WiL

• V

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

LIBRARY

OF THE

Museum of Comparative Zoology

THE

WILSON BULLETIN

A Quarterly Magazine
of

Ornithology

Edited by

JossELYN Van Tyne

Margaret Morse Nice
Frederick N. Hamerstrom, Jr.
Associate Editors

1 V

> 'ill

il f.

/

Volume 55
1943

Published
by the

WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

PAST OFFICERS OF THE WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

J. B. Richards, 1888-1889.
Lynds Jones, 1890-1893.
♦Willard N. Clute, 1894.

R. M. Strong, 1894-1901.
Lynds Jones, 1902-1908.

F. L. Burns, 1909-1911.

W. E. Saunders, 1912-1913.

T. C. Stephens, 1914-1916.

W. F. Henninger, 1917.

Myron H. Swenk, 1918-1919.

C. C. Maxfield, 1893.

R. M. Strong, 1894.

Ned Hollister, 1895-1903.

W. L. Dawson, 1904-1905.

R. L. Baird, 1906-1908.

W. E. Saunders, 1909-1911.
B. H. Swales, 1912-1913.
Geo. L. Fordyce, 1914-1919.
H. C. Oberholser, 1920-1921.
Dayton Stoner, 1922-1923.

President

R. M. Strong, 1920-1921.

Thos. L. Hankinson, 1922-1923.

Albert F. Gainer, 1924-1926.

Lynds Jones, 1927-1929.

J. W. Stack, 1930-1931.

J. M. Shaver, 1932-1934.

Josselyn Van Tyne, 1935-1937.

Mrs. Margaret Morse Nice, 1938-1939.
Lawrence E. Hicks, 1940-1941.
George Miksch Sutton, 1942-

Vice-President

Wm. I. Lyon, 1924.

Thos. H. Whitney, 1925-1928.

George Miksch Sutton, 1929-1931.
Edwin L. Moseley, 1932-1933.

Josselyn Van Tyne, 1933-1934.

Alfred M. Bailey, 1935-1936.

Mrs. Margaret M. Nice, 1937.
Lawrence E, Hicks, 1938-1939.
George Miksch Sutton, 1940-1941.

S. Charles Kendeigh, 1942-

Second Vice-President

Secretary

C. W. G. Eifrig, 1912-1913.
Orpheus M. Schantz, 1914.

Thos. L. Hankinson, 1915-1916.
G. A. Abbott, 1917.

Albert F. Ganier, 1918-1922.
Gordon Wilson, 1923-1925.
Howard K. Gloyd, 1926-1928.
Jesse M. Shaver, 1929-1931.
Lawrence E. Hicks, 1932-1936.
Olin S. Pettingill, Jr., 1937-1941.
Maurice Brooks, 1942-

Lynds Jones, 1888-1889.

J. Warren Jacobs, 1890-1891.
Willard N. Clute, 1892.

J. Warren Jacobs, 1893.

Wm. B. Caulk, 1894.

J. E. Dickinson, 1895-1897.

W. L. Dawson, 1898-1901.

John W. Daniel, Jr., 1902-1905.
Frank L. Burns, 1906.

Henj. T. Gault, 1907-1911.

Josselyn Van Tyne, 1932-1933
Alfred M. Bailey, 1933-1934.

Mrs. Margaret M. Nice, 1935-1936
Lawrence E. Hicks, 1937.

George Miksch Sutton, 1938-193^.' uao
S. Charles Kendeigh, 1940-1941)

Olin S. Pettingill, Jr., 1942

R. M. Strong, 1892-1893.
Lynds Jones, 1894-1901.

F. L. Burns, 1902-1905.

B. H. Swales, 1906-1908.

W. F. Henninger, 1909-1913.
P. B. Coffin, 1914-1916.
Frank M. Phelps, 1917-1919.

Lynds Jones, 1888-1924.
Frank L. Burns, 1901.

Treasurer

Geo. L. Fordyce, 1920-1922.
Wm. I. Lyon, 1923.

Ben J. Blincoe, 1924-1926.

J. W. Stack, 1927-1929.

W. M. Rosene, 1930-1935.

S. E. Perkins HI, 1936-1938.
Gustav Swanson, 1939-1942.
Milton B. Trautman, 1943-

Editor

T. C. Stephens, 1925-1938.
Josselyn Van Tyne, 1939-

♦Resigned.

A

locUtvy

' MAH 31 1943

\

\. *■ .' tt K A l<

Cfje l^ttsson puUetm

CONTENTS

Correlation of Bill and Foot Coloring with Age and

Season in the Black Duck Terence M. Shortt PL 1, p.
The Snowy Owl Migration of 1941-42 L. L. Snyder

Nesting Habits of the Black-billed Cuckoo O. Ruth Spencer
Observations on the Nesting of the Killdeer

Walter P. Nickell

A Hawk Census on Texas Panhandle Highways

Philip F. Allan and Palmer R. Sime
The Downy Young of Oyster-catchers J. Dan Webster
Myron Harmon Swenk, 1883-1941 John T. Zimmer

Elmer T. Judd, North Dakota Ornithologist O. A. Stevens
General Notes
Editorial

Ornithological Literature
Wildlife Conservation
Annual Reports

3

8

11

23

29

40

47

51

54

57

58
64
68

THE WILSON BULLETIN

is published quarterly in March, June, September, and December, as the official
organ of the Wilson Ornithological Club, at Ann Arbor, Michigan, and is sent to
all members not in arrears for dues. The subscription price is $2.00 a year,
invariably in advance, in the United States. Single numbers, SO cents. Outside
of the United States the rate is $2.25. Single numbers, 60 cents. Subscriptions
should be sent to the Treasurer.

All articles and communications for publication, bocks and publications for
review, exchanges, and claims for lost or undelivered copies of the magazine, should
be addressed to the Editor.

The current issue of The Wilson Bulletin is printed by the Ann Arbor Press,
Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Entered as second class matter July 13, 1916, at Ann Arbor, Michigan, under
Act of Congress of March 3, 1879.

THE WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

Founded December 3, 1888. Named after Alexander Wilson, the first American
ornithologist, and called the “Father of American Ornithology.”

The officers for the current year are:

President — George Miksch Sutton, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.

First Vice-President — S. Charles Kendeigh, University of Illinois, Champaign,
Illinois.

Second Vice-President — Olin Sewall Pettingill, Jr., Carleton College, North-
field, Minnesota.

Treasurer — Milton B. Trautman, Stone Laboratory, Put-in-Bay, Ohio.
Secretary — Maurice Brooks, University of West Virginia, Morgantown, West
Virginia.

Editor — Josselyn Van Tyne, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Associate Editors — Margaret M. Nice and F. N. Hamerstrom, Jr.

Membership dues are: sustaining membership, $5.00; active membership, $3.00;
associate membership, $2.00 per calendar year.

DOWNY

c? JUVENILE (IN JUVENILE PLUMAGE) S

<? JUVENILE (IN FIRST WINTER PLUMAGE) $

<? ADULT (IN WINTER PLUMAGE) ?

<3 ADULT (IN ECLIPSE PLUMAGE) ?

BLACK DUCK

(Anas rubripes)

THE WILSON BULLETIN

A QUARTERLY MAGAZINE OF ORNITHOLOGY
Published by the Wilson Ornithological Club

Vol. 55

MARCH, 1943

No. 1

CORRELATION OF BILL AND FOOT COLORING WITH
AGE AND SEASON IN THE BLACK DUCK

BY TERENCE M. SHORTT

CPORTSMEN and ornithologists have long been familiar with two
^ distinct types of coloration in the bill and feet of the Black Duck
(Anas rubripes), and many have published their interpretations (Brew-
ster 1902, 1909, 1910; Townsend 1905, 1912; Dwight 1909; Phillips
1920; Bent 1923; et al.). Some believed that the differences were due
to age and to seasonal changes ; others that the variants represented two
geographic races. In the present A.O.U. Check-List the latter interpre-
tation is accepted.

The greatest difficulty in ascertaining the significance of this color
variation has been in making an exact age determination for individual
birds. Young birds, once they had moulted from the juvenile to the
first winter (or nuptial) plumage, were not distinguishable from older
birds. This difficulty was overcome by Gower (1939), who found that
the bursa of Fabricius was an age indicator. This sac-like organ is
attached to the dorsal side of the large intestine and opens into the
cloacal chamber near the anus. It is believed not to be present in adult
birds except in the ostriches, but is present in all juveniles. Apparently

Plate 1. Bill and Foot Coloring of the Black Duck
downy: cT June 6, 1942, Kabiskaubakau River, Ontario (west coast of James Bay),
The sexes appear to be essentially alike.

JUVENILE (flightless): cf July IS, 1942, Fort Albany, Ontario (west coast of
James Bay). Much down still adhering to back and rump.

? July 9, 1931. Laird, Algoma District, Ontario. Much down still adhering to back and
rump.

juvenile (in juvenile plumage): cf July 23, 1942, Big Piskwanish, Ontario
(west coast of James Bay). Fully feathered and flying.

? September 17, 1941, Rice Lake, Ontario.

juvenile (in first winter plumage): cf December 1, 1941, Long Point, Lake
Erie, Ontario.

? December 1, 1941, Long Point, Lake Erie, Ontario.

ADULT (in winter plumage)*. cT November 30, 1941, Long Point, Lake Erie,
Ontario.

? December 1, 1941, Long Point, Lake Erie, Ontario.

ADULT (in eclipse plumage) : cf July 19, 1942, Nettichi River, Ontario, (west
coast of James Bay).

$ July 16, 1942, Nettichi River, Ontario, (west coast of James Bay).

(Note reversion to juvenile coloration.)

It should be remembered that there is considerable individual variation in the bill
and foot coloring of this species. The illustration does not show these variations but
rather is an attempt to portray the typical sequence of color change. The types of colora-
tion shown are those most frequent in the series of freshly killed birds available for
examination.

4

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 1

this sac, after complete development, is gradually absorbed and has
disappeared entirely by the time a bird is sexually mature. In surface-
feeding ducks the bursa appears to reach the height of development
when the bird is approximately four months old, that is, in September
or October. It is evident in all juveniles through November and Decem-
ber, is usually still discernible in February, sometimes in early March.

Hochbaum (1942) subsequently studied and further simplified age
and sex determination by cloacal examination. Particularly useful is the
comparison of the short, rudimentary penis of the juvenile male and
the large, sheathed organ of the adult. The oviduct of the juvenile
female is occluded; that of the adult shows as a conspicuous slit in the
left cloacal wall.

Pirnie (see Kortright,1942: 170) made a careful study of the Black
Duck and came to the conclusion that the variations in color of the
unfeathered parts were due to sex and age. He pointed out that the
coloration of the bill and feet was duller when adults were in the eclipse
plumage than when they were in winter or nuptial plumage.

In the light of the information contained in the papers mentioned
above, 38 Black Ducks taken in various places in Ontario have been
critically examined. The colors of the unfeathered parts were carefully
noted in relation to age, sex and seasonal variation of plumage.

Twenty-seven of these birds were in winter (or nuptial) plumage,
having been taken in late November. By cloacal examination 16 were
determined as males and 11 as females. Of the males four lacked any
trace of the bursa and possessed the large sheathed penis of the adult.
The remaining 12 had the bursa well developed (measuring 20 mm to
28 mm in length), and the copulatory organ of each was inconspicuous
and rudimentary. These were obviously birds of the year which had
just attained their first winter plumage. There was no trace of the more
streaked juvenile plumage, and the only outward manifestation of im-
maturity was the presence of two juvenile tail feathers in each of two
birds taken on November 30, 1941. These tail feathers were readily
identified as of the juvenile plumage by the blunt tips of the shafts,
which protruded some distance beyond the distal barbs, as described by
Witherby (1924:270).

The bill coloration of the adult males was from Wax Yellow ^ to
Lemon Chrome, faintly tinged with Olive at the base and on the termi-
nal portion. The feet were red, ranging from Coral-Red to near Scarlet-
Red. The other group, comprising the first winter males, showed bills
varying in color from Light Yellowish Olive to Greenish Yellow and
feet of Tawny to Apricot Orange.

In four of the 11 females examined the oviduct was visible and
open, and the bursa had been absorbed, indicating maturity. The other

^ Capitalized color names are from Robert Ridgway’s “Color Standards and Color
Nomenclature.” Washington, D. C. 1912.

Terence M.
Shortt

BLACK DUCK

5

seven displayed well-developed bursae, approximately the same size as
those found in the young males. The oviduct opening was not visible.
Here again there was a difference in the colors of the unfeathered parts,
though there was more variation, and the birds were not so readily
separated into two groups. All of the bills were spotted and blotched
with dusky and exhibited a gradual range from Deep Olive to Ochrace-
ous-Orange. The feet varied from dusky Olive-Brown to Jasper Red.
The four adults, however, were those with the reddest feet and most
brightly colored bills.

It will be noted that the bill and foot colors of the adult and juvenile
birds agree entirely with the respective characteristics attributed to the
supposed races. Anas r. rubripes and A. r. tristis.

Further evidence tending to refute the existence of the two sub-
species was obtained during the summer of 1942. Four adult Black
Ducks were collected at Nettichi River on the west coast of James Bay
between July 16 and 19. It should be recalled that this area is far to
the north in the very heart of the range of the supposed red-legged
race, A. r. rubripes. The coloration of the unfeathered parts of these
birds was noted and sketched immediately after the birds were re-
trieved. Two were males, the first flightless and with body plumage well
advanced in the post-nuptial moult. The second was entirely in eclipse
body plumage but possessed new flight feathers and was capable of
flight. The age of each bird was checked by the cloacal method, and
the mature penis and complete absence of the bursa were noted in both.
These birds showed a remarkable reversion to the bill and foot coloring
of the juvenile male. Their bills were Grape Green in color, somewhat
dusky along the ridge of the culmen. The feet in the flightless one were
Cinnamon, in the full-winged one Pinkish Cinnamon.

The two females, both birds with broods of young, were in the
post-nuptial moult, with wings and body feathers faded and worn and
some new eclipse feathers showing on the sides and breast. The coloring
of bill and foot in these birds bore a decided resemblance to the juvenile
female. The bills were from Court Gray at the tip to Tea Green at the
base, with a saddle of Dark Grayish Olive and a few blackish spots.
In one specimen the feet were Cinnamon, in the other Tawny-Olive.

Pirnie has demonstrated that the bright coloration of bill and foot
is not renewed until October or November, or in other words coincides
with the acquisition of the new winter, or nuptial, plumage.

The facts as presented above appear to leave little doubt that Anas
rubripes tristis and A . r. rubripes are one and the same.

In addition to the specimens mentioned above, I have critically
examined seven birds in the streaked juvenile plumage. A juvenile male
(July IS) which still possessed much down on the back and rump and
was incapable of flight, had an Olive-Brown bill, pinkish at the base
of the lower mandible. The feet were Benzo Brown. The bills of four

6

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

females of similar age were Dark Olive; the feet were as in the male.

A juvenile male, fully feathered and flying, which was taken on July
23, 1942, at Big Piskwanish, James Bay, had the bill varying from
Mineral Gray at the tip to Gnaphalium Green at the base with an area
of dusky along the ridge of the culmen. The feet were Pinkish Cinna-
mon. A juvenile female of the same age had the bill mostly Dark
Olive, but Tea Green at the base with some dusky spots.

The downy young of both sexes have the upper mandible and base
of the lower. Deep Olive-Gray. The nail and lower mandible are Pinkish
Buff. The feet are Chamois to Cream-Buff, variously mottled with
Buffy Olive and Olive-Brown.

The Black Ducks which may be seen in the hunter’s bag in southern
Ontario may be described as follows: In the early part of the season
will appear streaked juveniles, with greenish bills and Tawny feet, and
moulting adults still in partial eclipse plumage, with bills and feet
closely resembling those of the juvenile. Later in the season (late
November), the juvenile plumage will have given way to the first winter
(or nuptial) plumage, which is practically indistinguishable from the
adult winter plumage. In this stage the juvenile may retain the earlier
coloring of the unfeathered parts but usually shows a change to a
Greenish Yellow bill and Cinnamon feet. The adults at this season
have regained the full winter plumage and also the yellow bills and red
feet. By spring most of the yearlings have also attained the bright
coloration of bill and feet and are indistinguishable from the adult.
Some may be somewhat retarded in this respect, but the colors in all
are much brighter than in November specimens.

In the course of this study it was thought advisable to check some
of the characters which descriptions in the literature commonly ascribe
to mature Black Ducks. One statement frequently encountered is that
old males have the chin black. Two of the juveniles examined had the
black chin, and one adult lacked it, indicating that this marking is
not reliable as an age indicator, though it is probably more frequent in
adult birds. Another age character is one suggested by Ticehurst
(1938), namely that striae are present on the tip of the nail of the bill
in young birds but absent in adults. These striae were certainly absent
in all adults, but were also absent (or only faintly indicated) in most
of the first winter birds, only three having them well-marked. A
subsequent examination of skins in the Royal Ontario Museum of
Zoology shows this character to be more constant in birds still in the
juvenile plumage.

Literature Cited

Bent, Arthur Cleveland

1923 Life Histories of North American Wild Fowl. U.S. Nat. Mus. Bull.,
126. (pp. 64-68).

Terence M.
Shortt

BLACK DUCK

7

Brewster, William

1902 An undescribed form of the Black Duck {Anas obscura). Auk, 19: 183-

188.

1909 Something more about Black Ducks. Auk, 26: 175-179.

1910 Resurrection of the Red-legged Black Duck. Auk, 27: 323-333.

Dwight, Jonathan, Jr.

1909 The singular case of the Black Duck of North America. Auk, 26: 422-
426.

Gower, W. Carl

1939 The use of the Bursa of Fabricius as an indication of age in game birds.
Trans. Fourth N. Amer. Wildlife Conf.: 426-430.

Hochbaum, H. Albert

1942 Sex and age determination of waterfowl by cloacal examination. Trans.
Seventh N. Amer, Wildlife Conf.: 299-307.

Kortright, Francis H.

1942 The Ducks, Geese and Swans of North America. Amer. Wildlife Inst.,
Washington, D.C.

Phillips, J. C.

1920 Habits of the two Black Ducks Anas rubripes rubripes and Anas rubripes
tristis. Auk, 37: 289-291.

Ticehurst, Claud B.

1938 On a character of immaturity in the Anatidae. Ibis, 1938:

Townsend, Charles Wendell

1905 Birds of Essex County, Massachusetts. Mem. Nutt. Ornith. Club., 3:
125-128.

1912 The validity of the red-legged subspecies of Black Duck. Auk, 29:
176-179.

Witherby, H. F. (Editor)

1924 A Practical Handbook of British Birds, vol. 2. H. F. and G. Witherby,
London.

Royal Ontario Museum of Zoology, Toronto

8

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

^ THE SNOWY OWL MIGRATION OF 1941-42

A REPORT OF THE SNOWY OWL COMMITTEE,

PREPARED BY L. L. SNYDER

IN 1938 Charles Elton of the Bureau of Animal Populations, Oxford
University, England, suggested that a committee which would
gather data and briefly report pronounced migrations of the Snowy Owl
{Nyctea nyctea) in North America would fill a useful role. The prin-
cipal objective w^ould be to record the fact of a migration, state its
time-period, trace its direction, if possible, and picture its magnitude.
Such information would serve as an index to certain conditions in the
Canadian Arctic.

This proposal was discussed informally by several ornithologists
on the occasion of the annual meeting of the American Ornithologists’
Union held in Washington in October, 1938. These individuals, to-
gether with other volunteers living in areas likely to be involved by
a flight, agreed to act as a committee for this work. A few were
already concerned with accumulating data, annually, on populations
of certain animals including the Snowy Owl. Others volunteered to
obtain specific data whenever a pronounced flight became apparent.

No movement of Snowy Owls, south of the area which can be
regarded as the normal wintering range, was evident until the autumn
of 1941. At that time members of the Committee began gathering
records. Each was concerned with a fairly definite region. Many
hundreds of people contributed data through the several members,
who here express their appreciation.

When the flight seemed to have spent itself and regional reports
were complete, a large blank map was circulated among the members
of the Committee. Specific locality records were plotted on this map.
Two symbols were used. A small cross marked places where reports
indicated that no unusual numbers of Snowy Owls had been observed.
In this way it was possible to determine that a major incursion had
not taken place during the autumn of 1941 in the central and northern
prairie provinces of Canada. Numbers there could be considered usual.
The second symbol used on the map was a small circle. This marked
specific places where Snowy Owl occurrences had been unusual. If
one or two birds had been observed, the circle was left open; if three
to ten birds, the circle was half-filled with black; if more than ten,
the entire circle was made black.

The provisional map was then used as the basis for a final map
(Figure 1) prepared by T. M. Shortt. In order to reduce the map
for publication the details of the provisional map were condensed.
Three degrees of density are shown by correspondingly shaded areas,
and sections where no pronounced flight or increase of winter popula-
tion was reported are left blank.

L. L.

Snyder

SNOWY OWL MIGRATION

9

Data contributed by Committee members from the several regions
concerned the date when first records were made and the period when
the flight was clearly obvious. (The Committee has not attempted an
exhaustive study of migrating Snowy Owls.) These data are combined
as a brief general statement of the 1941-42 flight in the following para-
graphs. If the undertaking continues, future reports will not require
so lengthy an introductory statement as seemed advisable here.

The Committee will gladly add to its numbers ornithologists who
will, in future, undertake to gather information in areas not well cov-
ered in our initial attempt. Such areas will probably be shown by our
map. The members of the Snowy Owl Committee are listed below:

B. W. Cartwright, Winnipeg, Manitoba
A. O. Gross, Brunswick, Maine
H. F. Lewis, Ottawa, Ontario
F. C. Lincoln, Washington, D. C.

O. S. Pettingill, Jr., Northfield, Minnesota
L. L. Snyder, (Chairman), Toronto, Ontario
J. D. Soper, Winnipeg, Manitoba
D. Stoner, Albany, New York
R. W. Tufts, Wolfville, Nova Scotia
J. Van Tyne, Ann Arbor, Michigan
V. C. Wynne-Edwards, Montreal, Quebec

The 1941-42 Migration

The migration of 1941-42 resulted in concentrations of Snowy Owls
in the St. Lawrence valley, along the New England coast, and about
the shores of the Great Lakes. The source of this flight was probably
Baffin Island, Southampton Island, and the region about the Straits
and Hudson Bay portion of Ungava. This view is in harmony with
the 1939-40 Snowy Owl population map of Chitty and Chitty {Jour.
Animal Ecol., 10: 187) where it is shown that this species increased
in these areas. The same map shows that the Snowy Owl had decreased
in the western Arctic.

The earliest records were: — one seen on Grand Manan Island, New
Brunswick, September 6; one seen at Hawkesbury, Prescott County,
in the extreme eastern part of southern Ontario, on September 10. Late
September records came from Maine, New York (Long Island), and
Minnesota.

The period in which it became obvious that a pronounced flight of
Snowy Owls was taking place may be stated for each of the several
regions as follows: Province of Quebec, western section, early to mid-
October, eastern sections, later; Maritime Provinces, early October;
New England states, mid-October; southern Ontario, late October;
New York state, mid-November; Michigan, late November; Minnesota,

10

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

Concentrations
'IJUJUk Scattering
r V/J Dispersal limits

Figure 1. Snowy Owl flight. Scattered occurrences in the Ungava interior
have been assumed. We are much indebted to T. M. Shortt for preparing the map.

late October. Maximum numbers were present in these sections two
to three weeks later than the periods mentioned.

The line of flight taken by these migrants is suggested by the
probable source, by the general topography, and by the time element
as stated above. It would seem that the flight, which flowed south-
ward and westward, may have followed, in its initial course, the Lab-
rador coast, the east shore of Hudson and James Bay, and possibly,
a smaller trickle, down the west coast of Hudson Bay (see Minnesota
timing in relation to the east).

The above, together with the accompanying map, would seem to
record the essential features of the 1941-42 flight. Other details can
be left for treatment by individual ornithologists. *

Royal Ontario ^Museum of Zoology, Toronto

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

THE WILSON BULLETIN

11

NESTING HABITS OF THE BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO '

BY 0. RUTH SPENCER

During the summers of 1939 and 1941, 1 carried on studies on the
nesting habits of the Black-billed Cuckoo {Coccyzus erythropthal-
mus) at the University of Michigan Biological Station in Cheboygan
County, Michigan. I kept six nests under daily observation, two from
the laying of the first egg, and four from the last few days of incuba-
tion, through the nestling stage. I supplemented information obtained
from these nests with data from five additional nests of the Black-bill
and from two nests of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo {Coccyzus americanus) ,
which has similar habits (Barrows, 1912: 338; Bent, 1940: 54).

To note details of nestling activities and kinds of food brought into
the nesting area by the adults, observations totalling 94 hours were
made from canvas blinds three to five feet from the nests; depending
upon the nest height, these blinds were placed on the ground or on a
tower. A 4x field glass was used. Additional observations, particularly
on general habits, were made without a blind.

The information presented in this paper is based, except when
otherwise indicated, upon data obtained from the six nests under ob-
servation. Table 1 is a summation of these data.

Grateful acknowledgments are made to Dr. Olin Sewall Pettingill,
Jr., for guidance given in this study; to Dr. Theodora Nelson and Mrs.
Margaret Nice for valuable help and critical reading of the manuscript;
and to Dr. H. B. Hungerford for checking my identifications of insects.

Nests and Nest Building

The Black-billed Cuckoo generally nests in low trees or bushes
(Chapman, 1937: 331), but nest-sites in the Biological Station area
varied. The vegetation chosen for nests ranged from clumps of beech
saplings (Fagus grandifoUa) to coniferous trees (P. strobus and Tsuga
canadensis) and tall deciduous trees {Acer saccharum and Populus sp.),
and sites varied in elevation from 19 inches to 20 feet, with an average
elevation of 5.9 feet.

The nests were always well concealed by overhanging branches and
leaf-clusters. Made of small twigs loosely interwoven, and lined with
leaf scraps, pine needles, catkin remains, or empty cocoons, they were
comparatively frail platforms, with uniform %-inch inside depth and
3- to 3j4-inch inside diameter. Apparently the material was gathered
largely in the vicinity of the nest, both bulk and lining materials being
chosen from those readily available. Two nests. No. 3 and No. 5, were
selected for detailed examination of nesting material. The bulk of nest
No. 3 gave a total of 65 twigs, 10 varying from 9 to 14 inches in length.

^Contribution from the University of Michigan Biological Station.

TABLE 1

Six Nests of the Black-billed Cuckoo

12

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

1-1 c

o o ^
.o a

cu -g

>. c3 _

a.2

2^ I s

o t: c (j

.S bJD I
rt p ^ c
C ^ 3

o ° c

a-c 9“ o

^ •

^.S

a

c3

s

T3

C

cd ^

e t/j

S a
a

c ^ £

2 rt oj

w CJ .3

^ a

c c c c

VO to

<o o O «o

c

° rt

^ c

'H

cd

„ (U

C T3

t/3 .•^

<u

.:4

- w (1

tJD O •-

Td
Oi o

-o i

W

B

o O

^ I 4i

*'r2

a

c ^

B a-S

c

cd D,

.ti a

> E

ii-s

w cd a

B ^

t/3

ui ^
p O

cd •'3

O)

’^=5
c ^

c3 C

^ >
o

9 c

.« u

a u
o _ cd
— c i-
r3 o>

^ a

Cd o

o

(U

(U

32

C

. OJ

o 9“

cd

g cd

c/T"^

S

> cd -2
cd

V TO

U C3 ^ i::
£-2 cd ^

cd

c ^
O

>

0

t- cd
CXI <u

1 s-
■a cd

<u

a

O

^ 3=

<U 33
t- 'T3

aj c Sj
3: O

?: 6 b

(u cd

3* oi
O

— o
O 'S
a S

<

3: £

f j *-'

<*- C Cd
O O) OJ

5I;

rt

H

> c

(« (j — x;
D. <u <u
C^ OJ C o

t- 32 OJ C

u

CO

1 =
E b

cl E

C cd fcc

<3 Cd

U (U

o 3;

U u

to to
to to 4>-
CO to o <N

10 o

CO to O CO

to O x^ O
CO to O •d-

•S-S.

c a

X X X ^

::: = c 2

^ cd cd —

>t ^

O ^

aj

C cd

Cd "

<u

t/5

-C - ^ ^
^ «j C 32 (rt
H

53 c/i
2 a c

'r £ a

_C (/) cd

c c c c

to >0
<vj to x^
CO to Cd

a

(U . .

^ a S'

•33 aj X

o'®!)
OJ ja (u X
X 'c75 X 'w
O ■§ 3

c ..

i§

u£

O. Ruth
Spencer

THE BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO

13

30 from 6 to 9 inches, and 25 from 3 to 6 inches. Nest No. 5 gave a
total of 76 twigs of more uniform length, 40 varying from 5 to 12
inches, and 36 from 3 to 5 inches. The lining of the first nest was a
small handful of dry leaf scraps, and of the second, a considerable mat
of dead leaves, pieces of arbor vitae, willow catkins, and pine-needles.

I was not able to make observations during the nest-building period,
but there is evidence that nest-building is prolonged into the incubation
period. Three times at nest No. 6, an adult brought pine needles as
lining material when coming to replace its mate on the nest. Twice
the material was carefully worked into the nest.

Courtship Feeding

During my observations at nest No. 1 on July 12, 1939, the eighth
day of incubation, one of the adults (presumably the female) was on a
branch above the nest when the other (presumably the male) came
into the nest area with a green larva in his bill. Within a few minutes
he swallowed the larva and several times gave a loud call. Immediately
the female began flirting her wide-spread tail, while making a low
mewing sound. This display went on intermittently for fifteen minutes
before she flew to the top branch of a nearby aspen. The male re-
mained silent and motionless.

Again, two days later, one of the adults (presumably the male)
came into the nest area with a larva in his bill and took the usual
guarding position above the nest on a branch of a near-by tree. The
female left the nest and alighted on a branch just below. In a few
minutes the male hopped down to the same branch, ran down it toward
the female and mounted her. However, copulation did not take place.
The male immediately flew away with the larva still in his bill, and the
female remained motionless. After eight minutes the male returned
with another larva and alighted on the same branch with the female,
but this time as he ran toward her she flew away. In a short while the
male ate the larva he had brought, then remained on the branch ten
minutes before moving out of sight. This behavior, though merely in-
ceptive, can presumably be taken as illustrating courtship feeding
(Lack, 1940).

Egg Laying, Incubation, and Hatching

The Black-billed Cuckoos laid from 2 to 4 eggs, with an average of
3 eggs per nest. The eggs were oval in shape and dull greenish blue in
color, and some had a marbled appearance after three or four days’
incubation.

The egg-la)dng interval was variable. The nests were checked daily
at approximately 9 a.m. Each new egg was marked and recorded. Nest
No. 3, when discovered July 2, contained one egg. A second egg was

14

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

laid July 3 and a third July 6. Nest No. 4 contained one egg when
found July 7. A second was laid July 8 and a third July 10.

Several authors (e.g. Barrows, 1912: 340; Bent, 1940: 56, 73; and
Herrick, 1910: 229-232) state that not infrequently Black-billed and
Yellow-billed Cuckoos lay their eggs in each other’s nests as well as in
the nests of other birds. During my observations I noted only one case
of parasitism, finding a Black-bill’s egg in a Yellow-bill’s nest with two
young and two eggs of the Yellow-bill. It was readily distinguished
from the other eggs by its deeper color and smaller size.

Incubation began after the laying of the first egg, but was three to
four days shorter than the 14-day period given by Burns (1915: 283).
In nest No. 3 one egg, laid and marked the morning of July 6, hatched
the morning of July 16. In nest No. 4, the egg laid July 8 hatched
July 19. The shortest period of sitting was 15 minutes, the longest
115 minutes, with an average period of 90 minutes. The shortest in-
terval the eggs were left uncovered was 5 minutes, the longest 56
minutes, with an average interval of 28 minutes. The eggs were incu-
bated 68 per cent of the time (calculated on the basis of 15 hours’ ob-
servation, exclusive of the 4-hour period of unusual activity described
later).

The sexes were not distinguishable, but I was able to corroborate
the statement by Herrick (1910: 195) that both sexes take part in in-
cubating the eggs. Several times a second adult came into the nest
area, gave a low call, and took the place of the incubating bird as soon
as the latter left the nest. In 17 hours of observation during the in-
cubation period, I observed the second adult take over this duty three
times.

During both incubation and brooding, the adult sat very quietly,
turning the head from time to time, and moving the eyes more or less
continuously. Contrary to the observation made by Herrick (1910:
197), the adults varied their position on the nest, but four birds seemed
to have a favorite position, which they assumed more often than others.
The birds had also a favorite path to the nest, but it was not invariably
used.

Ordinarily the cuckoo remained close on its nest and was not readily
flushed during the last few days of incubation. A striking exception to
this was noted during an observation period the day before the first
egg was hatched. Nest No. 6, containing 3 eggs, was about ten yards
from the main road into the Station area. Three times the bird was
frightened from the nest — by a low-flying airplane overhead, by a pass-
ing group of children, and by a passing truck. With each disturbance
the bird flew to a favorite high branch above the nest, which it used as
lookout, and then returned to the nest by flying down to the nest
branch, and running along it, stopping cautiously and deliberately on
the smaller branches on the way. The adult appeared continuously
uneasy throughout the four hours of the morning-observation.

O. Ruth
Spencer

BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO

15

As far as I observed, egg-laying and hatching took place during the
early morning hours, except in one case, when the younger nestling in
nest No. 5 appeared about 3 p.m., July 18. This very exceptional case
of afternoon hatching gave me the opportunity to watch hatching pro-
cedure. The adult left the nest upon my approach at 2:55 p.m., expos-
ing one nestling and the second egg, whose shell was cracked and
slightly parted around its lesser circumference, showing the young bird
moving about inside. Within the next five minutes, half of the shell fell
away. The young nestling began emitting low cries, and emerged from
the remaining half-shell entirely dry. The adult, meanwhile, remained
on a branch of an adjacent tree and called softly at irregular intervals.

The egg shells were usually disregarded by most of the adults,
though they were sometimes pushed about in the nest with the bill.
That they were not consistently removed was proved by the fact that
many shell scraps were found in the bottom of the nests. However, at
nest No. 6, an adult ate the larger pieces of shell. About four hours after
the young hatched and after they were fed, the adult stepped over the
nest, but before taking the brooding position reached into the nest and
devoured what appeared to be small shell scraps. After a short period
of brooding, the adult again reached into the nest and brought out the
entire smaller half of the shell. It was too large to be taken into the
mouth whole, so that it was necessary to crack the shell first between
the mandibles. In about two minutes’ time the bird had swallowed the
entire half.

Nestling Stage

The newly hatched Black-billed Cuckoo nestling has a coal-black
skin, whose feather tracts are made conspicuous by wiry gray “hairs”
— the feather tubes of a vestigial down that never unfolds (Herrick,
1910: 198). The feet and bill are a steel-blue, the commissure very
slightly lighter in color. By the third day the down-feather tubes are
pushed out on the tips of the juvenal contour-feather tubes, and remain
attached to these for four or five days. The feather tubes on the anterior
portion of the ventral tract at first develop more slowly than the others,
being barely visible until the fourth day, but in their later development
they practically parallel those on the dorsal area. By the sixth day the
juvenal contour-feather tubes, ranging in length from 17 mm. to 21 mm.,
give the young nestling the appearance of a porcupine, but on the
seventh day the ends of these tubes begin to burst, and the nestling
for the first time has a somewhat fluffy plumage. According to Herrick
(1910: 206) the opening of the feather tubes (except those on the
head and neck, which require longer) is completed in about 12 hours.

The day-old nestlings weighed from 7.5 grams to 9 grams, giving
an average for 7 nestlings of 8.5 grams. Weight increased quite uni-
formly during the first four days, the average daily gain of 9 nestlings

16

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

being 4.7 grams; but the increase was more gradual during the re-
mainder of nestling life, the average daily gain of 9 nestlings being
2.8 grams. The average weight of the 9 nestlings on the last day of nest
life was 28.5 grams.

Feeding, Call Notes, Brooding of Young

Feeding began to 2 hours after hatching. The food consisted
almost entirely of insects, 90 per cent of which w^ere in the larval form.
The remaining 10 per cent was made up of grasshoppers, small moths,
mayflies, and robber flies, with an occasional spider. The larvae of the
rosy maple moth {Anisota rubicunda) were extremely abundant in the
Station area. This abundance probably explains why 81 per cent of the
larvae fed to the young cuckoos were of this variety. Herrick (1910:
212) found that smooth larvae made up 44 per cent of the total food
of Black-billed Cuckoos, hairy caterpillars 5 per cent, adult lepidoptera
5 per cent, and grasshoppers 27 per cent.

Feeding was done by both sexes. The adult approached the nest by
running along the nest branch, and the resulting vibrations excited the
food-response in the young: open mouth, stretched neck and flapping
wings, accompanied by a sound like the buzzing of bees. As mentioned
by Herrick (1910: 214), whenever this food-response was not given by
the time the adult stepped on the nest edge, the parent immediately
gave a peculiar low mewing sound, and this invariably excited a vigor-
ous response.

The wide-open mouth of the begging young bird displayed a very
conspicuous group of snow-white disks of variable size symmetrically
arranged on the bright red palate. (Herrick, 1910: 201). Some ob-
servers (e.g. Herrick, 1935: 99; Roberts, 1932: 593) believe these
disks to be sucking pads used by the young to hold the adult’s bill while
feeding. However, in 75 feedings, I noticed close contact between the
maxilla of the nestling and the bill of the parent only three times.
Since the lower or inner edges of the larger disks were decidedly rough,
the disks may be an aid in grasping the live food. Another possible
function of these disks may be as a food target, since they greatly in-
crease the conspicuousness of the palate.

The food was always carried to the young crosswise in the bill.
Occasionally the adult crushed the food before bringing it into the nest
area, but more often not until after alighting on the nest edge. Usually
the food was thrust far down in the throat. When necessary, additional
thrusts were given to hasten the swallowing response. With the younger
nestlings the larva was put into the open mouth, then a motionless
postion was held by both adult and young for many seconds — often
for as long as two or three minutes — before swallowing occurred. Herrick
(1910: 218) records an instance in which five minutes were required
to awaken the swallowing reflex. If the first attempt failed, the larva

O. Ruth
Spencer

BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO

17

was withdrawn, further crushed, and put again into the throat. Occa-
sionally this procedure had to be gone through a third time. With the
older nestlings swallowing took place either immediately, or within a
few seconds after the food was inserted into their mouths.

Food was generally brought by the adult when coming to take its
turn on the nest, the other adult leaving the nest and not returning for
a considerable period. A notable exception occurred about 10:30 a.m.,
July 24, 1941, at nest No. 6, which contained two nestlings. The
brooding adult left the nest as the relief adult came up the nest-limb
with a grasshopper nymph in its bill, which it fed to the day-old nest-
ling and then ran down the nest limb out of sight. In less than three
minutes it was back again with a larva about one inch long and corre-
spondingly thick, which it fed to the same nestling. Just as the larva
was inserted into the open mouth, the mate returned and alighted on
the nest edge, carrying a well-developed larva of the rosy maple moth.
The first adult withdrew the unswallowed larva just fed the nestling,
and both parents gave the low food-call. Response was instantaneous,
and both adults now tried to feed the younger bird. The first adult
succeeded in replacing the same larva, and the mate turned about and
placed the larva it was carrying in the wide-open mouth of the older
nestling. The swallowing response of both nestlings was retarded be-
cause of the size of the larvae, the older one swallowing first. The sec-
ond adult took the fecal sac and flew away again, leaving the other to
assume brooding duties.

Feeding intervals varied considerably. At nest No. 1, containing
three young (3-, 5-, 6-day age) intervals ranged from 1.5 minutes to
80 minutes; the average was 18.5 minutes during a 4-hour observation
made in the morning. At nest No. 6, with two young (2-day, 3-day
age), the feeding intervals varied from 3 minutes to 65 minutes over a
five-hour morning-period, and averaged 25 minutes. Herrick (1910:
222) cites two extreme observations. For a 53-hour period at two nests
containing six young (ages varying from one to six days), the feeding
rate was once every 25 minutes. For an entire day at a nest containing
three young (4-, 5-, 6-day), the feeding rate was once every 4 minutes.
Herrick explained this high rate by lack of fear, abundant food, favor-
able weather, and no other young, already fledged, to divert the atten-
tions of the parents.

After feedings on the first five days, fecal sacs were voided and were
picked up by the adult. They were either swallowed immediately or
carried away. During a four-hour period at nest No. 1 (containing 3
young), when 27 feedings took place, the fecal sacs were carried away
after 17 feedings and swallowed after the other 10. On seven occasions
after swallowing the sac, the adult settled on the nest, and on the three
other occasions it again fed the nestlings several times. It thus appears
that at this stage of nest life the manner of fecal disposal is determined

18

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

by the adult’s next activity: if the bird is disposed to brood or feed
again, it swallows the sacs; if not, it carries them away. Herrick (1910:
220) stated that the disposition of the fecal sacs was dependent upon
various circumstances in which must be included the hunger of the
old bird at the moment.

From the age of 5 days the nestlings backed to the edge of the nest
before voiding the fecal sacs. Occasionally the sacs fell to the ground,
but more often they fell on the edge of the nest and were picked up by
the adult and either swallowed or carried away.

An unusually strong grasping-reflex appeared during the first five
hours out of the shell, allowing the bird to cling to the nest. At one-
day-old a very rapid opening and closing of the toes was noticed. On
succeeding days the toes were opened and clo.sed with greater force.

