found this Hummingbird quite common at Fort Klamath, Oregon, where I took several of its nests and eggs. Two of the former have been figured in Mr. Robert Ridgway’s paper, “The Hummingbirds,” in the ‘Report of the National Museum for 1890” (Pls. 2 and 3), and a quadruple nest of the same species taken by Mr. Charles H. Townsend, near Baird, California, a most remarkable structure, is figured on Pl. 1 in the same publication. The Calliope Hummer made its appearance at Fort Klamath in 1883 about May 9, possibly a few days earlier, or about the time the wild currant and gooseberry bushes began to blossom, and by the middle of the month I have seen hundreds ina morning’s walk. While Selasphorus rufus was also quite com- mon at the same time, I believe this species outnumbered it about three to one. Although T searched for their nests most carefully, several weeks passed before [ sueceeded in finding one, and then its discovery was accidental. I had taken quite a long walk along the banks of Fort Creek on June 10, and, the day being a hot one, sat down with my back resting against the trunk of a bushy black pine whose lower limbs had been killed by fire; while resting thus one of these Hummers buzzed repeatedly about my head for a few seconds at a time, and then rose perpendicularly in the air, only to repeat the performance again. I had no idea then that this species nested in pines, but in order to give me an opportunity to watch its performance better I moved out from under the tree, and a few minutes later saw the bird settle on what I at first supposed to be an old clump of pine cones. On looking closer, however, I noticed its nest, which was ingeniously saddled on two small cones, and its outward appearance resem- bled a cone very closely. The nest contained two eggs, which were considerably advanced in incubation, and were not disturbed. Knowing now where to look THE CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRD. Pall for them, I had no further difficulty in finding their nests, and all of those observed by me were built in exactly similar situations. I succeeded in obtain- ing’ three sets of nearly fresh eges, and found a number of other nests containing young during the next few days. They were usually placed on or against a dry cone on small dead limbs of Pinus contorta, from 8 to 15 feet from the eround, and on account of the brittle nature of these limbs they were rather hard to secure. The nests, while outw ardly not as handsome as those of the majority of our Hummers, are nevertheless marvels of ingenuity, all those I have seen mimicking a small dead pine cone so perfectly as to almost de fy detection unless one sees the bird fly on or off the nest. The majority found were sad- dled on one or two such cones, or on a small limb and resting against the sides of a cone. The outer walls are composed of bits of bark and small shreds of cone, and the interior cup is softly lined with willow down. An aver ‘age nest measures about 14 inches in outer diameter by the same in depth 1; the inner cup being three- Tynantare of an inch in width by one-half inch in de pth. The nests were generally so placed that the contents were protected by larger limbs or green boughs above, and at distances varying from 5 to 12 feet from the ground. One I found had a flattened cone projecting directly over it, resembling an opened umbrella. While bushy pines seem to constitute their favorite nest- ing sites in northern California and Oregon at least, they do not invariably con- fine themselves to such trees. Mr. Shelly W. Denton took a nest of the € ‘allio, re Hummer at Franktown, Washoe C ounty, Nevada, which is now in Mr. William Brewster's collection at Cambridge, Massachusetts. Mr. Denton watched the bird while building it. This is composed interiorly of fine moss and willow down, and the outer walls are decorated with tiny shreds of bark, fine flakes of wood, and flakes of whitewash, fastened securely with cobwebs; it was placed ona knot in a rope hanging from the roof of a woodshed and within 5 feet of an occupie vd dwelling fast The materials out of which the nest is composed closely assim- ilate the rope and knot on which it is placed. This nest contained two eges on June 8, 1887, these being deposited on alternate days. The male was never seen about the nest. » The rope (one-third of an inch thick) hung down about 4 feet, so that every time the female settled on the rim of the nest while building she laa it to swing back and forth like a pendulum. ‘This specimen, which I have seen, does not resemble the nests taken by me very closely, and the Cal- liope Hummer ey idently attempts to mimic the immediate surroundings as nearly as practicable. Mr. Walter E. Bryant records another, built upon a projecting splinter of a woodpile, at a height of 5 feet.’ The only eggs of this species in the United States National Museum col- lection are those taken by the late Capt. John Feilner, United States Army, near Pitt River, California, in June, 1859, and three sets collected by myself near Fort Klamath, Oregon. They resemble the eggs of our better known Hummingbirds in shape and color, but are smaller. 1Bulletin of ‘ihe California Academy of Sciences, 1887, p. 452. 222 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. The average measurement of eight eggs in the United States National Museum collection is 11.71 by 7.94 millimetres, or about 0.46 by 0.31 inch. The largest egg measures 12.19 by 8.388 millimetres, or 0.48 by 0.33 inch; the smallest, 10.67 by 7.37 millimetres, or 0.42 by 0.29 inch. The type specimen, No. 21737 (not figured), from a set of two eggs, Ben- dire collection, was taken by the writer near Fort Klamath, Oregon, on June 11, 1883. 78. Calothorax lucifer (Swarnsoy). LUCIFER HUMMINGBIRD. Q07 Cynanthus lucifer SWAINSON, Philosophical Magazine, 1827, 442. Calothorax lucifer GRAY, Genera of Birds, 1848, I, p. 110. (B —, C —, R 344, C 418, U 437.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Table-lands of Mexico, from Puebla and the Valley of Mexico north to southern Arizona. We are indebted to Mr. H. W. Henshaw for the addition of the Lucifer Hummingbird to our fauna. He took a female of this species on August 7, 1874, near Camp Bowie, Arizona, where it appeared to be rare, and, as far as I am aware, no other specimens have since then been taken within our borders. The male resembles Costa’s Hummingbird somewhat in size and general colora- tion, so that it can scareely be recognized from it on the wing, and might therefore be readily overlooked by the average collector. It appears to be a common species in the more southern portions of Mexico, among the table- lands of Puebla and on the borders of the Valley of Mexico. The late Mr. Bullock, in his ‘Six Months in Mexico,” gives a description of the nest and eggs of this species, and says: ‘They breed in Mexico in June and July, and the nest is a beautiful specimen of, the architectural talent of these birds; it is neatly constructed of cotton or the down of the thistle, to which is fastened on the outside, by some glutinous substance, a white, flat lichen resembling ours. “The female lays two eggs, perfectly white, and large for the size of the bird, and the Indians informed me they were hatched in three weeks by the male and female sitting alternately. * * * In sleeping they frequently suspend themselves by the feet, with their heads downward, in the manner of some parrots.”! The general habits of this species seem to resemble those of our better- known Hummingbirds very closely. There are no nests and eges of the Lucifer Hummingbird in the collection, and I am therefore unable to give measure- ments; but, judging from the size of the bird, its eggs should correspond closely with those of Calypte coste ‘A fuller account of Mr. Bullock’s paper on this species can be found in Mr. Robert Ridgway’s paper on the Hummingbirds, in the Report of the National Museum, 1890 (pp. 360-362). RIEFFER’S HUMMINGBIRD. . 223 79. Amazilia fuscicaudata (Fraser). RIEFFER’S HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus fuscicaudatus FRASER, Proceedings Zoological Society, 1840, 17. Amazilia fuscicaudata RIDGWAY, Proceedings U.S. National Museum, I, 1878, 147. (B —, C —, R 345, © 419, U 438.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Northern South America,from Keuador and Colombia, north through Central America and eastern Mexico, to the lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas. Rieffer’s Hummingbird, a common Central American species, claims a place in our fauna from the fact that a single specimen has been taken at Fort Brown, Texas. This was brought alive to Dr. James (. Merrill, United States Army, for examination, in June, 1876, by one of the soldiers, and a careful description of it was made by the Doctor at the time, as the man wanted to keep it; but it shortly afterwards escaped from him. As it has not been obtained since then in the lower Rio Grande Valley, notwithstanding the fact that considerable collecting has been done there, it can only be considered as a strageler within our borders. Mr. Charles W. Richmond has kindly furnished me with the following interesting notes on this species: “Amazilia fuscicaudata is extremely abundant in the lowlands of eastern Nicaragua. It outnumbers in individuals all of the other (five) species of Hummingbirds found in the same region. On the Escondido River this species is confined to the banana plantations and the shrubbery around the houses, where it finds an abundance of food and good nesting sites. It is the plantation Hummer, only two other species occasionally wandering into the plantations from the forest, which is the home of the other species. This Hummingbird is inquisitive, like some other Hummers, and often poises 2 or 3 feet from one, changing its position on any conspicuous movement from the ol ject of its curi- osity, and when satisfied darts off at great speed, uttering a succession of shrill chirps. Its nest is frequently placed in small orange, lemon, or lime trees, near houses, 4 or 5 feet from the eround. The bird selects any desirable site for a nest, in fact often building it close to the end of the limb of a bamboo hanging out over the river or creek, and in this case usually 6 or more feet above the water. The exterior of the nest is often covered with moss, which in this damp region remains green during the* occupancy of the nest and for a long time afterwards, giving it a very pretty appearance. A nest found in October had just been deserted by the young birds, one found late in November contained fresh eges, one found about the middle of January contained eves nearly fresh, and another one found the same day was in course of construc- tion. The Spaniards here call Humminebirds ‘earrion.’” Mr. George K. Cherrie, in his Preliminary List of the Birds of San Jose, Costa Rica, in speaking of Rieffer’s Hummingbird, says: “The most abundant species about San Jose, and, indeed, the most abundant species found on either 224. LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. coast, and up to an altitude of about 6,000 feet. I believe that this species is nesting in every month of the year. Nests are usually placed about 15 feet from the ground, in either orange or lemon trees. A nest before me is constructed of some soft fiber much resembling hemp tow. There are a few lichens covering the outside, and an inner lining of a little native cotton. The nest, somewhat elliptical in form, measures 15 inches deep by 2 inches long and 15 wide; inside, 14 by seven-eighths by one-half inch deep. The two eggs, white in color and elliptical ovate in form, measure 0.53 by 0.37 inch.”! The general habits of Rieffer’s Hummingbird are very similar to those of our better-known species. The nests differ somewhat in make-up; of the two specimens before ine, both taken by Mr. Charles W. Richmond, on December 24,1892, and January 16, 1893, the first was saddled on the end of a small, drooping twig of an alligator pear tree, 45 feet up, the nest bemg partly sup- ported by the ends of a bunch of leaves. The base of this nest is constructed of bits of dry grass, and the walls of shreds of fine vegetable fiber. The outer walls of this specimen are well covered with green moss and with a few bits of lichens, the whole being securely fastened with spider webs. The inside is lined with soft, brownish down. The structure is a neat piece of bird archi- tecture, and contained two broken eges when found. It measures 1§ inches in outer diameter, and the same in height. The inner cup measures seven-eighths of an inch in width by three-fourths of an inch in depth. The base of the second specimen is composed of shreds of rotten wood fibers; the walls are built up of apparently similar but finer material, and they are very sparingly covered with shreds of green moss, but more profusely with small pellets of white plant down, held in place by spider webs, while the interior is lined with fine vegetable down. This nest resembles specimens of the Black-chinned Hummingbird somewhat, but is considerably larger. ‘The outside measurements are the same as those of the preceding, but the inner cup is somewhat more roomy; the outer walls are thinner and the cavity is shallower; it was fastened to a fork of a drooping bamboo twig hanging about 4 feet above the water of a crec':. Tt contained two nearly fresh eggs on January 16, 1893; these are now in the United States National Museum collection. They resemble the eggs of our better-known Hummingbirds, both in shape and color; and measure 13.46 by 9.14 and 13.72 by 8.64 millimetres, or 0.53 by 0.36 and 0.54 by 0.34 inch. The type specimen, No. 25813 (not figured), from a set of two eggs, was taken by Mr. Charles W. Richmond on January 16, 1893, from the last described nest, on the Escondido River, near Bluefields, Nicaragua, and it would appear as if this species actually nested in nearly every month of the year. 1The Auk, Vol. IX, 1892, p. 325. THE BUFF-BELLIED HUMMINGBIRD, 225) 80. Amazilia cerviniventris GouLp. BUFF-BELLIED HUMMINGBIRD. Amaziliaus cerviniventris GOULD, Proceedings Zoological Society, 1856, 150. (B —, C —, BR 346, C 420, U 439.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Valley of the lower Rio Grande in Texas; south through eastern Mexico to Nicaragua, Central America. The Buff-bellied Hummingbird was also added to our fauna by Dr. James C. Merrill, United States Army, who took the first specimen within our borders on the military reservation of Fort Brown, Texas, on August 17, 1876. Since then it has been ascertained to be quite a common summer visitor in the lower Rio Grande Valley, and a number of its nests have been taken there. It arrives in southern ‘Texas about April 1, and returns south in the latter part of Septem- ber or the beginning of October. It is one of our plainest-colored Humming- birds, and its general habits, food, ete., are undoubtedly similar to those of the better-known members of this family found in the United States. Dr. James C. Merrill says: “The Buff-bellied Hummingbird proves to be an abundant summer visitor, and I have nowhere found it so abundant as on the military reservation at Fort Brown. Here it seems pertectly at home among the dense, tangled thickets, darting rapidly among the bushes and creeping vines, and is with difficulty obtained. A rather noisy bird, its shrill cries usu- ally first attract one’s attention to its presence. A Hummer’s nest, undoubtedly made by this species, was found in September, 1877, within the fort. It was placed on the fork of a dead, drooping twig of a small tree on the edge of a path through a thicket; it was about 7 feet from the ground, and contained the shriveled body of a young bird. ‘The nest is made of the downy blossoms of the tree on which it is placed, bound on the outside with cobwebs, and rather sparingly covered with lichens. Intefnally, it is somewhat less than 1 inch in depth by one-half inch in diameter. The external depth is 14 inches.”? I have eight of these nests before me, all taken in Cameron ( ounty, Texas, which are readily distinguishable from those of other species breeding in the United States whose nests are known. They are composed of shreds of vege- table fiber, thistle down, and an occasional specimen is lined with a vegetable substance resembling brown cattle hair; but the majority are lined with thistle down. The outside is covered with bits of dry flower blossoms, shreds of bark, and small pieces of light-colored lichens, securely fastened in place by spider webs. The nests are neatly built, and are usually saddled on a small, drooping limb, or placed on a fork of a horizontal twig, at distances of from 3 to 8 feet from the ground. Small trees or bushes of the Anachuita (Cordia boissiert) ebony and hackberry seem to furnish their favorite nesting sites, though occasionally a nest is found in a willow. An average-sized nest measures 12 inches in outer diameter by 14 inches in height; the inner cup is seven-eighths ' Proceedings United States National Museum, Vol. I, 1878, pp. 149, 150. 