14243 perstiistsfocesati seit iit; hs ge of * lit ae at 5 i Ht} Ty etyt ee * 2 *4 7. 54335 ote yess Sree “eT ene OE Go NERS nt ND Bake A uw Ay ela ul — WW <= a z : = 4 Z a , 34 a 3 = S WS 7 c = s gs SN we G NOSHLINS S3IYUVYSIT _t IBRARIES _oMITHSONIAN IneR iT mE NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3IuVuE= ; =z i ae a (ox = i ° = 2) eS ° = ° | mad ps] = a = ee] - Fd > = > = >: = = ee) — 4 a = es Ee 5 : 5 : 5 = 5 o oD z= o = oD = . THSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS (SJ luyua Mtl BRARI ES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIG ee. 8 2 g Sia Zé. EQN FZ z EQS F 5 2 . 2) ze Oo % Be Kw fo) 2 ES 2 = 2 = Nias = NOSHLINS SaIluVvugIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3INVUS = n s n = | Ko 5 ws 13 hs Z ul we = z oe . al a et = cw ee = <> = = ‘> YP ws ioe - KS i= a i=: a ; m @ WW 2 m 2 o o = < 7) z 7) INOSHLINS SSIUYWYSIT_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI NVINOSHLINS SAIYVusl NVINOSHLINS S3Z1uvudal NVINOSHLIWS SMITHSONIAN SMITHSONIAN NVINOSHLIWS SMITHSONIAN NVINOSHLIWS ITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYSIT_ LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTIO y a= ” 2 w” = n = ty, = oe = a eA [oad = y” SA > = Be, > =) see 5 \S = = ae Magy’ sg Ee = \ = = Us iy — LP ee Ee me is Bie Greg Z a ae ¢ ITHSONIAN NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31IYVYSIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIGO! = wo = <2) z= ae: ” z or. < = S = cs we = Ws z =] z 4 Lf fg = ~) a z > fe) 2 Pe pe) LID thy 9 Qe & ae ro) ( 2 g 2 G4 2K 8 2 = Zz = 2 Oy E a = FA . 2 a 2 a » 2 = | INOSHLINS SaIuvugi7a LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3I uvuel RK me z 4 z in = ae ” KS ‘ 77) ERS See a af, Pa < 3 em lee Ys 2 = “ep 3 Z S = a 2 } ys ro) = 3 = Bi. oy 2 a Fa = z 1 IITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILOLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3SIYVYEIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN_INSTITUT i a z Ee = 2 S PS te o — ow — o — oo dy 2 = 2 5 2 = 2 Py ated = = im > Ee <> = wo = n* io RARIES SMITHSONIAN NOILMLILSI NOILMLILSI NOILALILS! NOILNLILS INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S3iuvVYdIT LIBRARIES SMITHSON S3INVYSIT LIBRARIE INSTITUTION INSTITUTION INSTITUTION INSTITUTION LMNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31YVYGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI_ NVINOSHLI NVINOSHLINS S31u¥Vuslt LIBRARIE NVINOSHLINS S3IYVYSIT_LIBRARIE (27) z z = < 2 af Z z =) Z NS z= \. z 9 x. D9 WY. 5 > rs a a n * nm es a aaa) Oo ¥ p99 \N a AS = z = } = = , = > = = = l = ” z ” : wo »; 77) RARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S31uvuaty LIBRARIES SMITHSON ul ; 7) = 7 SS uJ a w , =. ¢% “val a 4 aS cf ol :. eee EGU 3 : SQRX = : Wd, ? to Ge j= i rei =“ S : SAY : = a ae 3 = 3 = ro) a eo =) za I z ee at) =z i LALILSNI”NVINOSHLINS (S41 YVYaI7 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN” INSTITUTION | NOILALILSNINVINOSHLI ~ * oO -_ oO — —_ fo) pa ° o a ow _ wo — ao » a 5 re) = 7) = Fe) SY > = > = “> (E > YS a = a = a) is a KN = 2 : 3° ni 2 mn Sw o Bes = o = o z w RS RARIES, SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILMLILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS, SA1HVYGIT_ LIBRARIES, SMITHSON = = * =» <= = "a a = a i X =| = = =z 4 8 NS i = : g : 3 9 rc MW IAY OO oe ° Ss fe) Hs 2 E Qyw 2 = Z, E 2 fr : ee: 5 S 3 z LALILSNI_NVINOSHLINS S314YVYGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION _NVINOSHL Z e z no = 2 = on eo wo uJ a oa o = ee = x = a = =f nie -o x ATi | <= a 3 a 5 ar 5 2 5 ‘Sw 2 = 2 a a 3 2 ae RARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLIWS saiuvee 7 CR RAR eS Se a z G z = = 0 2 ps ° o = = 2 = = - x = Ee; > ra > P= > Ee; — 7 Fs) — 7 3 aD a b : 5 - 5 : b Shia on = e a D 2 ke IALILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS S31YVY 17 LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, NOWLALLAESNINWINOSH < = = K. = 2 ale, its = = = “ZF WS 5 > : Sj z ra} z 5M F S YF 5 4 o an \N a) 2 Rr Bd -E ae E s Zz S N = = i FA a » B = . 2 a SRARIES SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITUTION NOILMJILSNI_NVINOSHLINS saluvadia_t! BRARIES SMITHSON fyi RR! DIS api Ri, = “4 =a = - fy is x. = oc = o = “.¢7e yy = = = = = Ey 4! Uy oc S oc S ms ¢ = “yey a : S Se = o 3 ee = Z S = = er = a NVINOSHLIWS _S31uvud tl BRARI ES_ SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION { NOILOLILSNI_NVINOSHL = ; (e) - fo) - _ fo) = Me o = wo a o — oO 2 = pas = aa Fs es) ‘WY 4 e > res .> a => (URS 2 e 2 = 2 E 2) es i Tree Teh eh dieters ‘ i 7 hes ; ia Me . 4 ; + tk i De a 2 ME eee. ote a vi 4 apn” \) : i { 7 Bs ' im An, n - wv j } 7 ty e oy a " ce ORE ay °. i A ‘ee Naas ay, a i ca Ry 7 Day Pape mh j 4 y ‘il a A The Birds of Washington sxnsonian Inszi Xs “Ute, 3) ae 25 1909 oO rent ee i, Of this work in all its editions 1250 copies have been printed and the plates destroyed. Of the Author’s Edition 250 sets have been printed and bound, of which this copy is No.‘ Se Ns THE BIRDS OF WASHINGTON A COMPLETE, SCIENTIFIC AND POPULAR ACCOUNT OF THE 372 SPECIES OF BIRDS FOUND IN THE STATE BY WILLIAM LEON DAWSON, A.M., B. D., of Seattle AUTHOR OF *' THE BIRDS OF OHIO”’ ASSISTED BY JOHN HOOPER BOWLES, of Tacoma ILLUSTRATED BY MORE THAN 300 ORIGINAL HALF-TONES OF BIRDS IN LIFE, NESTS, EGGS, AND FAVORITE HAUNTS, FROM PHOTOGRAPHS BY THE AUTHOR AND OTHERS. TOGETHER WITH 40 DRAWINGS IN THE TEXT AND A SERIES OF FULL-PAGE COLOR-PLATES. BY ALLAN BROOKS AUTHOR’S EDITION SOLD ONLY BY SUBSCRIPTION. VOLUME I SEATTLE THE OCCIDENTAL PUBLISHING CO. Mog) ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CopyRIGHT, 1909, BY WILLIAM LEON DAWwsoNn Half-tone work chiefly by The Bucher Engraving Company. Composition and Presswork by The New Franklin Printing Company. Binding by The Ruggles-Gale Company. To the Members of the Caurinus Club, in grateful recognition of their friendly services, and in expectation that under their leadership the interests of ornithology will prosper in the Pacific Northwest, this work is respectfully Dedicated EXPLANATORY. TABLE OF COMPARISONS. INCHES. IPAGEATONT SAE) “Sactaye mio ae 5m) ERE COTE Re ur ES Cee eae Length up to 5.00 Wag etaestzeateicr ncaa ek uera civictasewlel jean .aetueteula sm nig 5.00- 6.00 SPAR MEES cao devon Ue Ghe A soe toed Ore teins pienso errarone 6.00- 7.50 Clrewiitkesiz ee wcde se hohe susie pistes sities. ors a ene eats aise tei cnctia 7.50- 9.00 IRV) DIE SOs «SecA Blo Gro ARNOT Spicer horse on te ay aco Rea Teme a 9.00-12.00 lenttlewlawkeesizeu Wedlicize. Ml enmesize-r)..4- 4: oriteet ne oie 12.00-16.00 (CHIOMWSVASS 6 Gti co yr oR es LN 16,00-22.00 CS UMSize we GAntASIZey a eel As eis se tal Seka Cute at ee eee ope 42.00 and upward Measurements are given in inches and hundredths and in millimeters, the latter enclosed in parentheses. KEY OF ABBREVIATIONS. References under Authorities are to faunal lists, as follows: ae Townsend, Catalog of Birds, Narrative, 1839, pp. 331-336. C&S. Cooper and Suckley, Rep. Pac. R. R. Surv., Vol. XII., pt. IL., 1860, pp. 140-287. Dea Lawrence, Birds of Gray's Harbor, Auk, Jan. 1892, pp. 30-47. L2 Lawrence, Further Notes on Birds of Gray’s Harbor, Auk, Oct. 1892, pp. 352-357. Rh. Rhoads, Birds Observed in B. C. and Wash., Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1893, pp. 21-65. (Only records referring explicitly to Washington are noted.) Dr. Dawson, Birds of Okanogan County, Auk, Apr. 18907, pp. 168-182. Si, Snyder, Notes on a Few Species, Auk, July 1900, pp. 242-245. Kb. Kobbé, Birds of Cape Disappointment, Auk, Oct. 1900, pp. 349-358. Ra. Rathbun, Land Birds of Seattle, Auk, Apr. 1902, pp. 131-141. 