I noted a very slight shivering of the wings during the food response
in all 14 nestlings at one-day-old. This movement became more force-
ful in the 2-day young. Four 3-day nestlings (nests Nos. 1,2, and 4)
were seen to stretch one wing after the other, sidewise, during prolonged
absences of the adult. Grasping at this age was so well-developed that,
unless I took great care when removing the young for weighing, the nest
was pulled apart. Ten nestlings at 4 days (nests Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4)
stretched the wing on each side downward while extending the corre-
sponding leg. This was done regularly during an adult’s absence of an
hour and fifteen minutes at nest No. 2, the leg- wing stretching occur-
ring on the average every 8 or 10 minutes, with a maximum interval of
16 minutes.

I saw no evidence of the preening instinct which Herrick (1910:
205) says becomes very active on the sixth day. During the last two
days of nestling life (6 and 7 days), with a very few quill tips on dorsal
and ventral tracts opened, the young cuckoos were quick to pick at ants
or flies on themselves. At no time could this action be mistaken for the
combing action as described by Herrick (1910: 205).

During the first two days of nestling life the sound accompanying
the feeding response had been similar to the buzzing of a bee. This
buzzing gradually gave way to a “bark,” a low grating call that took
on true cuckoo characteristics about the sixth or seventh day. At the
five-day age fear manifested itself in loud, explosive calls, and the
young became especially reluctant to be taken from the nest for weigh-
ing. Either just before or at the time of removal they voided a brown,
sticky excretion, whereas after feeding they invariably voided white
fecal sacs.

Accompanying the changes in the grasping-reflex and wing-move-
ments, and in the call of the nestlings, was the development of sight and
hearing. The eyes began to open at two days and were wide open for
short periods by the third day. At four days the nestling followed mov-
ing objects with its eyes, and at five days turned its head from side to

O. Ruth
Spencer

BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO

19

side in an attempt to see moving objects in the nest area. At one
day of age the rustling of leaves excited the food response, which in-
dicated an already keen sense of hearing. At five days the breaking of
a twig several feet from the nest caused the nestling to turn its head in
that direction. Both sight and hearing were well-developed by the six-
day age.

At my approach to the nest during brooding the behavior of the
adult very closely paralleled that described by Herrick (1910: 197). At
first, the adult moved its head to keep me within view, but as I came
nearer the nest (within 4 or 5 feet), the head began to rise and con-
tinued until the bill pointed to the zenith. Rapid movements of the
eyelids and fast breathing movements were very noticeable.

Even though the adult cuckoo was normally a shy, retiring bird it
became quite courageous and bold in defending its young. Early in the
period of incubation, when flushed from the nest by my approach
to within five feet of the nest, the adult flew very quietly to a nearby
branch and watched. Toward the end of the incubation period (8 to 9
days) the adult did not leave the nest so readily, but remained motion-
less until I was within two or three feet of the nest. When it did leave,
it was with a mewing sound and perhaps open bill. At the time of
hatching, the adult was more reluctant to leave and more vigorous in
its calls; it stayed closer to the nest than before — within two or' three
feet — while uttering kuk-kuks of protest. It continued to behave in this
manner for the first three or four days of nestling life. Later, whenever
the young emitted the raspy bark commonly made by them when dis-
turbed, the adult became strikingly bold, and a number of times flew
directly at my face with wide-open mouth, spread tail, and drooping
wings, sometimes clapping the bill loudly. Each attack was usually
short, and it quickly decreased in intensity, the adult finally perching
on a nearby branch and quietly looking on.

Observations on the attendance of the adult were made for 10-hour
periods at 2-day and 5-day ages of nestlings. In each case the data
were obtained during ten hours’ observation, during which the weather
was clear and the temperature mild (78° F and 81° F). The periods
of attendance were longest during the middle of the day. The shortest
periods were in late afternoon, when feeding activity increased. For the
2-day nestling the maximum attendance period was 120 minutes, the
minimum 45 minutes, giving an average of 87.5 minutes. For the 5-day
nestling the maximum attendance period was 105 minutes, the minimum
10 minutes, giving an average of 43.3 minutes.

Weather conditions had an evident bearing upon brooding. During
the entire life of the nestlings in nest No. 4, the weather was windy and
cool (65° F: five-day average) ; brooding was maintained quite steadily
through the first five days. The average length of the brooding period
(based on 19 hours of observation) was 80 minutes, and the young

20

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

were brooded 54 per cent of the time. In contrast with this, at nest
No. 6, when the temperature was quite high (93° F: three day aver-
age) with just an occasional breeze, the young were brooded only 26
per cent of the time. The average brooding period (based on 11 hours
of observation) was 20 minutes, and the parent would often shade the
young from the sun for an equivalent period.

During the approach and duration of a storm, brooding at nest No. 1
was maintained for a two-hour period. The adult apparently sensed
the storm’s approach, for although the second bird called from a near-
by branch, the brooding one did not leave. Three times during the
hour preceding the storm the adult used its bill and body in an attempt
to push the nestlings deeper into the nest. As the storm broke, the
bird noticeably lowered its body, at the same time spreading the wings
over the nest edge and lowering the tail. With each additional down-
pour the body was pulled more tightly to the nest, tail lowered further,
and bill pointed higher. For 45 minutes following the storm the only
change the brooding bird made in her position was to lower her head.
Herrick (1910: 225) watched a nesting adult during a 1^-hour rain.
He noted that it left as soon as the rain was about over. He also noted
that the bird raised her body two or three times during the rain to
examine the young, whereas the one I observed did not raise the body
until shortly before leaving the nest even though it was evident that
the nestlings were decidedly restless.

Nesting Success

During the summer of 1939, when I kept two nests under daily ob-
servation, both were brought to successful completion except for a
single egg, which did not hatch: but during 1941 only one out of the
four nests was entirely successful. In one nest (No. 3), two out of three
eggs hatched, the second four days after the first. The younger nest-
ling was found dead at two days of age, hanging on the outer edge of
the nest, from which it had probably been crowded. In another nest
(No. 4), one of the three eggs was pushed out of the nest and, although
I returned it before many hours had passed, it was again missing the
next morning with no evidence of it on the ground under the nest. The
younger of the two nestlings (three days of age) was also gone the fol-
lowing morning. In a third nest (No. 6), where brooding was in prog-
ress during a period of high temperatures (93°-99°), a 15-minute ex-
posure to direct sunlight for purposes of photography killed the tw^o
nestlings. (The adults stayed near the nest for several hours after-
wards, but deserted before the next day.)

Of the 18 eggs laid in the two seasons, 14 (87,4 per cent) hatched.
Ten of the young (71 per cent) left the nest, giving a total for surviv-
ing young of 55 per cent from the six nests.

O. Ruth
Spencer

BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO

21

Nest Leaving

Herrick (1910: 199) says the cuckoo nestling, in proportion to its
size, is probably the strongest and most enterprising altricial young on
the North American continent. This, in part, explains the shortness of
its nest life. Of the ten nestlings known to leave the nest, two left at
the age of six days, and eight at seven days.

My single observation of a young bird leaving the nest was made
during the summer of 1939 and occurred after I weighed the birds the
evening of the seventh day. When I was returning one young to the
nest, I noted that the one previously weighed had climbed out on the
supporting branch, where it stood erect with upward pointed bill, sug-
gesting the pose characteristic of a bittern. I loosened its grasp with
difficulty and put it back into the nest. It immediately ran out again
to the end of the nest-branch but, in its haste to escape, lost its balance
and, while hanging by its toes, gave loud calls that brought the parent,
in a spectacular display of courage, from its watching perch on a near-
by tree. The young lost its hold, fell, and, still giving its calls, ran with
amazing speed through the bracken {Pteris) for several yards before
being caught. It was returned to the nest but remained quiet only a
short while before repeating the attempt to escape, performing several
climbing-feats with skill and speed. Once again the nestling was re-
turned to the nest, but when I left the nest area it was standing in a
climbing position on the supporting bracken stem and nest edge. The
adult cuckoo, perched just a couple of branches above, was giving a
low coaxing call.

Summary

In northern Michigan the Black-billed Cuckoo was found to nest
usually in woodlands but occasionally in more open areas. A total of
six nests were observed during the summers of 1939 and 1941.

Nest elevation varied from 19 inches to 20 feet, the average being
5.9 feet.

Possible cases of courtship feeding were observed.

The egg-laying interval varied from one to three days. Both sexes
took part in incubating the eggs, one adult apparently assuming the
greater responsibility. The incubation period, determined in two cases
by marking the eggs, was found to be 10 and 11 days respectively.

Insect larvae made up 90 per cent of the food brought to the nest-
lings; the remaining 10 per cent consisted of miscellaneous insects.

The Black-billed Cuckoo nestling is exceptionally precocious. The
most outstanding reactions displayed upon hatching or shortly there-
after are its grasping-reflex, call-notes, and enthusiastic food-responses.

Observations showed the average attendance-period of the parents
to decrease somewhat less than 50 per cent between the 2 -day-old and

22

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

5-day-old stages of nestling life. During cool windy weather, length of
attendance-periods increased.

The young left the nest at the age of 6 or 7 days, with the juvenal-
feather tubes just beginning to open.

Literature Cited

Barrows, Walter Bradford

1912 Michigan Bird Life. Michigan Agricultural College, Lansing,

Bent, Arthur Cleveland

1940 Life histories of North American cuckoos, goatsuckers, hummingbirds
and their allies. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 176,

Burns, Frank L.

1915 Comparative periods of deposition and incubation of some North
American birds. Wilson Bull., 27: 275-286.

Chapman, Frank M.

1937 Handbook of Birds of Eastern North America. D. Appleton-Century
Co., New York.

Herrick, Francis Hobart

1910 Life and behavior of the cuckoo. Jour. Exper. Zool., 9: 169-233, pis.
1-7.

1935 Wild Birds at Home. D. Appleton-Century Co., New York.

Lack, David

1940 Courtship feeding in birds. Auk, 57: 169-178.

Roberts, Thomas S.

1932 Birds of Minnesota, vol, 1. Univ’ersity of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
1030 25 Avenue Court, Moline, Illinois

General Zoology. By Tracy I. Storer. McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y. 1943: 6 x9
in., xii + 798 pp., illus. $3.75.

Ornithologists who want to gain a better understanding of birds in relation
to the rest of the animal world will do well to study this admirable new zoology
text by the California ornithologist, Tracy Storer. His 37 page chapter on birds
is a remarkably clear and concise summary of the whole field of ornithology.
Other chapters especially helpful to students of birds are those on ecology,
distribution, and organic evolution.

We believe that many ornithologists will return to their special bird problems
with renewed enthusiasm and vision after a study of this volume. — J. Van Tyne.

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

THE WILSON BULLETIN

23

OBSERVATIONS ON THE NESTING OF THE KILLDEER

BY WALTER P. NICKELL

IN the last five years I have recorded a total of 1 7 nests of the Killdeer
{Charadrius vociferus) on the Cranbrook Estate in Bloomfield Hills,
Michigan. Observations on nine of these nests were cut short by a series
of mishaps. In two instances, boys on bicycles rode through the nests,
crushing the eggs; football players walked on two nests; the eggs in
one nest were very probably overheated by exposure to the sun, for they
were located in a dry field, and were left exposed for extended periods
during unusually hot weather. Small children took the eggs from one
nest, and the remaining nests were also robbed, probably by stray dogs.

During the season of 1942, 1 was fortunate in discovering eight nests
of (presumably) three pairs of these birds within sight of my home,
where I was able to observe them two or more times daily. All nests
referred to in the following discussion are those observed during thex
1942 season.

Habitat

The nests of all three pairs were found in the athletic fields of Cran-
brook School — low, filled in, almost perfectly level fields, kept closely
mowed during the Killdeer’s nesting season, and bounded on three
sides by winding lagoons. Five of the eight nests were located on the
white lines of crushed limestone marking the boundaries of the various
athletic fields.

Nest

The nests were little more than cavities in the earth or in the
crushed rock. No apparent attempt was made to line them (though the
power-driven lawn mower threw cut grass over the nests, and this
filtered down beneath the eggs after the nests were made). The three
nests which were not placed in the crushed rock of marker lines, were
located in areas of sparse grass in the clay soil. These nest cavities
were an inch to an inch and a half deep at the center, and diameters
ranged from five to seven inches.

Nests of Pair One

The first of these nests was discovered on April 6 at 9:00 a.m.,
when the first egg was still warm after deposition. The second egg
was laid on April 8 between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. Three observa-
tions were made between 1:00 p.m., April 8, and the late afternoon of
April 9. The nest held only two eggs at the last observation. During
the night of the ninth, a heavy snow covered the nest to a measured
depth of six inches. On April 10, at 7:00 a.m., and again at noon, I
attempted to find the nest, but not even a slight depression was visible
in the surface of the snow. Neither of the Killdeer was in evidence in
the vicinity. At 4:00 p.m. I found the nest with ease, for in the mean-

24

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

time the female had dug down to the eggs and had laid the third egg.
Her tracks in the snow showed plainly that she had alighted about 75
yards away and walked directly to the nest site. My own tracks,
made previously the same day, circled the nest a few feet away. The
Killdeer’s tracks indicated that after depositing her third egg, she had
left the nest on the opposite side from that of her approach. Somewhat
tubular markings at the edge of the excavation were plain evidence that
the seven-inch opening to the nest was dug largely with her beak. The

A

Figure 1. Killdeer nest on April 10 after being cleared of snow by the female.

fourth egg was laid less than 24 hours after the third, between 9:00
A.M. and noon on April 11. Consistent incubation began immediately
or shortly afterward, for a bird was near the nest at noon on April 11,
and the eggs were warm. At 2:00 p.m. on the same day, the incubating
bird left the nest at my approach and ran off a few yards, uttering
soft cries, but showed no other signs of distress such as the common
“broken-wing” behavior. When I had made my observations and had
moved away about a hundred yards, the bird came back quietly and
settled upon the eggs, facing directly into a sudden flurry of snow.
Observations were made three times daily until 7:30 p.m., April 17,
when all eggs had disappeared. During these six days, incubation must
have proceeded consistently, since at each observation the eggs were
quite warm.

During the 12 days of observation of the first nest, I saw only one

Walter P.
Nickel!

NESTING OF THE KILLDEER

25

bird at a time, but both were present near the nest site on April 18.
At my approach both birds flew about, uttering loud distress cries.
Suspecting that they were preparing to nest again soon, I kept the
area under close observation. Although both birds were near the
original nest site at each visit, I was not able to find the second nest
until May 4, when its four eggs had been under incubation for several
days. This nest was located on another yard-line, 17 yards from the
first. Eight days later a power mower ran across the nest, badly

cracking two of the eggs and breaking very small holes in the other
two. All eggs were allowed to stay in the nest until May 16, when
the two badly cracked ones disappeared, probably removed by the
parent birds. At 8:00 a.m. on May 20, the young in one of the two
remaining eggs could be heard, but had not broken through its shell.
No activity inside the other egg was audible. At 6:30 p.m. on May
21, the first egg was pipped in one place. The young could be heard
within the shell in the other egg. The first young emerged from its
shell at noon on the following day but was quite weak. The second
could still be heard. It finally pipped its shell between noon and 5:30
P.M., May 23, when it, as well as the first young, was found dead. The
nest was then abandoned, although the adults were seen in the vicinity
of the nest site at several subsequent observations.

26

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

The third nest, with four eggs, was discovered on June 3, just after
the grass mower had crushed its contents. This nest was located on
another yard-line, 53 yards from Nest 2. By this time, William Smith,
the driver of the grass mower, was watching for a nest, and on June 1 1
he saw the pair showing great distress at a point near the edge of the
football field, where he then found Nest 4. The new nest cavity was
in a sparsely sodded spot 58 yards southeast of Nest 3.

The first egg was laid before noon on June 12, the second and third
eggs were deposited before noon on June 13 and 14, and the fourth in
the afternoon of June 14, some time before 7:00 p.m. Incubation began
with the laying of the fourth egg. Daily observations were made
through June 26, when I went north for the summer, leaving the final
observations to Mr. and Mrs. Felix Bednarz of Birmingham, who were
able to make early morning and early evening observations daily. They
found three young out of the first laid eggs in the early morning of
July 9. The fourth egg hatched during the early morning of July 10.
No check was made on the period of parental care, for the parents and
young left the immediate vicinity four days after the young hatched.

As will be noted on the accompanying map, the nearest part of the
territory of Pair 2 was 120 yards distant, and since only one pair of
Killdeer was seen in Territory 1 throughout the season, it is reasonable
to assume that all four nests belonged to this pair. Moreover, the only
other Killdeer known to be nesting within the boundaries of the Estate
were Pairs 2 and 3, and they were occupied with their own family
affairs at the time of Pair I’s nesting operations. Gayle Pickwell (1925)
believed that one Killdeer he observed laid at least three clutches of
eggs from early April to the last of June, and that she may have raised
two broods.

Nests of Pair Two

The first nest of Pair 2 was discovered on !May 5, 210 yards north
of the first nest of Pair 1 . This nest contained five eggs, which hatched
in the following order: one young hatched and dry by 9:00 p.m..
May 11, two hatched betw^een 1:00 and 8:00 p.m.. May 12, and the
last two on the early morning of May 14. All of the young were
banded, and they left the nest on the early morning of May 15. All
were observed feeding with their parents daily, until June 12, when
only two were seen. On June 4, I had found, and marked by stakes,
three new nest cavities, made in the territory of this pair along the
boundary lines of the soccer field. I watched these daily. There was
no apparent difference in the cavities to indicate the one to be used.
Two were located at distances of 76 and 105 yards south of the first
nest of this pair. The other, the one chosen for the second clutch,
was 86 yards to the west of the original site. The four eggs were laid
as follows: before 8:30 a.m., June 17; before 8:30 a.m., June 19;

Walter P.
Nickel 1

NESTING OF THE KILLDEER

27

before 8:30 a.m., June 21; and in the afternoon of June 22. The two
remaining young of this pair were still with their parents in the late
afternoon after the fourth egg was laid, but were not seen after that
time. These young were able to fly short distances, and I had to chase
them down by bicycle in order to check their band numbers. Incuba-
tion of the second clutch began either near nightfall or early the next
morning after the last egg was laid, for one of the adults was on the
nest at 7:00 a.m., June 23, and the eggs were warm. Three eggs (the
first laid) hatched before 7:00 a.m., July 16; the fourth egg early the
next morning.

Pair Three

The third pair of Killdeer was found about 240 yards west of the
territory of Pair 2 on May 4, with four young about a week old. These
young were banded and observed with their parents until June 7, but
were not seen after that time.

On June 17, a nest containing four eggs was found about 30 yards
southwest of where the young had been caught and banded on May 4.
On June 23 the bird incubating at that time was collected for one of
the habitat groups in the Cranbrook Institute of Science. Dissection
showed that it was the female. Within twenty minutes another bird,
presumably the male, was on the nest, continuing the incubation. The
young hatched during July 1, left the nest on July 2, and were under
the care of the remaining parent through the last observation on July
13. There is little doubt that this was the second brood of Pair 3, since
only one pair of Killdeer was seen at a time in this territory throughout
the season.

The difference in behavior of the two incubating birds was notable.
The female had been extremely wary and would leave the eggs before
the observer came near the nest, running away and calling from a
distance. When she was collected, the approach to the nest had to.
be made from behind thick shrubbery which reached to within 25 yards
of the nest location. The “male” was much bolder and invariably
remained on the nest until I had approached to within a few feet,
when he began circling closely around my feet, spreading his tail and
beating the earth with his wings. During this display he uttered loud,
piercing, dee! dee! dee! calls, interspersed with trilling notes.

Discussion

Bent (1929:207) quotes several published reports on the Killdeer’s
incubation period. These range from 24 to 28 days. Miles D. Pirnie
writes me that he found all four young hatched and away from a nest
23% days after the last egg was laid. One of these young hatched
22% days after the last egg was deposited. My own observations show
incubation periods ranging from 24 to 26 days. It is possible that the
first eggs to hatch in each clutch received some incubation at night

28

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

before regular incubation began, although I always found the eggs
cold until the last one was laid. A factor which probably contributes
to the delay in hatching of the later eggs is the tendency of some
parent Killdeers to leave the nest with the first young hatched, allow-
ing the remaining egg or eggs to become chilled. On several occasions, I
have found dead young in well-pipped eggs which had been abandoned.

Bent (1929:207) states that both sexes incubate and both take care
of the young, and my observations agree. Finally, other observers have
reported the Killdeer building incomplete nests near the nest that was
actually used.

Summary

At Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, eight nests of three pairs of Killdeer
were studied in 1942.

In one nest, the clutch was complete by April 11, an early date for
this region. This nest, when it contained only two eggs, was covered
overnight with six inches of snow so that the observer was unable to
find it, though the Killdeer found it without difficulty, cleared it of
snow, and laid the third egg.

There were seven clutches of four eggs, one of five.

Periodicity of egg-laying was found to be variable, not only between
females, but in the same individual.

In three nests, incubation began immediately or shortly after the
last egg was laid.

The incubation period varied from 24 to 26 days.

When the incubating female was collected at one nest, another bird
(presumably the mate) took over the task of incubation.

The period of parental care for two broods was 39 and (about) 42
days.

One female apparently laid four clutches of eggs during the season
(April 6 to June 14). The second clutch produced young which died,
and the fourth produced young that were perhaps raised successfully.

Two pairs were double brooded.

Three new nests (two unused) were made by one pair before the
second nesting.

Literature Cued

Bent, Arthur C.

1929. Life histories of North American shore birds. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull., 146.
PiCKWELL, Gayle

1925. The nesting of the Killdeer. Auk, 42:485-96, pis. 21-22.

Cranbrook Institute of Science, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

THE WILSON BULLETIN

29

A HAWK CENSUS ON TEXAS PANHANDLE HIGHWAYS

BY PHILIP F. ALLAN AND PALMER R. SIME

' I ^HE Texas Panhandle offers an almost unparalleled opportunity for
the observation of hawks. The broad expanses unobscured by
trees or hills, the predominance of clear days with excellent visibility,
and the uniformity of landscape combine to make unusual or moving
objects conspicuous and the observation of hawks easy.

The Panhandle is that part of Texas north of a line drawn diag-
onally from Childress County, at the southwest corner of Oklahoma,
to Winkler County, at the southeast corner of New Mexico. Most
of the Panhandle is made up of treeless short-grass plains of 3,000 to
4,000 feet elevation. It is dissected by intermittent or shallow per-
manent streams, with wooded banks. Approximately a third of the
Panhandle consists of rolling, mid- or tail-grass plains, often covered
with sagebrush and oak shinnery. Elevations here are about 1,500
to 2,000 feet. Between the easterly rolling plains and the westerly
high plains is an abrupt break, rising sharply. This area is charac-
terized by canyons and buttes, often sparsely covered by grasses,
junipers, and deciduous shrubs. Abrupt cap-rock rims lie immediately
below the high plains.

Stimulated in part by the sight of large flocks of Swainson’s Hawks
in migration, the authors, whose regular work required much auto-
mobile travel, decided to keep a record of hawks, kites, vultures, and
eagles seen en route. The method of observation was essentially that
used by Nice (1934) and others; that is, miles traveled and hawks
seen were recorded. In contrast to other highway bird observations,
these were confined to a comparatively small area, the Texas Panhandle.

The trips were made at random between October, 1938, and Janu-
ary, 1942. A total of 26,768 miles was driven. Most of our trips
were separate, but occasionally we traveled together. Although both
of us covered most of the Panhandle at one time or another, Allan’s
observations were made particularly in the northern portion, while
Sime’s were made in the southern part. A convenient data sheet was
used, upon which was recorded the origin and destination of trips,
date, speedometer readings, miles traveled, and number of hawks of
each species seen. It was found impracticable for one man to record
the exact location of each observation, the habitat type, and other
information while traveling, so early efforts to obtain these data were
abandoned.

After some trials in analyzing the data, we decided to group the
records into quarters of the year. These seem to be more comparable
than individual months. Beginning with November, 1938, the data
were grouped to cover 13 consecutive quarters. The three months of
fall migration — August, September, and October — were placed to-

30

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

WIN'

FER

"T”

SPR

ING

1

SUM

MER

1

FA

V —

-

V

Nov. Dec- Jon. Feb. Mor. Apr. Moy June July Aug. Sep- Ocf.

UNIDENTIFIED HAWKS

WINTER 1 SPRING 1 SUMMER 1 FALL

/

\

/

A

/

V

/

"V

/

V

T

^

— ^

-J- -

-

—T

r-^

\

Nov. Dec Jon Feb. Mor Apr. Moy June July Aug- Sep Ocf.

CATHARTES AURA

Figure 1. Population trend, based on the rate per thousand miles traveled.
The solid line represents the monthly average ; the broken line the seasonal average.

gether. Thus November, December, and January are “winter”; Feb-
ruary, IMarch, and April are “spring”; and ^lay, June, and July are
“summer.” Although the data are somewhat meager for some months,
we believe that annual population trends are fairly well indicated in
Figures 1 and 2.

Philip F. Allan,
Palmer R. Sime

TEXAS HAWK CENSUS

31

The individuals of each species were totaled by quarters, and the
relative abundance of each was determined (Table 6), The number
of miles of travel per hawk of each species was calculated, and con-
verted to the number of each species seen per 1,000 miles of travel.
The results of these calculations appear in Tables 2 to 5 inclusive. (In
the tables, the data are arranged under “seasons” as defined above.)

WIN'

FER

1

SPR

ING

1

SUM

MER

”T"

FAl

-L

—

Nov Dec. Jon Feb. Mar Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Ocl

FALCO SPARVERIUS

WINTER 1 SPRING 1

SUMMER 1 FALL

_J

Nov. Dec. Joa Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Oct.

BUTEO RE6ALIS

WINTER 1

SPRING

1

SUMMER 1

FALL

r— ■

r-- —

i

Nov. Dec Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Oct.

ICTINIA MISISIPPIENSIS

Nov. Dec, Jon. Feb. Mor. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. OcJ.

ALL HAWKS

Figure 2. Population trend, based on the rate per thousand miles traveled.
The solid line represents the monthly average ; the broken line the seasonal average.

It is interesting to compare our data on hawks (Table 1) with those
of Mrs. Nice. The figures on vultures for the Texas portion of her
trip are remarkably close to ours of 1939 and 1941. There is, how-
ever, considerable difference in hawk figures. Our observations show
that the summer months are relatively poor for obtaining records.
It is difficult to see hawks unless they are in flight, and during the
heat of the day they are likely to be resting in the shade.

32

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

TABLE 1

Comparison of Hawk Populations Recorded by Nice (1933)
AND Allan and Sime (1939-1941)

June-

July

Miles

Hawks

Vultures

Birds

No.

Miles

Per

No.

Miles

Per

No.

Miles

Per

Location

Authority

1933

6,349

50

127.0

70

90.7

120

52.9

Ohio-Ariz.*

Nice

1933

557

7

79.6

16

34.8

23

24.2

Texas**

Nice

1939

1,470

115

12.8

41

35.9

156

9.4

Tex. Pan-
handle

Allan and
Sime

1940

200

8

25.0

4

50.0

12

16.7

Tex. Pan-
handle

Allan and
Sime

1941

566

31

18.3

16

35.3

47

12.0

Tex. Pan-
handle

Allan and
Sime

*Round-trip part of travels.
♦♦Texas part of travels.

While there was some concentration of hawks along highways, we
were unable to detect how much the perching sites and carrion to be
found there attracted them. Much of the travel was done on ranch
roads, and there seemed to be as many hawks along them as there
were along major highways.

Fifteen species were observed. It is probable that at least three
more species occur at times in the Texas Panhandle. J. O. Stevenson
(1942) records the Harris Hawk {Parabuteo unicinctus harrisi) from
Palo Duro Canyon, and Florence M. Bailey (1928) attributes to Ligon
a record 50 miles northeast of Carlsbad, New Mexico, which is 25 to
30 miles west of Gaines or Yoakum counties, Texas. The Black
Vulture {Coragyps atratus) occurs not far south of the Panhandle.
Pigeon Hawks {Falco columbarius) may occur as stragglers or un-
common migrants, but we have not positively recognized them. E. T.
Seton (correspondence) informs us that a female of Richardson’s
Pigeon Hawk was taken by him on the Perico Ranch in Union County,
New Mexico, which is 25 to 30 miles west of Dallam County, Texas.

CatharLes aura. Turkey Vulture (Figure 1). — Earliest spring record: April 1,
1941. Latest fall record: October 15, 1940. On April 19, 1939, 43 were seen in
80 miles, or 1 per 1.9 miles. (Hereafter, the ratio of miles traveled to birds
seen is expressed numerically, thus: 1.9:1.) During April, 1940, 20 were seen in 237
miles (11.8:1). On September 25, 1939, 132 Turkey Vultures were seen in 183
miles (1.4:1). During the month of September, 1939, 189 Turkey Vultures were
seen in 2,535 miles of travel (13.4:1). Our data show migration peaks in April
and September (Figure 1). In the Texas Panhandle this bird was found prin-
cipally in canyons and wooded river bottoms.

Ictinia misisippiensis. Mississippi Kite (Figure 2). — Earliest summer record:
May 4, 1939. Latest fall record: September 25, 1939. The largest number for

Philip F. Allan,
Palmer R. Sime

TEXAS HAWK CENSUS

33

one day was recorded on May 28, 1939: 23 seen in 79 miles (3.4:1). The high
day in fall was August 30, 1939: 23 in 307 miles (13.3:1). High month was May,
1940: 29 seen in 585 miles (20.1:1). High fall month was August, 1939: 36 seen
in 1,470 miles (40.9:1). The Mississippi Kite seemed to be principally confined
to wooded bottomlands. It was common in the northeastern Panhandle and
ranged at least as far west as Potter County. Bent (1937) indicates its occurrence
at Tascosa (Oldham County), west of Potter County.

Accipiter velox. Sharp-shinned Hawk. — This bird was scarcer than the
Cooper’s Hawk. Only 8 were seen. Like the preceding species, it frequents
the heavily wooded bottoms. Paul Russell found it in summer in Palo Duro
Canyon, according to J. O. Stevenson.

Accipiter cooperi. Cooper’s Hawk. — This was one of the rarer hawks, but
it is rather shy and frequents the more heavily wooded valleys; hence it may
have escaped our notice. It seems to be only a transient here.

Only 14 were seen. The habits of this and the preceding species are so
different from those of the other species treated in this paper that our figures can
give no real indication of relative numbers.

Buteo borealis. Red-tailed Hawk. — The Red-tail, primarily a winter bird
in the Texas Panhandle, is relatively uncommon, but by no means rare. J. O.
Stevenson informed us that Redtails have been observed in Palo Duro Canyon
in summer by Russell. It is a bird of wooded rangeland, particularly of canyons
and river bottoms. Earliest fall date: August 1, 1939. Latest in summer: May
9, 1941. Highs in single day observations were January 12, 1939: 4 seen in 57
miles (14.2:1); and October 23, 1939: 6 seen in 85 miles (14.2:1). High month
was October, 1938: 5 seen in 150 miles (30.0:1). January, 1939, however, is
probably a fairer sample: during this month 9 were seen in 673 miles (74.8:1).

Buteo swainsoni. Swainson’s Hawk (Figure 1). — The huge flocks of mi-
grating Swainson’s Hawks have been described many times. To a certain extent
this migration disrupted our data, for in September and October, 1939, we ob-
served 1,961 of these hawks — a record we never again approached. In random
travels it is possible to miss large concentrations of hawks, as we apparently did
in 1940 and 1941, for large flocks were reported to us during those years. There
is some reason to believe that 1939 was unusual, for it was a year of very dry
weather and an abundance of grasshoppers.

When not migrating, flocks of Swainson’s Hawks frequent the egg-laying
beds of grasshoppers, sometimes in flocks of a thousand or more.

In migration, the flocks are a loose group of flapping, wheeling, and soaring
birds, moving from ground level to the limits of visibility. Sometimes the hori-
zontal movement is relatively slow, while at other times the flock moves rapidly.
On one occasion following a raw, rainy day, 641 hawks were counted in about
an hour’s time. On this day, October 9, 1939, the weather was clear and cool,
with a strong northwest wind.

The Swainson’s Hawk is a common summer resident in the Panhandle, nesting
nearly everywhere that there are a few cottonwood trees. Earliest record for
arrival: March 28, 1941. Latest one seen: December 7, 1938. Our high one-day
record for spring is April 19, 1939; 30 seen in 80 miles (2.7:1). The high spring
month was May, 1939. In 1,131 miles of travel we saw 58 (19.5:1). Our high
day for fall was October 9, 1939: 641 seen in 35 miles (.05:1). On August 30,
1939, we saw 214 in 307 miles (1.4:1); on September 17, 1939, our record was
155 hawks in 165 miles (1.1:1). On September 27, 1939, 397 passed over
Amarillo, Texas, but these do not appear in our statistical data, since they were
not observed in the course of our travels. On September 26, 114 were seen in
a 70-mile trip (.6:1). September and October, 1939, were the high fall months.
During September we recorded 1,224 Swainson’s Hawks in 2,535 miles of travel
(2.1:1); and during October we recorded 737 in 1,381 miles (1.9:1). In August,
1941, 573 miles were traveled and 62 hawks seen (9.2:1).

34

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

Swainson’s Hawks were abundant in all types of habitats, but were pre-
dominant on rangeland. They often were perched on telegraph wires, a habit
unusual in large birds. Among the foods are cottontails and jackrabbits killed
by automobiles. A young Swainson’s Hawk was seen on one occasion to make
a very awkard and unsuccessful stoop at a Horned Lark {Octocoris alpestris).

Buteo lagopus. American Rough-legged Hawk. — This uncommon hawk is a
winter resident only. Earliest winter record: November 2, 1938. Latest record
in spring: April 21, 1939. This seems to be an unusually late date, and the bird
may have been weak or injured. The April 1, 1941, date is more likely normal.
American Rough-legs were so scarce that mileage records are hardly significant.
The high month was February, 1940, when 7 were seen in 372 miles of travel
(53.1:1). In December, 1938, we saw 14 in 1,144 miles of travel (81.7:1), and
in February, 1939, we recorded 7 in 846 miles (120.8:1).

Because this species is slow and unafraid, many are killed by hunters, who
find them easy targets along highways.

Buteo regalis. Ferruginous Rough-legged Hawk (Figure 2). — This is a year
round resident of the Panhandle. Some of the nests are huge. The accumula-
tions of nesting materials of many seasons evidently account for their size. One
large nest in Moore County was located in a hackberry (Celtis sp.). This nest was
about 4 feet in diameter and nearly 3 feet thick and supported the weight of a
man. In 1939, three young Rough-legs were raised here, but in 1940 and 1941,
the nest was occupied by Great Horned Owls {Bubo virginianus) . Interestingly
enough, an unoccupied nest was discovered in 1940 on the bare ground not far
from the large nest.

High day for Ferruginous Rough-legs was December 7, 1938: 18 were seen in
112 miles (6.2:1). On November 11, 1938, 18 were seen in 125 miles (6.9:1).
High month was December, 1938: 66 were seen in 1,144 miles of travel (17.3:1).

During the breeding season this hawk occurred only on rangeland, but later
was seen almost everywhere. As, with the .American Rough-leg, many are killed
along highways.

Aquila chrysaetos. Golden Eagle. — .\lthough a year round resident, the
Golden Eagle was seen mainly during the winter months, and then only
uncommonly. It nested in Palo Duro and Cito canyons in Randall County,
and in 1941 was observed nesting in a large cottonwood in Hartley County.
During the month of January, 1942, we saw 6 in 656 miles (109.3:1).

The Golden Eagle in the Texas Panhandle, as elsewhere in the west, is
principally a bird of canyons and rangeland.

Haliaeetus leucocephalus. Bald Eagle. — Only one Bald Eagle was recorded,
though it is reported as being not unusual in the Panhandle of Oklahoma.

Circus hudsonius. Marsh Hawk (Figure 1). — The Marsh Hawk is essen-
tially a winter bird in the Texas Panhandle, although it appears early and stays
late. During the wet summer of 1941 it nested in Randall County. A nest was
found May 30, 1941. Marsh Hawks usually appeared early in August (August 1,
1939, 1941) and became scarce after .-\pril. Latest summer date: June 30, 1939.
The high day for fall was September 9, 1939: 37 seen in 83 miles’ travel (2.2:1).
On February 1, 1940, 32 were seen in 116 miles (3.6:1), and on January 10, 1942,
37 were seen in 120 miles (3.2:1). Some of the high months were February,
1940: 74 seen in 372 miles (5.0:1); November, 1941: 88 in 527 miles (5.9:1);
December, 1941: 133 seen in 948 miles (7.1:1); and January, 1942: 115 seen
in 656 miles (5.7:1). The numbers of Marsh Hawks during several other months
were fairly high. More Marsh Hawks were observed than any other species
except the Swainson’s Hawk. A total of 1,374 was seen in 26,768 miles’ travel
(19.5:1). Migration peaks apparently occurred in February and October
(Figure 1).

Philip F. Allan,
Palmer R. Sime

TEXAS HAWK CENSUS

35

While the Marsh Hawk is ubiquitous, it frequents croplands, especially
cotton and sorghum fields, more than it does pasture. As would be expected,
it was often seen near playas (wet-weather lakes). Marsh Hawks were par-
ticularly abundant in areas having large populations of cotton-rats {Sigmodon
hispidus) . The remains of this rodent were found in a fresh Marsh Hawk
pellet, and nearby there were two dead cotton-rats. Jack rabbits and cotton-
tails killed on the highway are a staple and abundant source of food. We
witnessed an unsuccessful attack on a covey of Scaled Quail (Callipepla squa-
mata), and we found Marsh Hawks eating Meadow Larks {Sturnella neglecta)
and ducks, the latter presumably wounded.

Pandion haliaetus. Osprey. — Ospreys were rare migrants through the Texas
Panhandle. En route they obtain food in some of the larger lakes, where they
were found fishing. Six Ospreys were seen, but only 4 of these figure in our
data. One was seen on la power line pole on September 26, 1941, in Amarillo,
Texas. Another was observed on June 18, 1942, at Buffalo Lake, Randall
County.

Falco mexicanus. Prairie Falcon. — The Prairie Falcon was uncommon and
was seen principally in the winter, although occasionally at other times. Summer
observations lead us to believe that it may nest in some of the canyons. Although
January, 1941, showed fewer miles per bird (93.0:1), so few miles were traveled
during that month that it is best that October, 1939, be considered high. In this
month, 15 were seen in 1,381 miles (92.1:1).

This falcon was seen about equally in rangeland and cropland. Like its
larger relative, the Duck Hawk, it sometimes winters in cities. One frequented
the larger buildings at Amarillo during the winters of 1938 and 1939. Also, like
the Duck Hawk, this bird is sometimes seen at play. On one occasion a Prairie
Falcon was observed making repeated stoops at a Ferruginous Rough-leg. The
latter rolled over in air and presented a formidable defense, which caused the
little falcon to swoop upward. On another occasion, a Prairie Falcon and a
Marsh Hawk were observed in what appeared to be a game. The two maneu-
vered in such a manner as to be facing each other about 10 feet above the
ground. They then rose vis-a-vis, keeping about three feet apart, to a height
of about 50 feet, when they separated, dove earthward, and then repeated the
trick. This continued for about three minutes.

Falco peregrinus. Duck Hawk. — The Duck Hawk was decidedly rare. Only
three were seen on our travels, but two or three more have been seen when we
were not traveling.

Falco sparverius. Sparrow Hawk (Figure 2). — This hawk ranked fourth
in abundance and is a year round resident. It was most abundant in winter.
Our high day was December 1, 1940: 10 seen in 36 miles (3.6:1). September 9,
1939, was also a high day: 10 seen in 83 miles (8.3:1). High fall month was
December, 1941: 40 seen in 948 miles (23.7:1); and high spring month was
April, 1939: 45 seen in 2,413 miles (53.6:1). August, 1941, (28.6:1), September,
1939 (34.7:1), and January, 1939 (32.0:1), were also high months. Migration
data did not show well defined peaks.

This hawk generally frequents areas of tree growth and was commonly seen
along railroad right of ways, sitting upon telegraph poles. One is likely to see
Sparrow Hawks nearly anywhere in the Panhandle.

Unidentified hawks. It is to be expected that in a survey of this kind many
hawks would be unidentified. Whenever it was convenient to do so, questionable
identities were checked with a 7x35 binocular. Melanistic hawks, with the
occasional exception of Swainson’s Hawk and Ferruginous Rough-legs, were
usually unidentifiable. Most of the unidentified birds were buteonine. We
believe that all birds listed in the accompanying tables as unidentified hawks
actually were hawks. We were careful to exclude Ravens and Mourning Doves.

36

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

TABLES 2 and 3

Abundance of Hawks by Seasons

Species

Winter

1938-1939

Spring

1939

Summer

1939

Fall

1939

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

Turkey Vulture

81

21.2

54

20.7

213

39.5

Mississippi Kite

70

26.9

47

8.7

Sharp-shinned Hawk

2

.7

2

.8

2

.4

Cooper’s Hawk

8

2.8

2

’.5

2

.4

Red-tailed Hawk

26

9.0

16

4.2

15

2.8

Swainson’s Hawk

2

.7

120

31.3

106

40.8

2239

416.7

American Rough-

legged Hawk

24

8.3

9

2.3

Ferruginous Rough-

legged Hawk

136

47.2

44

11.5

12

4.6

25

4.6

Golden Eagle

6

2.1

6

1.6

2

.8

4

.7

Bald Eagle

1

.3

Marsh Hawk

178

61.7

85

22.2

8

3.1

354

65.8

Osprey

4

.7

Prairie Falcon

17

5.9

2

”.5

2

.8

26

4.8

Duck Hawk

3

.5

Sparrow Hawk

58

20.1

n

18.5

14

’^4

118

21.9

Unidentified

74

25.6

70

18.2

14

5.4

176

32.7

Totals:

531

185.2

507

131.6

284

108.7

3228

588.2

Miles traveled
during period:

2,887

3,834

2,601

5,384'

Species

Winter

1939-1940

Spring

1940

Summer

1940

Fall

1940

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

Turkey Vulture

20

15.0

22

28.0

2

3.3

Missisippi Kite

29

36.9

Sharp-shinned Hawk

1

*1.7

Cooper’s Hawk

1

.8

Red-tailed Hawk

13

*7.5

3

2.4

4

*6.7

Swainson’s Hawk
American Rough-

2

1.1

3

2.4

*7

8.9

4

6.7

legged Hawk
Ferruginous Rough-

5

2.9

7

5.6

15.0

legged Hawk

26

15.0

15

12.1

2

2.5

9

Golden Eagle

1

.6

3

2.4

Bald Eagle

46.7

Marsh Hawk

84

48.5

79

63.7

1

1.3

28

Osprey

1

1.7

Prairie Falcon

5

2.9

4

3.2

Duck Hawk

Sparrow Hawk

10

5.8

14

11.3

5

6.4

3

5.0

Unidentified

12

7.0

26

21.0

8

13.3

Totals:

144

90.1

147

146.3

66

84.0

60

100.1

Miles traveled

during period:

1,730

1,239

785

600

♦Number per 1000 miles of travel.