16896—No. 3——15 226 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. of an inch in width by five-eighths of an inch in depth. Open woods and the edges of chaparral thickets near roads or paths seem to be preferred for pur- poses of nidification. Probably two broods are raised in a season. ‘The earliest nesting record I have is April 23; the latest, June 16. The eges resemble those of our better-known Hummers in color and shape, and appear rather small for the size of the bird. The average measurement of eighteen specimens in the United States National Museum collection is 13.23 by 8.57 millimetres, or about 0.52 by 0.34 inch. The largest egg measures 14.22 by 8.89 millimetres, or 0.56 by 0.35 inch; the smallest, 12.19 by 8.64 millimetres, or 0.48 by 0.34 inch. The type specimen, No. 26800 (not figured), from a set of two eggs, Ralph collection, was taken near Brownsville, Texas, on May 9, 1892. 81. Basilinna xantusi (LAWRENCE). XANTUS’S HUMMINGBIRD. Amazilia xantusi LAWRENCE, Annals Lyceum, New York, 1860, 109. Basilinna vanthusi ELLrIoTr, Classification and Synopsis of the Trochilidie, March, 1879, 227. (B —, C 273, R 347, C 407, U 440.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Southern Lower California, north to about latitude 29°. Xantus’s Hummingbird appears to be confined to the southern half of the peninsula of Lower California, where it was first discovered by Mr. J. Xantus in the fall of 1859. It was described by Mr. George N. Lawrence in April, 1860, who named it in honor of its discoverer. Mr, Xantus did not communi- cate anything regarding the general habits of this species, and nothing further was learned about it until Mr. L. Belding visited the same regions and obtamed -its nests and eges, in the spring of 1882. According to this gentleman, it is a mountain-loving species, in winter frequenting the canyons in close proximity to water, while in summer it is distributed through the orchards and gardens, where it nests. Mr. Walter E. Bryant, in his “Catalogue of Birds of Lower California,” states: “I have found them only in mountainous country where there was abun- dance of water, from Comondu as far north as latitude 29°. None were seen on the islands.”? Mr. Belding, in speaking of this species, says: “It was common at the western base of Cacachiles Mountains in February; more so, in fact, than Calypte costa. twas not observed at San Jose until some time after my arrival, though it occurred in canyons only 2 or 3 miles to the westward. About the last of April it was common in orchards at San Jose. While incubating this species is very confiding and courageous, sometimes remaining upon the nest until removed from it by'the hand. A nest taken April 23, 1882, at San Jose, ‘Proceedings of the California Academy of Sciences, second series, Vol. II, 1889, pp. 289, 290. XANTUS’S HUMMINGBIRD. DORE yas placed underneath an awning or shade of boughs and weeds in front of a farmhouse. It was surrounded by downy heads of composite plants, and could scarcely be distinguished from them, having, as usual, been made of raw cotton.” This nest, which is now before me (No. 18563, United States National Museum collection) is composed exteriorly of fine plant fibers, thistle down, and shreds of moss, and these are securely fastened into place by spider webs; the interior is lined with thistle down and raw cotton; it measures about 13 inches in outer diameter by 1 inch in height. The inner cavity is large for the size of the nest, measuring 1 inch in width by one-half inch in depth. The second nest, No. 18564, taken by Mr. Belding on May 7, 1882, in a canyon near Santiago Peak, Lower California, resembles the nest of the Black-chinned Hummingbird somewhat, being principally composed of plant down, covered on the outside with a few scales of buds, seed capsules, fine shreds of bark fiber, leaf stems, and an empty cocoon, and these decorations are fastened with spider webs, while the inner cup is lined with plant down and other fine fibrous material. This nest was saddled on the fork of a small twig. Its dimensions are about the same as those of the first nest described, and like it is rather shallow. The eggs resemble those of our better-known Hunnningbirds in shape and color. The two taken from the first nest measure respectively 12.19 by 7.87 and 11.94 by 7.87 millimetres, or 0.48 by 0.31 and 0.47 by 0.31 inch; and those of the second nest, 11.94 by 8.13 and 12.19 by 7.87 millimetres, or 0.47 by 0.32 and 0.48 by 0.31 inch. The type specimen, No. 18564 (not figured), from a set of two eggs, was taken by Mr. L. Belding on May 7, 1882, near Santiago Peak, Lower California, as already stated. 82. Basilinna leucotis (Vremuor). WHITE-EARED HUMMINGBIRD. Trochilus leucotis ViEILLOT, Encyclopédie Méthodique II, 559. Basilinna leucotis Bore, Isis, 1831, 546. (B10 = Ri =O 4411.,) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Table-lands of Mexico and Central America; north in the United States to the higher mountain ranges in southern Arizona; south to Niearagua, Central America. This handsome Hummingbird has only very recently been added to our fauna, Dr. A. KK. Fisher obtaining a specimen on June 9, 1894, in the Chiricahua Mountains, in southeastern Arizona. In writing of this capture he says: “During the early part of June a camp was made at Fly Park, a well- wooded area southeast of the head of Pinery Canyon, at an altitude of about 10,000 feet. A boreal honeysuckle (Lonicera involucrata) grows commonly through the scattered woods of spruce (Picea engelmanni), fir (Pseudotsuga taxi- Jolia), pine (Pinus ayacahuite), and aspen (Populus tremuloides). The flowers of the honeysuckle attract great numbers of Hummers, and hundreds of Selas- 228 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. phorus platycercus and many Hugenes fulgens and Caligena clemenci@ were seen daily about the clumps. Early on the morning of June 9, in company with Mr. Fred. Hall Fowler, the writer saw a female Dasilinna leucotis sitting on a dead twig of a Lonicera bush, close to the ground, warming itself in the rays of the rising sun. ‘The white stripe on the side of the head was plainly visible, and led to its speedy capture. Subsequently others were looked for, but none were seen.”? Messrs. Salvin and Godman say: “This is one of the commonest and most characteristic of the Hummingbirds of the highlands of Mexico and Guatemala, its range extending from the States of Sonora and Tamaulipas to the uplands of * Nicaragua, birds from these widely separated districts presenting no appreciable difference. Its range in altitude is considerable. It does not occur much below 4,000 feet above sea level, and thence reaches as high as 7,000 or 8,000 feet. On the slopes of the Volean de Fuego we used to find it not uncommonly in open glades of the oak forests, where it took its food from any plants that happened to be in flower. Of the breeding habits of this species we have no account, but a three parts grown bird from Sierra de Victoria was shot by Mr. Richardson in April; so that the nesting time in that district would commence in March or the end of February. But the nesting season probably extends over a considerable period, for De Oca says he once found a nest in December, though the usual nesting time in the Valley of Mexico, where the bird is more common than at Jalapa, is in July and August. According to Villada it feeds from the flowers of Cacti and Agave, and also from those of Bouvardia and Salvia.” I have been unable to find a detailed description of the nest and eggs of this species, and there are no specimens in the United States National Museum collection. 83. lache latirostris (Swarnson). BROAD-BILLED HUMMINGBIRD. Oynanthus latirostris SwWAINSON, Philosophical Magazine, 1827, 441. lache latirostris BLL1Io TT, Classification and Synopsis of the Trochilidw, March, 1879, 235. (B=, ©-—, RB 348nC 42150 441) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Mountains of southern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico; south to the Valley of Mexico and Michoacan, Mexico. The Broad-billed or Ciree Hummingbird appears to be a moderately com- mon summer resident in suitable localities in southern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico, at altitudes from 3,500 to 5,000 feet. It was first added to our fauna by Mr. H. W. Henshaw, who took two adult males in the Santa Rita Mountains, a few miles from old Camp Crittenden, Arizona, on August 23, 1874. Since then it has also been taken by Mr. F. Stephens in the same locality, where he secured five specimens, which are now in Mr. William Brewster's collection. 'The Auk, Vol. XI, 1894, p. 325-326. * Biologia Centrali Americana, Aves, Vol. II, July, 1892, pp. 313, 314. THE BROAD-BILLED HUMMINGBIRD. 229 In speaking of their habits he says: “They were always found near water, and usually along the streams which flowed through canyons, high among the mountains. ‘They seemed to prefer sycamores to other trees, and invariably perched on dead twigs where they could command an open view. Their notes were flat, and differed from those of other Hummers.” ! Mr. W. EK. D. Scott subsequently extended its range northward to the Santa Jatalina Mountains. In his notes on the birds of Arizona he makes the following remarks about this species: “During the spring, summer, and early fall of 1884 this was a rather com- mon species in the Catalina Mountains, from an altitude of 3,500 to 5,000 feet, but in the corresponding season of 1885 the birds were apparently rare. The birds arrive at this point early in April, the 5th of that month being my earliest record, when I took two adult males. They remain throughout the spring and summer, leaving from the middle to the last of September. I took an adult female on June 26, 1884, that contained an unlaid egg, with shell nearly formed, so that there can be little doubt that the birds breed at this point. Besides, I have the young birds in first plumage from July 1 until late in August.” There are also a number of specimens of this species in the United States National Museum collection, taken by Mr. E. W. Nelson in the Santa Rita Mountains and near Tucson, Arizona; and Dr. Edgar A. Mearns took a specimen ina canyon of the Guadalupe Mountains, in southwestern New Mexico, close to the international boundary line, on August 31, 1893, and another on the Santa Cruz River, west of the Patagonia Mountains, near the Sonora line, on July 4, 1893, both of which are now in the collection here. Dr. A. K. Fisher failed to find this species in the Chiricahua Mountains, Arizona, in the spring of 1894, but it undoubtedly occurs there also. There is a nest of this species, No. 17890, in the United States National Museum collec- tion, taken by Prof. A. Dugés at Guanajuato, Mexico, and received from him in July, 1879, which measures 1$ inches in outer diameter by 14 inches in height. The inner cup measures 1 inch in width by three-fourths of an inch in depth. For a Hummer’s nest it is composed of rather coarse materials throughout. These consist of fine shreds of bark and plant fibers, mixed with a little finer vegetable down; the outside is decorated with narrow strips of bark, fine plant stems, bits of lichens, and a piece of white cotton thread, these materials being covered with a coating of spider webs, which hold them securely in place. The inner lining’ consists of finer materials of a similar nature, and the entire nest is rather loosely put together. This nest was saddled on a fork of a slender and drooping twig. ; Messrs. Salvin and Godman mention another specimen, stating: ‘Senor A, Herrera describes a nest of this species which he found at Chimalcoyoe, in the Valley of Mexico, as composed of the seeds of Asclepias linaria, and placed in a plant of an Opuntia in such a manner that a section of the plant shaded it from sun and rain.” * ' Bulletin Nuttall Ornithological Club, Vol. VII, 1882, p. 211. 2 Biologia Centrali Americana, Aves, Vol. II, May, 1892, pp. 257, 25%. 230 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. There are no eggs of this species in the United States National Museum collection, and I have been unable to find a description or measurements of the same; but they undoubtedly resemble those of our smaller Hummers very closely. “amily COTINGIDAS. Cortnaas. 84. Platypsaris albiventris (Lawrence). XANTUS’S BECARD. Hadrostomus albiventris LAWRENCE, Annals Lyceum, New York, VIII, 1867, 475. Platypsaris albiventris RtpG@wAy, Manual of North American Birds, 1887, 525. (B—,C —, R —, C —, U 441.1) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western and southern Mexico; south to Yucatan. Casually north to the southern border of the United States in southern Arizona. Xantus’s Beeard, the only representative of this family in the United States, claims a place in our fauna from the fact that a single specimen, an adult male, was taken by Mr. W. W. Price in southern Arizona, close to the Sonora line. Mr. Price makes the following remarks on this subject: “On June 20, 1888, I secured an adult male, in breeding plumage, of this species, in the pine forests of the Huachuca Mountains, at an elevation of about 7,500 feet, and 7 miles north of the Mexican boundary. (See Ridgway’s ‘Manual of North American Birds,’ p. 325.) Iam certain there were a pair of these birds, as I heard their very peculiar notes in different places at the same time; but the locality being so extremely rough and broken, I only secured the one above recorded. Several times while collecting at high altitudes I have heard bird notes that I thought were these, but they were always on almost inaccessible mountain sides. Their note reminds one of the song of Stephens’s Vireo (Vireo huttoni stephensi), but is not so long continued and is harsher. From obsery- ing the actions of the bird I killed, I am sure its mate was in the vicinity, and probably nesting, although I have since carefully searched the place without suc- cess. This species will doubtless be found breeding in Arizona, as was Trogon ambiguus.” From the fact that no other specimens of this species have been taken in that vicinity, which has since then been visited by several good collectors, | am inclined to believe that this bird can only be considered as a very rare summer visitor in southern Arizona. The late Col. A. J. Grayson met with this species at Mazatlan, where he obtained a male in February, and Mr. J. Xantus also found it on the plains of Colima, Mexico. Messrs. Salvin and Godman do not recognize this as a good species, and place it under the older name of Hadrostomus aglaie (Lafresnaye), stating how- ever: “This species, taken as a whole, is subject to a great amount of variation, not only as regards the intensity of the color of the back and under surface, but 1 The Auk, Vol. V, 1888, p. 425. XANTUS’S BECARD. 231 also as regards to the rosy spot on the throat, ete.” Further on, in speaking of the habits of H. aglaie, they say: “In all parts of our region the range in alti- tude of this species is very considerable, and extends from the sea level to an altitude of at least 8,000 feet. In the Tres Marias Grayson found it only in thick woods, where it was seen searching for insects, sometimes. darting after them when on the wing, at other times looking for them among the leaves and branches, not unlike the Warblers. Its notes are feeble and but seldom uttered, and its habits are solitary. This island bird has been separated by Mr. Ridgway as Platypsaris insularis. “Mr. Robert Owen found a nest of this bird on May 15, 1860, at Chuacusin, Guatemala, and sent us the female, its nest, and two eggs. The nest was entirely composed ot tendrils, strips of bark, and grass, so as to form a hanging nest, open at the top and about 2 inches deep. It was built between and hung from the forked branch of a sapling at the foot of a mountain. The egg is white, beautifully marked with pencilings of pinkish red and seattered spots of the same color; these markings are much blended and concentrated at the larger end.”? There is nothing recorded as yet regarding the nesting habits and eggs of Xantus’s Becard; but they are not likely to differ very much from the nest and eges of Hadrostomus aglaia, to which it is closely allied. As far as I can learn the eggs still remain unknown. Family TYRANNID. Tyrant Frycatcuers. 