2, Dawson, Birds of Yakima County, Wilson Bulletin, June 1902, pp. 59-67. Sst. Snodgrass, Land Birds from Central Wash., Auk, Apr. 1903, pp. 202-200. Ss2. Snodgrass, Land Birds Central and Southeastern Wash., Auk, Apr. 1904, pp. 223- 233. Kk. Keck, Birds of Olympia, Wilson Bulletin, June 1904, pp. 33-37. Ife Johnson, Birds of Cheney, Condor, Jan. 1906, pp. 25-28. B. Bowles, Birds of Tacoma, Auk, Apr. 1906, pp. 138-148. Edson, Birds of Bellingham Bay Region, Auk, Oct. 1908, pp. 425-4309. For fuller account of these lists see Bibliography in Vol. II. References under Specimens are to collections, as follows: U. of W. University of Washington Collection; (U. of W.) indicates lack of locality data. Pe Pullman (State College) Collection. Pt. indicates local specimen. Prov. Collection Provincial Museum, Victoria, B. C: 5 Collection C. W. & J. H. Bowles. Only Washington specimens are listed. Cc Cantwell Collection. N. Collection Bellingham Normal School. Iz, Collection J. M. Edson. PREFACE. Love of the birds is a natural passion and one which requires neither analysis nor defense. The birds live, we live; and life is sufficient answer unto life. But humanity, unfortunately, has had until recently other less justifiable interests—that of fighting pre-eminent among them—so that out of a gory past only a few shadowy names of bird-lovers emerge, Aristotle, Pliny the Elder, ZElian. Ornithology as a science is modern, at best not over two centuries and a half old, while as a popular pursuit its age is better reckoned by decades. It 1s, therefore, highly gratifying to those who feel this primal instinct strongly to be able to note the rising tide of interest in their favorite study. Ornithology has received unwonted attention of late, not only in scientific works but also in popular literature, and it has taken at last a deserved place upon the curriculum of many of our colleges and secondary schools. We of the West are just waking, not too tardily we hope, to a realization of our priceless heritage of friendship in the birds. Our homesteads have been chosen and our rights to them established; now we are looking about us to take account of our situation, to see whether indeed the lines have fallen unto us in pleasant places, and to reckon up the forces which make for happiness, welfare, and peace. And not the least of our resources we find to be the birds of Washing- ton. They are here as economic allies, to bear their part in the distribution of plant life, and to wage with us unceasing warfare against insect and rodent foes, which would threaten the beneficence of that life. They are here, some of them, to supply our larder and to furnish occupation for us in the predatory mood. But above all, they are here to add zest to the enjoyment of life itself; to please the eye by a display of graceful form and piquant color; to stir the depths of human emotion with their marvelous gift of song; to tease the imagination by their exhibitions of flight; or to goad aspiration as they seek in their migrations the mysterious, alluring and ever insatiable Beyond. Indeed, it is scarcely too much to say that we may learn from the birds manners which will correct our own; that is, stimulate us to the full realization in our own lives of that ethical program which their tender domestic relations so clearly foreshadow. Vi. In the matter herein recorded account has of course been taken of nearly all that has been done by other workers, but the literature of the birds of Wash- ington is very meager, being chiefly confined to annotated lists, and the conclusions reached have necessarily been based upon our own experience, comprising some thirteen years residence in the State in the case of Mr. Bowles, and a little more in my own. Field work has been about equally divided between the East-side and the West-side and we have both been able to give practically all our time to this cause during the nesting seasons of the past four years. Parts of several seasons have been spent in the Cascade Mountains, but there remains much to learn of bird-life in the high Cascades, while the conditions existing in the Blue Mountains and in the Olympics are still largely to be inferred. ‘Two practically complete surveys were made of island life along the West Coast, in the summers of 1906 and 1907; and we feel that our nesting sea-birds at least are fairly well understood. Altho necessarily bulky, these volumes are by no means exhaustive. No attempt has been made to tell all that is known or may be known of a given species. It has been our constant endeavor, however, to present something like a true proportion of interest as between the birds, to exhibit a species as it appears toa Washingtonian. On this account certain prosy fellows have received extended treatment merely because they are ours and have to be reckoned with; while others, more interesting, perhaps, have not been considered at length simply because we are not responsible for them as characteristic birds of Washington. In writing, however, two classes of readers have had to be considered,—first, the Washingtonian who needs to have his interest aroused in the birds of his home State, and second, the seriows ornithological student in the East. For the sake of the former we have introduced some familiar matter from other sources, including a previous work® of the author’s,and for this we must ask the indulgence of ornithologists. For the sake of the latter we have dilated upon certain points not elsewhere covered in the case of certain Western birds——matters of abun- dance, distribution, sub-specific variety, etc., of dubious interest to our local patrons; and for this we must in turn ask their indulgence. The order of treatment observed in the following pages is substantially the reverse of that long followed by the American Ornithologists’ Union, and is justifiable principally on the ground that it follows a certain order of interest and convenience. Beginning, as it does, with the supposedly highest forms of bird- life, it brings to the fore the most familiar birds, and avoids that rude juxtaposi- tion of the lowest form of one group with the highest of the one above it, which has been the confessed weakness of the A. O. U. arrangement. The outlines of classification may be found in the Table of Contents to each volume, and a brief synopsis of generic, family, and ordinal characters, in the a. The Birds of Ohio, by William Ieon Dawson, A. M., B. D., with Introduction and Analytical Keys by Lynds Jones, M. Sc. One and Two Volumes, pp. xlviii. +671. Columbus, The Wheaton Publishing Company, 1903. Vil. Analytical Key prepared by Professor Jones. It has not been thought best to give large place to these matters nor to intrude them upon the text, because of the many excellent manuals which already exist giving especial attention