Philip F. Allan,
Palmer R, Sime

TEXAS HAWK CENSUS

37

TABLES 4 and 5

Abundance of Hawks by Seasons

Winter

Spring

Summer

Fall

Species

1940-1941

1941

1941

1941

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

No.

Rate*

Turkey Vulture

1

.8

27

16.7

18

21.2

Mississippi Kite
Sharp-shinned Hawk

23

14.2

Cooper’s Hawk
Red-tailed Hawk

2

'll

2

1.2

1

1.2

Swainson’s Hawk
American Rough-

.5

6

’4.6

21

13.0

66

77.5

legged Hawk
Ferruginous Rough-

2

1.1

2

1.5

/

legged Hawk

71

39.2

9

6.1

3

1.8

7

8.2

Golden Eagle
Bald Eagle

1

.5

Marsh Hawk
Osprey

95

52.4

19

14.7

11

6.8

SO

58.5

Prairie Falcon
Duck Hawk

*6

3.3

1

.8

1

’ .6

1

1.2

Sparrow Hawk
Unidentified

33

18.2

4

3.1

’4

*2.5

29

34.1

16

8.8

13

10.0

15

10.2

7

8.2

Totals:

227

125.0

55

42.5

107

66.2

179

212.8

Miles traveled

during period:

1,812

1,295

1,617

850

Species

Winter

1941-1942

Total Period
1938-1942

Number

Rate*

Number

Rate*

Turkey Vulture

438

16.4

Mississippi Kite

169

6.3

Sharp-shinned Hawk

1

* ’.5

8

.3

Cooper’s Hawk

2

.9

IS

.6

Red-tailed Hawk

15

7.0

97

3.6

Swainson’s Hawk

1

.5

2578

96.2

American Rough-legged Hawk

4

1.9

53

2.0

Ferruginous Rough-legged Hawk

56

26.2

415

15.5

Golden Eagle

9

4.2

32

1.2

Bald Eagle

1

tr.

Marsh Hawk

336

158.7

1374

51.3

Osprey

4

.2

Prairie Falcon

10

4.7

76

2.8

Duck Hawk

3

.1

Sparrow Hawk

70

32.9

433

16.2

Unidentified

48

22.5

479

17.9

Totals:

555

263.2

6175

232.5

Miles traveled during period

2,131

26,768

♦Number per 1000 miles of travel.

TABLE 6

Relatre Seasonal Abundance of Hawks by Percentage

38

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

paypuapiuf^

A\0JJBd§

UOD[B aiJiB-iJ

X9jdso

91Sb3 piBg

9[SBa U9p[00

>{A\BH P3S39[

■qlJnoa snouiHnjJ93

>JA\T3H P9339[

■q3noa UB9U91UV

>{.\U3H S^UOSUlBAXg

>1A\BH pan^l-P^H

>JA\BH S^JSdOOJ

>|AVBH pauuiqs-dJBqs
9113 iddississij^

9jni[n \ A9>|jnx

O^OOONIO vooq fO OvDOOvO

rocorj-io -re

tH r- ( CN) >-H

o^pc>vq ppvqp locvjoccNjo
vdodr^io ■^t^oovo’evj

voocpvooo

(N1 ■ «-i (N| T-( ' ,-1

p ^ to t-N. OC to ro C> lo

ro to »-H \0 >-H o' O

tO'^ ■'^ro^CMvO

vq (VI

to 00 Tf

'T p p p p Tt OC p 1-H
vOOOcOto »-HvO(N'fOO

iq p

—I

p p . . p O . .

rt ' ’ CO • •

fO Tf

rofvvOtv. rfpopcvj

T-i O vO O O' vO

p p p

rd •

rvj O' O' VO

OC . vd " • — <’ ’ (d

P P vO
vO O' vd

p p p p

<d (d • -d td d

' rO ■ rxi

O'

ro O'

"i O'

00 ro

<7v O'

^ ro

, o) O'

= -n £ =

D- 3 rt
> imn iu

o

o

O' o O'

o Ti- Ei '

.£•§£= .S - £ = .-

>Q,3rt

:> C/2 C/5 Uh :> CA3 CA) >

CO p p
O' id vd td

t-H p p O

.-H O' to 00 tv.

• • * u

• • • -M ^

p p p p CV|

• • • i i

47.2
32.1

4.9

28.5

22.3

tr.

tr.

p p p d to

20.8

11.2

3.3

6.6

6.7

ro 1-H , ^ oq

CN ro • *

p p p

CM (VI i^ 1

»-H CM CO

rvi vO p vO vO

■vd r-I (VI ,-1

O CO eg

p p p p

p p p

• • d " (vj

• . CO

00 vq 1-;

• vo -e«-

• eg

aj be c c/j

.£•§2 = 1

Philip F. Allan,
Palmer R. Sime

TEXAS HAWK CENSUS

39

These are practically the only birds that might be confused with hawks in
highway observation; the former might be mistaken for any of the larger hawks,
while the latter are similar in size to the Sparrow Hawk, The unidentified hawks
make up 7.7 per cent of all hawks observed, and the abilities of both of us as
seen in our ratios of identified to unidentified birds are remarkably close. Ex-
cluding the large flocks of Swainson’s Hawks, most of which were observed by
Allan, there was less than 3 per cent difference in the ratios.

High points in the population curves of unidentified hawks (Figure 1) occur
in August, September, and February. It is likely, therefore, that many of them
are Swainson’s Hawks in the fall, and that Marsh Hawks predominate in the
spring.

Summary

Physiographic and climatic conditions in the Texas Panhandle
present excellent opportunities for highway hawk-censuses.

During a highway census covering a 39-month period (1938-1942)
6,175 hawks (including kites, vultures and eagles) were observed in
26,768 miles of travel.

With Swainson’s Hawks and Marsh Hawks far outnumbering all
others, 15 species were recorded out of a possible total of 18.

Hawks were seen at the rate of 232.5 per 1,000 miles, or one
bird per 4.2 miles.

Literature Cited

Bailey, Florence M.

1928. Birds of New Mexico. N. M. Dept, of Game and Fish, Santa Fe, N. M.
Bent, Arthur C.

1937. Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey. Part I. U. S. Nat.
Mus. Bull. No. 167.

Nice, Margaret M.

1934. A Hawk Census from Arizona to Massachusetts. Wilson Bulletin,
46: 93-95.

Stevenson, James O.

1942. Birds of the Central Panhandle of Texas. Condor, 44: 108-115.

Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C., and U. S. Army,
Lubbock, Texas

40

THE WILSON BULLETIN

^larch, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

THE DOWNY YOUNG OF OYSTER-CATCHERS

BY J. DAN WEBSTER

TN the hope that knowledge of the natal down of young oyster-

catchers might provide clues to the proper classification in the
genus Haematopus, this study was begun in the fall of 1941. Through
the kindness of the authorities of various American museums, most of
the extant downy specimens were available for comparison.^ Eight
races were represented by excellent examples in a series of 48 true
downies, plus six significant specimens in partial natal plumage; four
other subspecies were represented by one chick each in partial juvenal
plumage. Although we commonly expect the natal down of related
species to be more similar than adult plumages, the downy plumages
of all but one of the 12 forms I studied was individually characteristic.

The most recent review of the entire genus Haematopus is that by
Peters (1934:231-34). Peters based his arrangement largely on the
revision of the genus by Stresemann (1927) as supplemented by Salo-
monsen’s revision of the European forms (1930) and Hartert’s (1927)
work on the New Zealand forms; Peters recognized 21 forms belonging
to four species. Recently Falla (1939) showed that there were four
species in the New Zealand region, where Peters had recognized but
two forms, and considered them subspecies of the wide-ranging Haema-
topus ostralegus. In the present paper I have recognized as species
two additional forms accorded only subspecific rank (as races of H.
ostralegus) by Stresemann (1927) and by Peters. Thus I have re-
turned to the older classification utilized by Murphy (1925) for the
Western Hemisphere forms.

The natal down of oyster-catchers shows four principal colors, ar-
ranged in a fairly constant pattern. (1) Pure white down is present
on more or less of the underparts in every form but fuliginosus. (2)
Black down forms two parallel stripes down the back, a stripe at the
top of the thigh, a dot on the lores, and a dot behind the eye; also spots
and a median stripe on the pileum in some forms. (3) Some shade of
drab down covers those areas of the upper parts which are not black,
the throat, and (in the dark-bellied forms) most of the ventral surface.

1 The following museums and authorities courteously permitted the loan of specimens
for study at Houston, Texas: American Museum of Natural History — Robert C.
Murphy; California Academy of Sciences — James Moffitt; Museum of Comparative
Zoology — J. L. Peters; Field Museum of Natural History (including the collection of
H. B. Conover) — Rudyerd Boulton and H. B. Conover; Fuertes Memorial Collection
at Cornell University — George M. Sutton; Los Angeles County Museum (including the
collection of G. Willett) — George Willett; Museum of Vertebrate Zoology — Alden H.
Miller; San Diego Natural History Society — Laurence M. Huey; United States Na-
tional ^luseum — Herbert Friedmann.

Before I began the present study I had examined both adult and young oyster-
catchers at the California Academy of Sciences, the Museum of Comparative Zoology,
the Field Museum, Cornell University, and the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. V'aluable
help during the course of this work was rendered by Dr. Asa C. Chandler as well as by
the museum authorities listed above.

T. Dan

Webster

DOWNY OYSTER-CATCHERS

41

(4) Some of the drab down of the upperparts is tipped with a shade
of buff.

Uaematopus palliatus palliatus

I examined seven downy specimens from Virginia and South Caro-
lina. The rump and flank tippings varied from Light Ochraceous Buff^
to Ochraceous Buff (Ridgway’s buff series runs: Pale Ochraceous Buff,
Light Ochraceous Buff, Ochraceous Buff.) ; the lower back, wings, and
face (that is, the auriculars and areas above and below the eye) were
Avellaneous (a light, buffy drab). The sides and back of the neck were
evenly Light Drab.

Uaematopus palliatus pitanay

The single specimen examined from Peru was about three weeks
of age; no differences in natal plumage from typical H. p. palliatus could
be detected.

Uaematopus palliatus jrazari

1 examined thirteen specimens from Lower California and Sonora.
The rump and flanks were tipped with Light Ochraceous Buff; the
lower back, face and wings were near Avellaneous, although varying
from the true Avellaneous occurring in U. p. palliatus, to a slightly
grayer shade. The sides and back of the neck were Hair Brown to
Chaetura Drab. (Ridgway’s Drab series is: Pale Drab Gray, Drab
Gray, Light Drab, Drab, Hair Brown, Chaetura Drab, Chaetura Black.)
Three or four small black spots were present on the pileum of three
specimens, but such spots were in no case so extensive, so numerous,
or so anteriorly placed as in the Old World oyster-catchers (see below).
Bancroft (1927:52) mentioned and figured two jrazari chicks from
Scammons Lagoon, Lower California, which were the offspring of one
normal plumaged, and one ‘‘black-bellied”, jrazari parent. These
downies were collected by Laurence M. Huey, and formed part of the
series of specimens I used. One member of the pair (San Diego
Society Natural History 10538) was an average jrazari chick, perfectly
matching specimens from the Gulf of California. But the other
(S.D.S.N.H. 10537) had several black spots on the back of the head
(a character shared by two other jrazari chicks in my series) and
largely Drab Gray underparts. There was a triangular white patch
on the upper breast, as in bachmani, but the ventral dark down was
much lighter than in chicks of that species (Drab Gray rather than
Drab).

Uaematopus palliatus galapagensis

Examination of a chick entirely in the natal down may point to
recognition of this large-footed form as the full species originally

2 Throughout this paper, capitalized color names are used only where the color of
the area described has been compared and identified with Ridgway’s (1912) color key.

42

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

described by Ridgway (1886:331). The single specimen available
(American Museum of Natural History, 735002) was about three
weeks old when taken; it was the same one described by Rothschild
and Hartert (1902:42) and referred to by Murphy (1936:982). The
down of the throat was darker (Chaetura Drab) than the darkest
jrazari; the down of the back seemed to be Drab. The down remain-
ing on and near the rectrices lacked the buffy tippings found in jrazari
and U. p. palliatus, and thus the entire tail was a dense black.

Haematopus hachmani

Of this species I examined 15 specimens from Alaska, British Colum-
bia, and California. Unfortunately, the only young specimen available
from the Santa Barbara Islands (George Willett’s No. 752) was a
bird nearly three weeks old. Down still present on this specimen
seemed to be identical with that of northern chicks. The Light Ochra-
ceous Buff or Ochraceous Buff tipping was in this species less extensive
than in palliatus, resulting in a change in the ground color of lower
back, wings, and face from Ridgway’s brown series (e.g., Avellaneous,
as in palliatus) to the drab series, accompanied by a darkening to
Drab. The sides and back of the neck were very dark — Chaetura
Black.

The most obvious and constant difference between the two species,
bachmani and palliatus, so far as natal plumage was concerned, was
in facial coloration. The side of the head of a palliatus subspp. chick
was pale, almost buffy; that of a hachmani youngster (Webster, 1941:
156, fig. 6) was dark. The propriety of recognizing bachmani as a
full species is questionable. I am sure that bachmani and palliatus are
more closely related to each other than are palliatus and ostralegus.
But until intergradation has been demonstrated in Lower California,
where the two forms are co-resident, I hesitate to call them conspecific.

Haematopus ater

I examined three specimens, from Chile and the Falkland Islands.
As Murphy (1925:15 and 1936:989) noted, the white ventral area,
although much more extensive than in bachmani, did not cover the
entire belly and flanks as in palliatus. Peculiar to this species was
the restriction of Pale Ochraceous Buff tippings to very narrow strips
along the margins of the dorsal and femoral black stripes. This locali-
zation of brown pigment resulted in a Mouse Gray color of back, lower
belly, and head.

Haematopus leucopodus

Two specimens, from Tierra del Fuego and the Falklands, were
examined. The chief point of interest was the remarkable similarity
to occidentalis, from the British Isles. The pileum was prominently
marked with black; the back was Drab, tipped sparsely with Ochra-
ceous Buff; the upper breast, the throat and the sides of the neck were

J. Dan
Webster

DOWNY OYSTER-CATCHERS

43

Hair Brown. This species could, however, be differentiated from the
downy English oyster-catcher {H. ostralegus occidentalis) by the
basally black toenails and dark colored upper breast. The adult of
this species has peculiar short toes and broad nails, but no trace of such
characters could be detected in the chick.

HaematopMS ostralegus occidentalis

I examined seven specimens from the British Isles of this, the best-
known of all oyster-catchers. In view of the alleged relationships
between this form and palliatus (Murphy, 1925:2-4 and 1936:973-74;
Stresemann, 1927:72-73) it is interesting that the New World species
most closely resembling it in natal plumage are leucopodus from the
South Atlantic and bachmani from the North Pacific rather than
palliatus of eastern North America. The entire upperparts and face
were Drab (save for the usual black stripes) ; the sparse tippings of
the upperparts were Ochraceous Buff. The sides of the neck were Hair
Brown, and the pileum was prominently spotted with black, as in leu-
copodus, but the sooty brown of the throat did not extend onto the
breast as in that species.

Although I examined no downy young of E. o. malacophaga, from
Iceland, it seems reasonable to assume that few differences in natal
down would have been found, because adult malacophaga are differ-
entiated from adult occidentalis solely on the basis of size (Salomonsen,
1930:56).

Haematopus ostralegus longirostris

The single specimen available, from Western Australia, was over
three weeks old. The down left on the neck and throat was darker
than that of reischeki (see below) and lighter than that of occidentalis.

Haematopus reischeki

This form of New Zealand oyster-catcher has recently (Falla,
1939:263) been assigned specific status, although several earlier work-
ers, i. e., Stresemann (1927:77), Hartert (1927:16) and Oliver (1930:
278), regarded it as some kind of color variant or hybrid. Falla’s
studies led him to suggest (1939:264) that this form of oyster-catcher,
from northwestern New Zealand, was more closely allied to H. ostra-
legus longirostris from Australia than was any other New Zealand
species. But Falla, although he photographed a nest of newly hatched
young (1939:266, fig. 2) was unable to collect specimens for a descrip-
tion of the natal plumage.

A single specimen (A.M.N.H. 735098) bore the label, “Haemato-
pus unicolor; Kaipara Beach, near Helensville, North I., N. Z.; Robin
Kemp, Jan. 9, 1915; stolen from a stoat; beak greenish gray, irides
black, feet gray.” Because Falla listed reischeki from Helensville, and
indicated the hatching time of this species as January, it may be

44

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

presumed that this specimen was the undescribed natal form of reis-
cheki, and that the designation ‘‘unicolor” on the label indicated black
or largely black parents. This chick was paler than even the lightest
palliatus is gray brown and ater is sooty brown. The sides of the neck
World forms, in marked contrast to the adult plumages of these species.
For in the adult plumages reischeki is glossy black dorsally, whereas
palliatus is gray brown and ater is sooty brown. The sides of the neck
were Mouse Gray, the back largely Light Drab, the down tippings
Pale Ochraceous Buff.

Haematopus finschi

Although I examined no specimens of this form (native to South
Island, New Zealand), which was well described in the natal plumage
by Falla (1939:261), it might be mentioned that his description is
very similar to that of reischeki given above. His figure (1939:266,
fig. 1), however, suggests that pnschi is somewhat darker, and more
gray, than downy reischeki.

Haematopus juliginosus

I examined two specimens, one from Bass Strait, the other from
Western Australia. This species was peculiar among downy oyster-
catchers in its even, rusty coloration (although the black marks on
the pileum were plain) and in its complete lack of white plumage. The
belly was Light Drab; the neck, throat and back were Hair Brown;
the tippings of the dorsal down were Wood Brown.

Haematopus unicolor

Falla (1939:265) restricted the name “unicolor^^ to entirely black
oyster-catchers from the rocky shores of southern and middle New
Zealand. Oliver (1930:279) described the downy chick of this form
as, “covered with blackish brown down,” a description which would
fit juliginosus; in the single specimen I examined (A.M.N.H. 735143;
no locality but “New Zealand”; largely in juvenal plumage), down
remaining on the head and neck was only slightly lighter than that of
juliginosus ; down left on the lower back was nearest Hair Brown,
perhaps very slightly lighter than that of juliginosus.

Discussion

Murphy (1925:2-4) showed that the adult of palliatus has retained
essentially the juvenal plumage-phase of European ostraleguSy differing
chiefly in the extent of the white spotting of the primaries, a variable
character which is associated with geographical distribution in oyster-
catchers throughout the world. The differences between New World
and Old World oyster-catchers are given in Table 1. It is my opinion
that the two should not be regarded as conspecific.

J. Dan
Webster

DOWNY OYSTER-CATCHERS

45

TABLE 1

Comparison or New and Old World Oyster-catchers

New World Forms

Old World Forms

Adults

Adults

I rides:

yellow

red

Feet:

white or white tinged with pink

red

Back:

brown (except leucopodus)

glossy black

Rump:

brown or black

white (except reischeki
and black-bellied forms)

Downy Young

Downy Young

Nails:

dark at base

light at base

Pileum:

unspotted, or slightly spotted

spotted and streaked prom-

with black (except leucopodus)

inently with black

Summary

Comparison of 54 specimens of the genus Haematopus in natal
plumage led to the following original conclusions: H. paMatus jrazari
chicks are darker than those of the nominate race and tend to be
marked more often with black on the parietal region. H. bachmani
chicks have a dark, drab face ; H. palliatus subspp. chicks have a pale,
buffy face. Chicks of H. ostralegus occidentalis and H. leucopodus
are very similar.

Several differential characters (of both adult and young) are listed
which distinguish Old World and New World oyster-catchers.

H. leucopodus from the Falkland Islands and South America seems
to be the nearest thing to a living connecting link between eastern
hemisphere and western hemisphere forms. In this species the plum-
age of both adults and young is close to the Old World type, the adult
flesh colors are those of the New World type, but the configuration
of the adult toes and toe-nails is unique.

References Cited

Bancroft, Griffing

1927 Breeding birds of Scammons Lagoon, Lower California.

Condor, 29:29-57.

Falla, R. A.

1939 New Zealand oyster-catchers. Records Canterbury Mus., 4:259-66.
Hartert, Ernst

1927 Types of birds in the Tring Museum. Novit. Zool., 34:1-38.
Murphy, Robert Cushman

1925 Notes on certain species and races of oyster-catchers. Amer. Mus.
Novit., No. 194:1-15.

46

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

1936 Oceanic birds of South America, vol. 2. American Museum of Natural
History, New York.

Oliver, W. R. B.

1930 New Zealand birds. Fine Arts, Ltd., Wellington, N. Z.

Peters, James L.

1934 Check-list of birds of the world, vol. 2. Harvard University Press,
Cambridge.

Ridgway, Robert

1886 Description of a new species of oyster-catcher from the Galapagos
Islands. Auk, 3:331.

1912 Color standards and color nomenclature. Published by the author,
Washington, D. C.

Rothschild, Walter, and Ernst Hartert.

1902 Further notes on the fauna of the Galapagos Islands. Novit. Zool.,
9:373-418.

Salomonsen, Finn

1930 Remarks on the European forms of Haematopus ostralegus L. Ibis,
1930:56-66.

Stresemann, Erwin

1927 Die schwarzen Austernfischer {Haematopus) . Orn. Monatsh., 35:71-77.

Webster, J. Dan

1941 The breeding of the Black Oyster-catcher. Wilson Bull., 53:141-56.

The Rice Institute, Houston, Texas

and

36th Evacuation Hospital, Fort Sam Houston, Texas

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

THE WILSON BULLETIN

47

MYRON HARMON SWENK

1883-1941

BY JOHN T. ZIMMER

YRON HARMON SWENK, Chairman of the Department of
Entomology at the University of Nebraska, died at his home
in Lincoln, Nebraska, on July 17, 1941. He was born at Polo, Illinois,
on August 8, 1883, the son of Howard Swenk and Susanne Harmon
Swenk. In 1885, the family moved to Beatrice, Nebraska, in whose
public schools Myron received his preparatory education, graduating
from the Beatrice High School in 1901. That year the family moved
to Lincoln, where he entered the University of Nebraska and began
his studies in the Department of Entomology under Professor Lawrence
Bruner. He graduated with the degree of Bachelor of Arts in 1907
and received that of Master of Arts in 1908.

While an undergraduate, in 1904, Myron became Laboratory As-
sistant in Entomology. He was raised to the position of Adjunct
Professor in 1907, Assistant Professor in 1910, Associate Professor in
1911, Professor of Economic Entomology in 1914, and Professor of
Entomology in 1925, and was made Chairman of the Department of
Entomology in 1919, in which capacity he served until July, 1941,
a short time before his death, when ill health compelled his retirement
from active duty. He also served the University on various commit-
tees and from 1912 to 1928 was Chairman of the Committee on
Graduate Work on the Agricultural College Campus.

In addition to his pedagogical work, he was long associated with
the Nebraska Agricultural Experiment Station, as Assistant Station
Entomologist (1913-1919) and Entomologist (1919), and was also
Assistant State Entomologist (1908-1919) and State Entomologist
(1919-1927).

On April 24, 1918, he married Jane Chandler Bishop of Lincoln
who, with his father and a sister, Iva Swenk, also of Lincoln, survives
him.

Myron Swenk’s chosen profession was entomology and his work
in this subject, aside from his classroom activities, was primarily in
the economic field, as was but natural in view of his official positions
in an agricultural state. His numerous publications on economic ento-
mology were begun while he was still an undergraduate student and
continued throughout his lifetime, but they alone do not measure the
full extent of his services to the farmers of Nebraska. The problems
of the control of the insect enemies of the fields and orchards were
his constant study. As a taxonomist, he was interested primarily in
the bees, and most of his papers on systematic entomology deal with
that group of insects. Their role in the pollination of plants was a
phase of the subject that, from early years, drew his careful attention.

48

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

Entomology was closely seconded by ornithology as an avocation
in which Professor Swenk played a very active part throughout his
lifetime. He was one of the founders of the Nebraska Ornithologists’
Union when it was instituted on December 16, 1899. He was elected
its President in 1907-1908, Secretary in 1908-1910, Secretary-Treasurer
in 1910-1912 and again from 1915 to 1937, and Editor-Custodian
(1938-1941). He secured the affiliation of the Union with the Wilson
Ornithological Club (1915) and served as President of the Club for
the year 1918-1919. When the affiliation terminated in 1925 and The
Wilson Bulletin ceased to be the official organ of the Union, he began
the issue of a series of mimeographed “Letters of Information,” of
which sixty-eight numbers appeared. They contained the records of
the activities of the Union and its members and supplied the place of
a printed journal until The Nebraska Bird Review was initiated in
1933. The Review he continued to edit until early 1941. Thus, from
the founding of the Nebraska Ornithologists’ Union until his death,
he served the society in one capacity or another and was editor of its
publications for most of that time.

In 1904, under the joint authorship of Lawrence Bruner, Robert
H. Wolcott, and Myron Swenk, there was published “A Preliminary
Review of the Birds of Nebraska.” This consisted of an annotated
list of the birds recorded from the state, with keys for their identifi-
cation; remarks on their distribution, seasonal occurrence, and abun-
dance; and with citations of the records of the more uncommon forms.
The account appeared in the Annual Report of the Nebraska State
Board of Agriculture for the year 1903 and was immediately reissued
in book form. It became the standard work of reference on Nebraska
birds. Various additions and corrections have been published from
time to time, several from the pen of IMjTon Swenk himself, but no
more comprehensive account has appeared, and the book has not been
supplanted. For many years, Swenk had in mind a complete descrip-
tive work on the birds of the state, but it was not found possible to
finance the undertaking, and it was never carried to completion. The
biographer still has in his possession a portion of the manuscript note-
books that mark an early joint effort to assemble certain data for
such a work.

Perhaps realizing that the more ambitious undertaking was out
of the question. Professor Swenk began, in 1933, two series of articles
in The Nebraska Bird Review entitled, respectively, “A History of
Nebraska Ornithology” and “A Brief Synopsis of the Birds of Ne-
braska.” These undoubtedly would have brought together a great
deal of scattered information on the local bird life, but only four
instalments of the “History” and three of the “Synopsis” were pub-
lished before the author’s death. Other articles from his pen w^ere,
however, both numerous and varied, ranging from simple records of
local occurrences to such comprehensive studies as that on the Eskimo

John T.
Zimmer

MYRON HARMON SWENK

49

Curlew (1915), the Whooping Crane (1933), the measurements of
the geese of the Branta canadensis group (1934, 1935) and other
important studies. Whatever the subjects or their importance, the
articles are marked by the accuracy and careful attention to detail
that characterize all of Myron Swenk’s work.

Professor Swenk was interested in mammals to a somewhat lesser
degree than in birds, but he has to his credit “A Preliminary Review
of the Mammals of Nebraska” (1908), with three subsequent revisions
of the list (1915, 1918, and 1920), and a number of other papers
of taxonomic or economic interest, including the descriptions of five
new mammalian subspecies. In 1939, he began a privately published
series of papers on mammals under the general title of “Missouri
Valley Fauna,” of w'hich three numbers appeared before his death.

He was affiliated with numerous scientific organizations including
the American Association for the Advancement of Science, American
Association of Economic Entomologists, American Ornithologists’ Un-
ion, American Society of Mammalogists, Cooper Ornithological Club,
Ecological Society of America, Nebraska Academy of Science, Nebras-
ka Ornithologists’ Union, Wildlife Society, and Wilson Ornithological
Club, and the honorary societies of Alpha Zeta, Gamma Sigma Delta,
Phi Sigma, and Sigma Xi.

As a teacher. Professor Swenk was exceptionally successful. His
knowledge of his subject was profound, his manner of presentation
clear and forceful, and he had the gift of inspiring his students to
their best efforts. As a companion in the field he was genial, inter-
esting, and alert, and it is a pleasure to recall many hours spent with
him in past years, roaming the woods and fields, watching birds, col-
lecting specimens, and discussing problems of mutual interest.

From his boyhood he was a keen, though conservative, collector,
and he succeeded in building up an important private collection of
some thousands of birds, mammals, and insects of the Missouri Valley
region. After his death, the insects were presented by Mrs. Swenk
to the Department of Entomology at the University of Nebraska, and
the birds and mammals to the Nebraska State Museum. Mrs. Swenk
has since expended considerable time and effort in cataloguing the
birds and mammals in their new quarters and it is gratifying to know
that, through her generosity, this material, of special value to Nebras-
kans, will remain in the state, accessible to students in the region.
Local students will, however, miss the presence of Myron Swenk in
person. His was the lasting flame that kept alight through the changing
years of the Nebraska Ornithologists’ Union and his the spirit that
kept the organization a growing one. More than anyone, he made the
Union his own, and the history of the organization for forty years is
inextricably bound up with him. It will miss his guiding hand, his
fund of information, and his unfailing interest in local problems which
was at the service of Nebraska students. He left a foundation for

50

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 1

future work in the region for which all those who remain to carry on
his work will feel extremely grateful.

In The Nebraska Bird Review (Vol. 10, No. 1: 6-15, July 7, 1942)
will be found a bibliography of Myron Swenk’s publications prepared
by Dr. H. Douglas Tate, and in the same number (pp. 15-22) an
additional paper (with Edson Fichter) on “The Distribution and
Migration of the Solitary Sandpiper in Nebraska.”

American Museum of Natural History, New York City

Bird Migration. By A. Landsborough Thomson. H. F. and G. Witherby, Ltd.,

326 High Holborn, London, W. C. 1. 1942: 7 x 4^ in., 192 pp.; 7 photographs

and 13 maps. 6s.

In this revised edition, Landsborough Thomson has brought up to date the
useful short account of bird migration he originally published in 1936. Type for
the new volume has been more closely set, reducing the total number of pages
but not the text. The new edition is also printed on a cheap wartime pulp. About
four pages of material and several maps have been added.

Ornithologists will be more interested in the new contents of the book than
in its physical make-up. Brief accounts are given of the recent studies on homing
(by Ruppell, Wodzicki, Lockley, and Griffin) and of the work of experimental
biologists (Rowan, Bissonnette, and Wolfson). Mention is also made of the band-
ing results of Nice, B. Roberts, R. J. Middleton, and others. These appear to be
the three fields of inquiry currently yielding the most significant facts on bird
migration.

Popular books on this subject have one fault in common. Designed for the
general reader, they emphasize “the immensity of migration” and its complexity,
and suggest little to the bird watcher in the way of concrete studies that he him-
self can carry out in the field. To a considerable extent this is attributable to the
ideal of condensation that has governed recent books on bird migration. F. C.
Lincoln summed up the subject in about 65,000 words in 1939; Thomson here
covers it in about 50,000. Such a condensation also necessitates the omission of
many aspects of a field that is admittedly complex. To the reviewer, the present
volume is regrettably vague on the subject of the periodic irruptions studied by
Gross, Formosof, and Speirs.

In spite of this, the book can be considered the best general statement of bird
migration now available for the layman. Although British birds have deliberately
been allowed to predominate as examples, a check of the excellent index reveals
that about 43 per cent of the species listed are probably known to the average
bird student in North America. Supplemented by Lincoln’s pamphlet of 1935
(U. S. Dept, of Agriculture Circular, 363), it therefore offers American readers
an inexpensive and up-to-date summary of the general features of bird migration
and of our present theories on the subject. — J. J. Hickey.

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

THE WILSON BULLETIN

51

ELMER T. JUDD, NORTH DAKOTA ORNITHOLOGIST

BY O. A. STEVENS

North Dakota ornithologists have not been numerous, and the
death of Elmer T. Judd made a notable gap among them. He was
born at Bethel, Connecticut, on June 16, 1866. Even as a boy, he was
interested in bird life, and attended meetings of the early and short-
lived New Haven Ornithological Club. He came to North Dakota, then
still Dakota Territory, in 1887, and settled on a farm eight miles north
of Cando, Towner County. This area, situated in rolling prairie coun-
try, with many ponds but no streams, far enough north and east to be
out of the dry plains region, is admirably suited to encourage orni-
thological pursuits. Devils Lake, the largest lake in the state, with
well wooded edges, is about 40 miles southeast. The Turtle Mountains
are about the same distance in an opposite direction, and Rock Lake,
a fine large prairie slough, is about 25 miles directly north.

Judd must have sent back to the east glowing descriptions of the
bird life of the virgin prairies, for toward the middle of April, 1895, Dr.
L. B. Bishop of New Haven, Connecticut, W. H. Hoyt and John Shaler
of Stamford, Connecticut, and Homer L. Bigelow of Boston, Massachu-
setts, came out prepared to study birds in earnest and stayed until the
first of August. Dr. Bishop has kindly furnished me the following notes
on the visit, which describe the country as an ornithological field and
give an intimate picture of Judd.

“Judd was our guide, counsellor and friend, most efficient cook,
housekeeper, and driver. After some ten days in Cando, we moved to
a small house on Rock Lake, 23 miles north, kindly lent us by Dr.
George W. Vaughn of Cando. There were passed some of the happiest
days of my life, and most productive ornithologically. The country was
unbroken prairie, full of birds, with almost no habitations of white men
for 30 miles or more around, farther than we could see or drive. All was
our own to collect in a paradise of strange birds, and enjoy in perfect
freedom; and we made the most of it.

“With Judd’s little bronchos, we roamed the countryside, and
studied birds together. Judd drove us, cooked for us and tried to keep
us in some order. As the days passed we learned to know him more
intimately, admired his sterling honesty of purpose, and his unfailing
patience and good temper, and we felt we had left a sincere friend
when destiny called us home.

“I spent the summer of 1901, 1902 and 1905 with Alfred Eastgate
and his family at Stump Lake, and we scoured all the country north-
west to the middle of the Turtle Moutains, collecting. But in 1905 we
found all the country, where I formerly roamed in freedom, filled with
farms, flax and wheat. East of Rock Lake, where in 1895 there was
not a building as far as the eye could see, I counted about 200 farm

52

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

buildings in sight from one point across Rock Lake.”

The work of that summer of 1895 and the observations of E. S.
Bryant (1894) were used in Judd’s “List of North Dakota Birds”
(1917), published privately at Cando, which listed 255 forms from the
area. Among these were Hoyt’s Horned Lark and the Dakota Song
Sparrow, which had been collected by the party; Bishop (1896) had
named the Song Sparrow for Judd and the Horned Lark for Hoyt.
Some years later. Bishop (1921) also described the Lesser Loon from
the collections made that summer.

Judd did some collecting himself, but I am uncertain about the
amount. Mr. J. E. Graf, Associate Director of the U. S. National
Museum, informs me that the museum has in its collections a skin and
two sets of eggs of Baird’s Sparrow, three skeletons of Prairie Chicken,
five sets of eggs of Chestnut-collared Longspur, one set each of the
Shoveller and McCown’s Longspur, all collected by Judd. The collec-
tions of Bigelow passed to the Museum of Comparative Zoology at
Harvard College. The extensive collections of skins made by Bishop
went to the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago in 1939, the
eggs to the Peabody Museum of Yale University a few years later.

This part of North Dakota has been visited and described by other
ornithologists — Herbert K. Job in 1898, A. C. Bent, Bishop and Job,
in 1901, and Vernon Bailey and Florence Merriam Bailey in 1913 and
1917. In 1921, Norman A. Wood, of the University of Michigan, visited
North Dakota while preparing a list of the birds of the state (1923),
and he has kindly sent me the following notes:

“While engaged in a preliminary survey of the bird life of North
Dakota in 1921, with headquarters at the Biological Station (of the
University of North Dakota, since discontinued) at Devils Lake from
May 2 to July 25, Mrs. Wood and I were delighted with a visit from
Mr. Judd, who invited us to his home at Cando on June 1st. After a
few short trips about Cando in his auto (no longer the bronchos), he
drove us north, to and across the boundary line in the same region
where Cones worked in 1873, and took a large series of Baird’s Sparrow
(and where I took my only specimens of this species).

“Another auto trip was made with him to the fish hatchery at Fish
Lake in the Turtle Mountains, where we took specimens of the Dakota
Song Sparrow in the type region. On May 28, 1921, Mr. Judd drove
us to the Sully’s Hill National Park and to the Indian Reservation near
there. We enjoyed his company and great knowledge of the bird life
of the state. Mr. Judd was well known and respected throughout the
state, and his passing is a great loss to all who knew him and especially
to me who knew him so well.”

Before his paper of 1917 Judd had published three notes on game
birds (1891, 1892, 1893) in Forest and Stream. I have been unable to
find record of any further publications by him, but he continued active

O. A.
Stevens

ELMER T. JUDD

53

in promoting the conservation of bird life. He was State Game and
Eish Commissioner from 1922 to 1924 and president of the North
Dakota Audubon Society from 1924 until his death. My own acquaint-
ance with him began about 1925. He was a frequent visitor in Fargo,
and we had a number of pleasant discussions. We carried on quite an
active correspondence from 1924 to 1926, when he read the manuscript
for my own publication (1926), which of course made much use of his.
He died at Bismarck, North Dakota, on February 27, 1940, and was
buried at Cando, North Dakota.

He became a Master Mason in January, 1890, and his life has been
well described by Walter L. Stockwell, Grand Secretary and Librarian
(1941).

References

Bishop, Louis B.

1896 Descriptions of a new horned lark and a new song sparrow, with re-
marks on Sennett’s Nighthawk. Auk, 13: 129-35.

1921 Description of a new loon. Auk, 38: 364-70.

Bryant, Edwin S.

1894 A collecting trip in North Dakota. Oologist, 11: 182-83.

Judd, Elmer T.

1891 Dakota game birds. Forest and Stream, 36, No. 9: 169.

1892 North Dakota game. Forest and Stream, 39, No. 15: 314.

1893 North Dakota game. Forest and Stream, 40, No. 18: 382.

1917 List of North Dakota birds found in the Big Coulee, Turtle Mountains
and Devils Lake region. Publ. by the author, Cando, North Dakota.
(29 pp.)

Stevens, 0. A.

1926 Making use of our birds. N. D. Agric. Exp. Sta. Bull. 195.
S[tockwell], W. L.

1941 In Memoriam. Elmer T. Judd. Masonic Grand Lodge Bulletin, March,
1941.

Wood, Norman A.

1923 A preliminary survey of the bird life of North Dakota. JJniv. of Mich.
Mus. of Zool. Misc. Pub. No. 10.

North Dakota Agricultural College, Fargo, North Dakota

54

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

GENERAL NOTES

Least Bittern at Long Lake, North Dakota. — Because of the paucity of
records of this bird in North Dakota, it seems desirable to report an observation
of the Least Bittern {Ixobrychus exilis) at Long Lake near Moffit, Burleigh
County, North Dakota, August 28, 1942. The bird was flushed from a dense
growth of Scirpus acutus. It flew within 20 feet of me and then disappeared into
another stand of bulrush. Light conditions were excellent, and there seemed no
possibility of mistaken identification. — Clarence Cottam, Fish and Wildlife Serv-
ice, Chicago, Illinois.

An Ohio Record of the Surf Scoter. — On October 7, 1942, we collected a
female Surf Scoter (Melanitta perspicillata) on Lake Erie, between South Bass and
Middle Bass Islands, Ottawa County, Ohio. The bird was several hundred yards
from shore, and during a half hour of observation was seen to feed only by
dabbling in the manner of a shoal-water duck.

The total bulk of the stomach contents was 21 cc., of which 20 per cent was
fine gravel; 20 per cent, plant material (parts of rhizomes, and three Potamogeton
seeds) ; 60 per cent, parts of invertebrates. The recognizable portions of the inverte-
brates consisted of: pieces of the shells of 8 small snails; at least 42 cucumber
beetles (Chrysomelidae) ; 2 ham beetles (Corynetidae) ; one rove beetle (Staphyl-
inidae) ; one ground beetle (Carabidae) ; one water beetle (Hydrophilidae) ; one
predacious diving beetle (Dytiscidae) ; 12 large hornets (Vespidae) ; 2 wasps
(Psammocharidae) ; 3 chinch bugs (Lygaeidae) ; one stink bug (Pentatomidae) .
The preponderance of adult land insects is interesting, since Bent (U. S. Nat. Mus.
Bull., 130, 1925:148) and other authors state that even on interior lakes the
Surf Scoter’s food consists principally of molluscs, crayfish, nymphs of aquatic
insects, and a small amount of vegetable matter, and is obtained chiefly by diving.

The Surf Scoter is apparently the rarest of the three species of scoters found
in Ohio, and there are few published records. This skin is deposited in Ohio State
Museum. — Milton B. and Mary A. Trautman, F. T. Stone Laboratory, Ohio
State University, Put-in-Bay, Ohio.