85. Milvulus tyrannus (Linnxus). FORK-TAILED FLYCATCHER. Muscicapa tyrannus LINN.2US, Systema Nature, ed. 12, I, 1766, 325. Milvulus tyrannus BONAPARTE, Geographical and Comparative List, 1538, 25. (B 122, +240, R 302, C 366, U [442].) GROGRAPHICAL RANGE: From northern Patagonia north through South and Central America to southern Mexico and the Lesser Antilles. Within the United States accident- ally in Mississippi, Kentucky, New Jersey, and southern California. The Fork-tailed Flyeatcher can only be considered an accidental strageler within our borders. It is a common bird throughout the more level and open portions of Central America, and also throughout the greater part of South America. The Scissor-tail Tyrant, or “’Tijereta,” as this species is called by Sclater and Hudson, ‘is migratory, and arrives, already mated, at Buenos Ayres at the end of September, and takes its departure at the end of February in families, old and young birds together. In disposition and general habits it resembles the | Biologia Centrali Americana, Aves, Vol. Il, December, 1890, pp. 121-124. 232 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. true Tyrant-birds, but differs from them in language, its various chirping and twittering notes having a hard, percussive sound, which Azara well compares to the snapping of castanets. It prefers open situations, with scattered trees and bushes, and is also partial to marshy grounds, where it takes up a position on an elevated stalk to watch for insects, and seizes them in the air, like the Flycatcher. It-also greedily devours elderberries and other small fruits. “The nest is not deep, but is much more elaborately constructed than is usual with the Tyrants. Soft materials are preferred, and in many cases the nests are composed almost exclusively of wool. The inside is cup-shaped, with a flat bottom, and is smooth and hard, the thistle down with which it is lined being cemented with gum. The eggs are four, sharply pointed, light cream color, and spotted, chiefly at the large end, with chocolate. In the breeding time these Tyrants attack other birds approaching the nest with great spirit, and and have a particular hatred to the Chimango, pursuing it with the greatest vio- lence through the air, with angry notes, resembling in sound the whetting of a scythe, but uttered with great rapidity and emphasis. How greatly this species is imposed upon by the Cow-bird, notwithstanding its pugnacious temper, we have already seen in my account of that bird. “The Scissor-tails have one remarkable habit; they are not gregarious, but once every day, just before the sun sets, all the birds living near together rise to the tops of the trees, calling to one another with loud, excited chirps, and then mount upward like rockets to a great height in the air; then, after whirling about for a few moments, they precipitate themselves downward with the greatest violence, opening and shutting their tails during their wild zigzag flight, and uttering a succession of sharp, grinding notes. After this curious perform- ance they separate in pairs, and, perching on the tree tops, each couple utters together its rattling castanet notes, after which the company breaks up.”? Mr. George K. Cherrie, in his List of Birds of San Jose, Costa Rica, speaks of this species as follows: “Resident, but much more abundant at some seasons than at others—that is, immediately after the breeding season (from the latter part of April until the first of July) they become quite common about the suburbs of the city, and remain so until the middle of December. “Ata slightly lower altitude it nests abundantly. A nest with three fresh eggs, taken by Don Anastasio Alfaro at Tambor, Alajuela, May 2, 1889, was placed in a small tree, about 10 feet from the ground. The parent bird left the nest only very reluctantly and not until almost within the grasp of the col- lector. The nest is constructed of a mixture of small dry grass and weed stems and soft dry grass, rather compactly woven together, with a ling of a few fine rootlets. It measures outside 5 inches in diameter by 2% deep; inside, 24 in diameter by 24 deep. The eggs are white, sparsely spotted and blotched, chiefly about the larger end, with chestnut of slightly varying shades. In form the : 1 Argentine Ornithology, Vol. I, pp. 160, 161. * THE FORK-TAILED FLYCATCHER. 933 egos are ovate, and they measure 0.85 by 0.66, 0.88 by 0.65, and 0.89 by 0.63 inch” (equal to 22.35 by 16.76, 22.35 by 16. ile said 22.61 by 16 millimetres). 1 There are no eggs of this species in the United States National Museum collection, and I have been unable to obtain a fully identified specimen for illustration. 86. Milvulus forficatus (Genin). SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER Muscicapa for ficata GMELIN, Systema Nature I, i, 1788, 951. Milvulus for ficatus SWAINSON, Classification of Birds, I, 1527, 225 (B 123, C 241, R 301, C 367, U 443.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: From Nicaragua, Central America, north through eastern Mexico and in the United States, regularly through Texas and the Indian Territory to southern Kansas. Occasional in southwestern Missouri, western Arkansas, and Louisiana. Accidental in Florida, Virginia, Iinois, New Jersey, the New England States, Manitoba, and even north to York Factory, Hudson Bay, and the Mackenzie River Valley, Northwest Territory, Dominion of Canada. The Scissor-tailed, also known as “Swallow-tailed,” Flycatcher, and more frequently as the “Texan Bird of Paradise,” is a common summer resident throughout the greater portion of Texas and the Indian Territory, and extends its breeding range northward into southern Kansas. It usually arrives in the southwestern portions of Texas about the middle of March, and returns to its winter homes in Central America in October. Mr. W. E. Grover, of Galveston, Texas, informs me that some of these birds remain in that vicinity throughout the year, moving about from place to place in small of flocks from five to six, and occasionally as many as a dozen may be seen together. Its breeding range is coincident with its distribution in the United States. The Scissor-tailed Flycatcher is the most graceful and attractive species of this family found within our borders, and is certain to be noticed by everyone whereyer it occurs. Its long outer tail feathers, which it can open and close at will, and its pinkish flanks make it a conspicuous object among the Texan birds. In all of its movements on the wing it is extremely graceful and pleas- ing to the eye, especially when fluttering slowly from tree to tree on the rather open prairie, uttering its twittering notes, which sound like the syllables “psee- psee” frequently repeated, and which resentble those of the Kingbird, but are neither as loud nor as shrill; again, when.chasing each other in play or anger, in swift flight from tree to tree, when it utters a harsh note like ‘thish-thish.” It is agente a bird of the more open country, and shuns extensive timbered tracts, although it is frequently observed on the outskirts of these. It rarely lights on the ground, and its long tail makes it then appear rather awkward in its movements. Although included among the Tyrant Flycatchers, it is rather amiable and social in disposition; and atter the birds are once mated several 1The Auk, Vol. IX, 1892, pp. 251 and 322. 234 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. pairs may frequently breed close to each other, apparently in perfect harmony. It rarely molests or chases birds which are smaller than itself, but boldly attacks Hawks, Ravens, Crows, Jays, and other marauders with the utmost fury, when they come too close to its nesting site. The Scissor-tailed Flycatcher is.rather restless, and rarely remains in one place for any length of time. It is constantly on the lookout for passing insects, nearly all of which are caught on the wing and carried to some perch, where they are beaten into suitable pieces and swallowed at leisure. Its food eon- sists principally of moths, butterflies, beetles, grasshoppers, locusts, and cotton worms; while berries of various kinds are also eaten to some extent. Consid- ered from an economic point of view, they are among our most useful birds, and, as they are rarely molested, they seem to be steadily increasing in numbers, being far more common in many parts of Texas today than they were twenty years ago. They do not begin housekeeping at once after their arrival cea their winter quarters in Central America, but dally for several weeks in courting and love-making and having a good time generally before they begin their more serious duties of reproduction. They are not hard to please in the selection of a suitable nesting site, and almost any tree standing by itself is preferred to a more secluded situation Mr. H. P. Attwater, of Aransas County, Texas, writes me as follows on this subject: “'The bold, fearless character of the Scissor-tail is shown in the manner in which he builds his nest, which is a bulky structure, generally placed on a horizontal limb in an exposed position, and his careless disposition is also well exemplified by his choosing for materials anything that comes handy, frequently leaving long pieces hanging from the nest. I have found nests lined with feathers, and others with horse and cow manure.” They nest by preference in mesquite trees, less frequently in live and post oaks, the thorny hackberry or granjeno (Celtis pallida), the huisache (Acacia farnesiana), honey locust, mulberry, pecan, and the magnolia, as well as in vari- ous small, thorny shrubs. Their nests are placed at various distances of 5 to 40 feet from the ground, but on an average not over 15 feet, and often in very exposed situations, where they can readily be seen. Occasionally, when placed in trees whose limbs are well covered with long streamers of the gray Spanish moss, or in shrubs overrun with vines, they are rather more difficult to discover. As these birds are rarely molested, they become quite tame, and nest not infre- quently in gardens and in close proximity to the ranches. Nests of this species from different localities vary greatly in size and mate- rials from which constructed. The base and sides of the nest are usually composed of small twigs or rootlets, cotton and weed stems (those of a low floecose, woolly annual, Evax prolifera and Evax multicaulis, the former growing on dry and the latter on low ground, being nearly always present); in some sections the gray Spanish moss forms the bulk of the nest, in others raw cotton, and again sheep's wool; while rags, hair, twine, feathers, bits of paper, dry grass, and even seaweeds may be incorporated in the mass. One that I consider THE SCISSOR-TAILED FLYCATCHER. 235 a typical nest, is now before me; it is externally constructed of fine rootlets, mixed with stems of Hvax multicaulis, which are well worked into the outer walls. The inner cup of the nest is lined with fine plant fibers, with a little wool, and a few feathers. This nest is symmetrical in outline and compactly built; it was securely fastened on the forks of a small oak limb, and was pre- sented to the United States National Museum collection by Mr. H. P. Attwater, Rockport, Texas. Externally it measures 6 inches in diameter by 2? in depth; its inner diameter is 3 inches by 2 in depth. Other nests in the collection are much more loosely constructed and fully twice as bulky, due no doubt to the character of the materials used in their construction; and again, some birds are much neater and better builders and housekeepers than others. A nest taken by Dr. E. A. Mearns, United States Army, on April 29, 1893, from an oak tree situated on the edge of the parade ground at Fort Clarke, Texas, is mainly composed of strong cotton twine, mixed with a few twigs, weed stems, and rags; even the inner lining consists mostly of twine. How the female managed to use this without getting hopelessly entangled is astonishing. The previous season’s nest still remained in the same tree, and a considerable quan- tity of twine entered also into its composition. The earliest nesting record I have is April 19, at Brownsville, Texas, where fresh eges have also been found as late as July 6; and it appears more than probable that two broods are raised in many instances, at least in the southern portions of their breeding range. After the nest, which is constructed in about a week, is ready for occupancy, an egg is deposited daily until the clutch is completed; this usually consists of five eggs, occasionally of four or six. Incubation lasts about twelve days, and the female appears to perform this duty alone, while the male remains in the vicinity, and promptly chases away every suspicious intruder who may venture too close to the nest. The young are fed exclusively on an insect diet, and are able to leave the nest in about two weeks. Both parents assist in their care. In the late summer they congregate in considerable numbers in the cotton fields and open prairies preparatory to their migration south. The shell of the ege of the Scissor-tailed Flycatcher is smooth to the touch, strong, compact, and moderately glossy. The eggs are usually clear white, occasionally pale creamy white, and rarely of a very pale pinkish ground color. The markings consist of claret brown, heliotrope purple, and lavender spots, and elongated blotches, varying in size and abundance in different speci- mens; the larger end of the egg is generally the heaviest spotted; but few of these eges can be called heavily marked, and occasionally a specimen is found which is almost immaculate, the few markings on it being confined to the larger end only. In shape they vary from an ovate to a rounded ovate. The average measurement of one hundred and seven eggs in the United States National Museum collection is 22.51 by 16.96 millimetres, or about 0.89 by 0.67 inch. The largest ege of the series measures 23.88 by 18.29 milli- metres, or 0.94 by 0.72 inch; the smallest, 20.32 by 15.49 millimetres, or 0.80 by 0.61 inch. 236 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. Of the type specimens, No. 25574 (PI. 1, Fig. 12), from a set of six eggs, Ralph collection, was taken near Brownsville, Texas, on April 20, 1892, and measures a trifle above the average size, while No. 26292 (PI. 1, Fig. 13), from a set of four eggs, taken June 5, 1893, near Rockport, Aransas County, Texas, by Mr. H. P. Attwater, represents one of the least marked and smallest speci- mens in the series. 87. Tyrannus tyrannus (Linnxvus). KINGBIRD. Lanius tyrannus LINN BUS, Systema Nature, ed. 10, I, 1758, 94. Tyrannus tyrannus JORDAN, Manual of Vertebrates, ed. 4, 1884, 96. (B 124, C 242, R 304, © 368, U 444.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Temperate North America, chiefly east of the Rocky Moun- tains; rarer and more locally distributed westward, in portions of Utah, Idaho, Nevada, eastern California, Oregon, Washington, and southern British Columbia; north in the eastern British Provinces to about latitude 50°, and from Manitoba westward to about latitude 57° north; south in winter through central and western South America to Bolivia, the Island of Cuba, and the Bahamas. The Kingbird, also called ‘‘Bee Bird” and “Bee Martin,” is a common summer resident, and breeds throughout all of our Kastern and Middle States, and the southern portions of the Dominion of Canada, from Nova Scotia and adjacent regions, south of about latitude 50°, and west to about longitude 90°, whence it ranges north through Manitoba and Saskatchewan into Athabasca, beyond latitude 57°. In the South it breeds from Florida and the Gulf Coast to eastern Texas, but not nearly as commonly as in the Middle and Northern States. Thence it ranges in a northwesterly direction through the Indian Territory and Kansas to the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains, where it is rarely found at higher altitudes than 7,000 feet. It enters through some of the lower passes of these mountains into Utah, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Wash- ington, and British Columbia, where in certain localities it is not uncommon. I believe it has not yet been observed in northwestern Texas, New Mexico, or Arizona; and in California it can only be considered as a straggler. While : few winter in southern Florida and the Gulf Coast, the bulk of these birds migrate south into Central America, and some even into Bolivia, as well as to the Island of Cuba and the Bahamas. They leave the northern portions of their range about the middle of August, and linger in the south for some weeks before passing our borders. Few of our birds are better known throughout the United States than the Kingbird. Bold and fearless in character, yet tame and confiding in man, often preferring to live in close proximity to dwellings, in gardens and orchards, they are prime favorites with the majority of our farming population, and they well deserve their fullest protection. Few birds are more useful to the farmer; their reputation for pugnacity and reckless courage is so well established that to} THE KINGBIRD. Dt it is almost needless to dwell on it, as it is well known that they will boldly attack and drive off the largest of our Raptores, should one venture too near to their chosen nesting sites. Where a pair or more of these birds make their home in the vicinity of a farmhouse, the poultry yard is not likely to suffer much through feathered marauders at least; they are a perfect terror to all