to this field. The nomenclature is chiefly that of the A. O. U. Check-List, Second Edition. revised to include the Fourteenth Supplement, to which reference is made by number. Departures have in a few instances been made, changes sanctioned by Ridgway or Coues, or justified by a consideration of local material. It is, of course, unfortunate that the publication of the Third Edition of the A. O. U. Check-List has been so long delayed, insomuch that it is not even yet available. On this account it has not been deemed worth while to provide in these volumes a separate check-list, based on the A. O. U. order, as had been intended. Care has been exercised in the selection of the English or vernacular names of the birds, to offer those which on the whole seem best fitted to survive locally. Unnecessary departures from eastern usage have been -avoided, and the changes made have been carefully considered. As matter of fact, the English nomenclature has of late been much more stable than the Latin. For instance. no one has any difficulty in tracing the \Western Winter Wren thru the literature of the past half century; but the bird referred to has, within the last decade, posed successively under the following scientific names: Troglodytes hiemalis pacificus, Anorthura h. p., Olbiorchilus h. p., and Nannus h. p., and these with the sanction of the A. O. U. Committee—certainly a striking example of how not to secure stability in nomenclature. With such an example before us we may perhaps be pardoned for having in instances failed to note the latest discovery of the name-hunter, but we have humbly tried to follow our agile leaders. In the preparation of plumage descriptions, the attempt to derive them from local collections was partially abandoned because of the meagerness of the ma- terials offered. If the work had been purely British Columbian, the excellent collection of the Provincial Museum at Victoria would have been nearly sufficient ; but there is crying need of a large, well-kept, central collection of skins and mounted birds here in Washington. A creditable showing is being made at Pullman under the energetic leadership of Professor W. T. Shaw, and the State College will always require a representative working collection. The University of Washington, however, is the natural repository for \West-side specimens, and perhaps for the official collection of the State, and it is to be devoutly hoped that its present ill-assorted and ill-housed accumulations may early give place to a worthy and complete display of Washington birds. Among private collections that of Mr. J. M. Edson, of Bellingham, is the most notable, representing, as it does, the patient occupation of extra hours for the past eighteen years. I am under obligation to Mr. Edson for a check-list of his collection (comprising entirely local species), as also for a list of the birds of the Museum of the Belling- ham Normal School. The small but well-selected assortment of bird-skins belong- ing to Messrs. C. W. and J. H. Bowles rests in the Ferry Museum in Tacoma. Vill. Here also Mr. Geo. C. Cantwell has left his bird-skins, partly local and partly Alaskan, on view. Fortunately the task of redescribing the plumage of Washington birds has been rendered less necessary for a work of such scope as ours, thru the appearance of the Fifth Edition of Coues Key, embodying, as it does the ripened conclusions of a uniquely gifted ornithological writer, and above all, by the great definitive work from the hand of Professor Ridgway,’ now more than half completed. These final works by the masters of our craft render the careful repetition of such effort superfluous, and I have no hesitation in admitting that we are almost as much indebted to them as to local collections, altho a not inconsiderable part of the author’s original work upon plumage description in ‘The Birds of Ohio” has been utilized, or re-worked, wherever applicable. In compiling the General Ranges, we wish to acknowledge indebtedness both to the A. O. U. Check-List (2nd Edition) and to the summaries of Ridgway and Coues in the works already mentioned. In the Range in Washington, we have tried to take account of all published records, but have been obliged in most instances to rely upon personal experience, and to express judgments which must vary in accuracy with each individual case. The final work upon migrations in Washington is still to be done. Our own task has called us hither and yonder each season to such an extent that consecutive work in any one locality has been impossible, and there appears not to be any one in the State who has seriously set himself to record the movements of the birds in chronological order. Success in this line depends upon codperative work on the part of many widely distributed observers, carried out thru a considerable term of years. It is one of the aims of these volumes to stimulate such endeavor, and the author invites correspondence to the end that such an undertaking may be carried out systematically. In citing authorities, we have aimed to recall the first publication of each species as a bird of Washington, giving in italics the name originally assigned the bird, if different from the one now used, together with the name of the author in bold-face type. In many instances early references are uncertain, chiefly by reason of failure to distinguish between the two States now separated by the Columbia River, but once comprehended under the name Oregon Territory. Such citations are questioned or bracketed, as are all those which omit or disregard scientific names. ‘The abbreviated references are to standard faunal lists appear- ing in the columns of “The Auk” and elsewhere, and these are noted more carefully under the head of Bibliography, among the Appendices. At the outset I wish to explain the peculiar relation which exists between a. Key to North American Birds, by Elliott Coues, A. M., M. D., Ph. D., Fifth Edition (entirely revised), in Two Volumes; pp. xli.+ 1152. Boston, Dana Estes and Company, 1903. b. The Birds of North and Middle America, by Robert Ridgway, Curator, Division of Birds, U. S. National Museum, Bulletin of the U. S. N. M., No. 50; Pt. I., Fringillidae, pp. xxxi.+ 715 and Pl, XX. (1901); Pt. II., Tanagridae, etc., pp. xx.+834 and Pl. XXII. (1902); Pt. III., Motacillidae, etc., pp. xx. +801 and Pl. XIX. (1904); Pt. IV., Turdidae, etc., pp. xxll.