Remains of the Wild Turkey in Wisconsin. — The Oshkosh Public Museum
has a large collection of bird bones recovered from the Indian refuse pits on the
eastern shore of Lake Winneconne, Winnebago County. The writer was instru-
mental in having these bones sent to Alexander Wetmore for identification. Among
the bones were four metacarpals of the Wild Turkey (Meleagris gallopavo silves-
tris). This is striking confirmation of the statement of Allouez (Wilson Bulletin,
54, 1942:175) that he found Wild Turkeys at Lake Winneconne in 1670. Thanks
are due to Dr. VV’^etmore for the labor involved in working over the large mass
of bones. — A. W. Schorger, 168 North Prospect Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin.

Two Long-eared Owl Nests near Toledo, Ohio. — The Long-eared Owl
(.isio wilsonianus) has been regarded as a rare winter visitor in the Toledo region,
with a decided preference for dense evergreen cover (L. W. Campbell, “Birds of
Lucas County,” 1940), although nests have been recorded in 12 northern Ohio
counties.

Then, in the spring of 1942, Laurel Van Camp discovered two nests in small
deciduous woodlands in this area. The first was found April 11, in a grove of
small trees surrounded by level tilled country, in Sandusky County, near Kingsway,
not far from the Sandusky River. It was apparently an abandoned Crow nest,
relined with strips of bark, and was placed at a height of 20 feet, against the
trunk of a red maple. When discovered April 11, the female was brooding. Five

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

GENERAL NOTES

55

nestlings, the smallest not over three days old, were present April 23, but only
four on May 8, the fifth having fallen to the ground. Although the pellets re-
vealed nothing but meadow mice (Microtus) remains, a half-eaten small rabbit
lay on the nest at the time of the last visit.

A second nest of similar construction and location, but in a small pin oak, was
found May 9, near the base of Little Cedar Point, Lucas County, in a wood that
did not exceed ten acres, lying between an extensive Lake Erie marsh and level
open farm land. There were six nestlings. Comparison with the young in the
other nest led to the conclusion that these had hatched about April 18. On May
16, they were able to crawl out on limbs when approached. When the nest was
visited May 23, the adults were near, but the young were not found. We believe
that they left voluntarily. On the rim of the nest lay a partly plucked Yellow-
throated Vireo (Vireo flavifrons). — Laurel Van Camp, Genoa, Ohio, and Harold
Mayfield, 3311 Parkwood Avenue, Toledo, Ohio.

Evidence for the Former Occurrence of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker in
Ohio. — The Ivory-billed Woodpecker (Campephilus principalis) was found years
ago in Franklin County, Indiana, adjacent to the southwestern corner of Ohio,
and on this basis it has been carried in the hypothetical list of birds for the latter
state, on the logical assumption that formerly it must have occurred there. There
have been no positive records for it, however.

Recently Robert Goslin has sent to me for identification a set of birds’ bones
excavated in 1940 and 1941 by H. R. McPherson of Columbus, Ohio, from the
Feurt Village Site in Clay Township, Scioto County, Ohio, east of the Scioto River,
and not far from the Ohio River, which marks the southern boundary of the State.
The material is presumed to date- back to the fifteenth or sixteenth century, since
it was found at one of the sites of the Fort Ancient Culture.

Among the 24 species of birds included in this collection I was interested to
find a metatarsus of the Ivory-bill (now preserved in the osteological collections
of the U. S. National Museum). It appears to me that this constitutes a definite
record for the former occurrence of this bird in Ohio. It is true that the Ivory-bill
was considered of some value by the Indians, who without question carried the
heads and bills about, using them in medicine bundles and in other ways. It
seems hardly probable, however, that the foot (which was of no particular interest)
would have been taken to a locality distant from where the bird was killed.

Other interesting species whose bones are found in this deposit are the Prairie
Chicken (Tympanuchus americanus ) , the Passenger Pigeon (Ectopistes migra-
iorius) and the Raven (Corvus corax). The deposit also contained remains of two
other woodpeckers, the Pileated Woodpecker and the Flicker. — ^Alexander Wet-
more, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.

Roosting Habits of the Verdin. — For several summers I have observed the
Verdin (Auriparus flaviceps) at Hot Springs, Brewster County, Texas. In this
rough, dry country it is a common resident along chaparral-lined arroyos of the
lowlands, and its compact nests are easy to find. Noting, almost invariably, an
accumulation of excreta at the nest-entrance, I found myself wondering about the
species’ roosting habits.

Frequently during the last hour of daylight I came upon a nest with a pro-
truding tail visible at the outer edge of the tunnel-like doorway. By cupping my
hand over the nest-hole, I succeeded in capturing a bird now and then. Of five
finally captured thus, all were adult. Every attempt to capture roosting birds not
in such a “tail out” position failed.

At dusk on July 2, 1942, I found a nest with two tails showing in the entrance,
and succeeded in capturing both birds, which proved to be young of the year. (At
the same nest I had caught an adult on August 17, 1941.) The two immature birds

56

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

and the branch of granjeno ( Celtis pallida) supporting the nest were brought in-
doors and placed in a cage.

During the first night the captives roosted on the twigs just under the nest. On
the following night and every night thereafter they slept in the nest, tails pointed
out the doorway. During the morning of July 8 they tore a small hole in the nest
dome. At 10:30 that evening I flashed a light through this opening and discerned
the birds sleeping side by side, each with head under scapulars and tail extending
through the doorway. This was their sleeping position each night until they were
released on July 12 — to the excited tschep-tscheps of an adult pair, presumably
the parent birds, that had been keeping daily vigil at a window near the cage. —
Lovie M. Whitaker, 210 Plaza, Las Vegas, New Mexico.

An Unusual Nest of the Bronzed Crackle. — On April 16, 1941, as I was
walking through an old apple orchard, a Bronzed Crackle (Quiscalus quiscula
aeneus) flushed from a hole in one of the trees. On investigating the hole I found
the Crackle’s nest and four eggs. It was apparently an old Flicker hole, enlarged
by decay and further excavating. The orchard was partly surrounded by large
pine trees, planted many years ago as a windbreak. Several pairs of Crackles
were nesting in the pine branches. I was surprised to find this one pair nesting
in a hole, with so many of the pine trees they usually favor close at hand. — Clark
K. Lloyd, 2712 Hoover Avenue, Dayton, Ohio.

Snakes Destroying Birds’ Eggs and Young. — Although during a period of
a few years the average bird student may find many bird nests whose contents
are destroyed, he rarely happens to visit a nest at the time of the destruction. I
have had a number of such experiences involving snakes as the predators and list
them in the order in which they occurred.

On July 27, 1930, when passing a friend’s house in Battle Creek, he called me
into the yard, explaining that a snake had eaten four well-grown Chipping Spar-
rows (Spizella passerina passerina) from a nest four feet from the ground in a
grapevine in their yard. The snake, a Common Carter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis
sirtalis), lay dead beside the grapevines, and when dissected proved to contain the
remains of one of the Chipping Sparrows, the others having probably jumped out
of the nest the minute the snake captured the one.

On June 5, 1941, while studying birds along the bank of the Battle Creek river,
in Convis Township, Calhoun County, Michigan, I found a nest and five eggs
of a Prothonotary Warbler (Protonotaria citrea) in the hollowed end of a branch
of a fallen maple tree. On June 19 at 2 p.m. I found both birds scolding a Pilot
Snake (Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta) which was wrapped around the end of the branch
with its head inside the opening that contained the nest. When killed, he was
found to contain all five young of the Prothonotary Warbler, which were about
two days old. The nest was only two feet from the ground, 159 feet from the
river, in the bottomland area. The snake was identified by Morris Aiken of the
Battle Creek Public School Museum.

While visiting the Bernard W. Baker Sanctuary in Convis Township, Calhoun
County, on August 17, 1941, I heard the continued scolding notes of a Cold-
finch (Spinus tristis tristis) on a side-hill south of the marsh, where I found
the bird, a male, so interested in something that he did not note my approach
until I was within three feet. The Coldfinch nest was located in a small hawthorn
tree about four feet from the ground. Underneath the nest was a young bird, still
unable to fly. On the opposite side of the tree was a five-foot Blue Racer ( Coluber
constrictor flaviventris), which I soon captured. With slight pressure, another
young Coldfinch, the size of the one found on the ground, was forced from the
mouth of the snake. — Lawrence H. Walkinshaw, Battle Creek, Michigan.

March, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 1

THE WILSON BULLETIN

57

EDITORIAL

The color plate with which we begin this new volume is financed largely by
the proceeds from the auction, at our Urbana meeting, of a number of George
Sutton’s original drawings and paintings generously donated for this purpose by
the artist. This plate is an important contribution to scientific knowledge and,
incidentally, it will bring back happy memories to those of us who were privileged
to participate in that memorable auction presided over by the forceful and
persuasive James Boswell Young.

The Wilson Ornithological Club starts the year 1943 with sober prospects
of rising publication costs and an increased rate of membership loss, at least
among certain classes of members, such as those leaving for service overseas.
Richard L. Weaver and his Membership Committee are working steadily, but they
will need more help from our members throughout the country if they are to
make a complete success of their task.

Members can also help by raising their own membership class. No one need
hesitate to take out a Life Membership because of any apparent conflict with the
War Bond campaigns, for the Club’s receipts from Life Membership dues are
being invested in those same War Bonds.

We are greatly indebted to Ruth D. Turner for her prompt and accurate work
in preparing the index for the 1942 volume of the Bulletin.

We ask contributors not to try to pay for reprints in advance. It is rarely
possible for an author to guess the exact amount of the bill, and his attempt,
however well intended, only complicates our problem. Galley proof on articles,
notes, and reviews is always sent to authors, and an inquiry is made at that time
about possible reprint needs. The reprints are made soon after the Bulletin is
published and then the type is taken down. It is therefore impossible to fill
reprint orders received after the date of publication. Reprints are sent to the
author by the press, usually within three weeks. Immediately afterward bills for
the reprints, transportation, and tax are sent out to the authors. Finally, we
remind you that there is a minimum of 100 on reprint orders. The price scale
is printed inside the back cover of every Bulletin.

Ornithological News

The American Ornithologists’ Union has awarded the Brewster Medal to
Margaret M. Nice for her study “Life History of the Song Sparrow.”

Ruth D. Turner, formerly at the New England Museum of Natural History in
Boston, has accepted a position in the Zoology Department of Vassar College.

Prof. C. W. G. Eifrig, a member of our Club since 1907, has retired from
active work at River Forest, Illinois, and has moved to Windermere, Orange
County, Florida. He began his ornithological work in 1895 near Pittsburgh, but
later moved to Cumberland, Maryland, and then to Ottawa, Canada; for the last
33 years he has been in northern Illinois. He has published extensively in The
Wilson Bulletin and elsewhere. For 14 years he served as president of the Illinois
Audubon Society.

58

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, Xo. 1

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE ^

The IVORY-BH.LED Woodpecker. By James T. Tanner. National Audubon Society

Research Report No. 1: xii -j- 111 pp., colored frontispiece and 20 pis., 22 figs.

October, 1942. Paper covers. $2.50.

We welcome the inauguration of a series of research monographs by the Na-
tional Audubon Society. That very active and progressive society rightly “con-
siders facts obtainable through scientific research the essential basis for wise policies
governing the conservation of wildlife.” Ornithologists had strikingly failed to
secure the necessary information on this magnificent species, and so the Society
itself initiated an intensive study. The extent of the previous neglect of the Ivory-
bill is almost incredible. We note that: the latest and most complete study of the
Ivory-bill’s anatomy was published by Audubon in 1839; the only published record
of the weight of an Ivory-bill was by Catesby (1731); the food contents of but
three stomachs were ever saved; and neither the incubation nor nesthng period
had ever been recorded.

As John H. Baker says, the choice of James Tanner was a happy one. This
report demonstrates clearly his energy, intelligence, and scientific attitude of mind.
From 1937 to 1939 he spent 21 months in the field, traveling more than 45,000
miles and visiting 45 widely separated localities ranging from South Carolina and
Florida to Louisiana and Texas. He makes little mention of the physical hard-
ships involved, and few of his readers will realize the labor and risks of such a
campaign in southern swamp forests. His thorough coverage of the published
material while preparing his report is demonstrated in the accurate bibliography
of 153 titles.

The report includes sections describing the bird itself, its habitat requirements
and geographical distribution (with 18 maps), the history of its disappearance from
most of the original range, its present numbers, its breeding habits, and its con-
servation. One important section is that devoted to the Ivory-bill’s food and
feeding habits. Naturally, since it was out of the question to collect specimens,
this account suffers from the scarcity of material, but Tanner has by great in-
genuity and industry done much to overcome the handicap. For example, he has
even attempted (and apparently with considerable success) to analyze forests from
a woodpecker’s point of view, taking into account the botanical composition of the
forest, the proportion of insect-harboring wood, and the insect populations. We
should perhaps mention that the locality record of Moseley’s Ivory-bill (which
Tanner quotes from Cottam and Knappen’s food habits paper) is just another
example of the errors which appear with such disturbing frequency in the records
of the Fish and Wildlife Service. “Bowling Green” is actually just the collector’s
home town in Ohio and not the Louisiana home of that Ivor>'-bill (which Moseley
took 18 miles north of Holly Ridge, a station on the Vicksburg-Shreveport rail-
road) .

We find little about the Report to criticize. Tanner seems to have examined
but 91 of the 200 to 250 specimens which he estimates to be in the museums of
this country, and yet in his discussion of plumages and molts, for example, he
indicates that he was hampered by a shortage of material. The comparison of the
Ivory-bill’s “nesting success” (six nests) with Mrs. Nice’s results on 211 Song
Sparrow nests seems far-fetched. Throughout the paper Tanner uses the adjective
“juvenal” indiscriminately, both in the sense that Dwight proposed when he intro-
duced the word and as a synonym of juvenile. And finally, the price of $2.50 on
a 123-page, paper-covered, bulletin is hard to understand.

Tanner concludes that “the collecting and shooting of Ivory-bills has not been
a major cause of the species’ decrease, has not been as important as the destruction
of the Ivory-bill’s habitat by logging. But now that there are so few Ivory-bills
living, the shooting of a few birds might become the final cause for their extinc-
tion.”

1 For additional reviews see pages 22 and SO.

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

59

Tanner has done a fine job, and the Audubon Society has published his report
handsomely. However, the Ivory-bill is in a desperate situation. Will this report
be allowed to serve as the Ivory-bill’s obituary, or will conservationists follow the
matter through so that state and federal agencies may act quickly enough to save
the few small tracts of big timber where alone the Ivory-bill can survive? — J.
Van Tyne.

The Roseate Spoonbill. By Robert Porter Allen. National Audubon Society
Research Report No. 2: xviii 142 pp., colored frontispiece and 20 pis., 44
figs. December, 1942. Paper covers. $2.50.

This monograph, along with that of James T. Tanner on “The Ivory-billed
Woodpecker,” stems from the recently established research program of the National
Audubon Society. It is definitely a scientific report, though it starts with the
assumption that the Roseate Spoonbill should be — yes, must be — preserved as an
element in the fauna of the United States. Since this magnificent and bizarre bird
is shown to conflict to a negligible degree with man’s economic welfare, this pre-
conception will probably not be challenged from any responsible source. Nor will
many be inclined to take issue with a second assumption, that the preserve and
warden system of the Audubon Society has been an effective factor in the survival
of the precariously small colonies in Florida and in the growth of the population
in Texas. The author makes clear his belief, however, that an overflow from
larger colonies in the Antilles and in Mexico has been mainly responsible for the
maintenance of the species in the Southeast and for its increase in Texas. Just
how the breeding populations to the southward have affected and will continue
to affect the conservation of the species in the southern United States remains to
be determined by further research. In the meantime rigid care and continued vigil
are still required to prevent the extirpation of the species in the United States.

The vivid enthusiasm of a bird lover is not concealed between the printed lines
of description and of cautious and critical interpretation. One wonders whether
Allen’s unquenchable delight over the sight of spoonbills exceeded his joy in scien-
tific discovery. Whatever its basis, his enthusiasm overcame the discomforts and
loneliness of living for months with these birds and their ecological associates.

This intimate contact with the Roseate Spoonbill has enabled the author to
locate and to census all extant colonies in the United States, and hence to compare
present-day habitats and populations with former homes and numbers, as recon-
structed by a prolonged historical study. He has determined the facts of migra-
tion, further emphasizing the dependence of the Florida and Texas colonies on
the stocks of lands to the south. He has worked out the prenuptial and the mating
behavior in detail. He has determined also the six plumages, in a four-year cycle
of development. Food has been treated at length, from the viewpoint of food-
chains and general ecological relations.

In the matter of food one might criticize the author for drawing lengthy and
involved conclusions from inadequate data, for he gives stomach analyses of only
five birds. We realize, of course, that the need for protection was too strongly felt
to warrant a large kill for food samples, and that the author’s long observations
of the feeding birds and his analyses of organisms in the feeding waters furnished
much data on the spoonbill’s probable diet. Again one might criticize a rather
sweeping conclusion as to harm done by ectoparasites, when only four birds were
autopsied. The discussion on the fishes that live in the feeding waters of the
Roseate Spoonbill is marred by numerous slips and mistakes.

The treatment of “limiting factors” is a fine piece of applied ecology, and is
the product of much study and honest thought. The conclusion is reached that
man, long the most serious enemy of the spoonbill, “is now of negligible im-
portance as a decimating factor in the U. S. portion of the range.” Several “wel-
fare” and several “decimating” factors are analyzed. No outstanding critical
factor was discovered. — Carl L. Hubbs.

60

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

The Reproductive Cycles of the British and Continental Races of the Star-
ling. By W. S. Bullough. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, Ser.B, Biol. Sci.,
Vol. 231, No. 580:165-246. August 31, 1942.

This is a thorough, careful study based on the examination of 786 specimens
of Sturnus vulgaris from Yorkshire, the majority taken from communal roosts
in fall and winter. Detailed accounts, illustrated with sketches and microphoto-
graphs, are given of the reproductive systems of both sexes at different ages.

“It is shown that there are differences between the sedentary British starling
and the migratory Continental bird in the seasonal variations of these systems.
The gonads of the first-year British and Continental starlings begin to grow in
February, but the rate of growth in the British bird is greater than that in the
Continental. The gonads of the adult British starlings do not regress so far in
summer as those of the Continental birds, and they start to grow precociously in
early autumn. The gonads of the adult Continental starlings do not begin to
grow until January or February, the time when the gonad growth of the British
birds is accelerated. In February and March the gonads of the adult British
birds grow much more rapidly than those of the Continental birds” (p. 165).

Continental and British birds were distinguished partly by behavior, partly by
banding, and partly by the state of the neck feathers, (since British birds wear off
the tips by hole-exploration). Sex was told by eye-color — brownish in males, yel-
lowish in females; by the more pointed throat and breast feathers of the males;
and (when the beak is yellow) by the grey base of the mandibles in the male.
With adult British Starlings the beak becomes yellow in autumn, with Continental
birds not until January or February. Male Starlings were found not to breed
until their second year, females in their first year.

The British Starling is markedly sedentary, aside from some wandering in
summer by a proportion of the juveniles. In the fall, adult females “all appeared
to be paired . . . and the surplus of unpaired males also occupied holes and staked
out territories” (p. 227). Some British Starlings roost in their nesting holes
throughout the year, while others frequent the communal roosts from June through
December. British Starlings go to roost in holes at about the time in the afternoon
that Continental Starlings leave for their roosts 15 miles distant; thus British
Starlings get less light and less exercise than the Continental birds, yet their gonads
develop much more precociously. The author says: “It is known that extra light
in winter is capable of stimulating the gonads of starlings to precocious growth
(see review by Bissonnette 1936), and it is therefore probable that, in late winter
and early spring, the increase in ihe length of day helps to induce the growth of
the gonads in both races of starlings. The variation of the external environment,
however, merely helps as a superficial control to render more precise the timing
of an animal’s internal rhythm, a conclusion which, supported by the evidence
obtained from a study of the reproductive cycle of the minnow (Phoxinus laevis
L.), was put forward by Bullough (1939, 1941)” (p. 236).

The suggestion is made that the gonads of British Starlings seldom regress
enough to allow the attachment to the nesting site to be broken. It is otherwise
with the Continental birds, who “are released for the southward migration. In
late winter and spring, when the gonads grow once more, the birds are induced
to return to their nesting areas. Applied to birds in general, this theory, which
is certainly oversimplified, means that the basis of the autumn southward migra-
tion is negative (the absence of a stimulus), and that of the spring northward
migration is positive (the renewal of the stimulus)” (p. 238).

On the basis of the physiological differences between these two populations of
Starlings, the author divides them into subspecies, naming the British bird Sturnus
vulgaris britannicus. He suggests that the behavior of Starlings in this country
gives evidence that both races are present. A notable paper, well planned and well
executed. — M. M. Nice.

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No.

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

61

The Ducks, Geese and Swans of North America. By Francis H. Kortright;

illustrated by T. M. Shortt. American Wildlife Institute, Investment Bldg.,

Wash., D. C. 1942: 6 x 8^ in., viii + 476 pp., many text figs., 36 color pis.

$4.50 (de luxe edition $10.00).

The author of this fine manual modestly disclaims being an ornithologist, and
indeed the name of Francis Kortright is probably unfamiliar to many in this
field, but if he was not so recognized before, we certainly claim him as an
ornithologist now. In a field noted for its profusion of handsome illustrated
books, Kortright and Terence M. Shortt (also a comparative newcomer) have,
at their first attempt, produced a volume which for combined utility and beauty
will stand in the first rank.

There are many new features. The section on sex- and age-determination
includes information that will be new to almost any ornithologist. Another section
gives the weight, length, and wing-spread (in avoirdupois and inches) of both
sexes in each species. These were carefully compiled from a large amount of data
including that in many of the large museums. In the case of the male Mallard,
the weights given are based on 1,577 individuals! The excellent exposition of
the “very simple and extremely important” matter of scientific nomenclature,
and the explanation of the pronunciation and meaning of the scientific name
of each species, will do much to win converts to ornithology from the ranks
of those duck hunters who have supposed that such scientific matters would be
too technical to master. The accounts of waterfowl molts and plumages are far
more complete and understandable than any hitherto published. There are small
maps to show the summer and winter distribution of each native species, but
the scale is so small that some of them are very hard to read.

There is an extensive and well-chosen bibliography. However, some of the
titles are inaccurate, and many rather incomplete, and therefore difficult to use.

The book is magnificently illustrated. A series of 36 color plates depicts, with
two to five plumages each, all North American ducks, geese, and swans, and
even some of the hybrids between species. Four plates are devoted to the downy
young — a very attractive and intensely interesting series. Unfortunately an
occasional plate in the volumes we have seen is somewhat marred by poor print-
ing. A maximum sized image has been secured by filling the page completely with
the color plate, but the slightest error in trimming results in clipping the end of a
bill or tail here and there. The text is interspersed with drawings which show the
characteristics of the various species as they appear when swimming, flying,
standing, and sometimes in other poses. These will be very helpful except in
the case of the figures of flying Mute and Whistling Swans, which have been
accidentally transposed.

We can recommend this book in the highest terms to ornithologists and
sportsmen alike. — J. Van Tyne.

Wilson Ornithological Club Library

The following gifts have been received recently:

William H. Burt: 5 reprints
Lynds Jones: 19 magazines
Leon Kelso: 1 pamphlet
Karl F. Lagler: 2 reprints, 3 reports
Harrison F. Lewis: “The Natural History of the
Double-crested Cormorant”

Dayton Stoner: 5 reprints
Lawrence H. Walkinshaw: 10 reprints

62

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alcorn, J. R. Observations on the White Pelican in Western Nevada. Condor, 45,
No. 1, Jan., 1942: 34-36.

Aler, Lulu May. Blue-Gray Gnatcatchers In A Minneapolis Public Park. Flicker,
14, No. 2-3, Oct., 1942: 23-24.

Asmundson, V. S., G. A. Baker, and J. T. Emlen. Certain Relations Between the
Parts of Birds’ Eggs. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 34-44.

Bailey, Alfred M. The Birds of Cape Prince of Wales, Alaska. Proc. Colo. Mus.
Nat. Hist., 18, No. 1, Feb. 1, 1943: 1-113, illus.

Bartholomew, George A., Jr., The Daily Movements of Cormorants on San
Francisco Bay. Condor, 45, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 3-18, figs. 1-7.

Beck, D. Elden. Notes on the Occurrence of Gulls at Utah Lake. Great Basin
Nat., 3, No. 2. Dec., 1942: 54.

Blake, Emmet R. and Harold C. Hanson. Notes on a Collection of Birds from
Michoacan, Mexico. Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Zool. Serv., 22, No. 9, Nov., 1942:
513-51, pis. 17-20.

Breckenridge, W. j. Lake Traverse Bird Life in April. Flicker, 14, No. 2-3, Oct.,
1942: 25-27. (Minnesota).

Brodkorb, Pierce. A New Subspecies of Trogon citreolus. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash.,
55, Dec., 1942: 183-84. {Trogon citreolus sumichrasti, subsp. nov.).

Brodkorb, Pierce. The Chachalaca of Interior Chiapas. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash.,
55, Dec., 1942: 181-82. (Ortalis vetula vallicola, subsp. nov.).

Brooking, A. M. The Vanishing Bird Life of Nebraska. Nebr. Bird Rev., 10, No.
2, July-Dee., 1943: 43-47.

Brooks, Allan. The Status of the California Gull. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 15-
20, pi. 2.

Brooks, Maurice. West Virginia Bird Notes, 1942. Cardinal, 6, No. 1, Jan., 1943:
16-17.

Chapman, Floyd B. The Red Squirrel and the Birds. Cardinal, 6, No. 1, Jan.,
1943: 6.

Christy, Bayard H. Bird Portraiture. Cardinal, 6, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 11-13.

Clarke, L. Floyd, Hermann Rahn, and Malcolm D. Martin. Seasonal and
Sexual Dimorphic Variations in the So-Called “Air Sac” Region of the Sage
Grouse. Wyo. Game and Fish Dept. Bull. No. 2, Nov., 1942: 13-27, pis. 3-6.

CoTTAM, Clarence, Cecil S. Williams, and Clarence A. Sooter. Some Unusual
Winter Visitors or Late Migrants to the Bear River Marshes, Utah. Great
Basin Nat., 3, No. 2, Dec., 1942: 51-53.

Cumley, Russell W., and Leon J. Cole. Differentiation of Old and New World
Species of the Genus Columba. Amer. Nat., 76, No. 767, Nov.-Dee., 1942:
570-81.

Denton, J. Fred. Notes on the Birds of Americus, Sumter County, Georgia.
Oriole, 7, No. 4, Dec., 1942: 29-31.

Erickson, Arnold B. Sex Ratio of Ducks in Minnesota. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan.,
1943: 20-34.

Glegg, William E. The Food of the Wigeon, Mareca penelope Linn. Ibis, 85,
Jan., 1943: 82-87.

Groskin, Horace. Scarlet Tanagers ‘Anting’. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 55-59.

Hamilton, W. J., Jr. Nesting of the Eastern Bluebird. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan., 1943:
91-94.

Ha\vbecker, Albert C. A Life History Study of the White-tailed Kite. Condor,
44, No. 6, Nov., 1942: 267-76, figs. 82-83. (In California).

Honess, Ralph F., and Warren J. Allred. Structure and Function of the Neck
Muscles In Inflation and Deflation of the Esophagus in the Sage Grouse. Wyo.
Game and Fish Dept. Biill. No. 2, Nov., 1942: 5-12, pis. 1-2.

March. 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

63

Howell, Joseph C. Notes on the Nesting Habits of the American Robin (Turdus
migratorius L.) Amer. Midi. Nat., 28, No. 3, Nov., 1942: 529-603.

Huxley, Julian S. On the Habit of Brooding on the Perch in Birds. Proc. Zool.
Soc. London, Ser. A, vol. Ill, 1941: 37-39, pi. 1.

Ivor, H. R. Further Studies of Anting by Birds. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan., 1943:
Sl-SS, pi. 3.

Kelso, Leon. Weight Variation in Otus asio. Biol. Leaflet No. 18, Dec. 24, 1942:
1-3.

Lemon, Paul C. Observations on a Captive Horned Owl. Flicker, 14, No. 2-3,
Oct, 1942: 17-22.

McKernan, Donald L., and Victor B. Scheffer. Unusual Numbers of Birds on
the Washington Coast. Condor, 44, No. 6, Nov., 1942: 264-66.

Miller, Ansel B. Four-brooded Cardinals. Cardinal, 6, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 21-22.

Monroe, Burt L., and Robert M. Mengel. The Bachman’s Sparrow in Kentucky.
Kentucky Warbler, 19, No. 1, 1943: 2-4, photo.

Moser, R. Allyn. Should the Belted Piping Plover Be Recognized as a Valid Race.
Nehr. Bird Review, 10, No. 2, July-Dee., 1942: 31-37, illus. (Advocates recog-
nizing Charadrius melodus circumcinctus) .

Nichols, Charles K. ‘Anting’ by Robins. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 59-60.

Nickell, Walter P. The Nesting of the Willow Thrush in Charlevoix County,
Michigan. Jack Pine Warbler, 20, No. 4, Oct., 1942: 99-108, pis. 9-10.

Norris, Robert. Notes on the Nesting of a Pair of Alabama Towhees. Oriole, 7,
No. 2-3, June-Sept., 1942: 14-17. {Pipilo e. canaster).

North, M. E. W. Some Artificial Methods of Tree-climbing. Ibis, 85, Jan., 1943:
43-54.

PoLDERBOER, Emmett B. Cover Requirements of the Eastern Ruffed Grouse in
Northeastern Iowa. Iowa Bird Lije, 12, No. 4, Dec., 1942: 50-55, 1 pi.

Richardson, Frank. Functional Aspects of the Inner Vane of the Remiges. Auk,
60, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 44-50, pi. 3.

Soper, J. Dewey. The Birds of Wood Buffalo Park and Vicinity, Northern Al-
berta and District of Mackenzie, N.W.T., Canada. Trans. Roy. Canad. Inst.,
24, pt. 1, 1942: 19-97, pis. 2, 3.

Soper, J. Dewey. The Long-tailed Chat in Saskatchewan. Canad. Field Nat., 56,
No. 6, Sept., 1942: 83-85.

Sprunt, Alexander, Jr. Sight Records. Chat, 6, No. 4, Sept., 1942: 50-54.

Stevens, O. A. Winter Resorts of North American Birds. Turtox News, 21, No. 1,
Jan., 1943: 18-20.

Stevenson, Elmo. Key to the Nests of Pacific Coast Birds. Oregon State College
Monograph No. 4, June, 1942. 71 pp., 32 pis. (50^, Corvallis, Ore.).

Stoner, Dayton, and Louis J. Koster. Sora, Near-Victim of a Fish. Science, 96,
Dec., 1942: 580-81.

Sutton, George Miksch, and Allan R. Phillips. The Northern Races of Piranga
flava. Condor, 44, No. 6, Nov., 1942: 277-79.

Tomkins, Ivan R. The Range of the Little Sparrow Hawk in Georgia and South
Carolina. Oriole, 7, No. 23, June-Sept., 1942: 13-14. (Falco sparverius paulus).

Van Tyne, Josselyn. ‘Anting’ by the Robin and Towhee. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan.,
1943: 61.

ViEHMEYER, Glenn. The Hungarian Partridge and Its Range in Northern Nebras-
ka. Nebr. Bird Rev., 10, No. 2, July-Dee., 1942: 37-43.

Weaver, Richard Lee. Reproduction in the English Sparrow. Auk, 60, No. 1,
Jan., 1943: 62-74.

Wetmore, Alexander. In Memoriam: Joseph Harvey Riley. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan.,
1943: 1-15, pi. 1.

Wing, Leonard. Spread of the Starling and English Sparrow. Auk, 60, No. 1, Jan.,
1943: 74-87, figs. 1-4.

WOLFSON, Albert. Regulation of Spring Migration in Juncos. Condor, 44, No. 6,
Nov., 1942: 237-63, figs. 79-81.

64

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

WILDLIFE CONSERVATION

Proposal to Establish Large National Park in Yukon Territory. — On
December 8, 1942, the Dominion Government reserved an area of 10,130 square
miles along the Canada-Alaska Military Highway, in the southwestern part of
Yukon Territory, in order that it may be examined in detail and may be avail-
able in its present condition for establishment of a National Park at a later date.
This area contains outstanding mountain and glacier scenery, as well as foothills
that are the home of a large population of big game, including grizzly bear, moun-
tain goat, Dali’s mountain sheep, moose, and Osborn caribou.

Conservation in the National Parks of Canada Attacked and Defended. —
The National Parks of Canada are set aside not only as areas devoted to recre-
ational and educational purposes, but also as wildlife sanctuaries, where native
wild animals, along with vegetation and the geological formations which con-
tribute to what we call scenery, are to be preserved as far as possible in their
natural state, with the influence of man kept to a minimum. Like most policies in
a democratic country, this policy is frequently criticized and attacked, especially
by persons who want the national parks to produce a maximum quantity of shoot-
able game and who object to conservation of predators such as cougars, wolves,
foxes, eagles, hawks, and owls. A recent attack of this kind is found in a paper
entitled “Sabotage in the National Parks,” published by W. C. Fisher in the issue
of Hunting and Fishing in Canada for October, 1942. This author claims that
“sportsmen are the only true friends of wildlife,” that “animals were placed on
the earth for the benefit of man,” and that “the Parks officials are enamoured with
the phrase ‘The Balance of Nature.’ ” He concludes that the National Parks policy
with respect to predators must be changed and suggests as a better policy, “Game
shall be raised for Mankind,” including the tourist, alpine climber, camera man,
and sportsman.

A different view of the subject is presented by Professor J. R. Dymond, Di-
rector of the Royal Ontario Museum of Zoology, in a paper entitled “Game in the
National Parks,” which is published in the issue of the same magazine for Janu-
ary, 1943. Professor Dymond points out the need for keeping game populations
within such limits that available resources can support them in good condition. He
also points out that control by predators, which take the weak and subnormal,
tends to improve the game stock, while control by hunters, who seek to kill the
finest individuals, tends toward deterioration of the stock. He concludes: “The
principle of creating and maintaining National Parks for the preservation of natural
life, plant and animal, in representative areas of the different regions of the earth
is steadily spreading to all parts of the world.”

Publication of a third paper on the subject is promised by the management of
the magazine. — Harrison F. Lewis.

Golden Eagles and Bighorns

“In the spring of 1940, an eagle’s nest was discovered in the very heart of
the lambing grounds. Two eaglets were raised in the nest and it was under con-
tinuous observation from June 1 to August 1 ... It need only be said here that
no remains of lambs or adult sheep were found . . .

“To date no case of predation by eagles has been seen by a Survey member
nor has one been reported for the Crystal Creek area. The conclusion is that
eagles may be exonerated of any serious blame for the decline of the Crystal
Creek bighorn sheep herd.” (Honess, R. F. and N. M. Frost, “A Wyoming Big-
horn Sheep study,” Wyo. Game and Fish Dept. Bull., 1, 1942: 56.)

“Some eagles nested close to the lambing grounds. One nest was under ob-
servation from May IS, at which time the two eaglets were about ten days old,
until they left the nest early in July. Pellet examinations and actual observations

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

WILDLIFE CONSERVATION

65

during that period indicated that the eagles were feeding on prairie dogs . . .

The only other item of food found in pellets or at the nest was a trace of rabbit.
These observations are not conclusive, but they do indicate that, in the Tarryall
Mountains, the eagle is a minor factor . . .

“No evidence of predation by golden eagles was found,” (Spencer, C. C.,
“Notes of the life history of Rocky Mountain Bighorn Sheep in the Tarryall |
Mountains of Colorado,” Jour. Mammalogy, 24, 1943: 9, 11) — F. N. H.

To the Editor of the Wilson Bulletin:

In the December, 1942, issue, Mr. Hamerstrom took exception to a filler
which appeared in the Minnesota Conservation Volunteer and attempted to
“reveal” the true conditions of the Minnesota caribou herd. He was particularly
critical of liberating the animals from an enclosure and then opening a part of
the refuge to deer hunting this past fall.

Due to excessive rainfall, it was necessary to turn the animals free, for almost
all of the corral is swampy and was filled with water during the summer. The
area, opened to deer hunting for eleven days this past fall, lies along the north
shore of Upper Red Lake, extending eight miles in length and approximately one
and one-half miles in width. It amounts to about 7,680 acres. The nearest part
of open territory is about five miles southeast from the corral. In upland country
this distance may seem relatively short but the strip between the corral and open
area is largely muskeg and open swamp which is virtually impassible until frozen.

It is not classed as caribou range, for the Soil Conservation Service technicians
have mapped the area as potential waterfowl habitat. They also have outlined
the suitable caribou range as extending to the north, east and west of the corral
in the opposite direction from the area opened to hunting and well within the
sanctuary.

During the hunting season every precaution was taken to protect the caribou.

An area of 407,700 acres was maintained as an inviolate sanctuary. The boundaries
of the new hunting area were posted with special signs calling the hunters’ atten-
tion to the species and the penalties for killing one. Extra patrolmen were detailed
to the area and every hunter they met was cautioned to be alert to prevent
shooting any caribou.

The deer season closed without a single mishap to the protected species. Some
of the animals were sighted, not in the newly opened area, but to the north
and east of the corral. The “blunder” referred to by Mr. Hamerstrom was, indeed,
good wildlife management, for if the animals had been left in the corral they
surely would have perished. The deer in the newly opened territory received a
reasonable thinning down and no damage was done.

The article is an example of the condition which often occurs — that of hue and
cry by sincere persons not familiar with the problem and armed with only a part
of the facts.

Lansing A. Parker
Division of Game & Fish
St. Paul, Minnesota

I criticise only the deer hunting so close to the point of the caribou release.

It is axiomatic that one should expect wild animals, upon release from confine-
ment, to make extensive movements of an exploratory nature. As a corollary, one
should expect these movements to include areas of unsuitable range. No one
knows exactly what caribou do under these circumstances: too few transplantings
have been made. The conservative policy, therefore, would have been to admit
the likelihood of such a movement and to safeguard it in every practicable way,
recognizing that muskeg and swamp is no barrier to caribou and that the well-
m.eaning of most hunters is no guarantee against accidents. — F. N. Hamerstrom, Jr.

66

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

Exotic Game Birds

Ralph T. King has ably discussed the problem of exotic game birds in his article
“Is it wise policy to introduce exotic game birds?” {Audubon Magazine, 1942,
44:136-145, 230-236, 306-310). His conclusions were:

“(1) Economically the introduction of foreign species has been and un-
doubtedly will continue to be highly expensive. (2) The number of well inten-
tioned introductions that have resulted in establishment of the introduced species
and have since proven to be non-beneficial if not actually injurious is equally
as great as the number that have been proven to be desirable. (3) Introductions
resulting in establishment always create heavier demands on both foods and
coverts, may involve the introduction of new parasites and diseases, and may re-
sult in cross-breeding to the detriment of closely related native stock. Furthermore
such introductions do not necessarily result in reducing the hunting pressure on
diminished native species. (4) Introductions of additional animals into exhausted
or deficient environments can only result in the loss of the animals and further
deterioration of the environments. (5) Introduced species can and have increased
to pest proportions. (6) We cannot be sure of the population behavior, food
habits and degree of spread of any introduced species until several years after
the species has become successfully established. (7) Any successful introduction
must inevitably change natural associations and the native fauna to some extent.
We cannot tell to what extent until the introduced species is established. (8) Un-
fortunately we have not taken advantage of our opportunities and as a consequence
have learned relatively little about the costs and results of introductions.” — F. N. H.

Wildlife Conservation Committee

Frederick N. Hamerstrom, Jr., Chairman

NEW LIFE MEMBERS

We take this opportunity to introduce to the Wilson Club three of our new
Life Members: George B. Thorp, George H. Lowery, Jr., and Bernard W.
Baker. Others will be presented in subsequent issues of the Bulletin. We hope
the Endowment and Membership Committees will keep us supplied with candi-
dates for indefinite continuation of this series.

George B. Thorp, a former pro-
fessor of aeronautical engineering at
the Carnegie Institute of Technology,
has made a hobby of ornithology for
many years. He has been president of
the Audubon Society of Western Penn-
sylvania for the past three years; is a
leader and one of the sponsors of the
Pymatuning Group, whose interest cen-
ters in the Pymatuning Wildlife Refuge
in northwestern Pennsylvania; is Chair-
man of the Endowment Committee of
the W.O.C.; is a member of the A.O.U.,
the National Audubon Society, and
the Sewickley Valley Audubon Society.
He has been engaged in Americanization
work in connection wdth refugees, under
the sponsorship of the American Friends
Service Committee.

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

NEW MEMBERS

67

George H. Lowery, Jr., is Curator
of the Museum of Zoology of Louis-
iana State University. He received the
Master of Science degree from that
institution in 1936, at which time the
University established a zoological mu-
seum under his direction. He was
appointed Curator and later Assistant
Professor in Zoology, a position which
he now holds. Since the establishment
of the Museum of Zoology in 1936,
thousands of birds, mammals and other
vertebrates have been assembled by him
and his students. His chief ornithologi-
cal interests are in taxonomy and dis-
tribution, particularly in relation to the
lower Mississippi Valley and certain
sections of Mexico. He is a member
of the A.O.U., and is affiliated with the
Cooper Ornithological Club and various
other scientific organizations.

Bernard W. Baker is a former
dairy farmer, jack of all trades, suc-
cessful chain store owner and operator,
whose hobbies are ornithology, running
a seventy-five acre bird and wildlife
sanctuary in Ottawa County, Michigan,
taking kodachrome slides of bird and
wildlife, and lecturing to nature groups
and schools. He is a member of the
A.O.U., the National Audubon Society,
and the Michigan Audubon Society.

68

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

ANNUAL REPORTS

REPORT OF THE TREASURER FOR 1942

Despite rising prices and the difficult conditions which have caused the loss
of many members, our balance is larger than a year ago. This is due to the
generous donations of time and energy by the editors, secretary, and membership
chairman, and to the constant economies practiced by these officers as well as
to the loyalty of the members. The auction of paintings donated by President
Sutton was responsible for $159.50 of our present balance.