hawks, instantly darting at and rising above them, alighting on their shoulders or necks, and picking away at them most unmercifully until they are only too willing to beat a hasty retreat. The male is seemingly always on the lookout from his perch on the top branches of a tree or post for such enemies, and no matter how large they may be, a pair of Kingbirds is more than a match for any of them, our larger Falcons and Eagles not excepted. Crows and Blue Jays seem to be especially obnoxious to them, and instances are on record where they have done them material injury. Ronn the foregoing it. must not be assumed that our Kingbirds are agncalle quarrelsome and that they bully all other birds, as this is by no means the case. As arule they live in perfect harmony with all their smaller relatives, and some of the latter’s nests are not infrequently placed within a few feet of one of theirs, in the same tree, like that of the Orchard Oriole, for instance; and they are not content with protecting their own young and eggs, but watch over those of their neighbors as well. The only species I have observed as being on bad terms with the Kingbird is our little Ruby-throated Hummingbird, which is well known to be, if possible, even more aggressive and pugnacious than the former, and it would seem as if, small though he may be, he is a match for the average Kingbird, and probably always the aggressor. I have on two occasions seen a Ruby-throated Hummingbird put the other to flight. They arrive in our Southern States from their winter homes about the first two weeks in April, and move gradually northward, generally making their appearance in the more northern States about the middle of May. The return migration from the far north commences in the beginning of August, and from our Northern States usually in the latter part of this month. While by no means uncommon in many localities west of the Rocky Mountains, here this species is rather irregularly distributed, and while fairly abundant in certain sections, it is entirely absent in others which seem equally well adapted to it. I found the Kingbird rather common on the Malheur and John Day rivers, in Grant County, Oregon, while in closely adjacent sections (as in the vicinity of Camp Harney) I failed to observe a single specimen. I also met with it on Snake River, near old Fort Boise, Idaho. It appears to me to be gradually extending its range westward, and in Washington and southern British.Columbia it already reac shes the Pacific coast in places. The Kingbirds are rather noisy on their first arrival in the spring, and give free vent to their exuberance of spirits; they are very restless at this time, now hovering or fluttering slowly from one tree to another, or from fence post to fence post, the male following his mate with a peculiar, quivering movement of the wings and expanded tail, uttering at the same time a succession of shrill, 938 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. twittering notes like “‘pthsee, pthsee,” varied now and then with other calls which are rather difficult to express in print; one of these sounds like “twip-ip-ip-ip.” Occasionally their flight is apparently accomplished without perceptible move- ment of the wings, as if gliding along in the air, and again they speed away with the swiftness of an arrow in pursuit of an insect or an enemy, doubling on it with the greatest ease. The males are especially pugnacious during the mating season, and fierce combats ensue between rivals for the possession of the coveted female; but after they are mated they rarely fight among themselves, but quickly come to each other's assistance against a common enemy. From the observations made in the United States Department of Agricul- ture, about 90 per cent of the food of this species consists of animal matter, principally beetles, grasshoppers, butterflies, spiders, wild bees, wasps, and milli- peds; to this list can be added caterpillars, different species of flies, like the large black gadfly, so annoying to horses and cattle during the summer months, and small minnows. The greater portion of the food is taken on the wing, although it feeds also to some extent on the ground. The bird may usually be seen perched on a low limb of a solitary tree or bush in a pasture, on a fence post, a telegraph wire along some country road, or even on a weed stalk in a field, whence it darts after any passing insect. The snapping together of its mandi- bles after catching its prey can be heard quite a little distance away. With a few bee keepers the Kingbird does not stand in the best repute, as it is sup- posed to destroy many bees; but I believe that the damage done in this respect is greatly exaggerated, and on closer examination I am of the opinion that very few working bees will be found among the contents of their stomachs, and that the majority taken by them are drones, which do not store honey, and that the bee keeper is actually benefited by their destruction. The vegetable matter found in their stomachs consists mainly of sassafras and spicebush berries, wild chokecherries, juniper and dogwood berries, mulberries, blackberries, huckle- berries, elderberries, pokeberries, and frost grapes. In southern Louisiana, Mr. E. A. MclIlhenny tells me, the Kingbird feeds extensively on the berries of the prickly ash and Tabasco peppers, becoming a great nuisance on the pepper plan- tations. ‘The flesh becomes quite pungent from this food; the bird is considered a delicacy there, and numbers are shot and command a good price in the local markets. It gathers in large flocks in the fall, and is locally known there as “Gross Grasset.” The indigestible portions, like the wing covers of beetles, the legs of grasshoppers, and seeds of berries, are ejected in pellets. The Kingbird loves a rather open country, and is rarely found nesting at any great distance from water, and it shuns densely timbered tracts. In the more southern sections of its breeding range nidification begins usually in the first half of May, while in northern New York and our North- western States it rarely nests before June, more generally in the latter part of this month, and still later in the extreme northern parts of its range. The nests are placed in various kinds of trees, such as apple, pear, tulip, chestnut, elm, poplar, cottonwood, willow, oak, sycamore, osage orange, cedar, maple, birch, THE KINGBIRD. 230 hawthorn, locust, wild plum, orange, and lemon, as well as in shrubs and bushes of different kinds, generally at a distance of from 4 to 40 feet from the ground. They are usually placed in a fork or crotch on a horizontal branch, and fre- quently well out on the limb. They are not at all particular in the selection of a nesting site; I have seen nests placed on a fence rail (sometimes on top of one) and again between the rails not over 2 feet from the ground, in the hollow tops of stumps, and in abandoned nests of the Robin and the Bronzed Grackle. Dr. A. K. Fisher informs me that at Red Cloud, Nebraska, on July 3, 1893, a female was found sitting on a nest placed on top of a fence post, near the rail- road track. It is not evident why this site was chosen, as plenty of trees grew in the vicinity. There was no shelter above to protect the nest from the sun, and when seen the female was panting from the heat. Mr. Elmer T. Judd, of Cando, North Dakota, writes: ‘A pair of these birds were noticed building a nest on a sulky plow, and after the nest was nearly completed the plow was required and used, but the nest was not disturbed. On finishing the work I put the plow back in about the same place, and after a day or two of, consideration the birds finished the nest, laid their eges, and raised a broed of young. Two little girls used to visit the place every day, and the bird would almost let them put their hands on it before leaving the nest. In this section they usually lay our eggs, and the earliest date of nesting is June 29; the latest, the third week in July. Their favorite nesting sites here are in wild plum bushes, from 4 to 6 feet from the ground, and I have also noticed them nesting in eave troughs and binders.” The Kingbird, like many other species, after selecting a suitable nesting site and raising its young unmolested, will generally return to it from year to year. ‘The nest is usually well and compactly built, and varies more or less in size and bulk, according to the site. A typical nest now before me, taken by Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, near Fort Snelling, Minnesota, measures about 54 inches in outer diameter by 34 inches in depth; its inner diameter is 3 inches by 1% inches deep. Its exterior is constructed of small twigs and dry weed stems, mixed with cottonwood down, pieces of twine, and a little hair. The inner cup is lined with fine dry grass, a few rootlets, and a small quantity of horsehair. In other specimens bits of wool, strips of bark, thistle down, cattle hair, and fine rootlets are incorporated in the body of the nest. In the South the gray Spanish moss frequently forms the bulk of the outer walls, while in the Adi- rondack mountains, in Herkimer County, New York, in June, 1892, Dr. Ralph and the writer took a nest of this species from a crotch formed by the trunk and two broken branches of a small dead birch stump, about 8 feet from the ground, which was externally constructed of the long, green tree moss of that region, mixed with a few fine roots and twigs, milkweed down, weeds, and erasses, and lined with fine roots, hair, milkweed down, a little tree-moss, Ursnea, and a few blades of fine grass. The stump stood by itself on the edge of a small swamp, and the nest could be plainly seen for some distance. Mr. E. A. McIhenny tells me that in the willow swamps in southern Louisiana these birds 240 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. construct their nests entirely out of willow catkins, without any sticks whatever, and that the nests can be squeezed together in the hand like a ball. The male assists in the construction of the nest, and to some extent in the duties of incubation. He relieves the female from time to time to allow her to feed, guards the nesting site, and is usually perched on a limb close by, where he has a good view of the surroundings. Even when so-engaged he rarely sits entirely quiet, but every few minutes elevates his crest and looks around for a possible enemy. An egg is deposited daily, and incubation lasts from twelve to thirteen days. The young while in the nest are fed entirely on animal food and are able to leave it in about two weeks after hatching, and soon learn to provide for themselves. A second brood is occasionally raised in the more southern portions of their breeding range. The Kingbird is not particularly sociable, each pair keeping pretty much to themselves during the breeding season, and later in family parties, until the winter migration commences, when they gather in flocks and depart for the south. Three or four eggs are laid to a set; in some localities three seems to be the rule. This is especially the case in the more southern portions of their breeding range, while farther north they generally lay four, Although the Kingbird is credited by several writers as laying from three to five eggs, and sometimes even six, I have never seen a larger set than four among the many examined, and sets of even five eggs must be considered as very unusual. The ground color of these eggs varies from white or pale creamy white to a very faint rose pink, and they are spotted and blotched with chestnut, claret brown, cinnamon, rufous, heliotrope purple, and lavender. The markings vary greatly, both in size and quantity, but are generally heaviest about the larger end of the egg. In the more finely marked specimens the spots are usually more profuse and evenly distributed, and occasionally an almost unmarked egg is found. The shell is rather smooth, close-grained, moderately strong, and slightly glossy. The eggs are mostly ovate in shape, ranging from this to short and rounded ovate, and a few are elongate ovate. The average measurement of one hundred and forty eggs in the United States National Museum collection is 24.06 by 18.21 millimetres, or about 0.95 by 0.72 inch. The largest egg of the series measures 26.92 by 19.30 millimetres, or 1.06 by 0.76 inches; the smallest, 20.83 by 17.27 millimetres, or 0.82 by 0.68 inch. The type specimen, No. 22299 (PI. 1, Fig. 14), from a set of four eggs taken by Mr. Denis Gale, near Gold Hill, Boulder County, Colorado, on June 25, 1884, shows one of the less marked examples; and No. 25052 (PI. 1, Fig. 15), from a set of three eges taken by Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, near Fort Snelling, Minnesota, on June 13, 1890, represents a well-marked specimen. THE GRAY KINGBIRD. 241 88. Tyrannus dominicensis (Gmetiy). GRAY KINGBIRD. Lanius tyrannus 3. dominicensis GMELIN, Systema Nature, I, 1788, 302. Tyrannus dominicensis RICHARDSON, Report Sixth Meeting of the British Association, V, 1837, 170. (B 125, C 243, R 303, C 369, U 445.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: West Indies, coasts of Carribean Sea, and Gulf of Mexico; north to Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina. Accidental in Massachusetts and British Columbia. The Gray Kingbird is a moderately common visitor to and breeds along the southern border of the United States, and its habitat is mainly confined to the immediate vicinity of the seacoast and the banks of the larger streams flowing into the Gulf of Mexico. Audubon, who called this bird the Pipiry Flycatcher, reported it as quite common on most of the Florida Keys, and Dr. Bachman observed a pair breeding in the college yard at Charleston, South Carolina, which returned for at least three years in succession and raised two broods in a season! Mr. Arthur T. Wayne took a nest and eggs of this species on Sullivan Island, near Charleston, South Carolina, in June, 1893. Mr. C. J. Maynard found them rather common on some of the Florida Keys, and writes about them as follows: “The Gray Kingbirds appear to prefer the outer or higher keys, and visit them in great numbers, especially during the spring migration. In order to give some idea of the home of these birds, I will deseribe Bamboo Key, where I found them particularly common. This little island, which contains nearly 2 acres of land, lies about midway between Key West and Cape Florida. It is one of a line of outer, keys which have an old coral reef for a foundation, and as the present reef, which extends parallel with the keys, but which lies 5 miles at sea, is clearly visible, this is used as a wrecking station, and has a lookout erected on it. ‘There were two families living there; but, with the characteristic improvi- dence of the poorer class in Florida, they did not attempt to cultivate the soil, choosing rather to depend upon a precarious livelihood gained by wrecking. Thus the vegetation of the place was, in a great degree, in a primitive condition. Nearly the whole key was surrounded by a belt of mangroves, but these grew on very low ground, over which the tide rose every day; higher on the dry land were bushes, among which two or three species of cacti grew in profusion, and as the whole was overgrown by a tangled mass of vines it formed an impene- trable thicket. The wreckers had formed a small clearing in the midst of this jungle and erected two or three wretched houses. “T landed on the 1st of May, and remained there several days, during which time I saw hundreds of Gray Kinebirds. They appeared to be migrating, for numbers were constantly arriving from seaward; yet, unlike many other species, they invariably came in pairs, and were evidently mated, as they were constantly pursuing each other through the air in a playful manner, at the same 242 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. time vociferating loudly. They exhibit a decided preference for mangroves, and later, by the middle of the month, build them nests in them, usually selecting bushes which overhang the water. These birds inhabit all of the higher keys from Key: West to Cape Florida. They also occur on the west coast in suitable localities, but I do not think that they are as abundant on the east side of the peninsula. They must migrate early, as I never found them in autumn.”