+ 973 and Pl. XXXIV. (1907). i myself and the junior author, Mr. J. H. Bowles. Each of us had long had in anind the thought of preparing a work upon the birds of Washington; but Mr. Bowles, during my residence in Ohio, was the first to undertake the task, and had a book actually half written when I returned to the scene with friendly overtures. Since my plans were rather more extended than his, and since it was necessary that one of us should devote his entire time to the work, Mr. Bowles, with unbounded generosity, placed the result of his labors at my disposal and declared his willingness to further the enterprise under my leadership in every possible way. Except, therefore, in the case of signed articles from his pen, and in most of the unsigned articles on Grouse and Ducks, where our work has been a strict collaboration, the actual writing of the book has fallen to my lot. In practice, therefore, | have found myself under every degree of indebtedness to Mr. Bowles, according as my own materials were abundant or meager, or as his information or mine was more pertinent in a given case. Mr. Bowles has been as good as his word in the matter of co6peration, and has lavished his time in the quest of new species, or in the discovery of new nests, or in the location of choice subjects for the camera, solely that the book might profit thereby. In several expeditions he has accompanied me. On this account, therefore, the text in its pronouns, “I,” “we,” or ‘he,’ bears witness to a sort of sliding scale of intimacy, which, unless explained, might be puzzling to the casual reader. I am especially indebted to Mr. Bowles for extended material upon the nesting of the birds; and my only regret is that the varying requirements of the task so often compelled me to condense his excellent sketches into the meager sentences which appear under the head “Nesting.” Not infrequently, however, I have thrown a few adjectives into Mr. Bowles’s paragraphs and incorporated them without distinguishing comment, in expectation that our joint indebtedness will hardly excite the curiosity of any disengaged “higher critic” of ornithology. Let me, then, express my very deep gratitude to Mr. Bowles for his generosity and my sincere appreciation of his abilities so imperfectly exhibited, I fear, in the following pages, where I have necessarily usurped the opportunity. It is matter of regret to the author that the size of these volumes, now considerably in excess of that originally contemplated, has precluded the possi- bility of an extended physical and climatic survey of Washington. ‘The striking dissimilarity of conditions which obtain as between the eastern side of the State and the western are familiar to its citizens and may be easily inferred by others from a perusal of the following pages. Our State is excelled by none in its diversity of climatic and physiographic features. ‘The ornithologist, therefore, may indulge his proclivities in half a dozen different bird-worlds without once leaving our borders. Especially might the taxonomist, the subspecies-hunter, revel in the minute shades of difference in plumage which characterize the representa- tives of the same species as they appear in different sections of our State. We have not gone into these matters very carefully, because our interests are rather x. those of avian psychology, and of the domestic and social relations of the birds,— in short, the /ife interests. While the author’s point of view has been that of a bird-lover, some things herein recorded may seem inconsistent with the claim of that title. ‘The fact is that none of us are quite consistent in our attitude toward the bird-world. ‘The interests of sport and the interests of science must sometimes come into conflict with those of sentiment; and if one confesses allegiance to all three at once he will inevitably appear to the partisans of either in a bad light. However, a real principle of unity is found when we come to regard the bird’s value to society. The question then becomes, not, Is this bird worth more to me in my collection or upon my plate than as a living actor in the drama of life? but, In what capacity can this bird best serve the interests of mankind? ‘There can be no doubt that the answer to the latter question is usually and increasingly, 4s a living bird. Stuffed specimens we need, but only a representative number of them; only a limited few of us are fitted to enjoy the pleasures of the chase, and the objects of our passion are rapidly passing from view anyway; but never while the hearts of men are set on peace, and the minds of men are alert to receive the impressions of the Infinite, will there be too many birds to speak to eye and ear, and to minister to the hidden things of the spirit. ‘The birds belong to the people, not to a clique or a coterie, but to all the people as heirs and stewards of the good things of God. It is of the esthetic value of the bird that we have tried to speak, not alone in our descriptions but in our pictures. ‘The author has a pleasant conviction, born of desire perhaps, that the bird in art is destined to figure much more largely in future years than heretofore. We have learned something from the Japanese in this regard, but more perhaps from the camera, whose revelations have marvel- ously justified the conventional conclusions of Japanese decorative art. Nature is ever the nursing mother of Art. While our function in the text has necessarily been interpretative, we have preferred in the pictures to let Nature speak for herself, and we have held ourselves and our artists to the strictest accounting for any retouching or modification of photographs. Except, therefore, as explicitly noted, the half-tones from photographs are faithful presentations of life. If they inspire any with a sense of the beauty of things as they are, or suggest to any the theme for some composition, whether of canvas, fresco, vase, or tile, in things as they might be, then our labor shall not have been in vain. In this connection we have to congratulate ourselves upon the discovery, virtually in our midst, of such a promising bird-artist as Mr. Allan Brooks. I can testify to the fidelity of his work, as all can to the delicacy and artistic feeling displayed even under the inevitable handicap of half-tone reproduction. My sincerest thanks are due Mr. Brooks for his hearty and generous codperation in this enterprise; and if our work shall meet with approval, I shall feel that a large measure of credit is due to him. The joy of work is in the doing of it, while as for credit, or “fame,” that is a mere by-product. He who does not do his work under a sense of privilege is a Xi. hireling, a clock-watcher, and his sufficient as coveted meed is the pay envelope. But those of us who enjoy the work are sufficiently rewarded already. What tho the envelope be empty! We've had our fun and—vwell, yes, we'd do it again, especially if you thought it worth while. But the chief reward of this labor of love has been the sense of fellowship engendered. ‘The progress of the work under what seemed at times insuperable difficulties has been, nevertheless, a continuous revelation of good will. “Every- body helps” is the motto of the Seattle spirit, and it is just as characteristic of the entire Pacific Northwest. Everybody has helped and the result is a composite achievement, a monument of patience, fidelity, and generosity far other than my own. I gratefully acknowledge indebtedness to Professor Robert Ridgway for counsel and assistance in determining State records; to Dr. A. K. Fisher for records and for comparison of specimens; to Dr. Chas. W. Richmond for con- firmation of records; to Messrs. William L. Finley, Herman T. Bohlman, A. W. Anthony, W. H. Wright, Fred. S. Merrill, Warburton Pike, Walter I. Burton, A. Gordon Bowles, and Walter K. Fisher, for the use of photographs; to Messrs. J. M. Edson, D. E. Brown, A. B. Reagan, E. S. Woodcock, and to a score of others beside for hospitality and for assistance afield; to Samuel Rathbun, Prof. E. S. Meany, Prof. O. B. Johnson, Prof. W. T. Shaw, Miss