Balance as shown by last report dated Nov. 22, 1941 $ 42.04

Receipts Nov. 17, 1941 to Dec. 31, 1942
Dues;

Associate 1,185.35

Active 970.09

Sustaining 200.00

Subscriptions to the Wilson Bulletin 99.00

Contributions 325.41

Sale of back numbers of the Wilson Bulletin 179.00

Miscellaneous Receipts 5.10

Total Receipts $3,005.99

Disbursements:

The Wilson Bulletin: printing, engraving, mailing $2,001.42

Editor’s expense: postage, mailing 60.09

Secretary’s expense: stationery, postage, clerical aid 159.10

Treasurer’s expense: p>ostage, printing, clerical aid 79.65

Membership Committee expense: postage, printing 151.83

.Annual meeting of 1941: programs, badges 122.02

Bank charges 47.18

Bad checks returned 17.03

Subscription refunds on erroneous orders 12.70

Miscellaneous: reprints, purchase of old Bulletins 20.49

Total Disbursements $2,671.51

Balance on hand in St. Anthony Park State Bank,

St. Paul, Minnesota. Dec. 31, 1942 $ 334.48

Endowment Fund

The endowment fund made substantial increases during the year as a result
of the activities of the Endowment Committee, and because we received during
the year a bequest, the first during the present treasurer’s term of office. The
income from the endowment fund is used entirely for improving The Wilson
Bulletin.

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

ANNUAL REPORTS

69

Bonds on deposit in safety deposit box, St. Anthony Park
State Bank, St. Paul:

U.S. Postal Savings Coupon Bonds dated July 1, 1935 .$780.00

U.S. Savings Bonds, maturity value May 31, 1945

$900.00, purchase value 675.00

U.S. Savings Bonds, maturity value Aug. 1, 1948

$1,075.00, purchase value 806.25

Balance in savings account, St. Anthony Park State Bank,

Oct. 1, 1941 142.26

Received during year:

Interest on U.S. Postal Savings Coupon Bonds 39.00

Interest on savings account 3.79

Contribution 5.00

Bequest from estate of Marcia Clay, deceased member 100.00

New Life Members 525.00

Balance on hand in savings account, St. Anthony Park

State Bank, St. Paul, Minnesota, on Dec. 31. 1942 $ 815.05

Total endowment fund, savings account and bonds at purchase

value $3076.30

December 31, 1942

Respectfully submitted,
Gustav Swanson, Treasurer

REPORT OF THE SECRETARY FOR 1942

Once again the orderly procedure of the Wilson Ornithological Club has been
interrupted by war. The annual meeting for 1942, scheduled for Ithaca, New York,
was postponed, nor have any definite plans been drawn for further meetings until
after the emergency is over.

The Club closed its year (as of December 1) with a membership of 1,054.
During 1942 we lost 293 members and gained 166 new ones, the net loss being 127
members. The greater part of this loss is, the secretary believes, directly attributable
to the war. We now have more than a hundred of our members in the armed
services, and more are constantly being called up. Another factor contributing to
the decrease in membership was the omission of the annual meeting. These meet-
ings have always been important in attracting new members.

As in other recent years the Club owes a heavy debt of gratitude to Richard
L. Weaver, and to the members of his Membership Committee. They have been
unflagging in their work of solicitation, and fertile in devices for finding new
members. Largely through their efforts, our membership has grown considerably
in New England and in other eastern states.

Faced with the necessity of conducting the Club’s election and other business
by mail, the president, George M. Sutton, appointed a nominating committee
consisting of Margaret M. Nice, Chairman, H. L. Stoddard, and Jesse M. Shaver.
This committee published its report in the December Wilson Bulletin, nominating
a slate of candidates as follows:

President: George Miksch Sutton

First Vice-President: S. Charles Kendeigh

Second Vice-President: Olin Sewall Pettingill, Jr.

Secretary: Maurice G. Brooks

Treasurer: Milton B. Trautman

Councillors: Burt L. Monroe, Eugene P. Odum, Lawrence H. Walkinshaw

70

THE WILSON BULLETIN

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

All members of the club were invited to vote for officers, either from the
suggested slate, or as they otherwise chose. All ballots received by the secretary
have been in ratification of the committee’s slate, and the election of the officers
named above is hereby certified. The Club’s constitution places the responsibility
for electing an editor on the Council; this election has been held, and has resulted
in the unanimous selection of Josselyn Van Tyne to serve during 1943.

Late in the year George M. Sutton was commissioned a captain in the United
States Army, and has been forced to give up temporarily the active direction of
Wilson Club affairs. In his absence S. Charles Kendeigh becomes acting president
for 1943. O. S. Pettingill, Jr., automatically becomes acting first vice-president.
Another member of the Council, Burt L. Monroe, is also now in active military
service.

The Secretary wishes to express his sincerest thanks to those who have helped
him, and have borne with his many shortcomings during his first year in office.
It has been a trying period, and there have been many delays, seemingly un-
avoidable. He hopes sincerely that every member of the Club will feel a personal
interest in maintaining the membership of the organization, and in contributing
to its continued progress.

Respectfully submitted,

March 2, 1943 Maurice G. Brooks, Secretary

REPORT OF THE ENDOWMENT FUND COMMITTEE

During the past year this newly constituted committee, after preliminary dis-
cussions, came to substantial agreement as to the nature of the campaign to be
conducted for additional endowment, and laid plans for a long range effort. An
initial statement was made in the June Bulletin; and as it was generally considered
that conditions did not warrant sending out a letter to the entire membership on
the subject, a fuller statement with a more direct appeal was inserted in the
December Bulletin.

In the meantime the membership was apportioned on a geographical basis to
the members of the committee for making personal appeals; and while this work
has as yet only begun, and has hardly touched some regions, nevertheless at least
six new Life Memberships have come in. As was to be expected, the committee’s
work has suffered by reason of the war. One of its members has been called to
service, others are finding less time for non-war work, and it is proving more
difficult to interest the membership in such matters. It is hoped that as members
pay their 1943 dues they will give serious consideration to transferring to the Life
Membership class.

Respectfully submitted,

February 26, 1943 George B. Thorp, Chairman

REPORT OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS COMMITTEE

The present chairman took office in January, 1942, and the following members
agreed to serve on the committee — Roger Peterson, Karl Maslowski, Richard
Grossenheider and T. M. Shortt.

The exact functions of the recently formed Illustrations Committee were very
nebulous, and the committee’s operation this year has reflected this uncertainty.
It is sometimes difficult for such a widely dispersed committee to function quickly
enough to provide the answer to problems which arise late in the editing of a
given Bulletin. The committee, however, has been able to be of some assistance
to the editor. We aided in securing illustrations for the September issue of the

March, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 1

ANNUAL REPORTS

71

Bulletin. Some illustrative materials for other issues were submitted to the chair-
man for criticism, and ideas have been exchanged with the editor regarding illus-
trations in past issues. A list of artists and photographers who have offered
materials for use as illustrations in the Bulletin has been compiled.

The committee suggests that a file of the species of birds for which various
artists or photographers have illustrative material available for use in the Bulletin
would be of value to the editor. The compiling of such a file would be a
constructive function for succeeding Illustrations Committees.

Respectfully submitted,

February 15, 1943 W. J. Breckenridge, Chairman

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON AFFILIATED SOCIETIES

At the 1941 annual meeting the affiliation of the Inland Bird Banding Asso-
ciation, the Virginia Ornithological Society, and the Georgia Ornithological Society
was formally completed. The Wilson Club heartily welcomes these organizations
to affiliation and believes that the association will be of mutual benefit.

The matter of affiliation with our organization was referred to committee by
the Wisconsin Society for Ornithology at their annual meeting in April, 1942. A
vote will be taken at the coming annual meeting in April at Waukesha.

The committee will welcome any suggestion for the development of affiliation
activities and the names of groups that might be interested in affiliation.

Since the annual meeting of 1941 Burt L. Monroe and George H. Lowery, Jr.,
acted successively as chairman of this committee, but the exigencies of war and
other matters forced them to relinquish their duties.

Respectfully submitted,

February 12, 1943 Gordon M. Meade, M.D., Chairman

The Whlson Bulletin Publication Dates

The actual dates of publication of the four numbers in 1942 were: March 23,
June 22, September 23, December 31.

TO OUR CONTRIBUTORS

Our members are asked to submit articles for publication in the Bulletin.
Manuscripts will be accepted with the understanding that they have not been
published or accepted for publication elsewhere.

Manuscript. Manuscripts should be typed on paper of good quality and of
letter size (8J4 x 11). Write on one side only and use double spacing. The title
should be brief and carefully constructed so as to indicate clearly the subject.
Ordinarily the scientific names of the birds treated should be given and should
appear early in the article. Most articles should have a brief summary at the end.

Illustrations. Photographic prints, to reproduce well as half-tones, should
have good contrast and detail. Please send prints unmounted, and attach to
each print a brief but adequate legend. Do not write heavily on the backs of
photographs.

Bibliography. Literature cited should ordinarily be listed at the end of
articles. These citations should be complete and references to them in the text
should be made by the year of the citation and the exact pages referred to.

Proof. Galley proof will be submitted to authors and must be returned
promptly. Expensive alterations in copy after the type has been set must be
charged to the author.

Reprints. The Club is unable to furnish free reprints to authors. Arrange-
ments will be made, however, for reprints to be made at cost. A scale of costs,
based on the number of pages, is given below. Orders for reprints should accom-
pany the returned galley proof. Charge will be made for a minimum of 100 reprints.

REPRINT SCHEDULE OF THE WILSON BULLETIN

100 copies

Each Additional

100 copies

Covers: $3.S5 for first

1 page 2 pp.
$1.95 $2.10

70c S5c

100 copies; $1.40

4 pp.

8 pp.

$2.40

$4.15

1.40

2.20

additional

100 copies.

12 pp.

$5.90

Each

Additional

Jr

2.90

3.50

5Sc

Vol. 55 JUNE, 1943 No. 2

Pulletm

Published by the

Elision (f^rnitlboIoBttal Club

Ann ArboTf Michigan

V

CONTENTS

Wood Thrush

Thomas S. Roberts

PL 2

A Nesting Study of the Wood Thrush

Hervey Brackbill

73

Territoriality, Display, and Certain Ecological Relations
OF THE American Woodcock Frank A. Pitelka

88

Nidification of the Passerine Birds of Hispaniola

James Bond

115

General Notes

127

Editorial

133

Wildlife Conservation

134

Ornithological Literature

87, 125, 136

-142

Reports

143

THE WILSON BULLETIN

is published quarterly in March, June, September, and December, as the official
organ of the Wilson Ornithological Club, at Ann Arbor, Michigan, and is sent to
all members not in arrears for dues. The subscription price is $2.00 a year,
invariably in advance, in the United States. Single numbers, SO cents. Outside
of the United States the rate is $2.25. Single numbers, 60 cents. Subscriptions
should be sent to the Treasurer.

All articles and communications for publication, books and publications for
review, exchanges, and claims for lost or undelivered copies of the magazine, should
be addressed to the Editor.

The current issue of The Wilson Bulletin is printed by the Ann Arbor Press,
Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Entered as second class matter July 13, 1916, at Ann .Arbor, Michigan, under
Act of Congress of March 3, 1879.

THE WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

Founded December 3, 1888. Named after Alexander Wilson, the first American
ornithologist, and called the “Father of American Ornithology.”

The officers for the current year are:

President — George Miksch Sutton, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.

First \’ice-President — S. Charles Kendeigh, University of Illinois, Champaign,
Illinois.

Second Vice-President — Olin Sevvall Pettingill, Jr., Carleton College, North-
field, Minnesota.

Treasurer — Milton B. Trautman, Stone Laboratory, Put-in-Eay, Ohio.
Secretary — Maurice Brooks, University of West Virginia, Morgantown, West
Virginia.

Editor — Josselyn Van Tyne, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Associate Editors — Margaret M. Nice and F. N. Hamerstrom, Jr.

Membership dues are: sustaining membership, $5.00; active membership, $3.00;
associate membership, $2.00 per calendar year.

Plate 2

Minneapolis, 1903

Photo by Thomas S. Roberts

WOOD THRUSH

THE WILSON BULLETM.

A QUARTERLY MAGAZINE OF ORNITHOLOG^'^

-,11/1 Published by the Wilson Ornithological Club ®

V

Vol. 55 JUNE, 1943 No. 2

A NESTING STUDY OF THE WOOD THRUSH ^

BY HERVEY BRACKBILL

TN Baltimore, in 1942, a color-banded pair of Wood Thrushes {Hylo-
^ cichla mustelina) was watched for 75 hours during two nestings.
All of the watching was done openly, from distances of 25 to 50 feet,
the birds showing no hesitancy about their affairs.

Migration and Distribution

Arrival and departure. The male took up territory with loud song
early on the morning of April 29, the first day on which Wood Thrushes
were noted in his part of the city; he was color-banded the same
morning. The female, a partial albino which it would have been
impossible to overlook, was first noticed on the afternoon of May 2;
she was then already in company of the male and was color-banded
the same day. The male was last seen July 20 and the female July 26;
the Wood Thrush, as a species, was present through September 16.

Habitat. Resler (1891:106) stated 50 years ago that at Baltimore
the Wood Thrush “frequents shady woods, especially near the banks
of a brook or small river” and “appears to be not so well known as
the majority of our other songsters, in consequence of being more
solitary and shy.” Weaver (1939:16) likewise stresses dampness of
woodland habitat at Ithaca, New York; notes that undergrowth and
saplings also seem to be necessary; and mentions an “increasing tend-
ency” to dwell about occupied houses “in the vicinity of gorges, streams,
woods, or damp places.”

Dugmore (1900:169), however, found “damp or dry places . . .
indiscriminately chosen” for nesting in the neighborhood of New York
City, and Cooke (1929:65) found the birds much less shy, reporting
that in the region of Washington, D.C., “they now nest freely about
lawns in the suburbs as well as in the woods.” Chapman (1940:413)
also places them on “well-shaded lawns.”

My own observations of the last decade in Baltimore accord with
those of the latter group of writers. Shrubbery or undergrowth does,
however, appear to be essential — as cover for newly-fledged young.

^ Grateful acknowledgment is made to Mrs. Margaret M. Nice for criticism during
the preparation of this paper.

74

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

But I have not found the species restricted to the immediate vicinity
of streams, nor have I found the woods which it inhabits to be more
moist than others. In contrast to the nests mapped by Weaver
(1939:17), of which the one farthest from water was only 150 feet
away, the first nest of my thrushes was 800 feet from water (except for
a bird bath), and other Wood Thrushes nested at even greater distances;
song is common every summer in suburban neighborhoods 2,000 and
3,200 feet from water.

The habitat of my birds, 350 feet above sea level, was a block in
northwest Baltimore that is lined on three sides by detached houses;
on the fourth side a large vacant lot runs in deeply. That lot and
most of the back yards bear a close stand of oaks — chiefly white oaks
{Quercus alba) — 70 feet tall, with also a huge elm, a smaller beech,
and two or three mulberries. There are a few isolated trees between
houses, and oaks in most of the front yards. The outer half of the
vacant lot is heavily weed-growm, and practically all of the yards
contain more or less shrubbery.

Nests

Nest sites. Despite the comparative wildness and privacy offered
by the well-wooded heart of this block, the thrushes’ nests were built
in trees that stood between, and close beside, houses. The second nest
was 90 yards north-northeast of the first.

The first nest was placed 17 feet up in a 50-foot beech {Fagus
grandijoUa) ; it was set upon the base of a horizontal fork 10 feet out
from the trunk, and was 10 feet from the side of a house. The second
nest was 13 feet up in a scraggly 16-foot tree of heaven {Ailanthus
altissima) ; it was set amid four new shoots which rose steeply from
the tip of an old stem, and was 63^ feet from the side of a house.

Building and laying. I saw none of the building or laying; incuba-
tion of three-egg clutches was under way in both nests when they were
found.

Weaver (1939:16) suggests that the female chooses the nest site,^
and reports a building time of 5 days. Dugmore (1900:169) gives
the incubation period as 12 days. Using those figures, assuming that
the eggs were laid on successive days and that incubation began after
the laying of the second egg, and calculating back from the hatching
dates of May 30 and 31, it appears that work on the first nest began
about May 13, 11 days after the female’s arrival in the territory.

Similar calculations indicate that the second nest was begun on
the eighth day after the first brood was fledged, and that the first
egg of the second set was laid on the thirteenth day. Weaver (1939:22)

* My color-banded male has returned in 1943, but he has a different mate: a nor-
mally plumaged bird, so far unbanded. Nevertheless, his nest is near completion only
6 inches from the site of his first-brood nest of 1942. This indicates strongly that the
male selected this site. All of the building that I have seen, however, has been
done by the female.

Hervey

Brackbill

NESTING OF WOOD THRUSH

75

observed a fledging-to-egg interval of 16 days for one pair of Wood
Thrushes at Ithaca.

Incubation

Amount. The eggs were incubated entirely by the female, who was
on the nest for 78.0 per cent of the 940 minutes that first-brood incuba-
tion was watched and for 80.3 per cent of 1,014 minutes at the second
nest. The bird’s night term on the nest was about 9^ hours. Thus the
eggs were covered for approximately 87 per cent of the day’s 24 hours.

Twenty-three complete sittings observed at both nests ranged in
length from 7>4 to 58^4 minutes; 11 at the first nest averaged 31
minutes, 12 at the second nest averaged 27. Forty-one intervals off both
nests ranged from one to 16 minutes; 22 at the first nest averaged 8 >4
minutes, 19 at the second nest averaged 6lio.

Among sittings not seen in their entirety were one unfinished at the
end of 70 minutes on May 28, the second day before the hatching of the
first brood began, and one unfinished at the end of 76 minutes on July
6, the day before the hatching of the second brood began. These sug-
gest especially close sitting during the last days of incubation. During
a 90 minute observation period on July 5, however, sittings were of only
normal lengths.

During rain. The female was once watched at incubation in the
scantily-leaved ailanthus during a terrific downpour for 18 minutes,
followed by a drizzle for 10. Three times in the first four minutes she
half rose and then resettled herself, apparently adjusting to the torrent.
For the first 13 minutes she held her head up at a 60-degree angle from
its normal horizontal position, possibly to compress the plumage of the
nape and so shed more water. After that she sat normally.

During high wind. While incubating in the spindly ailanthus tree
the female was also watched for 80 minutes during a period of strong
puffy winds. The puffs now and then carried the nest, atop the slight
and almost vertical stem, over an arc of from three to at least five feet ;
twice the nest was carried so far that it tilted downward at 45 degrees,
and once it almost stood on edge.

The lesser puffs did not seem to inconvenience the bird; she even
rose during two of them and stretched her wings and legs. But two of
the three extreme swings appeared to throw her off balance: she stepped
out to one of the supporting shoots while the tilt was greatest, and then
back on again. She moved unhurriedly, and it seemed each time that
the eggs must spill before she returned to the nest.

Male’s activities during sittings. During the female’s sittings on her
first clutch the male usually occupied himself out in the territory, forag-
ing, singing, preening, or just idling. Two trees on the edge of the oak
grove, 75 and 85 feet north of the nest-beech, were favorite perching
places, no doubt because they commanded a clear view of the beech

76

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

and so enabled him to see when the female left to feed. For it was
usually only upon her departure that he went to the nest to stand guard.
A few times, too, he kept his guard from these oaks.

Not infrequently, though, the male spent some time in the nest-tree
itself while the female was on these first-brood eggs: periods that ranged
from a few seconds to almost half of the sitting. During these periods
he might preen a bit, or simply stand idle, but was only once observed
to sing (for seven minutes of a nine-minute stay).

The male’s activities during the female’s second-brood sittings dif-
fered in two ways: he was still feeding the first-brood young during the
first week of incubation and, even after he had become free of that
task, he spent no time in the nest-tree with the female. Since he did
once perch for five minutes on the roof-edge some yards above the
second nest, it may be that this change in behavior was not only part
of a general decrease in attentiveness during the second nesting but was
due in some degree to the smallness of the ailanthus; in the beech he
had usually perched 10 feet away from his mate, and no such distance
was possible in the ailanthus.

His favorite perches during second-brood incubation were 50 feet
north and 90 feet south of the nest; the first commanded a view of the
nest, the second did not.

Male's activities between sittings. When the female left the first-
brood nest to forage, the male almost invariably kept guard over it,
usually from the rim of the nest or some perch in the home tree.
Sometimes he sang during part of his watch — twice he sang half a dozen
phrases while standing on the nest-rim, and another time sang for two
minutes while standing just beside the nest. During only one of the
female's 22 absences while this nest was under observation was the male
neither seen nor heard.

At the second nest he stood guard during only 12 of the female’s 19
observed absences. In doing so during 5 out of 8 while he still was
feeding first-brood young he set a surprisingly good record; however,
after becoming free of feeding duties he maintained only that reduced
ratio, guarding during 7 of 1 1 absences, so that here, too, a decrease in
attentiveness appears. Another difference in behavior was that he never
sang while on guard in the second nest-tree, although he did sing a
few times from other guard stations nearby.

Hatch. Of the first clutch, one egg hatched May 30 and the other
two May 31. The second set of three hatched on three successive days,
July 7 to 9. The hatching hour was determined for only one egg (the
last one to hatch of the first set) : 2 hours 17 minutes after sunrise, at
6:59 A.M. The female was sitting at the time, and she flew away south-
westerly with half of the shell; three minutes later, while she was still
away, the male alighted at the nest, made a feeding, and then carried
the other half of the shell away northward.

Hervey

Brackbill

NESTING OF WOOD THRUSH

77

Brooding

Amount. The female alone brooded the young. She did so on every
day of their nest life, and also at night — whether throughout every night
was not determined, but the persistence of her diurnal brooding makes
that seem probable.

She covered her first family for 62.8 per cent of 641 minutes’ obser-
vation, during which the temperature range was 61° to 85° F. and the
skies varied from clear to misting. She covered her second family for
45.5 per cent of 610 minutes’ observation; mere attendance, during hot
weather, raised her total time at this nest to 72.7 per cent. The tem-
perature range during these observations was 73° to 95°, the skies
clear.

There was no progressive daily decrease in brooding at the first nest,
nor any clear correlation between weather and amount of brooding.
These statements also hold for the second nest, except at temperatures
of 93° and above.

At 93° and above, both the female and the nestlings showed dis-
comfort by holding their bills open more or less of the time, and the
female did almost no actual brooding but simply stood for 46.5 to 85.0
per cent of the time on the nest’s rim or on a branch beside the nest —
but, curiously enough, never on the sunward side, where she would
have shaded the young. On some days this behavior was continued
beyond the period of extreme heat — until the temperature had fallen
as low as 88°.

Feeding

Sharing of work. Both parents fed both broods of young both in
and out of the nest, but the male fed them much more often than the
female. He made two-thirds of the feedings while each brood was in
the nest, and almost all the observed feedings after each brood left
the nest.

Length of day. I observed when second-brood feedings started on
one morning (at 4:27 a.m., 24 minutes before sunrise), and how late
they lasted on one evening (until 7:42 p.m., 8 minutes after sunset),
which would suggest a feeding day of 15^ hours. Both observations
were made in clear weather.

Rate. During 826 minutes that feedings were watched at the first-
brood nest, 120 trips were made with food: 78 by the male, 40 by the
female, and 2 by an undetermined parent. At least five times the male
fed two nestlings on one visit, and at least three times the female took
part of the food he brought and fed an extra nestling. Counting 128
feedings, then, the average interval was 6.4 minutes, and the rate of
feedings was 9.3 per hour for the brood of three.

During 813 minutes of feedings at the second nest, 61 trips were
made: 42 by the male, 16 by the female, 3 by an undetermined parent.
The male at least twice and the female once fed two nestlings on one

78

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

visit. Counting 64 feedings, the average interval was 13 minutes for this
brood of three, a rate of 4.7 feedings per hour — just half the rate for the
first brood.

No steady increase in feedings from day to day was noted at either
nest.

Despite the difference in their observed feeding rates, with no per-
ceptible difference in the size of meals, the second brood left the terri-
tory when 10 to 12 days old, the same age at which the first brood left
the nest — equivalent acts, since the first brood obviously could have
been led away at once had not the second nest held the parents to the
territory.

Male's feedings. Because the female brooded so much, she was
usually on the nest when the male arrived with food. At the first nest
the female generally stayed during the feedings, and it was not unusual
for the male to make two or three trips during single sittings. At the
second nest, on the other hand, the female almost always flew away as
soon as the male arrived.

When the female left the first nest upon his arrival, the male some-
times kept guard until her return, as he had done when there were eggs,
but he was never seen to keep guard for the full interval after a second-
brood feeding. At both nests he occasionally stood guard during just a
part of the female’s absence, then disappeared, and at both he occa-
sionally made repeated feedings — as many as five — while she was away.
Now and then he made two feedings before beginning guard duty at the
first nest.

Female's feedings. At both nests the female made her feedings al-
most exclusively upon returning from her own meals to resume brood-
ing. At the first nest she brought food on almost all of those returns;
at the second nest, on less than half of them. Not until the latter part of
each brood’s stay in the nest did she occasionally make one feeding,
then fly directly away to find more food.

Female “trims" food. On the first few days of the nestlings’ life the
female took some pains to see that their food was readily digestible. She
herself gave them only caterpillars and very small insects, and she kept
an eye on the male’s offerings. If he, too, had brought a caterpillar or
particularly small insect she let him feed the young at once, but when
his catch was an insect of any size, she picked off, and herself ate, such
parts as the head and wings before rising and letting him feed the
young. That procedure was seen on both of the first brood’s hatching
days, and again on the day the birds were three and four days old. It
was seen once on the day the second brood was four to six days old.

On June 30, which was about the sixth day of second-brood incu-
bation, there occurred an incident that seemed to be an anachronistic
instance of food “trimming.” While the female was sitting, the male
alighted beside the nest with a caterpillar. The female arose, dabbed in
the nest for some seconds, then in accordance with normal behavior

Hervey

Brackbill

NESTING OF WOOD THRUSH

79

flew away to forage. Still holding the caterpillar, the male stood guard
for 1 1 minutes. Then as the female returned he moved slightly so as to
face her squarely and, after she had again used her bill briefly in the
nest, she pulled the head off the caterpillar and ate it and immediately
the male swallowed the remainder. This incidentally, was the only
time that a caterpillar was seen to be trimmed.

Feeding troubles. Food which one nestling could not or would not
swallow was taken from it and given to another bird. A caterpillar had
been brought to the nest by the male. When it remained partly visible
in the mouth into which he stuffed it, the watching female pushed or
pulled at it several times. Then, that youngster still failing to swallow
it, the male withdrew it and fed it to another.

On two other occasions parents misjudged the swallowing abilities of
their young. The male once placed a mulberry in a nestling’s mouth
crosswise and had to pick it up and replace it twice before getting it in
lengthwise so that it could be swallowed. Again, one adult (I believe the
male) of a pair crossing the study territory with young tried three
times to jam into the mouth of one fledgling a cherry too large for it
even to hold, and only after these repeated failures began tearing the
fruit to pieces and feeding it that way.

Out-of-nest feedings. After the young had left the nests, feedings
were seen as follows: First brood: by the male, 28, of all three birds;
by the female, 2, of one bird. Second brood: by the male, 10, of two
birds; by the female, 2, of the third bird.

In addition, on the ninth day after her first brood left the nest, the
female was once seen to feed one of two strange juveniles which with
their parents had come into the territory four days earlier.

Posturing rare. Only once was one of the fledglings noticed to flutter
its wings when fed. It was then 21 or 22 days old, and it hurried across
a lawn toward the male with head thrust forward, bill open, and wings
fluttering. A juvenile of the trespassing family likewise was seen just
once to flutter when fed. No such behavior was seen while the young
were in the nests.

Nature of food. Distinguishable food given the young during their
nestling days was: hairless caterpillars, earthworms, red mulberries,
white mulberries. Distinguishable food after they left the nest was:
Japanese beetles, white grub, earthworm, hairless caterpillar, red, white
and unripe mulberries.

Nest Sanitation

The nestlings’ feces were alrnost always eaten by the parents, but a
few times were carried away. When the female remained at the nest
through feedings by the male, he did not wait for the excreta to appear.

The two or three occasions on which excreta were carried away —
by both parents — all fell during morning twilight, although this was
not the usual manner of disposal at that time of day. During my only

80

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

period of evening twilight observation, all excreta were eaten. At a nest
of Robins {Turdus migratorius) which was studied sketchily, the one
time out of six that excreta were carried away instead of being eaten
also fell during morning twilight.

The Young

Fledging. All of the first-brood young left the nest June 12, when
they were 12 and 13 days old. All of the second-brood young left the
nest prematurely, upon being banded July 17, when they were 8 to 10
days old.

Flight powers. I did not see the young birds’ very first flights, but
on its initial day out of the nest one of the first-brood young made
a flight of about 25 feet from a low bush to a perch 10 feet up in
a tree. Two days later this brood was flying strongly. A juvenile of
another pair flew 50 feet on a level course on its first afternoon out of
the nest; that appeared to be the extent of its powers.

Habitat. On their first day out of the nest the first-brood young
resorted to bushes, perching about three feet above the ground. Two
days later they were found in trees, and positions 8 to 1 5 feet above the
ground remained the rule until a week later when they began to do some
of their own foraging. Thenceforth they divided their time between trees
and the ground.

The second-brood young also showed the tendency to get above the
ground. Having left the nest before they could fly, these birds were
unable to get up into bushes, but on their second day at large they
began to perch on stones a few inches high, and on spots a few inches
up in fallen bush, which they could reach by climbing.

Dispersal. While entirely dependent, the fledglings whenever they
could be found were scattered over the territory 28 to 60 yards from
each other. After they began to do some of their own foraging, any two
of the three first-brood birds might be found travelling together, either
by themselves or in train of a parent.

When the young finally left the nesting territory they appeared to
do so singly. Two first-brood birds remained four days longer than the
third and then vanished seven hours apart. Two second-brood birds left
something more than two hours apart, the third not until a day later;
the first of these three and the adult female disappeared simultaneously
and probably together, for the female was attending this bird when last
seen; the male and the third juvenile likewise vanished at the same
time; I have no idea whether the middle youngster, which had mean-
while disappeared, went over to the departed female’s care, or was still
under the male’s and merely undiscoverable.

Period of dependency. At least one of the first-brood young was
doing some of its own foraging by the age of 20 days, and all were by
the age of 23; one still was fed when 31 or 32 days old, and the others

Hervey

Brackbill

NESTING OF WOOD THRUSH

81

at least as late as 25 to 28 days. Last seen in the territory when 28 to
32 days old, all of the first brood presumably were independent when
they left the area.

Number of Broods

Bailey (1913:351) states that “sometimes” two broods are reared
by the Wood Thrush in Virginia. Weaver (1939:22) reports two
broods raised by a pair at Ithaca, New York. Two seem to be the rule
at Baltimore; Resler (1891:106) so judged from late dates for newly-
fledged young, and not only did the subjects of my study raise two
broods, but the color-banded male of a neighboring pair which fledged
birds in mid- June was still casually observed through July 29, and in
song through July 26, dates which suggest that he also nested again.

Weaver, watching a marked pair of birds, found as I did that the
same ones remained together for the second nesting.

Territory

The initial territory was practically identical with the area described
under Habitat. It included all of that city block except one edge, where
paved driveways and a comparatively close placing of buildings reduced
the amounts of lawn and shrubbery. This territory was just about 100
yards square. Other Wood Thrushes nested in all of the surrounding
blocks; the one other nest that I searched out was a first-brood one 80
yards south-southeast of the study pair’s first nest.

Between the two nestings there appeared to be a slight extension of
territory northward, and when the second nest was built on the north
edge of the original territory the birds made a pronounced extension in
that direction, the neighboring thrush on the north having apparently
moved away. The new territory was not determined precisely, but the
birds — freely crossing a paved street — were seen to go at least 75
yards northeast of their second nest, while they also held onto the heart
of their original block. Their final territory, therefore, must have been
something like 125 x 100 yards.

These were suburban territories, then, of about 2 and 2% acres;
Weaver (1939:18) found territories in stream-side woodland to range
from Vo acre to 2 acres.

Other birds nesting within these territories were: a number of pairs
of Robins, a number of pairs of Starlings {Sturnus vulgaris), some Eng-
lish Sparrows {Passer domesticus), a pair of Catbirds {Dumetella caro-
linensis), a pair of Blue Jays {Cyanocitta cristata), and almost cer-
tainly a pair of Chewinks {Pipilo erythrophthalmus) .

During both nestings there were innumerable encroachments upon
territory by other Wood Thrushes. The interlopers used a bird bath,
foraged, and sang on the edges of the study-pair’s land, and usually
with impunity since the nesting birds could not be everywhere at once.
The outstanding invasion was one made between broods by another pair

82

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

with two semi-dependent young; this family stayed in the territory for
five days and roved over practically every part of it. One of that pair,
apparently the female, was a color-banded bird.

The nesting female was seen to defend territory tmce and the male
four times. On the other hand, the female once allowed a strange Wood
Thrush to perch for half a minute and utter some little calls only three
feet below the nest on which she was incubating her second set of eggs;
she once foraged peaceably near the “female” of the trespassing family,
and, as already noted, she once fed one of that trespasser’s young. The
male also once tolerated this “female,” though he defended territory
against its mate and one of its young.

The female’s first defense of territory was seen May 10. She flew at
a stranger on the ground a few times and then pursued it mildly as it
withdrew from the territory. Her other defense was seen July 4: a
stranger appeared on the ground 15 yards from the nest, and the female
flew off her eggs with a burst of quit calls ; she then hopped in pursuit,
uttering at intervals a short explosive cry that had a musical quality
and suggested rudimentary or vestigial song. About 20 yards from the
nest, although the stranger was certainly still in the territory, the female
turned back and began foraging; the other bird then disappeared.

Three of the male’s four defenses were made against the trespassing
family in the period between the two nestings. Once he flew at the sup-
posed male and chased it out of the territory; once he seemed to be
satisfied when by hopping toward this trespasser he made it retreat a
short distance, for he himself thereupon flew away in the opposite direc-
tion. The other two defenses were more interesting, one because it
seemed to be made against a juvenile, and the last because it was a
battle of song.

In the case of the juvenile, the study male was in a mulberry tree
when the “female” trespasser and her two young appeared on the
ground below. After a minute and a half the male flew at the little
group, and one of the juveniles fled. The other two birds paid no at-
tention to the attack, and the study male then began to forage peace-
abl}^ only a few yards from them.

The battle of song lasted seven minutes, and the nesting male was
victorious. It occurred the morning of July 1, while the female was
sitting on her second set of eggs. Thirty yards south of the nest the
male was singing intermittently: song which at this date was no longer
first-class, but rather weak in volume and slightly slow in pace. For 10
minutes he sang, then he changed to a variety of calls for half a minute,
then he disappeared, and just as he did so a strange adult was noticed
on the ground beneath his tree, and one of the study male’s first-brood
juveniles in another tree nearby. Soon the stranger flew up near the
juvenile. In a little while the nesting male returned. He fed his off-
spring, then darted at the stranger, who fled to a tree some distance
southwest, giving several phrases of song on his way. The nester, after

Hervey

Brackbill

NESTING OF WOOD THRUSH

83

his little dash, alighted again near his juvenile and launched into loud,
fine song. Almost at once the stranger also began singing loudly. At
that, the nester moved to a tree nearer him; and when, after some
minutes, the stranger made a slight advance, the nester also moved for-
ward another short distance, so that finally the birds were singing only
8 or 10 yards apart. Seven minutes after the struggle by song began,
the stranger apparently admitted defeat by turning silent, and pre-
sumably he flew away — he had been hidden by foliage at the last. The
nesting male sang on for a quarter-minute more, then returned to his
normal affairs.

These Wood Thrushes were very tolerant of other species in their
nest-trees. While the female was sitting on her first set of eggs. Starlings
three times, English Sparrows four times, and a Robin once, were seen
to spend from a few seconds to several minutes* in the beech without
being molested. Some of those birds were in far parts of the tree, as
much as seven yards from the nest, but others were only one and two
yards from the sitting bird; also, some of them called, and scolded, and
the Robin sang for a minute and a half. Likewise, while she was brood-
ing her first nestlings the female permitted a couple of English Spar-
rows, a Starling and a Catbird to enter the tree. Once during the second
nesting, while both Thrushes were absent from the tiny ailanthus tree,
a Brown Thrasher (Toxostoma rujum) spent some seconds preening
only two or three yards from the eggs without attracting either parent.

No such hostility to Robins as Weaver reports (1939:19) was
shown by these Wood Thrushes; Robins nested within about 50 feet of
both Wood Thrush nests, and no clashes were seen. The only birds of
other species toward which hostility was displayed were a Blue Jay and
a Purple Crackle {Quiscalus q. quiscalus), and these had not entered
the nest-trees nor made any move to do so. On the first brood’s last
morning in the nest the female interrupted her covering of them when a
Jay appeared, foraging and calling, in a tree 25 yards away. She flew to
a wire near that tree; soon the male also appeared, and both began
steady calls of concern; then the male flew into the Jay’s tree and con-
tinued his calls there. Some Robins and a Catbird were attracted, and
they joined in the scolding. None made any attack, however, and after
three minutes the Jay flew away of its own accord. In contrast, on the
second day of the second-brood hatch, a Jay which appeared briefly
only 10 yards from the nest was engaged by a Robin, but the female
Wood Thrush continued to sit and the male did not appear. The
Crackle was attacked by the male when it appeared on the ground 10
yards from the second nest, which then held young 4 to 6 days old; the
Thrush flew at the Crackle several times, and in a minute or two the
Crackle went away.

Voice

MALE. The male sang regularly from his arrival on April 29 through
the morning of July 8, which was the second of the three days of second-

84

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June. 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

brood hatching. After that, he was observed to sing only July 12 and
1 5, and then only a few poor phrases. Other Wood Thrushes sang with
considerable regularity as late as August 2; the last song was heard
August 15. Weaver (1939:20) states that at Ithaca “there was song
in the evening only, after the young had left the nest”; there was song
in my bird’s territory every morning of the period between broods, and
the singer was once searched out and confirmed as the breeding male.
Other notes given by the male were:

Cheuh-heuh-heuh-heuh. The commonest call; sometimes one or two
syllables longer or shorter; unaccented or the last syllable slightly ac-
cented. Apparently the call which Weaver writes ‘^Trrrrrr” Used, as
she records, to indicate uneasiness, and also apparently as a location
note.

Strings of as many as five ^‘quit’s” These are the pit and quirt notes
to which Chapman (1940:413) and Weaver (1939:19) give opposite
meanings, and which seem to vary slightly in sound only because of dif-
ferences in force of utterance. Sometimes given calmly, and the mean-
ing then not clear. Usually given very loudly and excitedly, and then
they indicated great distress and served as a battle cry and a call for aid.

Heeh. Always given singly. Possibly denoted excitement. This ap-
parently is the “squeaky whistle” listed by Weaver, but it was never
used during my observations to urge the female off the nest or to urge
the young to eat, as noted in the Ithaca study.

A low-pitched rattle or trill varying in length. Meaning unknowm.
Given three times as the male flew from the nest-tree: twice upon the
female’s return from a foraging trip, ending his guard duty; once upon
his departure seven minutes after she had returned from foraging. On
one of the occasions the nest held eggs, on two it held young. Another
male was once observed to give this note under similar circumstances: as
he flew from a guard post near his nest-tree upon the female’s return to
their young.

FEMALE. The female used the cheuh-heuh-heuh-heuh call in the
same ways as the male. Once she gave one or two of these calls while
standing beside the nest, and twice she gave one immediately after go-
ing on the nest to incubate. A queer-toned variant, more nearly a
whistle than usual, was given by her several times when I approached
her fledged young, and once when the squeals of an unrelated young
Wood Thrush attracted her to the banding trap.

The strings of loud and excited quit's also were given by the female:
once while defending territory against another Wood Thrush, and a
number of times as she struck at a small mirror mounted on a pole,
which was used to see inside her second nest. Similar uses of these
notes are recorded by Weaver.

The only other note heard from the female was the explosive and
somewhat musical one uttered during a defense of territory and already
mentioned under Territory.

Hervey

Brackbill

NESTING OF WOOD THRUSH

85

YOUNG. The first-brood young were not heard to make a sound until
their last morning in the nest, when at the age of 12 and 13 days one or
more gave some little chip’s or chik’s. The young — exact age unknown
— in another first-brood nest were giving such calls on the day before
they took wing. The study-birds’ second-brood young were silent
throughout their nest life; however, as soon as they left the nest (pre-
maturely, at the ages of 8 to 10 days), they began uttering this same
note — a fact which shows its character as a location call. I recorded this
note at various times as tsih, chik, chip, tsip, tseep, and cheep, its quality
depending considerably upon its volume.

When last seen (at the ages of 10 to 12 days), the second-brood
young were still giving the above note exclusively. By the age of 21
days, when they were partly independent, the first-brood juveniles had
begun to give tih-tih’s as well, and soon these calls were lengthened to
three, four and even more syllables, so that they seemed to be a rudi-
mentary form of the adults’ cheuh-heuh-heuh-heuh. The earlier chip
notes were continued, however, to the age of at least 32 days, when
these juveniles disappeared.

A loud burst of quit’s identical with those of adults was given by a
fledgling just a few hours out of the nest, when it was chased.

Albinism

The female’s albinism consisted of one white feather in the crown a
short distance behind the right eye, some white feathers among the
upper tail coverts, and four white rectrices. The six young of the two
broods were color-banded while still in the nest; no sign of albinism
was seen up to the age of 3 2 days with the first brood, 1 2 days with the
second.