? Mr. W. E. D. Scott says: “The earliest record I have of its arrival about Tarpon Springs, Florida, is April 23, 1887, and the birds are common till late in September. The eggs are laid in this vicinity from about the middle to the last of May, and but one brood appears to be reared.” Mr. Atkins’ notes are as follows: ‘Arrives at Punta Rassa middle of April; nests commonly on the islands and along the shore in mangrove bushes; seems to prefer an isolated tree or bush near the water. Last noted at Punta Rassa September 13. Arrives at Key West about April 11. A few breed here.”” First Lieut. Wirt Robinson, Fourth Artillery, United States Army, found this species not at all uncommon at Matanzas Inlet, Florida, and took three sets of eggs, which are now in the United States National Museum collection, on May 18 and 23,1894. Here they nested in the low mangroves. The Gray Kingbird is far more abundant in the West India Islands, espe- cially in Cuba, Jamaica, Dominica, and the Bahamas, where it is one of the most conspicuous birds. Its general habits, food, and manner of flight appear to be very similar to those of our common Kingbird, and, like it, it is fearless and pugnacious in the defense of its chosen nesting site, boldly attacking birds much larger than itself. Mr. Richard Hill, of Spanish Town, Jamaica, in some interesting notes furnished to Mr. Gosse, says: “The Jamaica bird is not exclusively an insect feeder, but eats very freely of the sweet wild berries, especially those of the pimento. These ripen in September, and in groves of these this bird may always be found in abundance. By the end of September most of the migrant birds have left the island. * * * “This is among the earliest of the birds to breed in Jamaica. As early as January the mated pair is said to be in possession of some lofty tree, sounding at day dawn a ceaseless shriek, which is composed of a repetition of three or four notes sounding like ‘pe-chee-ry,’ from which they derive their local name. * = = Tn feeding, just before sunset, they usually sit eight or ten in a row, on some exposed twig, darting from it in pursuit of their prey, and returning to it to devour whatever they have caught. They are rapid in their movements, ever constantly and hurriedly changing their positions in flight. As they fly they are able to check their speed suddenly and to turn at the smallest imagin- able angle. At times they move with motionless wings from one tree to another. When one descends to pick up an insect from the surface of the water, it has the appearance of tumbling, and, in rising again, ascends with a singular motion 1 Birds of Florida and eastern North America, 1881, p. 176. 2 The Auk, VI, 1889, p. 318. THE GRAY KINGBIRD. 243 of the wings, as if hurled into the air and endeavoring to recover itself. * This Flycatcher is also charged by Mr. Hill with seizing upon the Humming- birds as they hover over the blossoms in the gardens, killing its prey by repeated blows struck on the branch and then devouring them.”! In Florida nidification rarely commences before the third week in May, and sometimes not before June. The nests are most frequently found in man- grove bushes, in different species of palms, and less often in live oaks; they are usually placed on horizontal limbs overhanging the water, and at no great distance above it. A nest now before me, taken by Lieut. Wirt Robinson, at Matanzas Inlet, on May 18, 1894, measures 6 inches in outer diameter by 24 inches in depth; its inner diameter is 4 inches by 14 in depth. It is externally composed of small twigs and rootlets, and lined with finer material of the same kind. It is a very loosely and carelessly built structure, resembling a Mourn- ing Doye’s nest more than anything else; it contained four fresh eggs when found. The number of eggs to a set varies from three to four, although it is said that occasionally as many as five are found. These are among the hand- somest of our Flyeatchers; their ground color varies from a creamy to a pinkish or flesh-colored tint, and they are profusely spotted and blotched with different shades of chocolate, burnt umber , Claret brown, mixed with lighter shades of lay- ender and heliotrope purple, the markings are usually heaviest about the larger end of the egg, and often form an irregular wreath. The shell is close grained and rather firm; the shape is usually elliptical ovate, less often elongate ovate. The average measurement of a series of forty eggs in the United States National Museum collection is 25.91 by 18.50 millimetres, or about 1.02 by 0.73 inches ‘The largest egg of the series measures 27.68 by 19.30 millimetres, 1.09 by 0.76 inches; the smallest, 22.61 by 17.53 millimetres, or 0.89 by 0.69 inch. . The type specimen, No. 16844 (Pl. 2, Fig. 3), was taken by Mr. N. B. Moore, near Manatee, Florida, in June, 1873, and represents a well-marked specimen, while No. 20405 (PL 2, Fig. 4), Bendire collection, taken by Mr. C.H. Nauman, in May, 1875, in southern Florida, represents an average-marked ege of this species. foto} 89. Tyrannus melancholicus ouchii (Barrp) COUCH’S KINGBIRD. Tyrannus couchii BARD, Birds of North America, 1858, 175. Tyrannus melancholicus var. couchii COUES, Check List, ed. 1, Dee., 1873, 51. (B 128, 129, C 246, R 305, C 372, U 446.) GHOGRAPHICAL RANGE: From Guatemala north through Mexico, to the lower Rio Grande Valley, in southern Texas. Couch’s Kingbird is a common summer resident throughout a considerable portion of Mexico, but within our borders it appears to be rather rare, and has so far only been observed in the lower Rio Grande V alle: »y, where it breeds spar ' History of North irene an Birds, 1874, Vol. IL, pp. 321, 322, 244 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. ingly. I have been quoted in the “History of North American Birds, 1874” (Vol. II, p. 329), as having taken this subspecies near Tucson, Arizona; this is evidently a mistake, as I can not find any reference to such a capture among my notes on Arizona birds. For what little we know about Couch’s Kingbird we are indebted to Mr. George B. Sennett, who first met with it on May 8, 1877, at Lomita Ranch, near Hidalgo, Texas. He says: ‘At this point is the finest grove of ebonies (Acacia flewicaulis) 1 saw on the river. On the hillside, back of the buildings, they over- look the large resaca, then filled with tasseled corn. It was the tops of these grand old trees that these Flycatchers loved, and so persistent were they in staying’ there that I thought they were going to settle in the neighborhood for the season. There was a company of some six or eight scattered about. I did not find them shy, for after our firmg they would almost immediately return to the same trees. They were readily distinguishable from Tyrannus carolinensis, which were shot in their company ; ee greater size and bright yellow under parts can be seen at gunshot range.”? A nest taken by one of Mr. Sennett’s collectors in 1881 is described by him as follows: “The nest was situated some 20 feet from the ground, on a small lateral branch of a large elm, in a fine grove not far from the houses of the ranch. It is composed of small elm twigs, with a little Spanish moss and a few branchlets and leaves of the growing elm intermixed. The sides of the nest are lined with fine rootlets; the bottom with the black, hair-like heart of the Spanish moss. The outside diameter is 6 inches and ue depth 2 inches. The inside diameter is 3 inches and the depth 1.25 inches.” There is as yet but little known about the general habits, food, anid call notes of this subspecies; but it is presumable that they do not differ very mate- railly from those of the other members of this family. The number of eggs varies from three to four, and the nests appear generally to be placed near the end of a horizontal limb, on a good-sized tree, at no very great distance from the ground, and preferably near water. All the eggs of this subspecies in the United States National Museum collection were taken in the vicinity of Brownsville, Texas, where these birds usually commence nesting during the first two weeks in May. The ground color of the eggs is a delicate creamy pink, and they are anode erately well blotched and spotted with chocolate, claret brown, heliotrope purple, and lavender. ‘These markings are, in some instances, scattered pretty evenly over the entire surface of the egg; in others they are mainly confined to the larger end. They are readily distinguishable from the eggs of the balance of our Kingbirds by their peculiar ground color, while their markings are very similar to those found on the eggs of the other species of this family. The shell is close-grained and rather strong, and in shape the eges are generally ovate or elongate ovate. ' Bulletin of the U. . Ge var ul and Ge seat al Sins 1878, Vor TDVE ENO. al5 sp. . 31. >The Auk, Vol. I, ea p. 93. COUCH’S KINGBIRD. 245 The average size of thirteen eggs in the United States National Museum eollection is 24.38 by 18.45 millimetres, or about 0.96 by 0.73 inch. The largest egg measures 24.89 by 18.80 millimetres, or 0.98 by 0.74 inch; the smallest, 23.62 by 17.53 millimetres, or 0.93 by 0.69 inch. The type specimens, Nos. 24313 and 26345 (PI. 2, Figs. 5 and 6), both from the Ralph collection, were obtained near Brownsville, Texas, the former on May 13, 1891, the latter on May 16, 1893, and show the different styles of markings. go. Tyrannus verticalis Say. ARKANSAS KINGBIRD. Tyrannus verticalis SAy, Long’s Expedition, IT, 1823, 60. (B 126, C 244, R 306, C 370, U 447.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western North America; from the Pacifie coast east to western Texas, western Indian Territory, middle Kansas, Nebraska, and western Min- nesota; north to North Dakota, southern Assiniboia, Alberta?, and southern British Columbia; south to Lower California, and in the winter through Mexico to Guatemala. Accidental in Iowa, Maine, New Jersey, New York, and Maryland. The Arkansas Kingbird, for which the name of ‘Western Kingbird” seems to be better suited, is pretty generally distributed as a summer resident through- out the middle and western portions of the United States, and it breeds in suitable localities throughout these regions. The northern limit of its breeding range extends, as far as is at present known, into southern Assiniboia (the valley of the Souris River), and probably westward through southern Alberta, as well as along the southern borders of British Columbia, where it appears to be fairly common, excepting in the immediate vicinity of the coast. In the United States it reaches its northern limits in North Dakota and southern Minnesota, where it is rare, and thence it is found south through Nebraska, middle and western Kansas, western Indian Territory to northwestern Texas, and in all of the inter- vening regions westward to the Pacific Ocean. In Lower California the Arkansas Kingbird appears to be rare, though a few breed in the northern portions of this peninsula. Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, found a nest of this species at St. Ysidora ranch on July 2, 1894, containing three eggs, which are now in the collection here. This species arrives from its winter home in Mexico and Guatemala, along the southern border of its breeding range, about the latter part of March, and passes leisurely northward, reaching our more northern States about the beginning of May, and returning early in September. By the middle of October all, or nearly all, have passed our borders, and I do not believe that any winter within the United States. The Arkansas Kingbird is pretty generally distributed throughout most of our Western States, and is especially abundant in the Great Basin region. It is essentially a bird of the more open country, especially of the river valleys, and is not generally found in the higher mountain systems, where it rarely reaches higher altitudes than 7,500 feet. I have observed this species as common in 246 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. southern Arizona as in northern Washington and Idaho, and wherever water and a few willows are to be found, no matter if the surrounding country may otherwise be a perfect desert, some of these birds are sure to be seen. This Flycatcher is, if anything, more noisy than our common eastern Kingbird, and utters also a greater variety of notes; some of these resemble the squeaking sounds of our Grackles; others are indifferent efforts at song—a low, warbling kind of twitter—while occasionally it gives utterance to shrill, metallic-sounding notes with more force to them than those of the Kingbird. During the mating season they are especially noisy, and begin their love songs, if they may be called such, at the earliest dawn, and keep up their concerts with but slight intermission during the greater part of the day; but after they are mated and nidification commences they are more quiet. Mr. R. H. Lawrence writes me from Monrovia, California, that the Arkansas Flycatcher also utters very peculiar notes at times during the night. He says: “On the night of July 30, 1893, I frequently heard a queer cry; sometimes only a single note, and again this was repeated three or four times, followed by a crying or wailing sound, as if made by a very young kitten. I heard these notes on successive nights. On August 2, about 4.30 a. m., I succeeded in shoot- ing the performer out of a pepper tree standing close to the house, and it proved to be an Arkansas Flycatcher.” The males precede their mates a few days in the migration, and as soon as the latter arrive constant quarrels between rivals for the favors of the coveted female ensue. Frequently half a dozen of these birds may be seen chasing each other about, pecking at and tumbling over each other in mid-air, keeping up an incessant chatter and scolding in the meantime; but very rarely have I seen feathers fly during these ostensible combats, and I am inclined to think that the majority of such performances are indulged in more in fun than in anger. They are undoubtedly more social than the common Kingbird, as I have seen two pairs nesting in the same tree, apparently living in perfect harmony with each other. While they are by: no means devoid of courage, they appear to me to be much less quarrelsome on the whole than the former, and they are far more tolerant toward some of the larger Raptores. For instance, in the vicinity of Camp Harney, Oregon, I found a pair of these birds nesting in the same tree (a medium-sized pine) with Bullock’s Oriole and Swainson’s Hawk, and, as far as I could see, all were on excellent terms. Their food consists of animal matter, principally grasshoppers where these are abundant, as well as of moths, butterflies, different species of flies, winged ants, caterpillars, and the large black crickets of the West. Most of their prey is caught on the wing, and they rarely fail in capturing it. They are extremely dexterous, and their flight is powerful and swift. During the summer they feed occasionally on wild berries, and among these the service berry seems to be more often eaten than any other. Like owr common Kingbird, they are often credited with feeding to a considerable extent on bees, and are therefore in bad repute with bee keepers. This accusation, like many others made about some of our most useful and beneficial birds, seems to be entirely unfounded. THE ARKANSAS KINGBIRD. 