Adelaide Pol- lock, and Miss Jennie V. Getty, for generous cooperation and courtesies of many sorts; to Francis Kermode, Esq., for use of the Provincial Museum collections, and to Prof. Trevor Kincaid for similar permission in case of the University of Washington collections. My special thanks are due my friend, Prof. Lynds Jones, the proven comrade of many an ornithological cruise, who upon brief notice and at no little sacrifice has prepared the Analytical Key which accompanies this work. My wife has rendered invaluable service in preparing.manuscript for press, and has shared with me the arduous duties of proof-reading. My father, Rev. W. E. Dawson, of Blaine, has gone over most of the manuscript and has offered many highly esteemed suggestions. To our patrons and subscribers, whose timely and indulgent support has made this enterprise possible, I offer my sincerest thanks. To the trustees of the Occidental Publishing Company I am under a lasting debt of gratitude, in that they have planned and counselled freely, and in that they have so heartily seconded my efforts to make this work as beautiful as possible with the funds at command. One’s roll of obligations cannot be reckoned complete without some recogni- tion also of the dumb things, the products of stranger hearts and brains, which have faithfully served their uses in this undertaking: my Warner-and-Swasey binoculars (8-power )—I would not undertake to write a bird-book without them; the Graflex camera, which has taken most of the life portraits; the King canvas boat which has made study of the interior lake life possible ;—all deserve hon- orable mention. Then there is the physical side of the book itself. One cannot reckon up the Xil. myriad hands that have wrought upon it, engravers, printers, binders, paper- makers, messengers, even the humble goatherds in far-off Armenia, each for a season giving of his best—out of love, I trust. Brothers, I thank you all! Of the many shortcomings of this work no one could be more sensible than its author. We should all prefer to spend a life-time writing a book, and having written it, to return and do it over again, somewhat otherwise. But book-making is like matrimony, for better or for worse. ‘There is a finality about it which takes the comfort from one’s muttered declaration, “I could do it better another time.” What I have written I have written. I go now to spend a quiet day— with the birds. WitiiamM Leon Dawson. CONTENTS OF VOLUME I. PAGE. Ne rerio TRL etek Met ee cE SU Slogan Sp a's YS ntay 0, font Gon nuce lou hav aronay n aueTehela ious eo oe i ES Sa ESTO SANG 1 SV egestas yh 3s > cysasy AVS 08 Soon yoga aah ore: xa tues lo, a, Ana CwNe ili PRTG. ore BGO BS 6 Oe € occ 6 REE DE Ot een eI ROIS te en rae V. Bier one Unt PAGE MIM USURATIONS2 <0 ./.0s sc. lice ccc ceede urease es con XV. DescrirTioN OF SpEcrES Nos. 1-181. Order Passeres—Perching Birds. Suborder OSCINES—Song Birds. NOS. Family Corvide—The Crows and Jays...........:... I-14 I licterida—— he: Uroupials; Geiss aes ee ss 15-22 43 Brangiiid@—— Whe Winches) ean. 4-142 ia92 +a 23-68 68 Tanagride—The Tanagers ................+-- 69 170 Mniotiltide—The Wood Warblers ............ 70-86 72 miloudidce ane Wanlist yew sates ce \eusie nics ier ore = 3 87-89 212 Motacillide—The Wagtails and Pipits......... 90-221 inodida— ive. Winusites) Wns) esc se QI-102 225 Sylvtide—TVhe Old World Warblers, Kinglets, anda Gnatcatchensmes --1yaer era es a fer 103-105 262 arid lwivera vitmatcem series cele cuss mazes of the grass so artfully that the human eye can fol- low with difficulty or not at all. At the ap- proach of danger a sitting bird may either steal from her nest unobserved and rise at a safe distance or else seek to further her deception by feign- Taken in Stevens County. Photo by the Author. ing lameness after the fashion NEST AND EGGS OF THE WESTERN MEADOWLARK. THE WESTERN MEADOWLARK. = 67 of the Shore-birds. Or, again, she may cling to her charge in desperation hoping against hope till the last possible moment and taking chances of final mishap. In this way a friend of mine once discovered a brooding Meadow- lark imprisoned underneath his boot—fortunately without damage for she occupied the deep depression of a cow-track. To further concealment the grass-lined depression in which the Meadow- lark places her four or five speckled eggs is almost invariably over-arched with dried grasses. This renders the eggs practically invisible from above, and especially if the nest is placed in thick grass or rank herbage, as is customary. ‘Touching instances of blind devotion to this arch tradition were, however, afforded by a sheep-swept pasture near Adrian. Here the salt-grass was cropped close and the very sage was gnawed to stubs. But the Meadow- larks, true to custom, had imported long, dried grasses with which to over- arch their nests. As a result one had only to look for knobs on the landscape. By eye alone we located six of these pathetic landmarks in the course of a half-hour’s stroll. One brood is usually brought off by May rst and another by the middle of June. Altho Meadowlarks are classed as altricial, 1. e. having young help- less when hatched and which require to be nurtured in the nest, the young Meadowlarks are actually very precocious and scatter from the nest four or five days after hatching, even before they are able to fairly stand erect. This arrangement lessens the chances of wholesale destruction but it would appear to complicate the problem from the parental standpoint. How would you, for instance, like to tend five babies, each in a separate thicket in a trackless forest, and that haunted by cougars, and lynxes, and boa-constrictors and things? We cannot afford to be indifferent spectators to this early struggle for existence, for it is difficult to overestimate the economic value of the Meadow- lark. The bird is by choice almost exclusively insectivorous. If, however, when hard pressed, he does take toll of the fallen wheat or alfalfa seed, he is as easily justifiable as is the hired man who consumes the farmer’s biscuits that he may have the strength to wield the hoe against the farmer’s weeds. Being provided with a long and sensitive bill, the Meadowlark not only gleans its insect prey from the surface of the ground, but works among the grass roots, and actually probes the earth in its search for wire- and cut- worms, those most dreaded pests. Besides devouring injurious grubs and insects of many kinds, the Lark has a great fondness for grasshoppers, sub- sisting almost entirely upon these in the season of their greatest abundance. In the matter of grasshopper consumption alone Meadowlarks of average distribution, are estimated by no less an authority than Professor Beal, to be worth about twenty-four dollars per month, per township, in saving the hay crop. To the individual farmer this may seem a small matter, but in 68 THE WESTERN EVENING GROSBEAK. the aggregate the saving to the nation amounts to some hundreds of thous- ands of dollars each year. Even in winter, when a few individuals or occa- sional companies of Larks are still to be found, a large proportion of their food consists of hardy beetles and other insects, while weed-seed and scatter- ing grain is