Knight (1940:574) states that among ten broods of young raised in
five years by a partly albino (male?) Robin there were no albinistic
birds. Smith (1934:109) reports that albinistic touches did appear in
the offspring of a partly albino female Robin.

Summary

A pair of color-banded Wood Thrushes in suburban Baltimore re-
mained together through two broods of three young each; nesting suc-
cess was 100 per cent.

The second nest was built 90 yards north-northeast of the first; the
general locations of the two were similar; the placements differed.

The immediate proximity of a stream was not found, as by some
other observers, to be a habitat requirement.

The female alone incubated. Attentive periods at the first and sec-
ond nests averaged 31 and 27 minutes, respectively; inattentive periods
8^ and minutes; the percentage of daylight hours spent on the nest
was 78 and 80.3.

The incubating bird’s behavior during rain and during high wind
is described.

86

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

The first-brood hatch extended over two days, that of the second
brood over three. The hatching hour of one egg was 6:59 a.m., 2 hours
1 7 minutes after sunrise. The shell was carried away.

The female alone brooded the nestlings. Brooding lasted throughout
the young’s nest life. No progressive daily decrease in the brooding was
found, nor any clear correlation between weather and amount of brood-
ing except at temperatures of 93° F. and above, when attentiveness
changed from covering to mere attendance — without shading.

Both parents fed the young. The male made many more feedings
than the female, but the female showed the better appreciation of the
nestlings’ needs; on the young’s first days she gave them softer food
than did the male, and she also trimmed certain portions away from
some of the food he tendered.

During comparable series of observations the average rate of feed-
ings at the first nest was 9.3 per hour, at the second nest only 4.7, with
equivalent food loads.

Both parents were somewhat less attentive to the second brood than
to the first. For example, the male guarded the first nest between almost
all of the female’s sittings, but guarded the second during only 60 per
cent of her absences. At the first nest single periods of brooding by the
female often encompassed two or three food trips by the male, but the
female almost always flew away from the second nest the moment her
mate arrived. The parents were equally responsible for the 50 per cent
drop in feeding rate from brood to brood.

The nestlings’ excreta were usually eaten, by both parents, but
two or three times, during morning twilight, were carried away.

All of the first brood left the nest on the same day, when 12 and 13
days old. These birds were doing some of their own foraging by the age
of 20 and 23 days; they continued to be fed by the parents to the age of
25 to 32 days; they left the territory, presumably independent, at 28 to
32 days.

Two broods seem to be the rule at Baltimore.

First-brood territory was about 100 x 100 yards in extent, second-
brood territory probably 100 x 125 yards.

Both adults defended territory against their own species, but not
especially vigorously; the observed defenses are described. On the other
hand, the female once fed a juvenile of a trespassing family that re-
mained in the territory five days. The study pair were very tolerant
of several other species, displaying hostility only toward a Blue Jay
and a Purple Crackle.

The notes uttered by male, female, and young are described, with
comment on their uses; the female’s use of a note suggesting song is
mentioned.

Partial albinism in the female was not inherited in the juvenal plum-
age by any of the six young.

Hervey

Brackbill

NESTING OF WOOD THRUSH

87

Literature Cited

Bailey, Harold H.

1913 The birds of Virginia, Lynchburg, Va.

Chapman, Frank M.

1940 Handbook of birds of eastern North America. New York.

Cooke, May Thacher

1929 Birds of the Washington, D. C., region. Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., 42:1-80.
Dugmore, a. Radclyeee

1900 Bird homes. New York.

Knight, Charles H.

1940 An albinistic Robin. Auk, 57:574.

Resler, Arthur

1891 List of birds resident in summer near the city of Baltimore. Trans. Md.
Acad. Set., 1891:105-138.

Smith, O. Warren

1934 An albino Robin. Bird-Lore, 36:109.

Weaver, Florence G.

1939 Studies in the life history of the Wood Thrush. Bird-Banding, 10:16-23.

3201 Carlisle Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland

Bird Display. An Introduction to the Study of Bird Psychology. By Edward

A, Armstrong. Cambridge at the University Press; Macmillan Co., N.Y. 1942:

SY2 X 8J4 in., xvi + 381 pp., 22 pis. $5.50.

The study of bird psychology has only recently emerged from its anecdotal,
anthropomorphic stage, and this excellent handbook will probably surprise many
students, who, because the literature has been so extremely scattered, have not
realized the extent of the progress we have made. Armstrong has not only assem-
bled, correlated, and interpreted this literature, but has wisely included the full
references which provide the evidence for his statements. If we question a general-
ization, we can promptly turn to the original sources and form our own
conclusions.

The author’s fine admonition to students of bird behavior demands quotation
in full:

“An interesting observation of a bird’s behaviour should be no less carefully
recorded and reverently preserved than the type specimen of a new subspecies.
Lack of regard for this principle has long prevented the outdoor study of birds
from being considered much more than the harmless hobby of men who preferred
looking at birds to killing them. Now that field ornithology is increasingly recog-
nised to be a serious scientific discipline from which careless observation and wan-
ton generalisation should be sternly excluded, it is essential that its literature
should eschew the vagueness which has hampered the progress of bird-behaviour
studies in the past. It is not enough to be told that birds do this or that; we
should be told what reliable observer has seen them do it.”

This book contains such a profusion of quotations from many sources that
inevitably some will be criticized by any reader. There is, for example, the descrip-
tion of the dance of the Sharp-tailed Grouse (p. 73), which is based on a long
out-dated, and in part anthropomorphic, account, and to which Armstrong adds a
probably erroneous stateipent. One even turns up (p. 13) the old misconception
of birds sleeping with the head under the wing. But perhaps the worst example is
the quotation in full (p. 185) from a recent best-selling novel ( !) of an apparently
imaginary description of the dance of the Whooping Crane.

The book is handsomely illustrated with 40 photographs by the author and
others. There is a bibliography of nearly 700 titles, a good index, and a separate
list of the scientific equivalents of all bird names used in the text. — J. Van Tyne,

88

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

TERRITORIALITY, DISPLAY, AND CERTAIN
ECOLOGICAL RELATIONS OF THE
AMERICAN WOODCOCK^

BY FRANK A. PITELKA

Following the appearance of Pettingill’s monograph (1936) on
the American Woodcock {Philohela minor) attention was drawn
to our limited evidence for territoriality in that species (Linsdale,
1936). Recently, however, Norris, Beule, and Studholme (1940) and
Studholme and Norris (1942) have published limited observations
which touch on the problem of territoriality. With the same problem
in mind, in the early spring of 1939, I undertook to study a small con-
centration of Woodcocks on a semi-wooded plot north of Crystal Lake
Park, Urbana, Champaign County, Illinois.

Figure 1. Habitat of the Woodcock. Photograph taken facing west near
upper end of north-south road in territory C (Figures 3 and 5) ; east- west road
is seen in right background. All of the open area seen in this photograph con-
stituted part of male C’s display territory; his feeding area was located in the
woodland seen in left background.

The area of study, approximately 45 acres in extent, is illustrated
in Figures 1 to 3. The open portions of this area were used by Wood-
cocks as “singing-fields” for their crepuscular displays. During the
day. Woodcocks were confined largely to the wooded and more densely
vegetated portions within the northern half of the area. The patch
of relatively dense deciduous woodland (Figure 1) contained white
oak {Qiiercus alba), red oak {Q. rubra), ash {Fraxinus sp.), shagbark

^ Contribution from the Zoological Laboratory of the L'niversity of Illinois.

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

89

hickory {Carya ovata), and elm {Ulmus americana). Thickets to the
southeast of the main wooded area contained large hawthorn shrubs
{Crataegus sp.), honey locust {Gleditsia triacanthos) , and young elms.
Additional hawthorns, elms, and a few sycamores (Platanus occiden-
talis) were scattered over the open area partially encircled by the old
stream bed or “ox-bow” (Figure 3), which was bordered largely by
willows {Salix sp.). The ground cover of this open area consisted only
of matted dead vegetation (largely grasses) ; the leaf -littered floor of
the wooded area was overlain with the usual stratum of small shrubs.
Within a haw thicket and woods of the northern half of the study area,
there were small shallow pools, the edges of which were frequented by
the Woodcocks. Several recent studies of the American Woodcock in-
clude data of interest on habitat preferences (Aldous, 1938; Merovka,
1939; Studholme and Norris, 1942).

Figure 2. Westward view across display territories of males B and A, show-
ing “open” portions of study area, as indicated in Figure 3.

Observations extended from early March to mid-April and totalled
approximately 40 hours. The Woodcock was first recorded on the study
area on March 5, when a single bird was flushed by J. Murray Speirs.
Crepuscular calling and singing of the males was noted from March 9,
when at least two performing males were present, through April 3. It
is possible, since no observations were made between March 5 and 9,
that calling and singing began prior to March 9. Following April 3,
no Woodcocks were detected on the area, and apparently none remained
to breed that season. Observations included 10 full evening perform-
ances and one morning performance (Table 1).

90

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June
Vol. 55.

U

CQ

<

H

o" ^

!5C

*s

<u

Ch

fcC

C

bC

I cS c

(U

o~:=:

rt

T3 U

+ + M

CNiOOiOrOOt^ loOiOrfrOfC ICN

c

■g

OCN liOrf^TfOO’-^'^ I I

Ot^ Ir^ocirjevioovcr^-^
f<^fN |fNrsrr!rO«NCNCN'^

s s s s s

OO O ^ O O O 00
lOrt ^101010?NO*OIC

o o o o o o o o

1 1

Ofo k«^'^o0'4oo 4* si s s
t; ^ T! Ml '^.

so so ^ sd so so O Tf’* sC so O ^ ^

yri m I ?N lO fO '

I I

^ s

£3 ^

a &;

S S s

P^ < Ph’

OOsOOsOf^iTjr^Ot^OO

I I I I I ! I I I I I i

0*r5cs'^'«-'0s‘00<^0s0s0

LOsO'OsOsOsOT^sOsOsOsOO

;=<<<<uuu<<;s<<

> r^ O >-' CN 00
-^CNCN CNCNrslCNPO

a

<

1943
No. 2

^ In this column arc listed the males, as designated in the text, to which particular attention was paid on different dates.
- Kollowing this morning singing period, a systematic survey disclosed the presence of at least 12 Woodcocks.

•'* An additional individual was found on the feeding area of male A just before calling began.

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

91

Figure 3. Map of study area. Dotted portions represent areas covered with
woodland or relatively tall and dense thickets; clear portions represent areas
covered with grasses, forbs, and numerous scattered shrubs, and a few small trees.
Small dark circles indicate distribution of Woodcocks over feeding areas follow-
ing the morning display period of March 24.

Weather data (Figure 4) were provided by the University of Il-
linois Meteorological Station through the kindness of H. P. Etler.
Supplementary field measurements of temperature were made with an
ordinary mercury thermometer. Data on light intensities were obtained
with an illumination meter (Model 603, Weston Electrical Instrument
Corp., Newark, New Jersey). For the loan of field equipment, I am
indebted to S. C. Kendeigh and V. E. Shelford, and to the Department
of Zoology, University of Illinois.

Acknowledgement is made gratefully to Mrs. Margaret M. Nice,
S. C. Kendeigh, J. T. Nichols, and especially to O. S. Pettingill, Jr.,
for critical reading of the manuscript. I wish also to thank Mr. and
Mrs. J. Murray Speirs for their field notes on the Woodcock, also
recorded at Urbana; J. T. Nichols for records of song-flights and nest-
ing of the Woodcock on Long Island; and C. T. Black for excerpts from
the manuscript notes of I. E. Hess, formerly of Philo, Illinois.

92

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

MARCH 1939 , APRIL

e to 15 20 25 30 1 4-

I I I I I I r I I I I I I r I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

RELATIVE HUMIDITY

(DAILY MEAN)

- r 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 I 1 ri i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 i 1-

-

RAINFALL

1

-

J

ttt.t

S 10
MARCH

1939,

30 I 4
APRIL

Figure 4. Weather data for the period of observation. In the graph of tem-
perature data, daily values include minima, means, and maxima. In the graph
of rainfall, t = trace. Moon phases are shown in the lower part of the figure.

The Problem of Territorialism

In the American Woodcock, habitat and spatial relations are rela-
tively complex. Within the period and geographic range of breeding,
the male confines himself to a feeding area (usually wooded — the
“diurnal territory” described by Pettingill, 1936:280) except for excur-
sions to an adjoining display ground (= open-country territory or the
singing-field) during crepuscular or nocturnal periods. Feeding areas
may be temporary, largely because of weather factors, and they un-
doubtedly shift with the advance of the spring and summer seasons.

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

93

Figure 5. Open-country display territories (.4, B, C) and adjoining feeding
areas (a, b, c) of three male Woodcocks. Distribution of additional singing males
is shown for March 21 (Si) and 24 (S2).

Following mating, the female occupies an area within which the nest
is placed. This she leaves periodically to feed at sites at variable dis-
tance from the nest. The female performs all nesting duties, and,
except for mating, the two sexes apparently remain independent of each
other.

The question now remains, does the male or female display terri-
toriality within one or more parts of the breeding habitat occupied by
the species? Various aspects of this question are considered below,
but to simplify the discussion, it may be stated at the outset that only
the display sites of the male Woodcock are known to be defended, and
only these areas will be termed territories.^

My observations were made largely on three males (A, B, and C)
which remained established on fairly definite feeding and display
grounds throughout the period of study. The display territories and
feeding areas of these males are shown in Figure 5. The territorial
boundaries shown are based on (1) location of calling posts on the

^ The term territory, as used here, will refer to any defended area. This follows
recent usage by Nice (1941:441) and other investigators.

94

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

ground, (2) spatial extent of the display flights, and (3) territorial
claims as evidenced by threat behavior and chases. These points are
all discussed in the following sections. The feeding areas were deter-
mined by repeated observations of individuals within the limits shown,
and of the emergence of each of the males A, B, and C, from his re-
spective feeding area prior to display. Whereas these birds were not
marked, all evidence drawn from their behavior leads me to conclude
that the same birds held the same territories throughout the period of
occupancy.

During the four-week observation period, there were, besides
females, at least five additional displaying males on the study area. The
latter were present for only one to three days. In Figure 5, locations
of singing males other than A, B, and C are shown for March 21 (S^)
and March 24 (So). It was not feasible to census the study area
repeatedly, but such data as are available indicate that numbers of
individuals increased to March 21, when there were between 10 and 15
Woodcocks present. On March 22, Speirs estimated that there were
14 in the area. On March 24, following a morning singing period, a
systematic census count revealed at least 12 Woodcocks (Figure 3),
although only 5 of these had performed (Figure 5).

Call Notes

1. The Teent Note and Crepuscular Calling Periods.

The harsh, loud, nasal note given repeatedly by the male on the
display territory has been expressed verbally in numerous ways (Pet-
tingill, 1936:292). Peent is one of the more acceptable renditions and
is used throughout the following discussions. Apparently both sexes
may call on the display territory of one male, although calls of birds
other than the occupant male are given only intermittently and briefly
(see also Brewster, 1937:168). In some instances the peents of several
birds on one territory may sound similar, but in several instances, it was
possible to distinguish peents lower pitched than those of the perform-
ing males. Pettingill (1936:294) has suggested that the lower-pitched
calls may be those of females, and a difference in the quality of calls
between the two sexes has also been suggested in the European Wood-
cock {Scolopax rusticola) by Pay (see Steinfatt, 1938:389).

On ]\Iarch 28 and 31, males A and B both called a few times from
their respective feeding areas before flying to their display territories.
Pettingill (1936:282, 296) and Brewster (1937:170) also cite instances
when calling began on feeding areas. Generally, however, calling began
almost immediately after arrival on the display territory. ^ One bird began
the calling, others followed, and calling continued up to the first flight
song; thereafter periods of calling alternated with song. During the
preliminary period, all individuals exhibited an acceleration of calling,
probably synchronized with the approach of darkness. The number of

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

95

calls given per minute prior to the first song ranged usually from 6 to
20 (Figure 6). For male A, however, the maximum rate, recorded just
before the first song, was 26 calls per minute. If no interruption oc-
curred, it maintained this rate between songs during the height of the
display period. In this respect, male A differed from the other birds,
with whom the rate of calling was lower, as a rule, between songs than
before the first song. Pettingill (1936:294) records a maximum of 27
calls per minute between flight songs.

Figure 6. Two examples of preliminary calling periods of the male Wood-
cock, showing acceleration of calling prior to display.

A preliminary calling period may be illustrated by a record of calls
given by six birds scattered over the open area south of the woods on
the evening of March 13. From 6:05 to 6:10, bird 1 called alone,
giving four calls. From 6:10 to 6:15, 23 calls were given by bird 1, and
17 by bird 2; bird 3 called once. From 6:15 to 6:20, 34 calls were
given by bird 1, 27 by bird 2, and 15 by bird 3. Birds 4 and 5 each
gave four calls during this five minutes, and bird 6, three. The first
song began at 6:20.

Neighboring males A and B consistently called more frequently dur-
ing territorial occupation than male C, whose “neighbor troubles” were
only intermittent. This type of competition is also seen in the obser-
vations of Norris et al. (1940:14) who, by imitating the peent note,
stimulated established males to call more vigorously and to attempt
assault on the “intruder.”

The lengths of calling periods (including the singing periods from
the beginning of the first song within an evening’s performance through
the last song) are summarized in Table 1. Calling periods are equiva-
lent to total time spent on the display territory. During this time, the
peent note is given continually, except for interruptions by flight dis-
play.

Given the suitable habitat, the chief factors which enter into the
variation among calling periods of established birds are light intensity.

96

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

weather (especially temperature), and psychological stimulation ex-
erted among neighboring individuals. Other factors affecting calling
(and display as well) are not to be overlooked: the presence of females
may influence calling and display; and the strength of the sexual urge
in relation to particular time of the breeding cycle would be reflected
in the length of calling and display periods (Studholme and Norris,
1942:233). During the early part of the breeding season, the com-
plex of environmental and physiological factors which influence migra-
tory movements may be superimposed on the previously mentioned
factors, and birds seemingly established in suitable habitat may depart
after subsidence of territorial calling and display (see below).

Light intensity. — Light measurements were taken on display
grounds. The receptor piece of the illumination meter was placed on
clear ground six feet away from the recorder and directed toward the
zenith. During evening and morning observation periods, readings were
taken every five minutes (Figure 7). Measurements were also taken
with the receptor piece six feet above the ground and directed toward
the sunset, but because of certain irregularities in the data, these were
discarded. Moreover, the bird on the ground is obviously affected more
directly by light of the zenith.

TABLE 2

Records of Light Intensity and Temperature at the Beginning of
Crepuscular Calling

Date

Beginning of
Calling

Light Intensity
(Foot-candles)

Temperature
(U. of I. Sta.)

Field

Temperature

March 20

6:09 p. M.

17

38°F.

21

6:14

11

53

22

6:09

28

56

27

6:30

2

37

36.5®F.

28

6:33

1.5

38

37.0

81

6:39

2.3

52

51.3

The amount of illumination at the beginning of calling on the dis-
play territory showed an appreciable variation (Figure 7 and Table 2).
On March 22, calling began at 28 foot-candles, whereas on March 28,
it began at 1.5 foot-candles. The average of six records is 10.3. Pettin-
gill (1936:297) reports only one measurement, of two foot-candles,
obtained with an exposure meter directed toward the sunset.

The possibility that the start of calling might be related in part to
temperature does not appear to be supported by the available (admit-
tedly limited) data (Table 2). The beginning of the calling periods
may be determined by the time of departure from the feeding area,
and therefore by the light intensity at the site of departure. Since such
areas are visibly shaded by even leafless winter vegetation, the features
of the particular site which the bird occupies would affect the onset

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

97

Figure 7. The time of first evening call in relation to light intensity. Each
line represents declining light values during one evening. A symbol on each line
indicates time of first call on the display territory in relation to light intensity
at that moment. Light readings (taken every five minutes) are shown by points
along the lines. (See also Table 3.)

of calling. It was observed, in fact, that Male C, whose feeding area
was at the eastern end of the forested area and therefore less lighted
in the evening, consistently appeared on his display territory before
males A or B on theirs. Accurate arrival times for all males are available
for three evenings;

A

B

C

March 21

6:14

6:14+

6:11 p.M.

March 27

6:30

6:30+

6:23

March 28

6:28

6:30

6:24

The rate of calling and the time calling begins are both affected
in any one bird by the activity of neighboring birds. Calling begun by

98

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

one bird stimulated others to leave their feeding areas to take up posi-
tions on singing fields. Calling was sustained at higher rates (20 to
26 calls per minute) during periods on March 20, 21, and 22, when
Woodcocks were apparently most numerous on the study area (Table
1 ) . On each of these evenings, calling also started relatively earlier.

The effect of cloudiness on length of calling period is seen on March
14, a dull, hazy evening, when calling began 24 minutes before sun-
set and continued for 32 minutes before the first song-flight (Table 3).
On six more or less clear evenings (March 20-31, Table 3), calling be-
gan 4 minutes before, to 16 minutes after, sunset and continued for only
3 to 15 minutes before the first song. (See also Pettingill, 1936:297.)

TABLE 3

Begin'xixg of Calling and Singing in Relation to Sunset
(Urbana, Illinois, Latitude 40°N.)

Date

Time

of

Sunset

Beginning

of

Calling

Interval

after

Sunsed

Beginning

of

Singing

Interval

after

Sunsed

Sky

Conditions

March 13

6:03 p. M.

6:05 p. M.

2 min.

6:20 p. M.

17 min.

■i

14

6:04

5:40

-24

6:13

9

Cloudy

17

6:07

6:13

6

—

—

Clear

20

6:11

6:09

- 2

6:23

12

Clear

21

6:12

6:14

2

6:26

14

Clear

22

6:13

6:09

- 4

6:24

11

Clear

27

6:19

6:30 j

11

6:34

15

Clear

28

6:20

6:33

14

6:36

16

Partly cloudy

31

6:23

6:39 1

16

6:43

20

Clear

April 3

6:26

6:36

10

—

—

Clear

^Average of these 10 records is 3 minutes after sunset.
'Average of these 8 records is 14 minutes after sunset.

Temperature. — A correlation of length of calling periods with tem-
perature is shown in Figure 8. Two temperature values are given for
each date: value at time of calling and the day’s mean. This diagram
illustrates the effect of temperature at the time of the evening or morn-
ing calling periods. The daily mean temperature, shown in Figures 4
and 8, may serve as an index to the day-to-day changes, and undoubt-
edly the summated effect of these changes is reflected in the general
physiology of the bird; that is, a Woodcock’s crepuscular performance
may be influenced as much by the temperature conditions of the pre-
ceding 24-hour period as by temperature at the moment of display.
At least for evening periods, lengths of calling periods appear to corre-
late more consistently with daily mean temperatures than with temper-
atures during the calling periods. At best, however, these data are only
suggestive.

On March 27 and 28, there was less preliminary calling, and dur-
ing singing periods, performances began to be less frequent and less

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

99

Figure 8. Correlation of daily temperature values with lengths of calling
and singing periods; note that the total time designated as a calling period in-
cludes the singing period.

forceful. The data are too limited for an explanation of this subsidence
of calling and display and of the ultimate disappearance of all the birds.
The species is a summer resident in the region, although at present it
is probably not regularly so. The weather record (Figure 4) shows un-
seasonably high temperature during the period March 22 to 27. Fol-
lowing this period, the birds apparently dispersed; on March 31, males
A, B, and C were still present; on April 3, only males A and B were
present, and on April 4 and thereafter, no Woodcocks were found.

100

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

During the cold evening of March 17 (temperature 26° F.), there
was only a brief period of activity. No songs were given. At least
three individuals called; the maximum number of calls was five within
one minute, given by a single bird. Otherwise, however, no effect of
temperature on rate of calling was detected. Of interest here is Brooks’
record (1935:308) from West Virginia of a male calling and singing
on April 27, 1930, when the temperature was 30° F. It remains yet for
someone to determine whether the temperature thresholds for calling and
singing are the same throughout the breeding season or whether these
thresholds fall as the season advances (Witherby et al., 1940:187).

2. Other Calls.

A second frequent note may be interpreted as ka-kak-ka-k-k-k , re-
ferred to in my subsequent discussion as a cackle. It appears to function
in assault and threat, while the peent note appears to be one of warning,
announcement, and advertisement. The cackle was heard most fre-
quently when Woodcocks were most numerous. On several occasions
the occupant of a territory was observed to give the cackle note during
a preliminary, somewhat circular, flight just above the low vegetation.
These flights occurred well after the calling had begun and from 3 to
10 minutes before the first song-flight. They were accompanied by a
continuous whirring of the wings as heard at the onset of the song-
flight. The cackle note was also given by an established male in silent
flight just as it approached an intruder, whose calling had disclosed
his position. All intruders were assaulted in this way. In some in-
stances, the assault was followed by a chase, in others by a display
flight, either from the site of intrusion or from the male’s usual terri-
torial position (see also Brewster, 1937:170). Also, the initial ascent
in a song-flight was interrupted by slight dips marked by the cackle
note (Figure 10, F). One particularly belligerent male (C) uttered
this note on several occasions just as he alighted on his territory after
a flight. Here, it seemed likely that the calls were evoked by the light-
instruments placed close to the bird’s favorite ground or by my crawl-
ing along the ground nearby. Once the cackle note was heard on A’s
feeding area, just prior to his flight to the display territory.

Norris et at. (1940:13) observed that Woodcocks flying over a
singing-field were chased by the occupant male, who uttered the cackle
note. Further, they observed that the peents of birds near a male in
his singing field produced the same reaction. Pettingill (1936:268, 305)
also observed that the cackle note was given when several birds were
present in the vicinity of a singing-field, and he interpreted it as a note
of reproof. Later, he observed two birds thought to be male and fe-
male and again heard the cackle note. He suggested that females may
cackle also and referred to cackling as notes of felicitation or “talking
sounds.” My observations do not support that interpretation. I found
that males uttered the cackle sound when assaulting any intruder and

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

101

when invading a close neighbor’s territory and attempting to displace
him (see below). In these and other usages described above, the note
seemed clearly to function as an intimidation device. Only the terri-
torial males produced this sound. I suspect that if not assaulted,
another Woodcock present on a display territory would be a receptive
female. There appear to be no published records of anyone’s collect-
ing and sexing suspected females on display territories. Trautman
(1940:249) collected a suspected female in a display flight; it proved
to be a male.

The third important note given during the crepuscular performance
is a softer call interpreted in my notes as ka-rurr, recorded by Pettin-
gill (1936:268) as took-oo. When the listener is only a few feet away
from the bird, the note has a rolling quality evident in the first tran-
scription; at greater distances, the note sounds softer, as in the sec-
ond. In my own case, I could not hear this note at distances greater
than 15 feet. The call is given one to three times between peents, each
took-oo note except the last, which is followed immediately by a peent,
being followed by a brief pause (Brewster, 1894:292; Pettingill, 1936:
294). The observations of Norris et al. (1940:12) would indicate that
the took-oo note is one of invitation and solicitation prior to and after
copulation. They report that a male approaching a decoy, prior to
treading, utters only the took-oo note. Brewster (1937:168) suggests
that this note is also given by the female.

Display or Song-flights

Figure 9. Pattern of sounds and time-relations observed in the song-flight
of a male Woodcock. Divisions of the display, according to discussion in the
text, are shown along the upper margin.

While the literature on the song-flight of the American Woodcock
is extensive, most of it really states little more than that the perform-
ance is a truly phenomenal sight. Brewster (1894) and Pettingill
(1936) have given us the best word pictures of the song-flight. In add-
ing further to the literature, I am interested not only in elaborating

102

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June. 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

Figure 10. Courses taken by song-flights of male Woodcocks, all viewed from
the side. Ascent begins at S. (A) Generalized pattern of the flight, based on a
series of flights of male B. (B) Two flights of a single male with five-second in-
tervals marked by cross-lines to show time relations. A scale is added to show
approximate breadth and height of flights. (C) A flight performed in a fairly
strong wind. (D) Courses of flight displays of competing neighboring males. (E)
Flight of a male who began to ascend near a neighboring male (position of lat-
ter shown by small arrow). (F) Flight of a male showing dips in steady ascent
during which the cackle note was given toward another male (Si, Figure 5).

and amplifying certain details of the song, but also, and more import-
antly, in presenting a simplified and somewhat graphic picture of it
in order to provide some basis for comparison with other Scolopacinae.
Typical performances are illustrated in Figure 10, A and B.

The display of the Woodcock may be divided conveniently into five
parts: initial silent flight, regular ascent, pulsated ascent, climax of
wing and vocal sounds, and silent descent (Figure 9). (1) The start
of a song-flight is silent and lasts but a few seconds. (2) The whirr
of the wings is then heard with a gradual rise in the pitch as the bird

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

103

begins to climb slowly in a large regular spiral about the point of be-
ginning; this part of the song-flight usually lasts about 15 seconds.
(3) During the third part, which is the greater part of the ascent, there
is a pulsation in the whirr of the wings, which becomes increasingly
pronounced; at first there seems to be a distinct sound, zzet, alternating
with each whirr of wing sound; toward the end of the main ascent,
when the wing pulse is quick, these notes are obliterated. (4) At
or near the peak of the ascent, the wing sounds become most distinct
and are given in series of three or four, alternating with zzet sounds,
which are again audible. This is followed by dips and irregularities
in flight, during which wing sounds are reduced. Corresponding to
these dips, there are series of vocal chip notes, sometimes termed
“twittering” (Figure 9). The fact that the zzet sounds are heard dur-
ing the series of chip notes suggests that they are wing sounds. This
climax period in the song-flight lasts 10 to 15 seconds and may in-
clude part of the descent. (5) It is followed by a rapid and silent
dive-descent to a spot near the starting point.

Exceptions to this general picture are seen in the behavior of male
C, whose singing-field was enclosed in part by tall vegetation (Figures
1 and 5). He was observed to precede an ascent by a silent flight to
a point about 150 feet away, where the sound of the wings was then
begun (Figure 10, E). Likewise, the descent may not always be direct.
Male C was observed to circle over the trees and shrubs to the west
and south of his territory before alighting. Pettingill (1936:284)
observed a male begin the first song-flight of an evening from his
feeding area and end it on the display territory.

Males may leave the display territory immediately after descent
without alighting; they may leave after alighting without calling; or
they may remain on the territory for a short period (2 to 6 minutes,
Table 1), during which calling continues, but subsides more or less
sharply (from 14 to 2 calls per minute). Brewster (1894:297) and
Pettingill (1936:300) report similar observations, although the post-
display calling reported by the latter author continued for 8 to 20
minutes. On March 31, a moon-lit night, the sound of flight was heard,
from the territory of male B, 8 and 10 minutes after calling ended; but
during several hours’ wait, no further activity was noted.

Song-flights vary in length among different individuals as well as
in a single individual (Table 4). The songs generally do not exceed
one minute in length. In my observations 60 seconds was maximum,
in those of Pettingill (1936:291), 66 seconds. My observations on
height of song-flights (Figure 10, B) agree in all essentials with those
of Pettingill (1936:291).

The chief function of the display flight appears to be territorial
advertisement, and, whereas the cackle note serves as a threat, the
song-flight may at times function as a superlative threat behavior in

104

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

TABLE 4

Duration of Song-flights

Date

Number of
Performances

Average

Length

Extremes

Male A

March 14

11

34 sec.

29-40 sec.

21

7

43

40-45

27

8

40.5

37-44

28

5

41

40-42

Male B

March 13

6

54

45-60

27

3

46

45-48

Male C

March 22

4

52.5

50-55

24

3

49

43-55

the face of a need for stronger offense. To cite some illustrative
observations: On March 20, male A flew toward an intruder, giving the
cackle note as he approached. (The lower pitched peents of the intruder
suggested it to be a female.) A few seconds after alighting near the
intruder, the male performed a flight display. On March 22, male C
flew toward an intruder without alighting and returned immediately
to his calling ground, where he started a song-flight. On the same
date, male C flew toward the area of a neighbor to the south, giving
the threat note, and then continued into a song-flight (Figure 10, E).
And, finally, in beginning his ascent, male C, circling widely above the
territory of a calling neighbor (SJ, would interrupt the steady whirr
of his wings with the threat note just above the other bird (Figure
10, F). Similarly, male A uttered the threat note during his ascent,
as male B called from his territory (March 27).

A difference between Philohela minor and Scolopax rusticola worth
noting at this time is that in details of the song-flight. The male of
Philohela minor displays over a rather circumscribed area, separate
from his feeding area. The male of Scolopax rusticola displays over
a comparatively large area, which apparently includes his feeding sites;
he seems to follow the bounds of selected territories in horizontal flight
circuits, from several hundred yards to one or two miles long, over or
along the edges of wooded areas, flying back and forth several times
during a single crepuscular period (Warwick and van Someren, 1936:
167). A similar horizontal display flight occurs in Scolopax saturata
(Mayr and Rand, 1937:29).

In the case of Scolopax, the area covered by display flights makes
study of territorial relations among neighboring males rather difficult,
but the flights appear to bear the same significance in territoriality as
those of Philohela. Witherby et al. (1940:187) term them advertise-
ment flights. Warwick and van Someren (1936:171) consider “roding”
(as the crepuscular flights are known in Great Britain) to be largely

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

105

aggressive and to have the same territorial basis as song has in many
passerines. My own opinion on comparable behavior in Philohela is
in agreement with these views.

‘^Double” Flights and Female Display. — On March 22, Mr. and
Mrs. Speirs had the good fortune to observe two Woodcocks in a pe-
culiar flight over the territory of male B. It appears that the two birds
began song-flights simultaneously, ascending about 20 feet apart. The
usual whirr of wings was heard during the ascent, but instead of the
gradual rise and subsequent pulsation, these two birds merely ap-
proached each other repeatedly while mounting to a height comparable
with that of normal song-flights. Following this, there was a smooth
descent without any chipping or twittering. I can only suggest that
these were probably two males who merely chanced to start their flight
simultaneously.

There is no satisfactory record for female display in the American
Woodcock, and the possibility of a mating flight remains doubtful.
Brooks (1935:307) describes a circular flight of two birds together;
he suggests that one may have been a female, but admits that the two
birds may have been males which happened to begin their flights at
the same time. Bagg and Eliot (1937:208) state that “occasionally two
birds perform together, facing each other, seeming to climb perpendicu-
larly up the air, each alternately the higher; but whether these are
mates, or rival males, and whether both sing, is as yet unknown.” Ac-
cording to Zedlitz (1927:76) and Steinfatt (1938:390), the female of
the European Woodcock does not display. Warwick and van Someren
(1936:170) consider flights of two birds together to be those of male
and female, but apparently no attempt was made to settle this point
conclusively (see ^dlitz, 1927:77).

Light. — Whereas calling began over an appreciable range of light
intensities, singing began consistently when the light fell between 1
and 0.5 foot-candles (Table 5). On the morning of March 24, both

TABLE 5

Time of First Song in Relation to Light

Date

Time

Light Intensity

March 20

6:23 p. M.

1-0.5 foot-candles

21

6:26

0

22

6:24

1-0.5

27

6:34

1-0.5

28

6:36

1-0.5

31

6:43

1-0.5

calling and singing ceased before the light indicator rose above zero.
Brewster (1894:293) observed that there was less daylight during
the morning singing period as compared with the evening period.

106 THE WILSON BULLETIN v

Temperature and Wind. — At least from IVIarch 13 through 28
(Figure 8), length of song period, in correspondence with length of
calling period, may be correlated with temperature; that is, from day
to day, song periods tend to vary in length directly with variations in
daily temperature (Pettingill, 1936:296). Song periods varied in
length from 21 to 33 minutes (Table 6). After March 27 the disper-
sal mentioned earlier began, accompanied by a subsidence of singing
and calling (Table 1 and Figure 8). The singing periods during this
latter part of the study are therefore regarded as subnormal.

TABLE 6

Duration of Singing Periods and Frequency of Song-flights

Date

Time

Length of
Singing
Periods^

Number of
Song-
flights

Average Interval
Between
Flight Starts

Male A

March 14

6:13-6:40 p. m.

27 min.

16

1.7 min.

20

6:23-6:46

23

10

2.3

21

6:26-6:54

28

10

2.8

27

6:34-7:00

26

16

1.6

28

6:37-6:58

21

9

2.3

Male B

March 27

6:34-7:00

26

15

1.7

28

6:36-6:58

22

9

2.4

31

6:43-6:57

14

5

2.8

Male C

March 21

6:18-6:51 p. m.

33

12

2.7

24

4:58-5:26 a. m.

28

11

2.5

* Measured from first to last song-flight.

Whereas length of singing periods was correlated with temperature,
there was no evidence that frequency of song-flights during the singing
period (Table 6) was affected by temperature. On the cold evening
of March 17, no song-flights were performed. It will be recalled that
no effect of temperature on rate of calling was noted except on March
17. Records of three males on various dates show that, at least within
the range of available data, the variation in frequency of song-flights
is slight. The low figures for March 14 and 27 may be accounted for
by exceptional competitive behavior between neighboring males. Among
the remaining records, song-flights were begun, on the average, once
every 2.3 to 2.8 minutes — a relatively regular rate — irrespective of
the length of the singing period.

Wind may have marked effect on the length and general perform-
ance of the song-flight (Pettingill, 1936:292, 293). In Figure 10, C,
a song-flight performed in strong wind is diagrammed as viewed from
the side. Under such conditions, the flights are shortened (see the
record of male A for March 14, Table 4). Part 3 of the song-flight
was shortened markedly in the face of strong wind, and lasted from
3 to 10 seconds (average 5.5 for 9 records) as against a normal 10 to
15 seconds on calm evenings.

Frank A.
Pitelka

- AMERICAN WOODCOCK

107

Territorial Behavior

At present, only the display sites are known to be defended. It
follows then that neither the feeding areas of the males nor the nest-
ing areas of the females can be called territories. Pettingill (letter)
properly points out that it would be unusual for a bird not to show
evidence of territoriality in the vicinity of the nest, but no data are
available. Woodcocks may be gregarious on feeding grounds in win-
ter and in migration, but it yet remains to be determined whether or
not they are gregarious in late spring and summer. Under present-day
conditions of reduced abundance, there is limited opportunity to in-
vestigate these points. During day-time observations (March 24) on
the study area, when at least 12 Woodcocks were found about suitable
feeding areas (Figure 3), no intolerance or chasing was seen. In the
literature on Scolopacinae, I have found no mention of territorial
behavior on feeding or nesting areas.

Extent of Feeding Area and Territory. — The size of the feeding
area occupied by the male Woodcock appeared to be determined largely
by availability and suitability of foraging sites. The area over which
a bird forages may vary to a considerable degree (Pettingill, 1936:283).
The birds believed to be occupants of areas a, b, and c (Figure 5) were
seen regularly at favored feeding sites within parts of their respective
areas. The feeding areas of these birds were between 250 and 300
feet in diameter and larger than examples mentioned by Pettingill. But
I attribute this to the greater extent of suitable feeding grounds in my
study area. At the time of observation, scattered spring ponds and
moist, soft, leaf-littered woodland floor provided excellent sites for
them. Areas a and c were both surrounded by additional ground over
which feeding might have occurred. I would suggest that these feeding
areas were probably maximal in extent.

Calling sites on the display territory were confined to areas rela-
tively small, and more or less circular, ranging from 50 to 75 feet in
diameter. Areas of about equal extent are described by Pettingill
(1936:284) and Aldous (1938:840). Depending apparently on the
presence of shrubby masses over the display territory, there may be
what Norris et al. (1940:9) term a “primary singing ground” together
with one or more “auxiliary” areas. This agrees in essence with my
observations of singing-grounds with scattered shrubs and without
clear-cut openings, where a male might call usually from one favored
site, but would move occasionally to another site as much as 75 feet
away. The areas described by Norris et al. (average 21x37 feet) prob-
ably were small chiefly because of this vegetational factor. Brewster
(1925:230; 1937:166) observed males singing and alighting at differ-
ent points in fields of several acres instead of maintaining more or
less definite stations.

108

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

My observations on the extent of the area covered by one song-
flight differ from those of most earlier reports. Most flights, the
ascents of which were more or less circular, were spread over areas of
only 35- to 40-yard diameter acre). Certain irregular flights of
male C extended over as much as ^ of an acre; moreover, male C
consistently flew over larger areas than males A or B. He also was the
most belligerent and held the largest territory. Further, the placement
of the calling site in relation to large vegetational masses was such that
his ascent could not be made over a circle about a beginning point,
and this largely accounted for the irregularities in his song-flights (see
Figure 10, E). Other factors, for instance the proximity of competing
males, may influence the spatial extent, as well as the vigor, of the
flight-song. Pettingill (letter) states that the total area covered by a
song-flight seldom, if ever, exceeds 300 feet square (about two acres)
This figure was calculated to include flights begun or ended outside the
display territory and flights performed in strong wind. Brooks (1935:
308) reports circles of as much as 400 yards in diameter. Such circles
would be over 2^2 acres in size! Brewster’s estimate (1894:293) that
a flight may extend over five acres likewise seems to be excessive.

However, the display flights do not always cover the same area.
On different flights, males may fly in different directions so that the
total area covered by all flights of one male may reach two to five
acres (Figure 5). A male asserts his claims in any part of the area
generally covered by his song-flights in spite of the fact that calling
is usually confined to the center of the area.

Relations oj Neighboring Males. — Several references have already
been made to the territorial behavior displayed among neighboring
Woodcocks; namely, (1) chasing of intruders, (2) preliminary flights
over territories, and (3) warning and threat notes. In addition, chases
occurred among closely neighboring birds one of whom would leave
his own area, invade that of a neighbor, and chase or attempt to
chase him away, indicating overlap of areas claimed by individual
males. On March 21 and 22, male C chased and probably attacked at
least three neighboring males (Figure 5); the third male, present only
on March 22, called from the open area along the south border of C’s
territory, west of the road. There were numerous other instances, in-
volving males A and B also, when fewer birds were present. Retalia-
tory chases were also noted. Male C assaulted and probably chased
at least twice a close neighbor to the south. He was apparently suc-
cessful in driving him off, for following the encounters, the south bird
began a song-flight and ascended over the territory of male C, then
continued to the north in a direct flight, and did not return.