247 Mr. Walter E. Bryant makes the following remarks relating to this subject 1 “Zoe” (Vol. IV, 1893, p. 57): “Mr, A. Barnett, of San Diego County, California, has 300 swarms of bees, which attracted the Flycatchers to such an extent that he made some investiga- tions to ascertain to what degree they might be damaging to the bee industry. Over one hundred Arkansas Flycatchers and Phoebes (Black and Say’s) were dissected. In all of the Arkansas Flycatchers only drones were found, but no working bees, although in many cases the birds were gorged. In most of the a, drone bees were also found; the only exception was that of a Phoebe (Say’s?) in which a bee sting was found in the base of the tongue. The birds were all shot about apiaries, and were seen darting upon and catching bees. The examinations were made with a hand lens. Mr. Barnett regards the occur- rence of the sting found in the Phoebe as accidental, and concluded that Fly- catchers are beneficial in reducing the numbers of drones.” The Arkansas Kingbird, like all of our Flycatchers, is extremely beneficial and deserves the fullest protection, and where not molested becomes quite tame and will readily nest about houses. They are not at all particular in the choice of nesting sites and build in various situations, but generally in trees in creek bottoms, near water, though I have occasionally found one of their nests fully a mile away in an isolated tree in the foothills. Cottonwoods and willows seem to be more often selected than other trees, but perhaps only because they are the commonest kinds throughout most of their breeding range. Oaks, sycamores, Australian blue gum, junipers, elms, and orchard trees are also made use of to a certain extent, while pines are rarely occupied. Mr. William G. pom informs me that m Colorado they nest occasionally on ledges. Dr. C. T. Cooke writes me that a pair of these birds nested in the summer of 1891 in a church steeple in Salem, Oregon, and Mr. Elmer T. Judd, of Cando, North Dakota, informs me that he found a nest on a beam of a rail- road windmill pump, about 6 feet from the ground, where trains passed close by the nest constantly; another was found by him on a grainbinder which was standing within a couple of rods of a public schoolhouse. I have examined many of their nests in various parts of the West. The majority of these were placed in forks of trees, and generally close to the trunk; others were saddled on horizontal limbs. One nest was placed in the top of a hollow cottonwood stump, the rim of the nest being flush with the top; another pair made use of an old nest of the Westerns Robin; and still another built on the sill of one of the attic windows of my quarters at Fort Lapwai, Idaho. They probably would not have succeeded in keeping this nest in place had I not nailed a piece of board along the outside to prevent the wind from blowing the materials away as fast as the birds could bring them. They were persistent, however, ak not easily discouraged, working hard for a couple of days in trying to secure a firm foundation before I came to their assistance. Both birds were equally diligent in the construction of their home until it was nearly fin- ished, when the female did most of the arranging of the inner lining, and many 248 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. a consultation was evidently indulged in between the pair before the nest was finally ready for occupation, a low twittering being kept up almost constantly. It took just a week to build it, and an egg was deposited each morning after- wards until the set, which consisted of four eggs, was completed. After incubation had commenced, I noticed that the female left her eggs for an hour or more at a time, during the middle of the day, when the sun was shining on that part of the house, and.sat panting on the window sill or on a little cotton- wood tree close by, keeping watch over her treasures. I also observed her turning the eggs over and rearranging them occasionally when she returned to the nest. The nests of the Arkansas Kingbird vary greatly in bulk and size accord- ing to the situation, and are usually placed at no great height from the ground. Generally they are compactly built structures, the foundation and outer walls being composed of weed stems, fine twigs, plant fibers, and rootlets, intermixed with wool, cocoons, hair, feathers, bits of string, cottonwood, milkweed, and thistle down, or pieces of paper, and lined with finer materials of the same kind. A typical nest, No. 26036, United States National Museum collection, taken by Mr. H. W. Henshaw, near St. Ysabel, California, measures 6 inches in outer diameter by 3 in depth; the inner cup is 3 inches wide by 19 deep. It is princi- pally composed of the stalks of Stylocline arizonica and Micropus californicus, mixed and lined with cocoons and a little down. Nidification, even in the more southern parts of their range, rarely com- mences much before the middle of May, more generally during June, and near the northern limits not before the first week in July. From three to five eggs are laid to a set, four being the usual number. I have taken two sets of five each near Fort Walla Walla, Washington, but such large sets are rather rare. Incu- bation lasts from twelve to thirteen days; this duty is mostly performed by the female, but I have also seen the male on the nest, and he can generally be observed close by, on the lookout for danger. Both parents are exceedingly courageous in the defense of their nest and young, and every bird of this species in the neighborhood will quickly come to the rescue and help to drive intruders grow rapidly and are able to to) leave the nest in about two weeks. They consume an immense amount of food, off as soon as one gives the alarm. The young certainly fully their own weight in a day. I have often watched the family previously referred to, raised on the sill of my attic window, and also fed them with the bodies of the large black crickets while one of the parents was looking on, and apparently approvingly, within a few feet of me. I have stuffed them until it seemed impossible for them to hold any more, but there was no satisfying them; it certainly keeps the parents busy from early morning till late at night to supply their always hungry family. They are rei dily tamed when taken young, and are very intelligent, making interesting pets. I believe that only one brood, as a rule, is raised in a season, excepting possibly in the extreme southern portions of their range, in southern Arizona and California, as I found fresh eges on Rillito Creek, near Tucson, as late as July 20, in a locality where these birds THE ARKANSAS KINGBIRD. 249 had not been previously disturbed, which seems to indicate that they occasion- ally may rear a second brood. The eggs of the Arkansas Kingbird do not differ in shape or coloration trom those of the Kingbird, and the same description will answer for both; but they are a trifle smaller as a rule. The average measurement of one hundred and four eggs in the United 92 7 States National Museum collection is 23.62 by 1 by 0.69 inch. The largest egg of the series measures 25.91 by 18.54 millimetres, or 1.02 by 0.73 inches; the smallest, 19.81 by 15.75 millimetres, or 0.78 by 0.62 inch. One of the type specimens, No. 20392 (Pl. 1, Fig. 16), from a set of three eggs, shows rather heavy and handsome markings, and also a slightly pinkish ground color, while No. 20399 (Pl. 1, Fig. 17), from a set of four (one of the largest specimens in the series) represents about an average- marked egg; both are from the Bendire collection; the former was taken at Fort Lapwai, Idaho, June 16, 1871, and the latter at Fort Walla Walla, Washington, May 25, 1881. 42 millimetres, or about 0.93 gi. Tyrannus vociferans SwaInson. CASSIN’S KINGBIRD. Tyrannus vociferans SWAINSON, Quarterly Journal of Science, XX, 1826, 273 (B 127, C 245, R 307, C 371, U 448.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Western United States; from the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains west to California; north to southern Wyoming; south through Colo- rado, New Mexico, northwestern Texas, Arizona, to Lower California, Mexico, and in winter to Guatemala and Costa Rica. Accidental in Oregon. Cassin’s Kingbird, while fairly common in certain sections of its range, appears to be entirely absent in some of the intermediate regions. Eastward, so far as is known at present, its breeding range extends to the eastern bases of the Rocky Mountains in Color ado, and possibly to southeastern Wyoming, where Dr. C. Hart Merriam obtained a single specimen on May 27, 1872, near Chey- enne. In the Great Basin region, through Utah and Nevada to the eastern slopes of the Sierra Nevadas in California, it has not yet been met with, but it probably occurs in southern Utah; while in the coast districts of southern Cali- fornia and through the greater portion of Arizona and New Mexico it is a common summer resident, and it also probably breeds in limited numbers in northwestern Texas. In Oregon it can only be considered as a straggler, though Mr. A. W. Anthony observed a few specimens on May 5, 1885, in Washington County, in the northwestern part of the State. W hile the Arkansas Kingbird appears to shun the immediate coast districts, Cassin’s Kingbird seems to prefer them. It is said to be quite common in many parts of Mexico during the breed- ing season, and in southern California it is partly resident. 250 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. Mr. F. Stephens writes me: ‘Cassin’s Kingbird is a winter resident in southern California, but it is not very common. I have failed to find them here during the breeding season, even in the mountains.” It has not as yet been reported from southern Arizona as a winter resident. I failed to notice them after October in the vicinity of Tucson, and believe they migrate regularly, returning from their winter homes in the south in March. Cassin’s Kingbird is neither as noisy nor as quarrelsome as the preceding species, and appears to be more of a mountain-loving bird and to nest at higher altitudes. Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, in his notes on Arizona Moun- tain Birds, says: “Cassin’s Kingbird breeds commonly throughout the pine forests. I found it in the uppermost timber on San Francisco Mountain in June, the altitude being nearly 12,000 feet. This conspicuous species likewise breeds in the low valleys of Arizona, together with the Arkansas Kingbird (Tyrannus verticalis), nests of both species having been found at the same time in one cot- tonwood tree in the Verde Valley. On the Mogollon Mountains I saw them attack Crows and Western Red-tailed Hawks, and drive them from the neigh- borhood of their nests after the spirited fashion of the eastern Kingbird.”! Their food, like that of the other members of this family, consists princi- pally of insects, and is obtained in a similar manner. Their call notes do not differ very much from those of the other Kingbirds, but on the whole are perhaps less shrill and a trifle more melodious. While they are possibly more common in the oak and pine belts in Arizona, I found them by no means rare in the lowlands along the Santa Cruz River and Rillito Creek, near Tucson, Arizona, during the summer of 1872, where I took a num- ber of their nests. I consider them very late breeders, my earliest record being June 14, when I took a set of four fresh eggs; but it is possible that I may have overlooked the first broods entirely, as most all the nests found by me during the month of June (about a dozen) contained fresh eggs. The season of 1872 was a very backward one, however, and this may account for the late nesting, especially as Dr. Cooper is quoted in ‘History of North American Birds, 1874” (Vol. II, p. 328), as finding Cassin’s Kingbird breeding at San Diego, California, as early as March 28. The earliest record I have is May 27, 1892—a set of three eges containing large embryos, taken at Dog Spring, Grant County, New Mex- ico, by Dr. E. A. Mearns, United States Army, and now in the United States National Museum collection. This nest was located in a hackberry tree, near a nest of Swainson’s Hawk, containing two-eges. The trees generally selected by«this species for nesting sites are pines, oaks, cottonwood, walnut, hackberry, and sycamores, and the nests are almost inva- riably placed near the end of a horizontal limb, usually from 20 to 40 feet from the ground, in positions where they are not easily reached. All of the nests examined by me were placed in large cottonwoods, with long spreading limbs, and were saddled on one of these, well out toward the extremity. The majority ‘The Auk, Vol. VII, 1890, p. 255. CASSIN’S KINGBIRD. 251 could only be reached by placing a pole against the limb and climbing: to it. They are fully as demonstrative as the Arkansas Kingbird when their nests are disturbed, and are equally courageous in the defense of their eggs and young. The nests are large, bulky structures, larger than those of the preceding species, but composed of similar materials. An average nest measures 8 inches in outer diameter by 3 inches in depth. The inner cup is 34 inches wide by 12 deep. Sometimes they are pretty well concealed to view from below, but they can usually be readily seen at a distance. From two to five eggs are laid to a set. Sets of three or four are most frequently found, while sets of two and five are rare, but I have found both, incubation having already commenced in the smaller set. This lasts from twelve to fourteen days, and is almost always, if not exclusively, performed by the female. I have never noticed the male on the nest. The eggs are similar in color and markings to those of the Kingbird and Arkansas Kingbird, and about the same size as the latter, but on the whole they are not quite as heavily spotted. The average measurement of forty-four eggs in the United States National Museum collection is 23.62 by 17.47 millimetres, or about 0.93 by 0.69 inch. The largest egg of the series measures 27.94 by 19.30 millimetres, or 1.10 by 0.76 inches; the smallest 22.61 by 16.26 millimetres, or 0.89 by 0.64 inch. The type specimen, No. 20413 (PI. 1, Fig. 18), from the Bendire collection, was taken by the writer on Rillito Creek, Arizona, on July 15, 1872, and is a rather large-sized egg, while No. 26146 (Pl. 1, Fig. 19) was collected by Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, on the east side of the San Luis Moun- tains, New Mexico, on June 17, 1892. The two specimens represent about average-marked eges of this species. | g2. Pitangus derbianus (Kavup). DERBY FLYCATCHER. Saurophagus derbianus KAuP, Proceedings Zoological Society, 1851, 44, Pl. XXXVI. Pitangus derbianus SCLATER, Proceedings Zoological Society, 1856, 297. (B —, C —, R 308, C 364, U 449.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: North to the lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas; south through Mexico and Central America to Colombia, Venezuela, and Trinidad, South America. The Derby Flycatcher, also locally known as the “ Bull-headed Flycatcher,” “Mexican Pitangus,” and “Rio Grande Flycatcher,” can only be considered as a rather uncommon, summer visitor in the lower Rio Grande Valley, in southern Texas, where it breeds in very limited numbers, though in the adjoining States of Tamaulipas and Nuevo Leon, in eastern Mexico, it appears to- be fairly common, and it is equally so throughout the greater portion of the Mexican Republic, both in hot and temperate zones, where it sometimes reaches an altitude of 5,000 feet. It also breeds throughout Central America in suitable localities. 252 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. Mr. G. B. Sennett, to whom we are indebted for a great deal of valuable information about the birds of the lower Rio Grande Valley, added this large and conspicuous Flycatcher to our fauna, and says: “On April 23, 1878, a male and female of this species: were shot at Lake San Jose, a few miles from Lomita. Both were shot about 4 feet up on the trunks of small retama trees standing in the water, and were clinging to them and working their way down to the water, possibly to drink. They were not particularlysshy. On May 3 another female was shot in a tree bordering the lake, yet not over the water. One or two more were observed in timber about water holes. In flight this Flycatcher resembles the Kingfishers. Dissection indicated the approach of the breeding season, and it undoubtedly nests in the large trees of the locality.”? Mr. E. W. Nelson writes me that he found the Derby Flycatcher rather common about reed patches bordering the salt lagoons, near Manzanillo, in Colima, Mexico. They usually perched on the tops of dead bushes or stout reeds, from which vantage points they made excursions in various directions after passing insects. He also met with them near Jalapa, Vera Cruz, where they frequented the scattered bushes on the borders of fields and along streams flowing through cultivated or inclosed lands. Mr. Charles W. Richmond has kindly furnished the following notes on this large Flycatcher, as observed by him in Nicaragua: “The name given this bird in Nicaragua refers to its note, which sounds like ‘kiskadee,’ several times repeated. They have another note, which they utter on some occasions, and also a note of distress, very different from either of the others. Although the food consists of insects, I have seen one specimen that had its mouth and throat full of ripe banana. The Derby Flycatcher is common along the streams, and almost invariably travels in pairs. The bird appears to be evenly distributed along the water courses, and two or three pairs t=) may*occupy perhaps a mile along the river front, which territory they go over every day. At the International Planting Company’s Headquarters, where I collected for over eight months, there were two pairs on the river, one on each side, and another pair located on a creek close by. After shooting the two pairs on our side of the river, no others came about for a long time, although the pair on the opposite side of the river (about 300 yards wide at this point) passed up and down each day on their rounds. Their flight ordinarily is short, the birds stopping a short time in each place, picking up food as they move along.” The most complete and interesting account of the general habits of the Derby Flycatcher is that published by the late George N. Lawrence, based upon collections and notes on the ‘Birds of Western and Northwestern Mexico,” made by the late Col. A. J. Grayson, and published in the ‘Memoirs of the Boston Society of Natural History” (Vol. II, p. 286). These are as follows: “This is a common and abundant species, inhabiting the western and north- western parts of Mexico; I found it equally as common in ‘Tehuantepec as in THE DERBY FLYCATCHER. 