laid under tribute, as it were, reluctantly. It goes without saying that we cannot regard this bird as lawful game. We exempt the horse from slaughter not because its flesh is unfit for food— it is really very sapid—but because the animal has endeared itself to our race by generations of faithful service. We place the horse in another category, that of animal friend. And the human race, the best of it, has some time since discovered compunctions about eating its friends. Make friends with this bonny bird, the Meadowlark, and you will be ashamed thenceforth to even discuss assassination. Fricassee of prima donna! Voice of morning en brochette! Bird-of-merry-cheer on toast! Faugh! And yet that sort of thing passed muster a generation ago—does yet in the darker parts of Europe! No. 23. WESTERN EVENING GROSBEAK. A. O. U. No. 514a. Hesperiphona vespertina montana Ridgway. Description Adult male: Forehead and superciliaries gamboge yellow; feathers about base of bill, lores, and crown black; wings black with large white patch formed by tips of inner secondaries and tertials; tail black; remaining plumage sooty olive brown about head and neck, shading thru olive and olive- green to yellow on wing and under tail-coverts. Bill bluish horn-color and citron yellow; feet brownish. Adult female: General color deep smoky brownish gray or buffy brown, darker on the head, lighter on wings, lighter, more buffy, on sides, shading to dull whitish on throat and abdomen, tinged with yellowish green on hind-neck, clearing to light yellow on axillars and under wing-coverts; a small clear white patch at base of inner primaries; white blotches on tips of upper tail-coverts and inner webs of tail-feathers in varying proportions. Length about 8.00 (203.2) ; wing 4.39 (111.5) ; tail 2.42 (61.4) ; bill 82 (20.8) ; depth at base .62 (15.9) ; tarsus. 81 (20.3). Female very slightly smaller. Recognition Marks.—Chewink size; olive-brown coloration with black and white in masses on wings; large, conical beak distinctive; high-pitched call note. Nesting.—Has not yet been found breeding in Washington but undoubtedly does so. Nest (as reported from New Mexico): principally composed of fine rootlets with some Usnea moss and a few sticks, settled upon horizontal branches of pine or fir, near tip, and at considerable heights; in loose colonies. Eggs: 4, “in color, size, form, and texture indistinguishable from those of the Red-winged Blackbird” ( Birtwell). Gillon Ar aks :0) THE WESTERN EVENING GROSBEAK. 65 General Range.—Western United States and Northern Mexico; east to and including Rocky Mountains; north to British Columbia. Range in Washington.—Co-extensive with evergreen timber and appearing irregularly elsewhere. Resident within State but roving locally. Winters regu- larly in parks of the larger cities. Authorities.—? Fringilla vespertina ‘Townsend, Journ. Ac. Nat. Sci. Phila. VIII. 1839, 154 (Columbia R.). Hesperiphona vespertina Baird, Rep. Pac. R. R. Surv. IX. 1858, 409. T. C&S. Ra. Kk. B. E. Specimens.—U. of W. P'. Prov. B. E. SPARROWS are also called Cone-bills ; it is, therefore, fair that the bird with the biggest cone should take precedence in a family history. But for this primacy there are damaging limitations. The Grosbeak is neither the most beautiful nor the most tuneful of the Fringillide, if he is by common consent rated the oddest. His garb is a patchwork; his song a series of shrieks; his motions eccentric; his humor phlegmatic; and his concepts beyond the ken of man. Altho at times one of the most approachable of birds, he is, on the whole, an avian freak, a rebus in feathers. Perhaps we make too much of a mystery of him, just as we rate the owl highest in wisdom for the single discretion of silence, which any dunderhead may attain. But now take this group in the. park; just what are they at? They sit there stolidly in the rowan tree where all the passersby may take note of them, giving vent ever and anon to explosive yelps, but doig nothing by the hour, until an insane impulse seizes one of their number to be off to some other scene no better, be it near or far, and the rest yield shrieking consent by default of alternative idea. It is all so unreasonable, so uncanny, that it irritates us. Evening Grosbeaks are semi-gregarious the year around, but are seen to best advantage in winter or early spring, when they flock closely and visit city parks or wooded lawns. One is oftenest attracted to their temporary quarters by the startling and disconnected noises which are flung out broad- cast. It may be that the flock is absorbed in the depths of a small fir, so that one may come up near enough to analyze the sound. Three sorts of notes are plainly distinguishable: a low murmuring of pure tones, quite pleasant to the ear; a harsh but subdued rattle, or alarm note, wesst or weesp, familiarly similar to that of the Crossbill; and the high-pitched shriek, which dis- tinguishes the bird from all others, dimp. tail 3:65) (92.7); bill .62 (15-8). Recognition Marks.—Chewink size; almost uniform slaty coloration with thicket-haunting habits distinctive; lithe and slender as compared with Water Ouzel. 322 1, COE CATBIRD Nesting.—WNest, of twigs, weed-stalks, vegetable fibers, and trash, carefully lined with fine rootlets, placed at indifferent heights in bushes or thickets. Eggs, 4-5, deep emerald-green, glossy. Av. size, .95 x .69 (24.1x 17.5). Season, first two weeks in June; one brood. General Range.—E astern United States and British Provinces, west regu- larly to and including the Rocky Mountains, irregularly to the Pacific Coast from British Columbia to central California. Breeds from the Gulf States northward to the Saskatchewan. Winters in the southern states, Cuba, and middle America to Panama. Bermuda, resident. Accidental in Europe. Range in Washington.—Summer resident; not uncommon but locally dis- tributed in eastern and especially northeastern Washington; penetrates deepest mountain valleys on eastern slope of Cascades, and is regularly established in certain West-side valleys connected by low passes. Casual at Seattle, and else- where at sea-level. Authorities.—Galeoscoptes carolinensis, Belding, Land Birds of the Pacific District (1890), p. 226 (Walla Walla by J. W. Williams, 1885). D*. Sst. Ss?. J. Specimens.—U. of W. Prov. P. C. THOSE who hold either a good or a bad opinion of the Catbird are one- sided in their judgment. ‘Two, and not less than two, opinions are possible of one and the same bird. He is both imp and angel, a “feathered Mephis- topheles” and “a heavenly singer.”’ But this is far from saying that the bird lives a double life in the sense ordinarily understood, for in the same minute he is grave, gay, pensive and clownish. Nature made him both a wag anda poet, and it is no wonder if the roguishness and high philosophy become inextricably entangled. One moment he steps forth before you as sleek as Beau Brummel, graceful, polished, equal-eyed; then he cocks his head to one side and squints at you like a thief; next he hangs his head, droops wings and tail, and looks like a dog being lectured for killing sheep ;—Presto, change! the bird pulls himself up to an extravagant height and with exag- gerated gruffness, croaks out, “Who are you?” Then without waiting for an answer to his impudent question, the rascal sneaks off thru the bushes, hugging every feather close to his body, delivering a running fire of cat-calls, squawks, and expressions of contempt. There is no accounting for him; he is an irrepressible—and a genius. The Catbird is not common in Washington, save in the northeastern portion of the State, where it is well established. Miss Jennie V. Getty finds them regularly at North Bend, and there is a Seattle record; so that there is reason to believe that the Catbird is one of those few species which are ex- tending their range by encroachment from neighboring territory. There can be no question that civilization is conducive to the bird’s welfare, primarily by increasing the quantity of its cover on the East-side, and, possibly, by re- ducing it on the West. Catbirds, when at home, are found in thickets and in loose shrubbery. River-banks are lined with them, and chaparral-covered hill- THE CATBIRD. — ond sides have their share; but they also display a decided preference for the vicinage of man, and, if allowed to, will frequent the orchards and the rasp- berry bushes. ‘They help themselves pretty freely to the fruit of the latter, but their services in insect-eating compensate for their keep, a hundred-fold. Nests are placed almost anywhere at moderate heights, but thickety places are preferred, and the wild rosebush is acknowledged to be the ideal spot. The birds exhibit the greatest distress when their nest is disturbed, and the entire neighborhood is aroused to expressions of sympathy by their pitiful cries. My friend, Dr. James Ball Naylor, of Malta, Ohio, tells the following story in answer to the oft-repeated question, Do animals reason? The poet’s house nestles against the base of a wooded hill and looks out upon a spacious well-kept lawn which is studded with elm trees. The place is famous for birds and the neighborhood is equally famous for cats. Robins occasionally venture to glean angle worms upon the inviting expanses of this lawn, but for a bird to attempt to cross it unaided by wing would be to invite destruction as in the case of a lone soldier climbing San Juan hill. One day, however, a fledgling Catbird, overweening and disobedient, we fear, fell from its nest overhead and sat helpless on the dreaded slopes. ‘The parents were beside themselves with anxiety. The birdie could not fly and would not flutter to any purpose. There was no enemy in sight but it was only by the sufferance of fate, and moments were precious. In the midst of it all the mother disap- peared and returned presently with a fat green worm, which she held up to baby at a foot’s remove. Baby hopped and floundered forward to the juicy morsel, but when he had covered the first foot, the dainty was still six inches away. Mama promised it to him with a flood of encouragement for every effort, but as often as the infant advanced the mother retreated, renewing her blandishments. In this way she coaxed her baby across the lawn and up, twig by twig, to the top of an osage-orange hedge which bounded it. Here, according to Dr. Naylor, she fed her chitd the worm. Comparing the scolding and call notes of the Catbird with the mewing of a cat has perhaps been a little overdone, but the likeness is strong enough to lodge in the mind and to fasten the bird’s “trivial name” upon it forever. Be- sides a mellow phut, phut in the bush, the bird has an aggravating mee-a-a, and a petulant call note which is nothing less than Ma-a-ry, Cautious to a degree and timid, the bird is oftener heard in the depth of the thicket than elsewhere, but he sometimes mounts the tree-top, and the opening “Phut, phut, coquillicot’—as Neltje Blanchan hears it—is the promise of a treat. Generalizations are apt to be inadequate when applied to singers of such brilliant and varied gifts as the Catbird’s It would be impertinent to say: Homo sapiens has a cultivated voice and produces music of the highest order. Some of us do and some of us do not. Similarly some Catbirds are “self- conscious and affected,” “pause after each phrase to mark its effect upon the “THE CATBIRD. audience,” etc. Some lack originality, feeling, are incapable of sustained effort, cannot imitate other birds, etc. But some Catbirds are among the most talented singers known. One such I remember, which, overcome by the charms of a May day sunset, mounted the tip of a pasture.elm, and poured forth a hymn of praise in which every voice of woodland and field was laid under contribution. Yet all were suffused by the singer’s own emotion. Oh, how that voice rang out upon the still evening air! The bird sang with true feeling, an artist in every sense, and the delicacy and accuracy of his phrasing must have silenced a much more captious critic than I. Never at a loss for a note, never pausing to ask himself what he should sing next, he went steadily on, now with a phrase from Robin's song, now with the shrill cry of the Red- headed Woodpecker, each softened and refined as his own infallible musical taste dictated; now and again he interspersed these with bits of his own no less beautiful. The carol of Vireo, the tender ditties of the Song and Vesper Sparrows, and the more pretentious efforts of Grosbeaks, had all impressed themselves upon this musician’s ear, and he repeated them, not slavishly, but with discernment and deep appreciation. As the sun sank lower in the west I left him there, a dull gray bird, with form scarcely outlined against the evening sky, but my soul had taken flight with his—up into that blest abode where all Nature’s voices are blended into one, and all music is praise. Taken near Stehekin. Photo by the Author. A HAUNT OF THE CATBIRD. THE AMERICAN WATER OUZEL. 9a No. 125. AMERICAN WATER OUZEL. A. O. U. No. 7o1. Cinclus mexicanus unicolor (Bonap.). Synonym.—AMERICAN DippeEr. Description.—Adults in spring and summer: General plumage slaty gray paling below; tinged with brown on head and neck; wings and tail darker, black- ish slate; eyelids touched with white; bill black; feet yellowish. Adults in fall and winter, and immature: Feathers of underparts margined with whitish and some whitish edging on wings; bill lighter, brownish. Young birds are much lighter below; the throat is nearly white and the feathers of remaining under plumage are broadly tipped with white and have wash of rufous posteriorly—tips of wing-feathers and, occasionally, tail-feathers extensively white; bill yellow. Length of adult 6.00-7.00 (152-178); wing 3.54 (90); tail 1.97 (50); bill .68 (eues)ic tarsus 1.12) (28.5). Recognition Marks.—Sparrow size but chunky, giving impression of a “better” bird. Slaty coloration and water-haunting habits distinctive. Nesting.—WN est: a large ball of green moss lined with fine grasses, and with entrance on side; lodged among rocks, fallen timber, roots, etc., near- water. Eggs: 4 or 5, pure white. Av. size, 1.02 x .70 (25.9x 17.8). Season: April- June; one or two broods. General Range.—The mountains of western North America from the north- ern boundary of Mexico and northern Lower California to northern Alaska. Resident. Range in Washington.