Competition between males A and B was noted several times. On

® In Pettingill’s monograph, the statement concerning area covered by a song-flight
(1936:291) should read 300 feet square instead of 300 yards square. In a letter, he
suggests that this correction be recorded here.

frank A.
Pitelka

a:siericax woodcock

109

March 21, for instance, male A was observed to display again almost
immediately after descent if male B was in display at that time. On
March 27, male A displayed six times, and male B five times, within
the same period of six minutes. Similarly, on March 28, males A and
B gave five overlapping performances (three by male B) within a per-
iod of three minutes. Another demonstration of competitive behavior
was seen in the directions of the respective ascents of males A and B,
as shown in Figure 10, D, again suggesting overlap of territorial areas
desired by each male. This feature of the song-flights of the two neigh-
boring males was observed repeatedly when both were performing.

Pettingill (1936:282) observed an established bird fly over to the
calling site of a second bird and there begin a song-flight. He saw no
combat between one male and two others which were established within
300 yards of the first, but I found males fighting and actively com-
peting when they were 500 feet apart (Figure 5). i\ldous (1938:840)
observed the shortest distance between two singing grounds to be 400
feet; this apparently refers to the boundaries, so that occupant males
were probably farther apart. He makes no mention of any competitive
behavior.

Strutting and Mating

While calling, the male maintained a stiff stance with head pulled
back, wings dropped, and tail spread and held vertically (see also Pet-
tingill, 1936:294). When uttering the peent note he jerked his head
backward. Usually, the calls were given from one position, which was
then changed by a few steps. But on two occasions I saw a rhythmic
strutting (by male C, March 22). Tail, wings, and head were held as
described above. The bird moved stiffly along a straight line for about
two feet, then turned about 120° to the left, giving a peent note at the
end of the turn. The original direction of movement was then resumed,
and at the end of another two feet, another turn was made. This
performance was repeated several times.

This behavior appears to be only a manifestation of excitement
during the display period. Female Woodcocks strut similarly when
disturbed from the nest (Ford, 1926; Murphy, 1926), and I would
regard this behavior (wings dropped, tail spread, etc.) as comparable
with that seen in individuals of a variety of species when excited. It
is not necessarily a courtship display — the behavior preliminary to
mating may be distinctly different, as described by Norris et al.
(1940:10). But it is possible that strutting may occur just prior to
copulation: Pulchaski (see Steinfatt, 1938:410) reports a displaying
male Scolopax rusticola that alighted near a nest which contained an
incomplete clutch; the female left the nest and strutted, then crouched;
copulation followed.

What can be said of the relation of mating to the display territory?
The established male appears to resent all intruders and assaults them

110

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June. 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

with the cackle note. Females may visit the singing-field (Pettingill,
1936:284), but visiting birds may include males as well, both estab-
lished (as competing neighbors) or unestablished (as transients or new
arrivals on breeding grounds). Several authors insist on interpreting
chases as occurring between male and female. The events subsequent
to any territorial intrusion are determined largely by the responses
of the outsider to intimidation. On several occasions, I have seen the
male approach an intruder and then either display in a song-flight or
chase the intruder — a chase if the latter leaves, or a display if the
intruder stays his ground. Norris et al. (1940:10) suggest that copu-
lation is attempted if the intruding bird remains quiet. They observed
that a decoy of male proportions placed in normal standing position
on a territory, if seen by the established male, was received sooner or
later as a female, and copulation was attempted. Here the important
point is that an intruder remaining quiet on the singing grounds of a
male is accepted by him as a receptive female. Under these circum-
stances, the male assumed a peculiar stance, first described by Norris
et al. With wings raised and legs stiffened, the male approached the
decoy, dropping his wings occasionally and uttering only the took-oo
notes. Treading occurred from both sides as well as from behind. Any
conclusions drawn from these observations must remain tentative, how-
ever, until full data on behavior before and after natural copulation
are available.

An observation of mating in the European Woodcock has been
mentioned above. The only report of copulation in the American
Woodcock is that of Shelley (Pettingill, 1936:305); this record ap-
parently was also made on the display territory. I did not observe
copulation. From our limited information, it appears that mating may
occur either on display grounds or near nesting sites, but initial mat-
ings of a breeding season probably occur on the display grounds. The
question arises: does one male establish a pairing bond with a female
during the egg-laying period and later visit the site of the nest? Or
does the occurrence of mating near the nest result from a chance
discovery of a receptive female by a male moving about favorable
feeding grounds?

Pettingill (1936:306) and Norris et al. (1940:9) consider the
Woodcock to be polygamous, but the available evidence is not satis-
factory. Circumstantial evidence drawn from my observations agrees
with that cited by Pettingill (1936:305): more than one bird may
enter the display territory and apparently remain for a time; likewise,
on diurnal feeding areas, several birds may be present (Figure 3). Pair
formation does not occur in the European Woodcock (Steinfatt, 1938:
387), and the species is regarded as polygamous (Zedlitz, 1925:67).
Zedlitz (1927:75) reports females of Scolopax rusticola to be polyan-
drous in areas where males are numerous. The studies of Steinfatt and

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

111

Zedlitz suggest that several copulations are necessary for the comple-
tion of a clutch. Considering the comparable breeding biology of
Philohela and Scolopax, it is possible that these conditions obtain in
Philohela, also. On the other hand, Aldous (1938:842) regards the
species as monogamous. Certain observations by Brewster (1925:228,
’229) favor this contention.

Display in Relation to Migration and Nesting

Woodcocks did not remain to nest on the study area in 1939, and
from the foregoing discussion, it is evident that American Woodcocks
may, during passage northward, become established temporarily and
exhibit territoriality. According to data sent to me by J. Murray
Speirs, performing males were present in Champaign County in 1940
at least from March 19 to April 2, but departed; in the spring of 1941,
although several observers looked for Woodcocks, none was found.

Data from other parts of the northeastern United States, presented
below, show that flight displays of the Woodcock are normally given
for approximately two months beyond the latest record from Cham-
paign County. Most breeding records fall in April. There seems to be
little doubt that the birds which left the study area became re-estab-
lished elsewhere.

Territorial behavior, then, may not necessarily be restricted to
sites where actual breeding will take place. Studholme and Norris
(1942:231) report migratory movements of Woodcocks and variations
in numbers of singing males during the first week of April in central
Pennsylvania; after the first week, numbers were more or less sta-
bilized, and territories were definitely established. Steinfatt (1938:384,
386) observed that males of Scolopax rustkola performed their cre-
puscular flights when stopping in the course of spring migration. It
may be added that flight displays of the American Woodcock have
been observed at the time of fall migration (Pettingill, 1936:303).

In east-central Illinois, as in most other parts of the state, the
Woodcock generally arrives in spring during the first half of March
(Pettingill, 1936:233). The earliest arrival date at Urbana is March
5. The species may be fairly common locally during migration, but
as a summer resident it is uncommon. Available nesting records show
that eggs are laid from late March through April (Hess, 1910:31 and
1912, MS). Nesting records from northeastern states generally range
from late March through May, however, and at any particular location
the breeding season may be irregular because of the relatively long
time span during which nesting may take place (Brooks, 1930:249).
Yet there is no satisfactory evidence that the American Woodcock
generally nests more than once a year. Two nestings may take place
on occasion, as suggested by records of Pettingill (1936:218), Hicks
(1933:181), and Bagg and Eliot (1937:208). The European Wood-
cock regularly breeds twice a year (Steinfatt, 1938:390).

112

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

In east-central Illinois, display flights have been observed from
March 9 through April 2. Records over a series of years, however,
would probably extend this period. In northwestern Ohio, for exam-
ple, records of males in flight displays extend from February 28
through May 10 (Trautman, 1940:249); in the Cayuga Lake basin.
New York, from March 14 to June 2 (Pettingill, 1936:277, 297); and
on Long Island, New York, from February 13 to May 28 (J. T. Nich-
ols, letter). Bagg and Eliot (1937:208) record males in the Connecti-
cut Valley, Massachusetts, giving crepuscular calls on February 5 and
24; dates on which flight displays were seen range from March 4 to
June 7. One late date, July 17, 1933, is also given. Studholme and
Norris (1942:233) found that most males ceased regular display by
the middle of May, although irregular display continued until June 3.
Their observations indicate that there is only one cycle of active
display among the established males of an area. In the European
Woodcock, there are two cycles of active flight display corresponding
to the two broods per nesting season (Steinfatt, 1938:384): the “Friih-
lingsbalz,” in East Prussia, lasts from late March through April and
the “Sommerbalz” lasts from early May through most of June, or even
until as late as July 12.

In making this study of the American Woodcock, I attempted
primarily to investigate certain features of territorial relations left
unsettled by earlier studies. Unlike Pettingill’s experience (1936:283),
I found evidence for (1) competition in selection and maintenance of
a display territory, (2) combat, (3) overlap of territories, (4) leaving
of territories to fight neighbors, and (5) increased vigor of singing
among neighboring males. However, these points need to be amplified
through further observation and study. My own field work was limited
by lack of time. There is obviously a great deal yet to be learned about
the American Woodcock, and several questions must be apparent to
the reader. Among these are the problems of polygamy, pair-forma-
tion, and territoriality on areas other than display sites. Investigators
may gain some idea of the data needed for the American Woodcock
by reading the excellent summarization by Witherby et al. (1940:184)
of available data on the European species.

Summary

During the early spring of 1939, a study of territoriality, display, and
certain ecological relations of the American Woodcock was undertaken
at Urbana, Champaign County, Illinois. From a small concentration
of migrant Woodcocks present on the semi-wooded study area from
IMarch 5 to April 3, three established males were studied. They were
confined to more or less definite feeding areas and to open-country,
crepuscular-display territories.

A call-note of advertisement and warning, peent, is given repeat-

Frank A.
Pitelka

AMERICAN WOODCOCK

113

edly on the display territory when the occupant male is not performing
a song-flight. Competition among neighboring males accelerates rate
of calling. Normal, day-to-day variations in temperature do not appear
to affect rate of calling. But the length of the crepuscular calling pe-
riod tends to correlate directly with temperature variations; that is,
calling periods are longer when daily temperatures are higher. There
is undoubtedly a relation between light intensity and beginning and
ending of crepuscular calling, but other factors complicate this relation.

The cackle note is given by an established male in assault and
threat toward other birds who invade his territory or who occupy
neighboring territories.

The song-flights of the male Woodcock function chiefly in territorial
advertisement but may also function in intimidation. Neighboring
males may compete through more frequent performance of the song-
flight. The frequency with which the song-flight is performed does
not appear to be affected by temperature. First song-flights were
given during evening display periods when the light intensity fell to
1.0 to 0.5 foot-candles. Length of singing period as well as length of
calling period tends to vary according to day-to-day temperature
fluctuations.

Only the display sites of males are known to be defended, and at
present only these can be termed territories. Manifestations of terri-
toriality among established males are seen in competitive selection and
maintenance of singing-fields, combat, overlap of display territories,
efforts to displace neighbors through aggression, and increased vigor
of singing and calling among closely neighboring males.

Feeding areas occupied by three males were 250 to 300 feet in
diameter. Calling sites ranged from 50 to 75 feet in diameter, but
territorial claims are asserted over larger areas, defined in part by outer
limits of display flights. Single flights may cover areas of ^ to ^ of
an acre. All flights of a single male may cover a total area of two to
five acres.

Both male and female Woodcocks may strut when excited. Strut-
ting is not necessarily a courtship display preliminary to mating.

Territorial males resent all intruders and assault them with the
cackle note. Events subsequent to any intrusion are determined largely
by responses of the intruder to intimidation.

American Woodcocks may become temporarily established on ter-
ritories during the period of spring migration.

Literature Cited

Aldous, Clarence M.

1938 Woodcock-management studies in Maine, 1937. Trans. 3rd North
American Wildlife Conference, 1938:839-46.

Bagg, a. C., and S. A. Eliot, Jr.

1937 Birds of the Connecticut Valley in Massachusetts. Hampshire Book-
shop, Northampton, Mass.

114

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

Brewster, William

1894 Notes and song-flight of the Woodcock, Auk, 11:291-98.

1925 The birds of the Lake Umbagog region of Maine. Part 2. Bull. Mus.
Comp. Zool., 66:211-402.

1937 Concord River, Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass,

Brooks, Maurice G,

1930 Notes on the American Woodcock in central West Virginia. Atik,
47:248-49.

1935 Does the female Woodcock ever sky dance? Auk, 52:307-8.

Ford, Edward R.

1926 The Woodcock’s display. Bird-Lore, 28:395.

Hess, Isaac E.

1910 One hundred breeding birds of an Illinois ten-mile radius. Auk, 27:
19-32.

Hicks, Lawrence E,

1933 The breeding birds of Ashtabula County, Ohio. Wilson Bull., 45:
168-95.

Linsdale, Jean M.

1936 Opinions aroused by Pettingill’s monograph on the American Woodcock.
Condor, 38:250-51.

Mayr, E., and A. L. Rand

1937 Results of the Archbold Expeditions, 14. Birds of the 1933-1934 Pap-
uan Expedition, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 73:1-248.

Merovka, Lawrence J.

1939 The Woodcock in Louisiana. La. Cons. Rev., 8:11-14.

Murphy, Robert Cushman

1926 Nest-protecting display of the Woodcock. Bird-Lore, 28:265-66.

Nice, Margaret Morse

1941 The role of territory in bird life. Amer. Midi. Nat., 26:441-87.

Norris, Russell T., John D. Beule, and Allan T. Studholme

1940 Banding Woodcocks on Pennsylvania singing grounds. Jour. Wildlife
Management, 4:8-14.

Pettingill, Olin Sewall, Jr.

1936 The .American Woodcock, Philohela minor (Gmelin). Mem. Boston
Soc. Nat. Hist., 9, No. 2:167-391.

Stein FATT, Otto

1938 Das Brutleben der Waldschnepfe. Jour, ji'tr Ornith., 86:379-424.
Studholme, Allan T., and Russell T. Norris

1942 Breeding VV’oodcock populations. Auk, 59:229-33.

Trautm.xn, Milton B.

1940 The birds of Buckeye Lake, Ohio. Misc. Puhl., Mus. Zool., Univ.
Mich., No. 44:1-466.

W.VRWicK, T., and V. D. van Someren

1936 The roding of the Woodcock (Scolopax rusticola rusticola Linne).
Scot. Nat. (Edinburgh), No. 222:165-72.

WiTiiERBY, H. F., F. C. R. JOURDAIN, N. F, Ticehurst, and B. W. Tucker
1940 The handbook of British birds. Vol. 4, Witherby, London.

Zedlitz, O.

1925 Aus der Kinderstube schwedischer Brutvogel. 4. Die Waldschnepfe
{Scolopax rusticola rusticola L.). Beitrdge zur Fortpflanzungsbiologie
der Vogel, 1:65-67.

1927 Contributions a I’etude biologique de la Becasse. Rev. Frangaise d’Or-
nithologie, 2nd kr., No. 214:74-81.

University of California, Berkeley, California

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

THE WILSON BULLETIN

115

NIDIFICATION OF THE PASSERINE BIRDS
OF HISPANIOLA

BY JAMES BOND

HEN I began my survey of the avifauna of the West Indies in

1927 very little was known of the nesting habits of the birds of
Hispaniola, and I tried to fill this gap during the nine months that I
spent on the island. It seemed especially important to secure informa-
tion on the nesting of the endemic species, all of which I encountered in
the field and most of which I collected. It must not be forgotten that
the instinct to construct a particular type of nest is inherited, just as
structural and color characters are; and although rarely mentioned by
systematists, the type of nest is, I believe, frequently more indicative of
relationships than anatomical characters are.

This paper deals only with the Passeriformes, not only because birds
of this order are the least known, but also because their nesting habits
(with a few exceptions) are of greater taxonomic significance. For
example, the nidification of the continental Schiffornis turdinus indicates
that this peculiar species is a member of the suborder Mesomyodi and
should probably be referred to the Cotingidae. Griscom (1932:277)
writes that “the characters which make it a member of the Mesomyodi
are only assumed” and that “in life Schi§ornis is thrush-like in habits
and appearance.” But no thrush that I know of builds a nest or has
eggs resembling those of Schiffornis. Again, nests and eggs of the
peculiar family Pteroptochidae suggest relationships with the New
Zealand “wrens” {Xenicus, etc). As an example among non-Passerine
families, I believe that a comparative study of nidification of the swifts
will prove particularly helpful to systematists.

After examination of hundreds of nests of West Indian birds from
all parts of the region, I have reached the following conclusions:

(a) Quite distinct or at least not strictly representative species of
the same genus usually build distinctive nests (e.g. Elaenia martinica,
E. fiavogaster, E. fallax).

(b) Representative species and subspecies build similar types of
nests, and the eggs are usually similar. There is more individual than
subspecific variation in nest construction.

(c) In the West Indies many of the rarer passerine species lay not
more than two eggs, the common species seldom less but rarely more
than three. In the Greater Antilles, certain genera (e.g. Myiarchus,
Corvus) frequently, if not habitually, lay four eggs.

(d) In southern Haiti the breeding season of most of the rarer
passerine birds is toward the end of the first rainy season (May and
June), and but one brood is raised annually. The season is not nearly
so definite with the commoner species, some of which (e.g. Coereba,

116

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

Tiaris) may be found nesting at any season of the year, and they prob-
ably rear two broods. Birds apparently nest earlier in northern Haiti
than in the south.

Annotated List *

Gray Kingbird, Tyrannus dominicensis dominicensis

The Gray Kingbird habitually lays three eggs in Hispaniola. A few
nests were found with one or two eggs, but these were probably incom-
plete or may have represented a second laying. Nests found from
April 18 to June 1.

Loggerhead Flycatcher, Tolmarchus caudijasciatus gabbii

This flycatcher builds a flimsy, cup-shaped nest like that of the
Gray Kingbird. One nest, which I found near Kenscoff, contained two
heavily incubated eggs, which were unfortunately broken when an at-
tempt was made to collect them. Mr. George Smooker of Trinidad has
a set of three eggs that was taken in Haiti by Dr. J. G. Myers, formerly
of the Imperial College of Tropical Agriculture in Trinidad. These eggs
he describes (in a letter) as follows: “ground a medium cream color;
upper markings umber-brown of rather varying shades, splashed and
scattered irregularly over the surface of the shell, but more pronounced
at the larger end where a very few black hair lines and dots are ap-
parent; underlying markings lavender-grey, not profuse (23.5 x 17.5;
24.6 X 18.2; 24 x 18 mm.).”

The nidification of Tolmarchus indicates close relationship with
Tyrannus but not with Titan gus {sidphuratus) which builds a large,
untidy globular structure with the entrance near the top (Belcher and
Smooker, 1937:234). In the latest review of the Tyrannidae (Hell-
mayr, 1927) the genus Tolmarchus is far removed from Tyrannus,
being placed next to Pitangus. From a morphological viewpoint alone,
the relationship of Tolmarchus with Tyrannus seems to me at once
apparent. The bill, particularly that of the Bahaman race {bahamen-
sis), resembles that of T. melancholicus. The color pattern of Tol-
marchus, especially the dark pileum and whitish tip of the tail, re-
minds one of our Eastern Kingbird (T. tyrannus). Incidentally, its
rather harsh chattering notes are also reminiscent of this well known
species. Nests found from May 14 to July 12.

Stolid Flycatcher, Myiarchus stolidus dominicensis

The nidification of the Stolid Flycatcher resembles that of others of
the genus. Nests found in Hispaniola and on Gonave Island were
placed in cavities in trees or cacti. One nest contained shed snake skin,
a material often found in nests of the northern M. crinitus, and also

* Description of nests and eggs are supplementary to those given in Wetmore and
Swales (1931) and in Bond (1936). Precise nesting dates pertain to nests, found in
Hispaniola or on Gonave Island, that contained eggs unless otherwise stated.

James

Bond

NESTS OF HISPANIOLAN BIRDS

117

noted in nests of M. tyrannulus, although not in those of M. validus
and M. barbirostris , both of Jamaica, probably because snakes are al-
most extinct in Jamaica, where I saw only one snake {Epicrates subfla-
vus Stejneger), which had been caught by a native near Morant Bay.
Eggs (3 to 4) of the Stolid Flycatcher are strikingly marked. Except
that they are, of course, decidedly smaller, they are like those of M.
(Hylonax) validus. Nests of Myiarchus likewise resemble those of
M. {Hylonax) validus.

In Haiti I have found M. stolidus nesting at an altitude of about
5,000 feet. The Jamaican race {M. s. stolidus) is, however, confined to
the lowlands, being replaced in the mountains by M. validus. Nests
found from May 9 to May 31.

Greater Antillean Pewee, Contopus caribaeus hispaniolensis ^

The West Indian pewees are usually placed in the genus Blacicus,
but I am of the opinion that they should be included in the more wide-
spread Contopus. They have been placed by systematists next to
MyiarchuSy but the nidification does not indicate close relationship.

Nests and eggs of the pewee from Hispaniola resemble those of the
common Wood Pewee (C. virens) of eastern North America. The nests
are saddled on the limbs of trees or bushes, often within reach of the
ground. The eggs (2 to 3) are frequently heavily wreathed about the
middle or widest part, a characteristic of those of C. virens. Nests
found from May 28 to June 12.

Greater Antillean Elaenia, Elaenia jallax cherriei

The nidification of this flycatcher indicates conspecific relationship
with the Jamaican jallax. The nests are bulky cups of moss, heavily
lined with feathers, and are very different from those of either E. mar-
tinica or E. jiavogaster. As far as known, both forms of jallax lay but
two eggs. A single egg from Haiti measures 18.8 x 14.5 mm. Nests
found in Haiti were situated from about 6 to 30 feet above the ground.
Known breeding dates: May 12 (hatching) to June 4 (laying).

Eggs of the West Indian Elaeniae resemble those of Empidonax, a
genus now placed in a different subfamily {Myiarchinae) . And the
Caribbean Elaenia {E. martinica) reminded me in the field of the Alder
Flycatcher {Empidonax traillii), its song and call-note being much
like those of this well known species.

Antillean Cliff Swallow, Petrochelidon julva julva

For an account of the nesting habits of P. j. julva in Hispaniola see
Wetmore and Swales (1931:319). This swallow lays two or three eggs.

As far as I am aware the only swallows in North or Middle
America that build nests of mud and lay spotted eggs are those of the
genera Hirundo and Petrochelidon, which are evidently related and

118

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. Xo. 2

probably of Old World origin, although they are not placed together by
Hellmayr (1935). Incidentally, it seems to me clear that if the South
American swallow known as Petrochelidon andecola should prove to
build a mud nest and to lay spotted eggs its inclusion in the genus
Petrochelidon is correct. If, on the other hand, the nidification of this
bird should prove to be like that of other American swallows it would
indicate that it should be referred to the genus Haplochelidon, proposed
for this species by Todd in 1929. Nests found from April 24 to July 6.

Golden Swallow, Lamprochelidon euchrysea

The nesting habits of the Hispaniolan Golden Swallow (L. e.
sclateri) resemble those of Iridoprocne and CalUchelidon. Some nests
are built under the eaves of houses (at Furcy and at Kenscoff), others
in tree cavities such as old woodpecker holes. Three white eggs are
laid. Breeding dates: June 6 (egg and young) to June 12 (young).

Purple ^lartin, Progne subis domwicensis

This martin has been found nesting in Hispaniola in old wood-
pecker holes and under the eaves of houses, but eggs have not been
collected on the island. Nests found from March to June.

White-necked Crow, Corvus leucognaphaliis leucognaphalns

I found a nest of this crow near Bois Laurence on May 2. It was
placed in a crotch of a pine which I could not climb. The eggs (3 to 4)
were taken by Gundlach in Puerto Rico. They resemble those of other
crows.

Palm Crow, Corvus palmarum palmarum

Nests and eggs of this locally abundant bird resemble those of other
crows. Its eggs (4) are, of course, smaller than those of C. leiicognapha-
lus. Nests found from April 24 to May 21.

Northern ^lockingbird, Mimus polyglottos orpheus

The North and Middle American (including West Indian) genera
of Mimidae lay immaculate greenish blue eggs, the exceptions, as far as
known, being Mimus, Xesomimus, Oreoscoptes and Toxostonui (except
T. crissale). In regard to eggs of Toxostoma, Oates (1905:86) states
that, starting with T. rufus of the eastern United States, birds of this
genus lay eggs that become progressively bluer as we proceed west-
ward, the series culminating in the immaculate greenish blue egg of
T. crissale. Eggs of the Mexican species {T. guttatum and T. ocella-
tum) have not been described.

The systematic arrangement of this family might well be modified
by reference to nidification. Thus Dumetella would not be inserted be-
tween Mimus and Toxostoma, as was done in the 1931 A.O.L". Check-
list, but would be placed next to the Mexican Melanoptila.

The Northern Mockingbird lays three or four eggs in Hispaniola.
Nests found from March to July.

James

Bond

XESTS OF HISPANIOLAN BIRDS

119

Pearly-eyed Thrasher, Margarops juscatus juscatus

Not definitely recorded from the mainland of Hispaniola, although
known to inhabit Beata Island, off the south coast of the Dominican
Republic. Nests have been found on other islands of the West Indies.

La Selle Thrush, Turdus swalesi

Nests of the La Selle Thrush are placed in bushes at low or mod-
erate elevations above the ground. They are bulky cups of grasses,
covered externally with moss so that they appear, until taken apart,
to be constructed entirely of the latter material. The eggs are “robin’s-
egg blue,” rather evenly spotted with greyish brown and lavender-grey.
They are characteristic of Turdus, and are quite different from those
of Mimocichla. Incidentally, T, aurantius of Jamaica, believed to be
the nearest relative of T. swalesi, lays eggs strikingly similar to the
putty-colored examples (see below) of Mimocichla. Nests found from
May 20 (a deserted nest) to June 9 (nest under construction).

Red-legged Thrush, Mimocichla plumbea ardosiacea

I feel very strongly that Mimocichla should be placed next to or
near Turdus, although Hellmayr (1934) places it far from this genus,
with the solitaires (Myadestes) in between. The most important
generic characters of Mimocichla, separating this genus from Turdus,
are the graduated tail and distinctive color pattern.

Nests found at high elevations in Haiti are constructed of grass and
moss, and are virtually indistinguishable from those of the La Selle
Thrush, but the eggs (2 to 3) are quite different. They are greenish
white, heavily and handsomely marked with dark brown. Strangely
enough, eggs from elsewhere in the West Indies have a putty ground
color. Nests of the Red-legged Thrush, found at low elevations, are con-
structed almost entirely of grass. Nests found from May 14 to May 31.

Antillean Solitaire, Myadestes genibarbis montanus

The solitaire has not yet been found nesting in Hispaniola. For an
account of the nidification of this species in Jamaica and in Dominica
see Bond (1936:290, and 1941:373).

Palm Chat, Dulus dominicus

For an account of the nesting of this interesting bird see Wetmore
and Swales (1931:347). (A life history study of the Palm Chat would
be of considerable interest and comparatively simple to make since the
species is found abundantly in and near Port-au-Prince and the large
communal nests can be located with ease.) Breeds mainly from March
to June (Wetmore and Swales, 1931).

Thick-billed Vireo, Vireo crassirostris tortugae

In habits, song, and nesting this vireo resembles the North Ameri-
can White-eyed Vireo (F. griseus), but the eggs (2 to 3) are generally
more heavily marked than those of the northern species. The height of

120

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

the breeding season is apparently in March, since I found on He La
Tortue as many as five nests that contained either eggs or young dur-
ing the latter part of this month. The species is not known from His-
paniola proper, but is found virtually throughout the Bahama Islands
(V. c. eras sir 0 stris) .

Flat-billed Vireo, Vireo nanus

The Flat-billed Vireo evidently lays only two eggs, which are
nearly, or quite, immaculate. Measurements of one set were 19 x 13.4,
and 18.2 x 13.3 mm. Nests found from May 19 (eggs about to hatch)
to May 21 (eggs slightly incubated). On March 12 in northern Haiti,
near Port de Paix, I secured a male in breeding condition — which would
indicate that this vireo nests at an earlier date in this section.

The Flat-billed Vireo is related to and representative of V. modestus
of Jamaica (Bond, 1934). Both species sing on the nest.

Black-whiskered Vireo, Vireo altiloquus altiloquus

Many nests of this vireo were found on Gonave Island in late May.
Nests and eggs (3) resemble those of the North American Red-eyed
Vireo. Nests found from May 19 (with young) to July 20.

Some time ago the nest and eggs of a vireo, believed to have been
‘^Vireosylva caymanensis” (= Vireo magister caymanensis) ^ were de-
scribed by Savage English (1916:28). This is the only species of
the Vireosylva group other than V. a. altiloquus among indigenous West
Indian birds. English’s record I consider open to question, since he
made no mention of V. crassirostris and showed his unfamiliarity with
the vireos by stating that Vireo caymanensis is very probably the
real singer of the song attributed to Melopyrrha taylori” However, the
nest he described was undoubtedly that of a vireo (probably V, crassi-
rostris j since the nest was situated only three feet above the ground).
Recently I received from Bonaco Island, Honduras, a nest and egg of
Vireo m. magister ^ the only vireo known to inhabit this island. The
nest resembles that of altiloquus, but the egg, possibly abnormal, is
immaculate, except for some minute specks at the larger end.

Bananaquit, Coereba flaveola bananivora

The large globular nest of this abundant species is usually placed
at a low elevation in bushes or among vines. The nest is utilized not only
for breeding but also for roosting (Wetmore and Swales, 1931:364).
I have never seen more than three eggs in a clutch. There is no definite
breeding time; nests are found virtually throughout the year anywhere
in the West Indies. Nests found in the study area from January to July.

Golden Warbler, Dendroica petechia albicollis

This Golden Warbler has not yet been found nesting. Nests and
eggs that I have examined of other West Indian forms resemble those
of northern Yellow Warblers.

James

Bond

NESTS OF HISPANIOLAN BIRDS

121

Pine Warbler, Dendroica pinus chrysoleuca

This common warbler of the pine forests of Hispaniola has not as
yet been found nesting on the island.

I have stated (1936:313) that the song of the Pine Warbler is
“easily distinguishable” from that of D. pityophila. This is indeed true
of the North American and Bahaman races, but in the spring of
1941, after visiting the haunts of D. pityophila earlier in the year, I
heard the song of the Pine Warbler in the forests of La Selle, and I was
forcibly struck with its resemblance to that of D. pityophila. Known
breeding date: May IS (female with newly formed egg).

Gray-breasted Ground Warbler, Microligea palustris palustris

Two nests of this warbler were found on the summit of Morne
Tranchant (about 5,900 feet). Both were situated near the ground,
one in a very dense bush, the other in a blackberry thicket. The eggs
are unlike eggs of Geothlypis, believed to be the genus most nearly
related to Microligea, being more like those of the Cuban warblers of
the genus Teretistris in having a decidedly greenish background.
Though of course much smaller than eggs of Phaenicophilus, they re-
semble them in color. I shot one of the birds on the nest, a most un-
pleasant thing to have had to do, but essential, since I had previously
collected both this species and M. montana in this locality, and it was
necessary to be absolutely certain of identification. Measurements of a
set are 19.5 x 14.7 and 19.7 x 14.8 mm. Nests found from May 31 to
June 1.

White-breasted Ground Warbler, Microligea montana

The nest and eggs are unknown. It would be interesting to compare
them with those of the preceding form, since the two species are not
geographically representative of each other. Specimens taken in the
Massif de la Selle in early June were in breeding condition.

It is noteworthy that no Antillean warblers are known to nest on the
ground as many Central and South American species do.

Antillean Euphonia, Tanagra musica musica

This species has been found nesting in St. Lucia {T. m. fiavifrons)
and in Trinidad (T. m. intermedia). The euphonia evidently breeds
early in Hispaniola, for in Haiti I collected males with enlarged testes
as early as April.

The nidification of Tanagra is not characteristic of the Thraupidae.
The nests are more or less globular in shape and the eggs finch-like.
Some South American species (e.g. T. laniirostris, T. violacea, Chloro-
phonia cyanea) habitually nest on the ground, in the side of a bank.

Hispaniolan Golden Tanager, Spindalis dominicensis

Seven nests were found. These were placed in bushes at low or
moderate elevations (from 3 to 15 feet) above the ground. They are

122

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

composed entirely of dry grasses, are always rather loosely constructed,
and are sometimes surprisingly small.

Eggs (2 to 3) of this species var>^ greatly in color and markings.
Those of a set collected measure 23.4 x 16.6, 22.5 x 16.3, and 22.9 x
16.8 mm. Nests found from May 14 to June 10.

Black-crowned Palm Tanager, Phaemcophilus palmarum

Nests were found in low bushes three to six feet above the ground,
but the majority of individuals undoubtedly build in trees. The nests
are deep cups, not unlike those of the Scarlet Tanager (Piranga oU-
vacea) ; they are neater and more strongly built than nests of Spindalis.
The eggs (2 to 3) show much variation both in color and in size; meas-
urements vary from 23.6 x 17.6 to 27.8 x 18.1 mm.

^\'hen examining a nest found on Morne Tranchant, I was aston-
ished at the concern of one of the parent birds, presumably the female,
which approached vsdthin a few inches of my hand, complaining
vociferously, although at the time her eggs were fresh. The species is
usually rather shy. Nests found from May 13 to June 8 (nest under
construction). A nest, containing three young, that I found near Cara-
col in northern Haiti on April 28, 1928, almost certainly belonged to
this species.

Gray-crowned Palm Tanager, Phaenkophilus poUocephalus coryi

I found about 15 occupied nests of this tanager on Gonave Island.
They were situated at from 4 to 30 feet above the ground, and they
resemble those of Ph. palmurum. The eggs (2 to 4) vary considerably
in color. As with nests of the Scarlet Tanager, it is sometimes possible
to see the eggs from below. Nests found from May 14 to June 26.

Chat Tanager, Calyptophilus jrugivorus tertius

Although the Chat Tanager is common on Gonave Island (C. /.
abbotti)j no nests were discovered during May and June. The birds
did not appear to be in full breeding condition but were found for the
most part in pairs. Male Chat Tanagers (C. /. tertius) with much en-
larged testes were, however, taken in the Massif de la Selle in early
June. No certainly authentic nest was discovered, although a single
nest, containing one addled egg (23.6 x 18.3 mm.) that I found on
Mome Tete-bois-pin (also known as Morne Decouverte) near Morne
Trajichant, probably pertained to this species. This nest (found June
14) was situated in a fern about two feet above the ground, bordering
a blackberry patch. There was a protesting pair of Chat Tanagers a
few yards from the nest, so that it is likely that there were young
nearby.

I believe that the genus Calyptophilus is related to the continental
Rhodinocichla, the nidification of which is unknown.

James

Bond

NESTS OF HISPANIOLAN BIRDS

123

Tawny-shouldered Blackbird, Agelaius humeralis

No nest of this well known Cuban species has been found in His-
paniola. Known breeding date: July 9 (young out of nest).

Village Weaver, Ploceus cucullatiis cucullatus

An introduced species, locally common in Haiti. On one occasion, at
Basin Generale, I observed over 70 nests in a single tree. For a de-
scription of eggs taken in Haiti see Bond (1941^:110). Nests found
August 4.

Yellow-faced Grassquit, Tiaris oUvacea olivacea

This finch nests at low elevations in bushes and trees and not infre-
quently on the ground, either under the side of a bank or in the grass of
a roadside pasture. As with many common West Indian birds, nests
may be found virtually throughout the year. Danforth (1929:374)
recorded one that contained five eggs, in the Dominican Republic, but
I have never seen a clutch of more than three of either this or the fol-
lowing species. Known breeding dates: from May (young on wing) to
August.

Black-faced Grassquit, Tiaris bicolor marchii

This well-known species builds its nest in Hispaniola near the
ground, in bushes or ferns or among the spines in the tops of pineapple
plants (Christy, 1897:324). In the Bahamas {T. b. bicolor) I have
found nests in the fronds of palms as much as 20 feet above the ground.
Known breeding dates: from May (young on wing) to August.

Greater Antillean Bullfinch, Loxigilla violacea affinis

I found 17 nests of this bird in Haiti during May and June, every
one of which contained three eggs. Wetmore and Swales (1931:438)
report that Abbott received a nest (of L. v. maurella) containing six
eggs from a native on La Tortue, but I have no doubt that these, as
they suggested, represented two separate clutches. I might mention
here that I never allow natives to bring me nests and eggs that they
have found. I always require that they not only show me the nest
in situ but also the parent bird on the nest.

Nests found in Haiti were placed either on the ground or as high as
10 feet above the ground, in bushes. Most of the nests were domed,
with the entrance at the side, but some had the entrance near the top,
and one nest, which contained a full set of eggs (3), was cup-shaped.
But the nest is always bulky. It is composed in the mountains very
largely of moss; in low arid sections, where moss is not available, of
dry grasses. Measurements of a set of eggs of L. v. affinis are 20.8 x
16.8, 21.7 X 16.5, and 21 x 16.9 mm. All eggs examined had a very pale
bluish-white background (not dull white as in those of the Lesser An-
tillean L. noctis). Nests found: L. v. affinis, from May 12 to June 25;

124

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

L. V. parkhi, May 15; L. v. maurella, from March 19 (not “May 19”
as stated by Wetmore and Swales, (1931:438) to June 20.

Antillean Goldfinch, Loximitris dominicensk

Though all nests that I have found of this species were situated in
low bushes or small pines, I think it likely that many are placed high in
the pines. They are very neat and compact cups composed entirely of
moss. Eggs of one set taken measure 18.5 x 13.7, 18.2 x 13.8, and 18.2
X 13.5 mm. Eggs found from June 2 (eggs heavily incubated) to June
12 (fresh eggs).

White-winged Crossbill, Loxia leucoptera megaplaga

A small series that I collected near Morne Cabaio (southeastern
Haiti) in June, 1930, had very small gonads. In the Dominican Re-
public, young that had recently left the nest were collected in March,
so it would appear that this crossbill breeds very early in the year.

Grasshopper Sparrow, Ammodramus savannarum intricatus

Although nests have been found of both the Jamaican and Puerto
Rican races, the nest of the Hispaniola race is still unknown. It is
doubtless similar to those of other forms of this well-known species. A
young bird in juvenal plumage was taken on February 1 (Wetmore
and Swales, 1931:443).

Andean Sparrow, Zonotrichia capensk antillarum

No nest with eggs has been found of this race, which is known only
from the Dominican Republic. The nest presumably resembles those
of other forms of this widespread tropical American species. Female
observed gathering nest material May 19 (Wetmore and Swales,
1931:446).

Most West Indian Fringillidae have eggs that are of little value in
indicating relationship. A noteworthy exception is the egg of the
Antillean Saltator; this is truly distinctive in color and markings, and
agrees in these respects with eggs of extralimited species (namely S.
atriceps, S. maximus, S. coerulescens, S. orenocensk and S. aurantii-
rostris) .

Literature Cited

Belcher, Charles, and G. D. Smooker

1937 Birds of the colony of Trinidad and Tobago (Pts. S and 6). Ibis, 1937:
225-249, 504-550.

Bond, James

1934 The systematic position of Lawrencia and Laletes. Proc. Acad. Nat.

Set. Phila., 86:399^02.

1936 Birds of the West Indies, Philadelphia.

1941a Some West Indian birds’ eggs. Auk, 58:109.

1941^7 Nidification of the birds of Dominica, B.W.I. Auk, 58:364-375.
Christy, Cuthbert

1897 Field-notes on the birds of the island of San Domingo. Ibis, 1897:
317-343.

James

Bond

NESTS OF HISPANIOLAN BIRDS

125

Danforth, Stuart T.

1929 Notes on the birds of Hispaniola. Auk, 46:358-375.

Griscom, Ludlow

1932 Distribution of bird-life in Guatemala. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 64.
Hellmayr, Charles E.

1927 Catalogue of the birds of the Americas and the adjacent islands. Field
Mus. Nat. Hist., 13, Pt. 5.

1934 Same, Pt. 7.

1935 Same, Pt. 8.

Oates, Eugene W., and Savile G. Reid

1905 Catalogue of the Collection of birds’ eggs in the British Museum, Vol.
4, London.

Savage English, T. M.

1916 Notes on some of the birds of Grand Cayman, West Indies. Ibis, 1916:

17-35, pi. 1.

Wetmore, Alexander, and Bradshaw H. Swales

1931 The birds of Haiti and the Dominican Republic. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull.
No. 155.

Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia

Joseph Grinnell’s Philosophy of Nature. Selected Writings of a Western
Naturalist. University of California Press, Berkeley, 1943: 6x9^ in., xv +
237 pp., 2 col. pis., 6 photos., 5 maps and figs. $2.00.

The late Joseph Grinnell’s many admirers will be glad to learn that the Uni-
versity of California has brought out in an attractive volume a collection of
twenty-eight of his scientific papers. These appeared originally in a variety of
publications, and many of them were quite inaccessible to the present generation
of natural history students. The papers, which are arranged chronologically, cover
the period from 1903 to 1936, and are well chosen to illustrate the work of this
great naturalist at its best. The very titles challenge our attention: ‘The Museum
Conscience,’ ‘Conserve the Collector,’ ‘Sequestration Notes,’ ‘The Principle of
Rapid Peering, in Birds.’ There are 13 maps, diagrams, and pictures, three of them
in color, and an ably written preface by Grinnell’s student and successor, Alden
H. Miller.

This volume reminds us that Joseph Grinnell was not only an unusually com-
petent and active administrator, teacher, editor, and investigator, but also an
original thinker and a clear and forceful writer. — J. Van Tyne.