253 may be heard at all seasons of the year, but more particularly during the breeding season, when it is excessively garrulous. It is more frequently met with in the neighborhood of fresh-water streams and lagoons, and I have often observed them dart into the water after water insects and minnows that were swimming near the surface, not unlike the Kingfisher; but they usually pursue and capture on the wing the larger kinds of Coleoptera and Neuroptera, swallow- ing their prey entire after first beating it a few times against their perch. They are usually in pairs, but I have also seen as many as twenty about a stagnant pool, watching its turbid water for insects and small fish, for which they seem to have a great partiality. “The nest of this species is very large, and its construction differs from all the Tyrannide of which I have any knowledge excepting M. texensis. It is dome-shaped or covered, with the entrance on the side, while the other species build a saucer-shaped nest. The nest of the Bull-headed Flycatcher is usually placed in the forks of the branches of very thorny trees, 25 or 30 feet from the eround. It is composed of very coarse materials, of either straw or lichens, sometimes of both, the lining, however, is of firmer and more elastic fibers. Other birds sometimes make their nests in the same or nearest tree, such as M. texensis, C. melanicterus, and I. pustulatus. The eges of this Flycatcher are usually five in number; they are of moderate size, rather lengthened, of a light cream color, with a small reddish speck; the shell is delicate and easily broken.” Messrs. Salvin and Godman make the following remarks about this species: “In Guatemala Pitangus derbianus builds its nest in April and May; one found at Duenas was a large, loose structure with a great deal of superfluous matter about it, its entrance bemg on one side; it was composed entirely of small twigs and placed at the end of a branch about 20 feet from the ground; another taken at San Geronimo had two openings, but one seems to be the rule. A favorite haunt is the banana groves, where the nest may be found wedged in among the clusters of fruit. The eges are slightly pear-shaped, of a pale creamy-white color, spotted and blotched with brick red. They vary consider- ably in size and color, especially as to the magnitude and density of the spots. “We never noticed P. derbianus feeding on fish and water insects, as described by Grayson, but Mr. Hudson ascribes similar habits to P. sulphuratus in the Argentine Republic.”? There are three sets of eggs in the Ralph collection, taken in Cameron County, Texas, on May 9, May 27, and June 23, 1893, respectively. Each of these contained four fresh eggs when found; the last set was probably a second laying, the first having been destroyed. Two of these nests were located in a thicket of huisache trees (Acacia farnesiana), about 10 feet from the ground; the other in a large bunch of Spanish moss, pending from the limb of a large tree, about 14 feet up. The last-named is now in the collection here. The nest proper is an unusually bulky structure, composed principally of gray Spanish moss, dry weed stems, pieces of vines, and swamp grasses, and lined with finer ‘Biologia Centrali Americani, Aves, Vol. II, 1889, p. 45. 254 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. materials of the same kinds. It measures 11 inches in outer diameter by 5 inches in height. ‘The inner cup measures 5 inches in diameter by 2 inches in depth. The various materials are well interwoven and make a compact mass. The walls of the nest are unusually thick. ‘lhe other nests were lined with wool, feathers, plant down, and Spanish moss. The number of eggs to a set is four or five, and probably only one brood is raised in a season. ‘They vary considerably in shape; the majority may be called short ovate, others are ovate and elongate ovate; the shell is close grained and but slightly glossy. The ground color is pale creamy white, and is spar- ingly spotted, principally about the larger end, with irregularly shaped splashes and minute specks of seal or liver-brown and different shades of lavender. The average measurement of eighteen eges in the United States National Museum collection is 29.46 by 21.34 millimetres, or 1.16 by 0.84 inches. The largest egg measures 30.48 by 22.10 millimetres, or 1.20 by 0.87 inches; the smallest, 26.16 by 21.34 millimetres, or 1.03 by 0.84 inches. The type specimens, Nos. 26342 and 26343 (PI. 1, Figs. 20 and 21), both from sets of four eggs, Ralph collection, were taken in Cameron County, Texas, on May 27 and June 23, 1893, respectively, and represent the heavier and finer marked types of these eges. 93. Myiozetetes texensis (Giraup). GIRAUD’S FLYCATCHER. Muscicapa texensis GIRAUD, Sixteen Texas Birds, 1841, Pl. [. Myiozetetes texensis SCLATER, Proceedings Zoological Society, 1859, 5F (B —, C —, R 309, C —, U [450].) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Central America; south to Colombia, South America, north to northern Mexico (and southern Texas?). Giraud’s Flycatcher is included in our fauna on Giraud’s Texas record, but no other specimens have since been secured, and if it occurs at all in the lower tio Grande Valley, in Texas, it can only be considered as an accidental strag- ler, and it is not probable that it breeds within our borders. Mr. Charles W. Richmond has kindly furnished me the following notes on this bird: “It is very abundant in Nicaragua. It is confined to the vicinity of water courses, and is evenly distributed in such localities. It is quite a stationary bird; pairs occupying a certain precinct may be found in the same place week after week, seldom wandering far away, according to my observations. The bird usually selects a tree overhanging the water for its perch, where it often sits for a considerable length of time, uttering its peculiar cry, which resembles that of a young chicken, only louder. The bird has other notes which it makes use of at different times. Occasionally it prospects around the outer branches of the tree for insects, making short flights from branch to branch in a leisurely manner, looking carefully about before proceeding to the next branch, and GIRAUD’S FLYCATCHER. 255 stretching its neck out, after the manner of a Dove. It frequently flies out from its perch after passing insects, like a Wood Pewee or Kingbird. This bird bathes frequently during the day if the sun is shining, flying down into the water with a splash, then up to its perch again, where it dresses its feathers. This style of bathing I have noticed only in Giraud’s Flycatcher. “The nest is a beautiful structure, roofed over, with the entrance at one side. It is usually profusely covered with living moss, and is generally placed in a bush or tree over the water, from 5 to 15 feet up as arule. Nests are often placed in bunches of bananas, and I have found them in young lime trees, 4 feet from the ground. One nest, found in a clump of vines, was fully 30 feet from the ground. I found a nest May 13, containing three young birds fully fledged. The parent birds were very much excited while I remained in the vicinity. The species is known as ‘Little Kiskadee’ by the English-speaking people here, on account of its resemblance to the Derby Flycatcher.” Mr. E. W. Nelson writes me: “I found Giraud’s Flycatcher common along tall hedges bordering fields near Jico, Vera Cruz, Mexico, during June and July, 1893. They were also particularly common along streams bordered by a more or less straggling growth of tall bushes. They appeared to nest only in the latter situations similarly situated. They were placed in forks near the tops of tall, slender, and generally overhanging bushes, from 12 to 15 feet from the ground. In several instances the nests were placed in the tops of bushes overhanging streams. a dozen or more of their nests were found here, all There was not the slightest attempt at concealment, and the nests were usually visible at a considerable distance, appearing like large, ragged handfuls of dry grass thrust carelessly into the forks of the bushes. They were. still more conspicuous from the fact that they were usually built in the tops of bushes somewhat taller than the average, or apart from the general mass of surrounding vegetation. “Unfortunately, all of the nests examined-were either occupied by young or had already been deserted; they were all lined with fine grass stems. The old birds were not at all shy, but watched my approach with considerable anxiety, hovering about from the top of one bush to another, in the vicinity of nests containing young, uttering clear, plaintive, whistling notes of alarm, with occa- sional harsher, chattering cries. When undisturbed these birds perch quietly on conspicuous points, whence they dart off after passing insects or utter occasional mellow, whistling call notes. They are usually rather quiet birds, although always conspicuous from the nature of their surroundings. The upper limit of their range, near Jalapa, Vera Cruz, appears to be about 4,500 feet.” Mr. G. K. Cherrie, of San Jose, Costa Rica, has kindly presented the United States National Museum with a well-preserved nest of this species, and also a handsome set of eggs, the first fully identified specimens in the collection. Since these have been received I find that the late Col. A. J. Grayson had taken the nest and eggs of Giraud’s Flycatcher near Mazatlan, Mexico, years pre- viously, and a short but correct description of the nest is given in the Memoirs 256 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. of the Boston Society of Natural History (Vol. II, p. 286). An egg taken by him at the time is now in the collection here, and undoubtedly belongs to this species. Giraud’s Flycatcher begins nesting in Costa Rica about the ‘first of April, and probably rears two broods in a season. The set of eggs presented by Mr. Cherrie was taken on June 30, 1890, and was, more than likely from a second laying. This gentleman describes a nest taken by him near Talamanca, Costa Rica, on April 1, 1890, as follows: “It was placed in a thorny shrub, about 5 feet from the ground, the shrub growing in a clearing by the side of a river. It is composed entirely of dry grass, externally of rather coarse stems, and lined with-very fine, soft tops. It is somewhat retort shaped, resting in the forks of the limb, but is also bound to one of the branches of the fork for almost the entire length of the nest. Long grass stems hang from the front of the nest for 12 inches below the bottom; the nest measures externally 10 inches in depth by 6 inches in horizontal diameter.” The one sent to the United States National Museum, taken at the same place on April 8, 1890, is similarly constructed; it resembles the nests of our Cactus Wren very much, and might readily be mistaken for one of them. The eggs are two or three in number, ovate in shape, rather thin shelled, and without luster; their ground color is a delicate creamy white with a faint pinkish tint, and they are sparingly marked, especially about the larger end of the egg, with minute spots of prune and heliotrope-purple and lavender. The average measurement of five eggs in the United States National Museum collection is 23.11 by 16.76 millimetres, or 0.91 by 0.66 inch. 'The largest ege measures 25.91 by 16.76 millimetres, or 1.02 by 0.66 inches; the smallest, 21.34 by 16.51 millimetres, or 0.84 by 0.65 ‘inch. The type specimen, No. 25283 (PI. 1, Fig. 22), from a set of three eggs, was taken by Mr. George K. Cherrie, near San Jose, Costa Rica, on June 30, 1890, and represents an average-marked egg. 94. Myiodynastes luteiventris ScuaTEr. SULPHUR-BELLIED FLYCATCHER. Myiodynastes luteiventris SCLATER, Proceedings Zoological Society, 1859, 42 (ex Bonaparte Compte Rendu XXXVIII,,1854, 657, nomen nudum). (B-—, C —, R 310, C 365, U 451.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Mexico and Central America; north to southern Arizona; south to Panama. We are indebted to Mr. W. H. Henshaw for the addition of this handsome Flycatcher to our avifauna. He says: “This peculiar Flycatcher appears to be a summer resident of the Chirica- hua Mountains in southern Arizona, where I obtained a pair of old birds, together with three young, August 24, 1874. These, though indistinguishable in size THE SULPHUR-BELLIED FLYCATCHER. 7 bo DT and perfection of plumage from the adult pair, were still the objects of their solicitous care, and were dependent upon them for food. Indeed, their presence might have remained unnoticed by me had I not been greeted, as I entered the mouth of one of the deep, narrow canyons intersecting the mountains in every direction, by the shrill notes and angry cries of the old birds, who hovered in the air at a short, distance, or flew restlessly from tree to tree endeavoring to distract my attention from the young, till, taking the alarm, they flew over into an adjoining ravine, where soon after I found the whole family assembled, the old birds having immediately rejoined their charges. The- following day Dr. Rothrock, while out botanizing, saw what he supposed to be a second family of six or seven of these birds, so that the occurrence of the species here is proba- bly to be regarded as by no means accidental.”? Since then Lieut. Harry C. Benson, United States Army, and Dr. A. K. Fisher have both taken this species among the oaks in some of the canyons near Fort Huachuea, and it undoubtedly occurs regularly throughout the mountain regions of southern Arizona during the breeding season. Mr. E. W. Nelson found it not uncommon about Jalapa and Jico, in Vera Cruz, where they were noted during June and July. They were found alone hedges bordering the roadsides and fields, and also among bushes on the more open parts of the slopes of hills and canyons. In their general habits they closely resemble Myiozetetes texensis. Mr. Richard D. Lusk has recently sent me the following notes on the nest- ing of this species in southern Arizona, under date of October 14, 1894. He writes: “After watching every pair of Sulphur-bellied Flycatchers that came to my notice, all through the season, in the hope of discovering some actions that looked like nesting, I had given it up as useless, when, on the morn- ing of August 1, I saw one in the distance fly to a hole in the main stem of a sycamore tree, about 40 feet from the ground. The bird flew first to an outer branch of the tree and made a careful reconnoiter of the vicinity. I waited and watched quietly until the programme was repeated twice, and then, after going close to the tree and ascertaining the hole to be a natural knot hole, came to the conclusion that the bird must be building, for there had been none of the species in that vicinity a few days previous when I remained there for some time hunting. ‘Two weeks later I returned to the tree and succeeded in reaching the hole, after some difficulty. It was about 4 inches in diameter, straight in, scarcely extending below the margin of the entrance, so that the bird, sitting on the eggs, could have easily looked out of the hole. Within was a nest, which, though exceedingly simple in construction, was certainly unique in material of composition, for there was not a vestige of anything in its struc- ture except the stems of walnut leaves, with which the bottom of the hole was lined for a depth of about half an inch. “Three years ago Mr. O. C. Poling shot a specimen of this species of Fly- eatcher which had a fully developed egg in its ovary, as late as the last of July, ‘Geographical Surveys West of 100th Meridian, Vol. V, 1875, p. 347. 