—Of regular occurrence along all mountain streams. Retires to lower levels, even, rarely, to sea-coast in winter. Authorities—Cinclus mortoni, Townsend, Narrative, April, 1839, p. 339. Also C. townsendi “Audubon,” Ibid., p. 340. 'T. C&S. Lt. Rh. Dt. Ra. D*. B. E. Specimens.—Prov. B. E. “ADVANCING and prancing and glancing and dancing, And dashing and flashing and splashing and clashing ; And so never ending, but always descending, Sounds and motions forever and ever are blending, All at once and all o’er, with a mighty uproar ; And this way the Water comes down at Lodore.” But the scene of aqueous confusion was incomplete unless a leaden shape emerged from the spray, took station on a jutting rock, and proceeded to rub out certain gruff notes of greeting, jigic, jigic, jigic. These notes manage somehow to dominate or to pierce the roar of the cataract, and they symbolize henceforth the turbulence of all the mountain torrents of the West. The Water Ouzel bobs most absurdly as he repeats his inquiry after your Som THE AMERICAN WATER OUZEL. _ health. But you would far rather know of his, for he has just come out of the icy bath, and as he sidles down the rock, tittering expectantly, you judge he is contemplating another one. Yes; without more ado the bird wades into the stream where the current is so swift you are sure it would sweep a man off his feet. He disappears beneath its surface and you shudder at the possibilt- ties, but after a half minute of suspense he bursts out of the seething waters a dozen feet below and flits back to his rock chuckling cheerily. This time, it may be, he will rest, and you have opportunity to note the slightly retroussé aspect of the beak in its attachment to the head. The bird has stopped springing now and stands as stolid as an Indian, save as ever and again he delivers a slow wink, upside down, with the white nictitating membrane. It has been asserted that the Ouzel flies under water, but I think that this is a mistake, except as it may use its wings to reach the surface of the water after it has released its hold upon the bottom. The bird creeps and clings, rather, and is thus able to withstand a strong current as well as to attain a depth of several feet in quieter waters. The Water Ouzel feeds largely upon the larvee of the caddice fly, known locally as periwinkles. These are found clinging to the under surface of stones lining the stream, and their discovery requires quite a little prying and poking on the bird’s part. ‘The Ouzels are also said to be destructive to fish fry, inso- much that the director of a hatchery in British Columbia felt impelled to order the destruction of all the Ouzels, to the number of several hundred, which wintered along a certain protected stream. This was a very regrettable neces- sity, if necessity it was, and one which might easily lead to misunderstanding between bird-men and fish-men. We are fond of trout ourselves, but we con- fess to being a great deal fonder of this adventuresome water-sprite. The Ouzel is non-migratory, but the summer haunts of the birds in the mountains are largely closed to them in winter, so that they find it necessary at that season to retreat to the lower levels. ‘This is done, as it were, reluctantly, and nothing short of the actual blanketing of snow or ice will drive them to forsake the higher waters. The bird is essentially solitary at this season, as in summer, and when it repairs to a lower station, along late in November, there is no little strife engendered by the discussion of metes and bounds. In the winter of 1895-6, being stationed at Chelan, I had occasion to note that the same Ouzels appeared daily along the upper reaches of the Chelan River. Think- ing that such a local attachment might be due to similar occupation down stream, I set out one afternoon to follow the river down for a mile or so, and to ascer- tain, if possible, how many bird-squatters had laid out claims along its tur- bulent course. In places where there was an unusually long succession of rapids, it was not always possible to decide between the conflicting interests of rival claimants, for they flitted up and down overlapping by short flights each other’s domains; but the very fact that these overlappings often occa- THE AMERICAN WATER OUZEL. 327 sioned sharp passages at arms served to confirm the conclusion that the terri- tory had been divided, and that each bird was expected to dive and bob and gurgle on his own beat. Thus, twenty-seven birds were found to occupy a stretch of two miles. Here in winter quarters, the first courting songs were heard. As early as Christmas the birds began to tune up. and that quite irrespective of weather. But their utterances were as rare in time as they are in quality. In fact, it does not appear to be generally known that the Water Ouzel is a beautiful singer, and none of those who have been so fortun- ate as to hear its song, have heard enough to pass final judgment on it. We know, at least, that it is clear and strong and viva- cious, and that in its utterance the bird re- calls its affinity to both Thrushes and Thrashers. The Ouzel places its nest beside some brawling stream, or near or behind some small cascade. In do- ing so, the chief solici- tude seems to be that Taken in California. Photo by Frederick Bade. AF) THE LAST STATION. the living MOSSES, of IN ANOTHER MOMENT THE OUZEL WILL VISIT HER BROOD UNDER THE WATERFALL. which the bulky globe is composed, shall be kept moist by the flying spray, and so retain their greenness. Indeed, one observer reports that in default of ready-made conveniences, the bird itself turns sprinkler, not only alighting upon the dome of its house after returning from a trip, but visiting the water 328 THE AMERICAN WATER OUZEL. repeatedly for the sole purpose of shaking its wet plumage over the mossy nest. Unless we mistake, the bird in the first picture is about to visit a nest behind the waterfall, and of such a nest Mr. John Keast Lord says: “I once found the nest of the American Dipper built amongst the roots of a large cedar-tree that had floated down the stream and got jammed against the mill- dam of the Hudson Bay Company’s old grist mill, at Fort Colville, on a tribu- tary to the upper Columbia River. The water rushing over a jutting ledge of rocks, formed a small cascade, that fell like a veil of water before the dip- per’s nest; and it was curious to see the birds dash thru the waterfall rather than go in at the sides, and in that way get behind it. For hours I have sat and watched the busy pair, pass- ing in and out thru the fall, with as much apparent ease as an equestrian performer jumps thru a hoop covered with tissue paper. The nest was in- geniously constructed to prevent the spray from wetting the interior, the moss being so worked over the en- trance as to form an admirable ver- andah.”’ Of the nest shown in the accom- panying illustration, Mr. A. W. An- thony Says that it was completed un- der unusual difficulties. A party of surveyors, requiring tc bridge a stream in eastern Oregon, first laid a squared stringer: This an Owzel ~ roten in Oregon. promptly seized upon, and in token of — Photo by 4. W. Anthony. proprietorship began to heap up moss. AN UNSHELTERED NEST. This arrangement did not comport with business and the nest foundations were brushed aside on two successive mornings.