16896—No. 3 17 258 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. and last year, about the middle of July, I shot a female that was obviously laying. IT conclude from these circumstances, coupled with my experience this season, that the bird is an exceptionally late breeder, which possibly may account for no one vetting on the track of their nests before, as the bird is not very uncommon in some localities in this section. Regarding their notes, I think I have noted but two distinct kinds, their discordant screech and a single call. The screech, it seems to me, is not to be compared to any bird voice I have ever heard, but might perhaps be compared to the protest of a wagon wheel that needs oiling, varying in length, but always of the same incomparable quality of tone. Once heard, it is certain to live in the memory and be recognized even after the lapse of years. I could hardly describe their single note or call without hearing it again. I only know that it does not closely resemble that of any other Fly- catcher, though it might not impress one as peculiar in itself, as does their other note. I do not think it is uttered nearly as frequently as the screech. “They are fully as quarrelsome as the average Flycatcher, at least about their nesting tree, always keeping up their discordant notes while so engaged, though if a man is about they are apt to make themselves scarce. They are much less inclined to seek an exposed, dead branch than some of the other members of this family, and seem to me at least to be much less actively engaged in their legitimate calling of catching flies than any other Flycatcher. Moreover, I have seen them repeatedly flying into wild-cherry trees, loaded with ripe fruit, and though I have not happened to be close enough at the time to see them eating the fruit, I concluded that that was what they were domg. ‘They frequent streams bordered with large trees, seeming always to prefer sycamores, and I have rarely seen one more than 50 yards from a stream. The extreme width and size of their bills, together with their short necks, give them a peculiar appearance-even at a distance.” This nest, when taken on August 15, 1894, contained three well incubated egos, these being the first ones actually found within our borders. They were oo”) obtained in Ramsey’s Canyon, in the Huachuca Mountains, and are now in the United States National Museum collection. As the plates for this volume had already been made up and were then in the lithographer’s hands, none of them can be figured. They are broad, ellip- tical ovate in shape; the shell is close-grained, strong, and only slightly glossy. Their ground color is rich, creamy buff, and they are profusely blotched and spotted, principally about their larger ends, with dark pansy purple and lighter shades of lavender; these markings do not resemble the streaky pattern found in the eggs of the genus Myiarchus. They measure 27.18 by 19.05, 26.42 by 18.80, and 24.64 by 18.54 .millimetres, or 1.07 by 0.75, 1.04 by 0.74, and 0.97 by 0.73 inches. The specimen figured on PI. 2, Fig. 7, was kindly loaned by Mr. William Brewster, as there were no eggs of this species in the collection at the time the plates were made up. It was taken by Mr. R. R. McLeod, near Carmen, Chihuahua, Mexico, on May 26, 1885, from a cavity in a tree. THE SULPHUR-BELLIED FLYCATCHER. 259 It resembles the eggs previously described in shape and ground color, but the markings are somewhat brighter and lighter colored, and it measures only 24.89 by 19.56 millimetres, or 0.98 by 0.77 inch. The female parent, No. 23643, Brewster collection, was secured at the same time. 95. Myiarchus crinitus (Liyyavs). CRESTED FLYCATCHER. Muscicapa crinita LINN AUS, Systema Naturie, ed. 12, I, 1766, 325. Myiarchus crinitus LICHTENSTEIN, Nomenclator Museo Berolinensis, 1854, 16. y ) ) ’ (B 130, C 247, BR 312, C 373, U 452.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Hastern United States; north to the Provinces of New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, and Manitoba, Dominion of Canada; west to Minnesota, eastern Nebraska, eastern Kansas, eastern Indian Territory, and slightly beyond the eastern half of Texas; south in winter through eastern Mexico te Panama and Colombia, South America. The Crested or Great Crested Flycatcher is a common summer resident in suitable localities throughout the eastern United States, and breeds from Florida and the Gulf Coast northward, including the southern portions of the Dominion of Canada. The western limit of its breeding range in Texas extends some- what beyond the eastern half of the State into Tom Green County, and thence in a northeasterly direction to Minnesota and southern Manitoba. While the majority of these birds pass beyond our borders in winter, not a few remain on the Florida peninsula and the adjacent keys throughout this season, probably birds from the extreme northern portions of their breeding range. The majority reenter the United States between March 25 and April 10, moving leisurely along, and usually arriving on their breeding grounds in the Middle States about the latter part of April, and correspondingly later farther northward. In north- ern New York and thence west to Minnesota they are rarely noticed before the middle of May. The return migration from their breeding grounds in the extreme northern limits of their range commences in the latter part of August, and few of these birds remain into September. The Crested Flycatcher, though not particularly rare along our northern border, is far more common in our Middle and Southern States, though perhaps not as often observed as its abundance would warrant. Its characteristic call notes may generally be heard in any piece of woods containing some dead tim- ber and situated not too far from water. During the mating season it is one of the noisiest of our Flycatchers, and its loud, ringing eall notes can be heard quite a distance. It utters a variety of sounds; the most common is a clear whistle like “e-whuit-huit,” or ‘“wit-whit, wit-whit,” repeated five or six times in a some- what lower key, and varied to “whuir, whuree,” or “puree,” accompanied by various turnings and twisting of the head. Its alarm note is a penetrating and far-reaching ‘“wheek, whéek,” and it took me some time to make sure that it was made by this species. I had previously attributed it to a Shrike; but one 260 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. morning, while making observations, | found a brood of young Crested Fly- catchers, barely able to fly, which the parents vainly tried to coax away from the neighborhood, and I identified the makers of this note fully. The depressed crest was raised while uttering it, and the calls were repeated for minutes at a time, as the young were not inclined to leave the trees they were in. Mr. J. W. Preston writes me: “I heard a peculiar note of this Flycatcher one evening at sunset. he singer was perched in the top of a tall tree, and along with the ordinary song it uttered a clear, liquid ‘bir die-birdie,’ with much the same tone and energy of the Cardinal’s song.” I consider this Fly catcher much shyer and nonce more retiring than other species of this family, like the Kingbird, Wood Pewee, Phebe, ete., and, although probably equally abundant in some sections as the species mentioned, it is not nearly as often noticed. It appears to me to be rather unsocial in its habits, and one will rarely see more than a pair together excepting during the migrations. From my own observations, I take it also to be more intolerant toward smaller birds generally than other Flycatchers, but not as pugnacious as the Kingbird toward larger birds. Among each other they are rather quarrelsome, and after a pair has selected a nesting site no intruders are allowed to encroach on their ‘ange. The late Colonel Goss says: ‘They fight fiercely for a mate, and they have a habit that I have not nunca in other birds, of plue king, if possible, the tail feathers of a rival, in order to disfigure him, so that he will not be looked upon with favor by the opposite sex; and when lucky enough to pull a feather, it is amusing to see them fuss over it, picking, pulling, in fact fighting it, forgetting for the time the owner in their exultation over the capture.”? Its favorite haunts are the heavily timbered bottom lands along the banks of streams and the borders of timbered tracts contiguous to water, and generally at some little distance from human habitations. Sometimes an exception is found to this rule, and pairs of these Flycatchers have been known to nest in close proximity to dwellings, and even in such artificial nesting sites as martin boxes, ete. From an economic point of view the Crested Flycatcher riust be considered an extremely useful bird. Its food consists mainly of insects, such as beetles, various species of flies, grasshoppers, butterflies, moths, and larvee, varied in the late summer with wild berries of different kinds. Its flight is strong, swift, and graceful, but rarely protracted. Each bird has a few favorite perches within its range, generally a dead limb near the top of a tree on the edge of a wood, whence it darts after passing insects, which seldom escape capture; these are then carried to the nearest perch and devoured at leisure. I have seen it double in the chase with as much ease as a Falcon, and the sharp snapping of mandibles indicated plainly that its sudden dash was successful. Nidification commences ordinarily some two or three weeks after its arrival on the breeding grounds, each pair of birds selecting a suitable nesting Geng of the Birds of ones) 1891, p. 360. THE CRESTED FLYCATCHER. 261 site, consisting usually of a natural cavity in some tree near the borders of a forest, in an old orchard, or in a dead stump leaning over water, and frequently an abandoned excavation of one of the larger Woodpeckers is used. Natural cavities are preferred, however, where such are obtainable, even should these be much more extensive than are really needed, as instances are known where openings in hollow limbs fully 6 feet deep have been filled up with rubbish to within 18 inches of the top before the nest proper was begun. Both sexes assist in nest-building, and it takes sometimes fully two weeks before their task is completed. The finishing and lining of the nest is generally completed by the female. In Florida and other Southern States nidification begins ordinarily during the first two weeks in May; in the Middle States, in the latter half of this month and the first week in June; and in the more northern portions of its breeding range, rarely before the middle of this month, or not until the weather has become quite warm. The nests of the Crested Flycatcher vary greatly in bulk and composition according to the localities in which they are placed. The trees most frequently used for nesting sites are old apple or pear trees, different species of oaks, maple, ash, cottonwood, and pines. 1 Land Birds of the Pacifie District, 1890, p. 97. 286 LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS. The average measurement of thirty-two eggs in the United States National Museum collection is 21.51 by 16.10 millimetres, or about 0.85 by 0.63 inch. The largest egg of the series measures 23.11 by 17.27 millimetres, or 0.91 by 0.68 inch; the smallest, 20.32 by 15.24 millimetres, or 0.80 by 0.60 inch. The type specimen, No. 23891 (Pl. 2, Fig. 15), from a set of three eggs taken by Mr. Gale, near Gold Hill, Boulder County, Colorado, on July .3, 1889, represents one of the richer-colored eggs, while No. 25685 (PI. 2, Fig. 16), from i tol =iee) ] fe] ’ a set of three, Ralph collection, also from Colorado, taken June 16, 1892, shows a i d ? ’ yaler-colored example; they also show the difference in size. } ple; 106. Contopus pertinax Casanis. COUES’S FLYCATCHER. Myiarchus pertinae LICHTENSTEIN, Nomenclator Mueso Berolinensis, 1854, 16 (nomen nudum). Contopus pertinay CABANIS, Museum Heineanum, IT, Sept. 30, 1859, 72. (B—, C 254, R 319, C 381, U 460.) GEOGRAPHICAL RANGE: Highlands of Guatemala and Mexico; north to Arizona and southwestern New Mexico. Accidental in Colorado. The breeding range of Coues’s Flycatcher is eoextensive with its geo- graphical distribution in the United States, where it is only a summer visitor. It was added to our avifauna by Dr. Elliott Coues, who took a specimen near Fort Whipple, Arizona, on August 20, 1864; and since then it has been found to be generally distributed throughout the mountains of the southern half of Arizona and southwestern New Mexico, although nowhere very common. The best account of its general habits is that of Mr. H.W. Henshaw, who says: “In 1873 I obtained a pair of old birds, which were accompanied by several young, in the White Mountains, near Camp Apache, and, not meeting with it elsewhere, supposed it to be rare. Such, however, proves not to be the ‘ase, as the past season it was found to be one of the most numerous and char- acteristic of the Flycatcher tribe, being seen everywhere in the mountainous districts from Camp Apache to the border line. “Tn general appearance as well as habits it is quite similar to the Olive- sided Flycatcher, and shows the same proclivities for inhabiting the pineries, often on the edge of an opening, or where the country is diversified and cut up by rocky ravines and the pines are interspersed with oak woods. In such places the species is sure to be present, and may be seen circling about the high pine stubs or descending to the lower trees, as the oaks, and launching itself out from the branches in vigorous pursuit of flies or beetles, which it hunts with the greatest energy and perseverance. ‘The notes are loud and very foreibly given, possessing the same character as the call of the Olive-sided Flycatcher, but are readily distinguishable. They resemble the syllables ‘pe-wee-ee,’ great emphasis being laid on the middle syllable, while the last is quite prolonged and in a slightly raised key. Each pair apparently takes COUES’S FLYCATCHER. 287 possession of a large area, and allows no intrusion of their kind within the limits. Having spent a few moments in one spot, the bird makes a hurried dash, and in a few moments its voice can be just distinguished as it is sent back from afar in answer to the mate near by. 146 Dutch ..-. 142 San EU a Se ces cee seeroccm tac ascesceeecnns 142 SLO pNONS(S see eeeetate een eee anal semester 151 \WINE a URC peas Sate ocensaem cess Geeta csSesssessco ene 385 AVE 2a S5 csc se coo c a snae aoe Sec coos cose cone 385 White, M. A., on the time required to hatch the eggs of (Che C Ow Dinas encase eon anal = ee 438 White-backed Woodpecker.........-.-..----.------------ WZ Di ledu OL COCK essen esa nee sea eee e elas == eee ee 42 NWiOU0 DECK Grane ses —stere taste aaa aes 42 -eared Hummingbird .......-.-...---....-.--------- 227 “NOM OG te) 8 Verne alle eee en nn ole oa ol le 388 IWioOd Dek Gleee smn sa nisanlceeie= eae 70 -necked Raven 402 -throated Swift 185 Widmann, Otto, on the nesting habits of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo 22 on the habits of the Yellow-bellied sucker = 85 on the nesting habits of the Chimney AE ose acess ogosoocnccoSaSSaesEcon 178 on the occurrence, nesting habits, and migration of the Ruby-throated Hum- mingbird, in Missouri -.-.-...--.------ 195 Williams, R.S., on the habits of the Pileated Woodpecker. 104 Walliamson's) SaApSUCK Clo -eseceee ee ce weenie. === === =I 97 TAH PWG. WIRE bh oe conbcoes co noassocucondosouerposesboSnco 163 A WANG DBE Senos acne necosccoconcUsDnOoccEnCnSUece ome 6 W000 GUC Kesee ae eee eee seas ale stale ee 102, 121 DWioOd COG Kae sense sera ane enema a nnan a cece. cea =a =n seen 42, 102 Wi00d-heMl <== << 2-2-2 c ccc coc cenmeeannamncesensen-co=n>ae-=" 102 woodhousei (Aphelocoma) .-..--.------------------------- 372 Woodhouse’s Jay .-----.----------- +0202 enn ee eee eee eee 372 Woodpecker, Alaskan Three-toed..-.---..---------------- 80 Alpine Three-toed ......----.--- 80 American Three-toed ......----- = 77 Arctic Three-toed-.-.-.. Sete VES Arizona...-- 5 68 Bairdis2s--.--- = 63 Banded-backed. -----. ..5.c.2 22.0 5--n--n--5-- q7 Banded Three-toed. ......-.----------------- W7 Batehelder's!]-=--cncee=enea==aacae=—- secon 60 Big Guinea....--..-.-----22---- o----------- 46 Black-backed Three-toed ....-.-.-.-.------- 74 Black-breasted. -~-- -- os. 8. soc cennacnnne= 97 IBTOWi ena annneaalcanemesscencce=ssaccan=== 97 (Gabamis: Sloan sce ne nc ae ace esis oneal =a ainsi mine 53 Californianlsasasee een =aeeeene ee = aoe ee am 112 (Caroling esas =a eeites emdclnassieren ae ai === a= 121 Gheckerediencssncenceemsce reese aan 121 DOWNY -2- 2-2 son cn cncnsecsconccnecccnennscee 55 Gairdner’s........--.. gacecesess 58 (CHB es eece. ceeseonocnancoseSene 127 Golden-fronted. -... 124 Golden-winged. ---- 129 air ype sate rente= 46 Harris's. - --- 52 Tvory-billed. 42 adder baCkedmeescseasas sea core 63 WMeGwislSieccosee ee eras oe eee eee eran a 117 Little Guinea. - 55 Narrow-fronted -- 117 Northern Hairy.......,.0--sccsccsesncesse-= 50 518 ALPHABETICAL INDEX. Page. Page. Woodpecker, Nuttall’s .-< 2. - 22202. c ee scenwcecceenecaea--- 65 | xanthocephalus (Xanthocephalus)........-...------------ Phillips's ..--..-- 50 | Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus .-........-....-.-..------ Pileated....-...-- =) e102) ||) -santhoura loxt0ss)--ceesscee seen nea es sakes eee eee Red-bellied! -assese eee renee eee seen e aoe 1210) -xantust (Basilinns))---2--ceen= == nee nee ole Red-preasted oe owes eee elew sewer sea 92 | Xantus’s Becard Red-cockaded . .-...---.----------- = 61 Hummingbird - - - (Red-headed ias~ esas ese = 07; AP ep eoocceesssncitiso Round-headed. - -- = 97 | Xenopicus albolarvatus...-.. : Sonthern)) Heinys. -..-s-sssoseeeeeeseeee= == 51 | Yellow-bellied Flycatcher.-..-...........-.------.-------- ALM C8Sa-- sce eee eae ee 65 SapSUCkKena-= =n ae eee Striped-back Three-toed .-......------------ 80 -billed Cuckoo .-..-- Whining 82 Magpie...----- White-backed- - 17 -fronted Woodpecker -~ Bn WW ahtite~ Dil Od ee eee ae eleietetee a= 42 AION ae ne oe ot erigtnace coscocnc eee Stssosseose Wihite-shead dian oa. ose e ewe ecisseena= == 70 -headed Blackbird Wellowatconted se aa-.0 = ae =seee neers ee 124 -shafted Flicker WWiOOd ME Gy 06 sere m eee aie = eee 288 | Young Old-man Bird.-..--.... Pigeon 19 | Zebra Bird wrightii (Empidonax) 318 | Zopilotillo ....... Wiriphtis tly CatChOl. nsec cameawcemecisccneectwisece rosea =e = 318 tA retest ah SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIO _ iii & 002344 hbird gQL698 B45 n Life histories of orth American birds,