126

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

GENERAL NOTES

Normal Flight of a Black Duck after Healing of Wing Fractures. — On
December 5, 1942, while Kenneth H. Doan and I were in a blind on South Bass
Island, Lake Erie, Ottawa County, Ohio, a Black Duck (^Anas rubripes) alighted
among our decoys, after first circling them in the wary Black Duck fashion. Its
flight appeared normal in every respect. Upon retrieving this duck I noticed that its
left wing was decidedly shorter than the right. Dissection revealed that the left
humerus had at some time been fractured near the elbow, and in healing, the two
segments of the bone had fused at an angle. Thus the humerus was shortened ; the
proximal segment pierced the skin and protruded at least a quarter of an inch.
(Figure 1.) The hollow center of the bone thus exposed had been completely
blocked with minute bone fragments, behind which was normal-appearing marrow.
The edges of the skin around the exposed tip were entirely healed. At the point of
fusion, where the bone was greatly enlarged, there was an arched projection of
bone with a hollow center between it and the fracture. An old shot-gun pellet, pre-
sumably the one that broke the humerus, was embedded in the muscle beside the
point of fracture.

Figure 1. Healed bones of Black Duck wing.

H = humerus; HF = humerus fracture; UF = ulna fracture; P = arched
projection of bone ; dotted line = skin.

At some time, possibly when the humerus was broken, the ulna had also been
fractured, obliquely, near the middle. This fracture had healed, leaving the bone
normal in length, although somewhat enlarged at the point of fusion. The muscles
and tendons surrounding the humerus and ulna were apparently in excellent condi-
tion, but were, of course, distorted because of the abnormal angle of the elbow
joint. The fused portions of humerus and ulna appeared to be as strong as the re-
maining sections of these bones. The duck itself, although not fat, appeared to be
in good physical condition. It seems remarkable that so mutilated a wing could
function so well that there was no noticeable “limping” in the bird’s flight. — Mil-
ton B. Trautman, F. T. Stone Laboratory, Ohio State University, Put-in-Bay,
Ohio.

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

GENERAL NOTES

127

Roseate Spoonbills Transported Northward by Ship. — Chester S. Lawton of
the cable division of Western Union has reported to me an interesting case of
Roseate Spoonbills (Ajaia ajaja) being accidentally transported far north of their
normal range.

Captain Bredin Delap and Second Officer W. McGarva report that at sunset on
the evening of January 18, 1943, while the cable ship Cyrus Field was in the
Florida Straits (26° 56' N., 79° 36' W.; 25 miles offshore), three Roseate Spoonbills
approached the ship from the southwest, circled it once, and flew away to the
northeast. The weather was moderate, the wind in the southeast. The next morning
at 7:00 a.m. (29° 32' N., 79° 45' W.; 67 miles offshore), three Spoonbills, pre-
sumably the same individuals, boarded the ship and perched on the lifeboat davits.
The weather was then cloudy and squally, the wind in the south. The Spoonbills
seemed very tired, and the men tried to feed them, but the birds would not touch
food or water. During the day one of the Spoonbills was captured, taken below,
and fed. At 5:00 p.m. the two free birds were accidentally frightened from the
ship. By that time the wind was strong, and from the northwest. The birds seemed
unable to regain the ship and were last seen flying southeast (31° 03' N., 79° 22'
W.; 95 miles offshore). The third Spoonbill escaped shortly before noon the next
day (January 20) in about the latitude of Charleston, South Carolina (32° 42' N.,
76° 47' W.; 92 miles offshore).

The identification of the Spoonbills is conclusively demonstrated by photographs
submitted by Captain Delap. Perhaps similar, but unrecorded, incidents would ac-
count for some of those extra-limital records of various species in ornithological
literature which are now supposed to represent natural biological distribution. —
JossELYN Van Tyne, University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor,
Michigan.

The Little Brown Crane in Ohio. — Robert Goslin, of Columbus, Ohio, has re-
cently sent to the National Museum for identification another small lot of bird
bones from archeological excavations at the Feurt Village site in Clay Township,
Scioto County, southern Ohio, a locality from which many vertebrate remains have
been obtained. Among the forms represented I find a complete left humerus col-
lected by Dr. Stanley Copeland, of Columbus, and a nearly complete pelvis secured
by H. R. McPherson, of Columbus, that come from the Little Brown Crane {Grus
canadensis canadensis). The occurrence of this bird in Ohio has previously been
open to question. J. W. Aldrich of the Fish and Wildlife Service informs me that
the only record he has seen is that of Oliver Davie, who says: “I mounted a speci-
men of this bird which was taken in the spring of 1884 from a flock of seven birds
near Springfield, Ohio. It is a rare migrant in the state.” (Nests and Eggs of North
American Birds, 1898, page 121.) Aldrich tells me that he has not been able to find
that this record had been confirmed by other students, and that it has not been
currently accepted.

On comparison with modern skeletons of the Sandhill and Little Brown Cranes,
the bones listed above are easily identified by their small size, in which they agree
completely with the latter form. They thus make a substantiating record for the
occurrence of the Little Brown Crane in Ohio.

From the Feurt excavations there come also three radii that from their large
size are obviously the Sandhill Crane. The Indian hunters then, obtained both forms
of these birds in this region in the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries. Alexander Wet-
more, V. S. National Museum, Washington, D. C.

Coots Killed Under Unusual Circumstances. — Although Coots {Fulica
americana) becoming enmeshed in vegetation and strangling to death is probably
only an occasional cause of mortality, the instance which I observed is of interest.
While making brood counts and nesting observations on waterfowl in Mud Lake,

128

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

near Ruthven, Iowa, July 16, 1939, I found a dead Coot of between six and seven
weeks of age suspended by the neck on a piece of reed grass {Phragmites com-
munis). The lower one-third of the Coot’s body was in the water. Just above and
back of the bird was a large platform nest about 24 to 30 inches above the water,
built by piling stalks on the base of a smashed clump of reed grass. The bird, using
this as a roosting platform, had undoubtedly in jumping off the nest become
snared in the loop of reed grass.

Another unusual cause of death among Coots was observed several times dur-
ing the course of waterfowl investigations in Iowa marshes. On two occasions
during the summer of 1939, and once during 1940, I came across Coots hanging
from a barbed wire fence which crossed the marshland in Clay County known as
Barringer’s Slough. Upon closer examination I found that two of these birds had
apparently hit the barbs on the wire, which were pointing upward at about 45
degree angles. The barbs tore into the skin of the lower neck, and the birds had
swung once completely around the wire, and were thus fastened very securely to it.
The other bird had not gone completely around the wire but had caught on a hori-
zontal barb and had fallen over the wire to the side opposite the barb. How long
the birds struggled before death overtook them is not known.

On another occasion, several Coots from a flock of about 25 or 30 flying low
, over the marsh were seen to strike the fence, but none was caught on the barbs.
How many birds struck the fence for each one caught is problematical. It is con-
ceivable that injury and death to birds from striking these wires might in a season
reach numbers sufficiently large to make justification of the barbed wire across this
waterfowl habitat highly questionable. — Jessop B. Low, Illinois State Natural His-
tory Survey, Natural Resources Building, Urbana, Illinois.

Greater Yellow- legs as a Fish-eater. — Most shore birds generally feed upon
insects and other invertebrate life. The Greater Yellow-legs {Totanus melanoleucus)
is quite adaptable, however, and occasionally an individual is found feeding upon a
type of food that may be considered far removed from its normal diet.

On September 3, 1942, at Lac aux Morts (Lake Alice), Ramsey County, North
Dakota, I observed a Greater Yellow-legs standing in about 2 inches of water and
feeding upon fish. During the short period of 15 minutes that this bird was under
observation, it consumed eight small minnows. The bird caught the fish at right
angles to its bill, then skillfully turned the fish so that the head was swallowed
first. — Clarence Cottam, Fish and Wildlife Service, Chicago, Illinois.

Purple Sandpipers at Richmond Beach, Ohio. — About 30 miles east of Cleve-
land the Grand River empties into Lake Erie at Fairport Harbor. The town of
Fairport is on the east, the village of Richmond on the west. A large turning-
basin for ore boats has been dredged out at the mouth of the river, and in order
to protect this basin from the prevailing currents, which would soon fill it up with
sand, a huge stone pier has been built out into Lake Erie for several hundred feet.
Since the lake’s outlet is to the east of the pier a long sand beach, known as
Richmond Beach, has gradually formed to the west. The pier itself is made of
large blocks of stone laid without mortar joints, and has many large cracks and
crevices. The sides slope downwards to about water level, where the base extends
outward on each side for about four feet forming flat stone strips which are covered
with algae. On these four-foot strips and on Richmond Beach itself, other observers
and I have made a number of records of the Purple Sandpiper {Arquatella maritima)
since 1937 — which are, I believe, the only modern records for this bird in Ohio.
They are as follows: one sandpiper seen on December 27, 1937, and one on January
2, 1938 (James Akers) ; four seen on November 13, 1938 (Mr. and Mrs. M. B.
Skaggs, Isabelle Hellwig, and Ralph O’Reilly) ; two, November 19, 1938 (Mr. and

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

GENERAL NOTES

129

Mrs.^M. B, Skaggs, Vera Carrothers, and Margarette Morse) ; three, November 20,
1938* (James Akers) ; one, December 27, 1941 (Arthur Fuller) ; three, December
31, 1941, and one, November 27, 1942 (Raymond Hill).

I have carefully checked these records with the observers, Skaggs informs me
that he and his companions observed the sandpipers with glasses, in good light, at
a distance of about 25 feet, and noted the characteristic dark coloration of head
and breast, yellow at base of bill, and yellowish-orange legs. The description tallies
with Akers’ and Fuller’s observations and with my own.

On December 31, 1941, I had one of the three sandpipers seen that day under
close observation for over an hour, and took 35 feet of 16 mm. colored film, using
a three-inch telephoto lens, set at distances of from 12 to 25 feet. I have shown
this film to J. Van Tyne and some of his associates at the University of Michigan,
who agreed in identifying the movie “specimen” as a Purple Sandpiper. — Raymond
W. Hill, 3316 Kenmore Road, Shaker Heights, Cleveland, Ohio.

Glaucous and Great Black-backed Gulls at the Western End of Lake
Erie. — While the rest of the lake is still jammed with ice, the thaws and westerly
winds of early March commonly bring open water along the shallow western end
of Lake Erie. As the shore-fast stacks and sheets of ice slowly disintegrate, flocks of
gulls gather to feed on the winter-killed fish in the cracks of the ice and in the
muddy pools at the shore.

During the two or three weeks that these conditions usually last, I have sel-
dom failed in the last three years to find at least one Great Black-backed Gull
{Larus marinus) and (though less frequently) one or two Glaucous Gulls {Larus
hyperboreus) , among the hundreds of Herring Gulls {Larus argentatus smith-
sonianus) and Ring-billed Gulls {Larus delawarensis) .

These two northern gulls have been considered rare in this region, and though
other observers and I made regular sight records, their occurrence in Michigan
was not proved by specimens before 1943. Our seeing these birds so regularly dur-
ing the last three winters, I believe, is only partly explained by the fact that we
knew when and where to search. The evidence points to an increase in numbers of
both species, especially of the Black-backed. In previous years the Glaucous might
have been overlooked frequently, but it seems unlikely that so conspicuous a bird
as the Black-backed could have been missed often.

Although similar conditions seem to attract both gulls in their greatest num-
bers, there are interesting differences in their behavior here. The Black-backed is
more regular than the Glaucous; it is the most wary of the gulls seen here; it has
never appeared before a freeze-up in Lake Erie, and it is seldom seen after the
ice has vanished from the lake; it is rarely seen away from the open lake;
birds which look fully mature outnumber immatures 7 to 1. In contrast, the
Glaucous may appear at any time from the onset of winter to the end of April;
it may be approached at least as easily as a Herring Gull; it has been seen on
several occasions along the marshes, estuaries, and rivers near the lake, and on one
occasion an individual was seen feeding on skinned muskrat carcasses in a field;
individuals vary widely in amounts of buff in the plumage, and every one ob-
served closely enough to discern this character had the dark-tipped mandible in-
stead of the orange-red mark of the fully adult bird.

The Glaucous Gull, which had been observed eight times in seven years, be-
ginning in 1934 (L. W. Campbell, Birds of Lucas County), was seen four times
in 1941, four in 1942, and four in 1943. Before 1941, no more than one bird was
seen on one day, but two were observed on April 13, 1941, and two on March 21,
1942. Although one was seen as early as November 29 (1936), and one as late as
June 6 (1937 — specimen taken at Little Cedar Point, Ohio, by Campbell), most
have appeared between mid- January and mid- April. In all these observations we
have eliminated the possibility of confusion with albino Herring Gulls by direct

130

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

comparison with individuals of this species present at the same location. Campbell
and I took a subadult Glaucous Gull, the first Michigan specimen, at Halfway
Creek, Erie Township, Monroe County, February 27, 1943.

The Great Black-backed Gull was first noted in this region on March 3, 1928,
and a total of 13 were recorded in 12 years (Campbell). No more than one was
seen in a day until January 8, 1939, when two appeared at Little Cedar Point,
Lucas County, Ohio. Then, early 1940 brought 4 records and the \^dnter of 1940-
41, 9 observations, with a maximum for one day of 5, on January 4 at Erie Beach,
Monroe County. In early 1942, 11 were seen, with a peak of 6 on March 15 at
Erie Beach. In early 1943, 26 were noted, with the high point on March 7, when
11 were counted in the eight miles of shore between Bolles Harbor and North
Cape, Monroe County. The earliest date for Black-backs is December 22 (1940),
when two were seen after an unusual thaw had cleared the lake of ice following an
earlier freeze-up. The latest — the only April record — is April 18 (1942). I took
an adult Black-backed Gull, the first for Michigan, along the beach of Erie Town-
ship, Monroe County, March 21, 1943.

This specimen, and the February 27, 1943, specimen of the Glaucous Gull,
were placed in the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology.

The observations included in this report were restricted to week-ends. All
figures neglect possible duplications between different days, but are corrected for
such duplications in any one day. The territory covered fairly regularly extends
from Little Cedar Point, Lucas County, Ohio, north about 12 miles airline to Bolles
Harbor, Monroe County, Michigan. Between these two extremes it includes several
miles of the lower Maumee River and the irregular shoreline of Maumee Bay.
Other observers who contributed to these data are William Anderson, Mr. and Mrs.
Fred E. Stearns, and John Stophlet, all of Toledo. — Harold Mayfield, 3311 Park-
wood Avenue, Toledo, Ohio.

The Great Gray Owl as a Predator on Pocket Gophers. — On June 9, 1941,
I observed a Great Gray Owl (Scotiaptex nebulosa nebulosa) in the Bridger Moun-
tains, about 20 miles northeast of Bozeman, Montana. The locality was in the
upper Canadian Zone, at 7,000 feet elevation. The day was cloudy and dark, with
occasional spatters of rain. The owl’s presence was first given away by the squawk-
ing of a Steller’s Jay (Cyanodtta stelleri), which chased the owl from tree to tree
and finally into a stand of dense lodgepole pine and Douglas fir, wEere the owl was
lost to sight.

.■\t 1:15 p.M. I saw the owl in a 25-foot Douglas fir at the edge of a small
mountain meadow. Its perch was near the end of a branch about 12 feet from the
ground. Within a few minutes the owl made three swoops from this perch, ap-
parently without catching anything. On the fourth swoop it hit the ground with
considerable force and in a minute or two flew away with a dead pocket gopher
(probably Thomomys ialpoides) in its talons. .\n attempt to follow its flight was
unsuccessful, and after searching the immediate area for a possible nest I returned
to the original meadow. I was astonished to find the same owl, to all apf>earances,
sitting in the same position on the same perch. It again made several swoops, and
nine minutes later flew away with another pocket gopher. Fourteen minutes later it
was back on the same perch. By 4:30 p.m. the owl had thus caught a total of four
gophers and one mouse. The mouse was eaten on the ground where it was caught,
but all the gophers were carried away.

The four gophers were caught in the same spot. The first caught was probably
heard digging by the owl, which gave every indication of listening to some sound
before swooping. Inspection of the spot while the owl was away revealed that the
owl had apparently broken through the thin roof of one of the feeding runways of
the gopher’s burrow. Lack of turf (due to constant tunneling by the gophers in
this area) would make such an action easy. The other three were probably caught

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

GENERAL NOTES

131

as they attempted to plug that break in the tunnel with dirt. Though pocket
gophers are chiefly solitary animals, the young gophers are active and still in the
parental burrows at this time of year in the Bridger Mountains.

The owl was not wary, but it would fly if I approached to within 40 feet, and
then return to the same perch. Apart from this it appeared oblivious of my pres-
ence. It seemed to have no difficulty in seeing in the daylight. No sound was made
by it at any time.

On July 4, 1941, I again saw a Great Gray Owl flying through an open space in
the forest, at 1:00 p.m. when the sun was shining brightly. The location was three
miles away from that described above, but in a similar situation. H. B. Mills re-
ports seeing this species in the Bridgers on August 9, 1942, and also in Yellowstone
National Park on October 8, 1934. Saunders {Pac. Coast Avifauna, 14, 1921:68)
reported the Great Gray Owl in Montana as only a winter visitor, but Weydemeyer
{Condor, 34, 1932:139) reported young on July 4, 1931, from eastern Lincoln
County in the northern part of the state. Bent {U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 170, 1938:
219) has already pointed out that this owl may regularly breed within the limits of
the United States. Though no nest has been discovered in the Bridger Mountains
it would seem likely that the Great Gray Owl is a permanent resident there. —
C. A. Tryon, Jr., Department of Zoology and Entomology, Montana State College,
Bozeman, Montana.

Plague of Mice as Food for Short-eared Owls. — Snyder and Hope {Wilson
Bulletin, SO, No. 2, 1938:110-12) gave a detailed account of an influx of Short-
eared Owls {Asio flammeus) into the Toronto region during the late winter of
1935-36 when meadow mice {Microtus pennsylvanicus) occurred there in unusually
large numbers. After examining 1,078 pellets collected under a roost in that area,
they found about 72 per cent of the individuals were meadow mice, and about 27
per cent were deer mice {Peromyscus spp.) , the remaining 1 per cent being house
mice and small birds.

A congregation of Short-eared Owls occurred simultaneously with a high
Microtus population in central New York during a later winter. Between Decem-
ber 31, 1941, and March 5, 1942, from 2 to 14 Short-eared Owls roosted in a white
pine grove near the village of Perry City in Schuyler County, New York.
Meadow mice were unusually abundant in this area and formed a large part of
the contents of 142 pellets collected under this roost at the end of the winter.
Following are the results of the examination of the 142 pellets:

Animals represented Number

Microtus pennsylvanicus 124 (82.1%)

Mus musculus 18 (11.9%)

Peromyscus leucopus 5 ( 3.3%)

Pitymys pinetorum 3 ( 2.0%)

Blarina brevicauda 1 ( 0.7%)

151

The owls usually emerged from the pine roost at about 3 p.m. each day. As
if on a given signal, they would fly out from the pines and start beating back and
forth over the adjacent pasture, scanning the snow for mice. On February 9, four
Short-eared Owls were seen crossing and recrossing the pasture, while a fifth sat
on a nearby fence post with a Microtus in one foot. Sometimes they hovered over
a particular spot in the snow with a quivering motion of the wings and body;
then they would plummet downward with the wings held high overhead and their
feet extended as they dropped on the snow. On February 24, 14 owls were
flushed from this roost. — Pvt. John K. Terres, U. S. Army, Peekskill, New York,
and E. W. Jameson, Jr., Department of Zoology, Cornell University, Ithaca,
New York.

132

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

Diving of a Long-billed Marsh Wren.— The “Rice Pond” on Coleraine
Plantation, western Charlton County, Georgia, provides one of the best rail and
marsh wren habitats in that general region.

On January 16, 1941, Frederick V. Hebard, John W. Burch, and I were listing
and collecting birds there. In the middle portion of the pond where the water was
knee deep there were thick patches of “maiden cane”, the most prevalent plant.
Along the edge of a mat of this vegetation a Long-billed Marsh Wren {Telmato-
dytes palustris) was wounded, and Burch and I spared no effort to catch it. In the
dark water among the cane stems, this bird deftly eluded our finger tips by diving —
after the manner of some waterfowl — at each attempted grasp. Considering the
time beneath the surface, and the fact that it always emerged very close by, it is
highly probable that the wren clutched the bottom growth. More than a minute
passed before it was captured. The skin, identified by Harry C. Oberholser of the
Cleveland Museum, is referable to typical palustris.

This is the first incident I know of diving among the Troglodytidae. — Robert
Norris, 1408 North College Avenue, Tijton, Georgia.

The Alaskan Longspur in Ohio. — On a recent examination of specimens in
the U. S. National Museum, I found a specimen of the Alaskan Longspur {Cal-
carius lapponicus alascensis), taken at Columbus, Ohio, February 19, 1875, by Dr.
J. M, Wheaton. This bird, a male, has the light edgings of the dorsal feathers
extensive, and pale in color, and the concealed chestnut of the hindneck also light
in color, both distinctly lighter than in true lapponicus. The bird is cataloged as
No. 203,070 U.S.N.M. and came to the Museum with the collection of Pierre Louis
Jouy. So far as I am aware, this is the first example of this race to be reported
from the State of Ohio. — Alexander Wetmore, U. S. National Museum, Wash-
ington, D. C.

Neglected Sources of Data. — The current preparation of a paper on the food
and habits of the Belted Kingfisher has called to my attention an unfortunate situa-
tion that I have noticed before. There are, scattered throughout the country, manu-
script reports of valuable studies made by workers leaving for service with the
armed forces, by candidates for advanced degrees in colleges and universities, or by
investigators now deceased. Often an investigator learns only by chance of such
studies even when they are in fields closest to his own. It would therefore seem de-
sirable that special effort be made to bring attention to worthwhile material of this
kind. Some universities (e. g., Cornell) publish abstracts of doctoral theses, a
helpful practice, although many workers obviously fail to consult this source. An-
other means by which unpublished information (especially theses) may be circu-
lated is through University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan. This agency, for a
nominal fee, not only provides 35 mm. film copy, but also publishes a catalog of
items photographed and sends library cards to participating institutions. Such pub-
licity speeds research progress and helps to avoid needless duplication of effort.
Two ornithological examples that illustrate the situation follow:

Gould, Victor Eugene. 1934. A monograph of the Belted Kingfisher, Megaceryle
alcyon (Linnaeus). MS. 309 pp., plus summary, bibliography, and illustrations.
(Gould died in 1934 before revising this paper for submission to the Graduate
School of Cornell University. A copy of the manuscript is .in the hands of
Harrison F. Lewis, Chief Migratory Bird Officer, Ottawa, Canada.)

Manuel, Canuto G. 1931. The relation of gulls and terns to the commercial
fisheries of Saginaw Bay, Michigan, with particular reference to the Common
Tern, Sterna hirundo Linnaeus. MS. 180 pp., illustrated. (Doctoral thesis.
Copies are in the University of Michigan Library and in the library of Carl L.
Hubbs, Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor, Michigan.) — Karl F. Lagler, De-
partment of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

THE WILSON BULLETIN

133

EDITORIAL

We take this occasion to thank Edward A. Me Ilhenny for his recent generous
gift toward the expenses of publication of the Bulletin. For more than forty years
a member, and for several years a Life Member of the Club, Mr. Me Ilhenny has
long demonstrated his sincere and active interest.

With the hope of making our section on Bibliography more useful, we introduce
in this issue a subject classification. The present arrangement is only tentative, and
we shall welcome your comments and your suggestions for improving it. Reprints
of this section are available at a small cost. Since a number of our members sub-
scribe for these to clip and file in their own bibliographies, the titles from each
issue of the Wilson Bulletin are now to be included in the bibliographic section of
the following issue.

The Club is indebted to Katie Roads, Leslie D. Case, and George M. Sutton for
gifts of series of back numbers of the Bulletin. There is a steady demand for these,
and we are very glad to replenish our stock whenever members find that they
have runs or even single numbers which they no longer need.

George B. Thorp and his Endowment Committee report a total of ten new Life
Members added in 1942-1943. They ask us to inform the members that any who
wish to become Life Members during the year will be allowed credit for 1943
dues already paid.

Ornithological News

Wilfred H. Osgood, Alexander Wetmore, and John T. Zimmer have joined with
six outstanding taxonomists in other fields of zoology to form a General Council on
Zoological Nomenclature to replace, for at least the duration of the War, the Inter-
national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, which can, of course, no longer
function. A printed set of by-laws may be obtained from Osgood at Field Museum.

William Vogt, of the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs, has
been awarded a Guggenheim Fellowship for the preparation of a book on Peru’s
guano birds, based on three years’ study which he recently carried on as naturalist
to the Peruvian Guano Administration.

OBITUARY

Leonhard Stejneger, distinguished herpetologist and ornithologist, died in
Washington, D. C., on February 28, 1943, at the age of 91. During later years
Stejneger devoted himself entirely to herpetology, but between 1871 and 1905 he
published many important contributions to ornithology and became an acknowl-
edged authority on the birds of the North Pacific. From 1884 to 1889 he was As-
sistant Curator of Birds in the United States National Museum.

Althea R. Sherman, well known Iowa ornithologist, died April 16, 1943, at
her home in National. She will be especially remembered for her remarkable
nesting studies of the Flicker, Screech Owl, Sparrow Hawk, and Chimney Swift.
The earliest of these, which were among the first such studies made in this coun-
try, were published in 1910 and 1911. Miss Sherman was also a bird artist of
real ability, and shared with Louis Agassiz Fuertes the distinction of showing her
work in 1919 at the first American Ornithologists’ Union exhibit of bird paintings.
A member of the Wilson Club since 1902, Miss Sherman was made an Honorary
Member in 1929.

134

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, Xo. 2

WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
Conservation Education

Two recent articles by Aldo Leopold should be read by every member of the
Club. Each can be read in a few minutes; each deserves long reflection. The
following quotations are but samples, not summaries, and \vil\ not spoil the fun
of reading the complete articles.

From “Land Use and Democracy” {Aud. Mag., 44, Sept.-Oct., 1942: 259-265) :

“Conservation is our attempt to put human ecolog>' on a permanent footing.
Milk-and-water education has convinced people that such an attempt should be
made, and they have told their government to act for them. Some other force
must now persuade them to act for themselves.

“Money-minded people think they are acting when they pay taxes. This hal-
lucination, during the ‘defense’ period, nearly cost us the war. It will cost us our
natural resources if we persist in it.

“To analyze the problem of action, the first thing to grasp is that government,
no matter how good, can only do certain things. Government can’t raise crops,
maintain small scattered structures, administer small scattered areas, or bring to
bear on small local matters that combination of solicitude, foresight, and skill
which we call husbandr\'. Husbandry watches no clock, knows no season of
cessation, and for the most part is paid for in love, not dollars. Husbandry of
somebody else’s land is a contradiction in terms. Husbandry is the heart of
conservation.

“The second thing to grasp is that when we lay conservation in the lap of the
government, it will always do the things it can, even though they are not the
things that most need doing.

“The present over-emphasis on game farms, fish hatcheries, nurseries and arti-
ficial reforestation, importation of exotic species, predator control, and rodent con-
trol is here in point. These are things government can do. Each has an alternative,
more or less developed, along naturalistic lines, i.e., management or guidance of
natural processes. Research shows these alternatives to be, in general, superior.
But they involve husbandry, which government can do only on its own lands.
Government lands are a minor fraction of our land area. Therefore government
neglects the superior things that need doing, and does the inferior things that it
can do. It then imputes to these things an importance and an efficacy they do not
merit, thus distorting the growth of public intelligence.

“This whole twisted confusion stems from the painless path, from milk-and-
water education, from prolonging our reliance on vicarious conservation.” (p. 262.)

From “Wildlife in American Culture” {Jour. Wildlife Manag. 7, 1943:1-6):

“Ornitholog\% mammalogy, and botany, as now known to most amateurs, are
but kindergarten games compared with researches in these fields. The real game is
decoding the messages written on the face of the land. By learning how some small
part of the biota ticks, we can guess how the whole mechanism ticks.

“Few people can become enthusiastic about research as a sport because the
whole structure of biological education is aimed to perpetuate the professional
research monopoly. To the amateur is allotted only make-believe voyages of dis-
covery, the chance to verify what professional authority already knows. This is
false; the case of Margaret Nice proves what a really enterprising amateur can do.
What the youth needs to be told is that a ship is a-building in his own mental
dr>'-dock, a ship with freedom of the seas. If you are a pessimist, you can say that
this ship is ‘on order’; if an optimist you can see the keel.” (p. 5.) — F. N. H.

Winter Feeding

“Few pleasures are more fascinating than watching birds feeding at window-
shelves and at stations near our houses . . . But let us be sincere with ourselves
and not count this feeding as a virtue nor take credit for our generosity. The
statement of the National Audubon Society that ‘wildlife is at the weather’s mercy
during periods of subnormal winter temperatures and snow’ is without foundation
in fact. The birds do very well without us. Nature has taught them how and

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

WILDLIFE CONSERVATION

135

where and in what latitude they can best feed themselves. The greatest considera-
tion we can show to birds is to protect their natural environment. When this is
impossible, the best feeding of birds is done by natural plantings. What birds need
most is protection from interference.

“The bird feasts that we spread often set up false conditions . . . We learn

little of the balance of nature when we observe it through a pane of glass

“But if you have already taught birds to abandon their wild ways be sure to
continue to feed them until the coming of spring. In the event of an ice storm
which covers ground and bark and standing seeds with a hard coating of ice, grain
and other food scattered widely over the countryside may save many birds —
particularly if an unseasonable ice storm should come in the spring after the mi-
grating birds have arrived from the south.’’ (Rosalie Edge, “Conservation for
Victory,” Emerg. Cons. Com., Ann. Rep., 1942, Publ. 88, April, 1943:26.)

Mrs. Edge’s example of the ice storm would seem to come very close to the
Audubon Society’s account of the effects of “subnormal” weather, and in any
case couples poorly with the flat statements of her opening paragraph. Neverthe-
less, if she may here — as elsewhere — be criticized for driving a generality too far,
she has a factual starting point which she has not hesitated to bring forward, even
though the facts may be displeasing to many of her readers. The necessity for
winter feeding of songbirds has been increasingly questioned of late. There can be
little doubt that artificial winter feeding is being greatly over-emphasized as a
conservation measure. In short, it is well to examine critically the idea of winter
feeding, but it is too soon to consider the question settled. Meanwhile, remember
Mrs, Edge’s good advice: when you do start to put out feed next winter, don’t
stop until spring. — F. N. H.

Small Arms Ammunition for Civilian Use Rationed in Canada

Because of a two-thirds reduction, as compared with 1942, in the amount of
necessary metal available for the manufacture of small arms ammunition for
civilian use, the Wartime Prices and Trade Board of Canada has issued an Order,
effective on March 24, 1943, which sets up rationing regulations to ensure that the
reduced supply of such ammunition goes to essential users,

A spokesman for the Board pointed out that the supply of copper alloys is
limited and that since such materials are required for both munitions for war pur-
poses and ammunition for civilian use, curtailment of output of ammunition of
the latter type is now necessary to safeguard the flow of materials for direct
war use.

The Order divides Canada into remote areas and settled areas, as defined
therein, and names eight classes of non-military “essential users” of small arms
ammunition, including police; guards of commercial establishments; licensed trap-
pers; prospectors; persons who rely on the hunting of wild game and birds for
food ; persons who require ammunition as a means of protecting live stock, poultry,
and crops; gun clubs with special written permission to obtain ammunition; and
certain defense units not organized under the Militia Act but furnished with writ-
ten permission to obtain ammunition. Essential users resident in remote areas may
purchase necessary ammunition without special formality, but those resident in
settled areas may purchase ammunition only upon their completing and filing cer-
tificates of essentiality and, in some cases, obtaining the approval of their local
ration board. Purchases of ammunition for the Dominion Government or for the
government of any province are not affected by the order. Persons who desire to
hunt for sport or for a non-essential food supply may not purchase ammunition
for those purposes, but may use any ammunition that they may have had in their
possession when the order became effective. — Harrison F. Lewis,

Wildlife Conservation Committee
Frederick N. Hamerstrom, Jr., Chairman

136

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE ^

Systematics and the Origin of Species, From the Viewpoint of a Zoologist.

By Ernst Mayr. Columbia University Press, New York, 1942: 9 x 6 inches,

xiv + 334 pp.; 29 figs. $4.00.

This outstanding book is based on the Jesup lectures delivered at Columbia
University in March, 1941, and commences with an introduction by Dobzhansky, a
geneticist noted for his interest in speciation and geographical variation.

The avowed purpose of the book is to outline the change from the old “static”
species concept to the “dynamic” species concept of the modern systematist. The
great significance of the polytypic species and the role of geographic variation in
evolution are not properly appreciated by biologists or even by taxonomists, and
Mayr undertakes to expound their importance and, by inference, their fascination.

The first two chapters are an excellent exposition of elementary taxonomic
procedure. The next two are an equally interesting treatment of the phenomena
and aspects of geographical variation. The fifth is perhaps the most controversial,
since it deals with the “new,” “dynamic” or “biological” species concept. This leads
naturally to a discussion of the polytypic species, the helpful concept of the super-
species, and the important distinctions between allopatric and sympatric species
(excellent terms, criticizable only on the grounds of etymological hybridity). The
proof of geographic speciation is excellent, and the value of the superspecies concept
in this connection is fully brought out. The systematist must remember that geo-
graphic speciation has been constantly denied.

Two summary definitions are worth quoting. In Mayr’s view “species are
groups of actually or potentially interbreeding natural populations, which are
re productively isolated from other such groups.” “A new species develops if a
population which has become geographically isolated from its parental species ac-
quires during this period of isolation characters which promote or guarantee repro-
ductive isolation when the external barriers break down.” I hope that these defini-
tions will arouse the interest and curiosity of readers, who will then read the book
to discover their validity.

A chapter on non-geographic speciation is quite brief, since this is still a very
controversial field. The ecological race, the sibling species, and the biological race
are concepts which should particularly interest American ornithologists, for they
define a field which is still “wide-open” with many common North American birds.
They should read Mayr’s discussion of the malarial mosquitos of southern Europe,
where most of the species and races cannot be told apart as museum specimens!

Every chapter is replete with a wealth of illustration. Most of the cases are
ornithological, and the author naturally prefers examples from Melanesia and
Polynesia, on whose birds he is the world’s authority. But he does not hesitate to
give case histories in other groups of animals, and displays a breadth of knowledge
of animals, genetics, and the literature of systematics which arouses admiration and
respect, especially when we recall that he is not writing in his native language.
There is more tolerance, less over-positive statement, than in his earlier writings.
On a few occasions he boldly criticizes monographic studies in groups of animals
other than birds, and revises the authors’ conclusions to suit his own ideas; he has
already been challenged at least twice.

The final chapter discusses the higher categories of classification, and is
a sane and practical approach to the concepts of genus and family. Here and there
are very courteous references to the A. O. U. check-list as “rather conservative,” and
suggestions as to the unnecessary number of genera and species, with most of which
the reviewer is in hearty accord.

Mayr’s book is the most comprehensive treatment in English of the new science

^ For additional reviews see pages 87 and 125.

, ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE 137

\ol. 55, No. 2

of speciation. Interestingly and clearly written, it arouses thought and reflection,
and one returns to reread an earlier chapter. This review, at least, has not been
dashed off. The reviewer is definitely a disciple of the new species concept; he is
a systematist who has believed for years in the importance of the polytypic species
and the role of geographic variation in the evolution of new species; he has de-
plored the lack of understanding in geneticists and experimental biologists.

What will this able book accomplish? First and foremost, it should help sys-
tematists to be better systematists, to abandon purely mind-made systems of put-
ting animals into a series of cubbyholes of different sizes. The general biologist
should be impressed with the weight of evidence which a competent expert like
Mayr can martial for the importance of geographic variation. Some may complain
that their pet group of animals has been neglected. Others will feel that experi-
mental research has been slighted; it happens to be particularly difficult or impos-
sible with birds. Others again may say that they still do not know how new
species are evolved; our author does not claim to settle it. There is one difficulty
inherent in systematics, as Mayr, I feel sure would be the first to admit. System-
atics is a subjective field in two respects: (1) No written words and charts can take
the place of knowledge in the field of the birds themselves or of the study of
museum series. (2) On Mayr’s own definition of a species, the impossibility of proof
by experiment reduces the test of reproductive isolation to a question of individual
judgment and authority rather than of fact. If systematists would only accept and
face these two handicaps, their work would receive more consideration from other
biologists and inspire more respect and less irritation from amateurs. — Ludlow
Griscom.

Wildlife Refuges. By Ira N. Gabrielson. MacMillan, New York, 1943: 6 x 9

in., xiii -j- 257 pp., 32 pis., 17 figs. $4.00.

Wildlife conservation has come a long way since the time when restrictions on
the kill were considered the complete solution. As a part of this development, the
function of refuges has changed from that of saving individuals to one as much
concerned with saving and managing habitats so that more individuals can be
produced and supported by the land. A number of attendant values, as well as
an appreciation of the limitations, of refuges have also come to be better under-
stood. Examples of the former are contributions to flood- and erosion-control and
supplying seasonal work and recreation to the people living nearby; of the latter,
competition between different species on the same refuge, and destruction of
habitats if refuges are allowed to become over-crowded. Methods of developing
and handling refuges have also been more thoroughly worked out.

The first fifth of “Wildlife Refuges” expands these ideas under the headings:
history, purposes, values and limitations, types, and management of refuges; about
three-fifths deals with the refuges administered by the Fish and Wildlife Service;
other federal, state, and private refuges in this country, Canadian and Mexican
refuges, a bibliography, and an index make up the rest of the book. Although
waterfowl are stressed, there is much that pertains to big game, upland game birds,
non-game birds, and fur-bearers.

As Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, Gabrielson has an unusually de-
tailed knowledge of the whole refuge movement. This, coupled with his ability
as a biologist, gives his judgments an authority which few others could claim. His
examples of land treatments, and of the solution of disagreements between
cooperating agencies, give one a better understanding of the actual mechanics of
refuge development, and serve as the best sort of precepts.

Gabrielson’s enthusiasm for the necessity and effectiveness of the work of his
Service has caused that work to be better and sooner done; if carried over too
extensively into his writing, however, this spirit may hinder his readers in apprais-
ing the results of the refuge program. There is some evidence that this may have

138

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

occurred. To cite the most obvious example; in speaking of the development of the
nine-foot channel through the Upper Mississippi Refuge, he says (italics mine),
“. . . after consultation with the Service, the Army Engineers so modified construc-
tion plans that the area, far from being destroyed, has been vastly improved.” (p.
193) The examples which are to substantiate this accomplished improvement read:
The first pool *‘is becoming a fine waterfowl resort . . in the later pools ‘‘in-
dications of the same development are seen. Only a few of the pools are yet suf-
ficiently vegetated to be attractive . . . The wildlife value of the Upper Mississip-
pi Refuge is now entirely dependent on the operation of the dams. If they are so
managed as to minimize water fluctuations and to limit winter drainage of the
pools, this area will become a major wildlife habitat of the midcontinent.” (p. 193)
There are less important faults, such as the placing of maps and illustrations, with-
out page references, far from the descriptive texts. In places the writing shows
evidences of haste.

These flaws should not blind one to the value of the book. “Wildlife Refuges”
will be interesting to the layman and a useful reference work for the professional
conservationist. There is no other single book on the subject, and this one, if not
up to Gabrielson’s best, is still a good job. — F. N. Hamerstrom, Jr.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Physiology {including weights)

Amadon, Dean. Bird Weights and Egg Weights. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943:
221-234.

Bartsch, Paul. Birds and smell. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943:271-272.

Behle, William H. Weights of Some Western Subspecies of Horned Larks. Auk,
60, No. 2, April, 1943; 216-221.

Edwards, Ernest P. Hearing Ranges of Four Species of Birds. Auk, 60, No. 2,
April, 1943: 239-241.

Lamoreux, W. F. The Influence of Different Amounts of Illumination upon the
Body Weight of Birds. Ecol., 24, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 79-84.

Montagna, William. Weights and Plumages of the Horned Larks of Central New
York. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943: 210-215.

Anatomy {including plumage and molt)

Fisher, Harvey I. The Pterylosis of the King Vulture. Condor, 45, No. 2, Mar.,
1943: 69-73, figs. 21-24.

Glenny, Fred H. A Systematic Study of the Main Arteries in the Region of the
Heart, Aves VL Trogoniformes, Part 1. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943: 235-239.
Hochbaum, H. Albert. Sex and Age Determination of Waterfowl by Cloacal Ex-
amination. Trans. 7th N. Amer. Wildlife Conf., 1942: 299-307, fig. 1.

Petrides, George A. Variation in the outermost greater primary covert as related
to method of flight. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943: 264-265.

Petrides, George A. Age Determination in American Gallinaceous Game Birds.

Trans. 7th N. Amer. Wildlife Conf., 1942: 308-328, figs. 1-4.

Uttal, Leonard J. Two oddly-plumaged Ruffed Grouse. Auk, 60, No. 2, April,
1943: 266-267, pi. 7.

WooLFOLK, E. J. A White Meadowlark in Eastern Montana. Condor, 45, No. 2,
Mar., 1943: 75.

Wright, Philip L. and Robert W. Hiatt. Outer primaries as age determiners
in gallinaceous birds. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943: 265-266, pi. 7.

See also Physiology : Montagna.

Distribution and Taxonomy

Ball, Stanley C. Further Bird Notes from Gaspe, Quebec. Canad. Field-Nat., 57,
No. 1, Jan., 1943: 1—4.

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

139

Bee, Robert G, and John Hutchings. Breeding Records of Utah Birds. Great
Basin Nat., 3, Nos. 3 and 4, Dec., 1942 [1943]: 61-85.

Brodkorb, Pierce. Notes on two rare birds in Chiapas, Mexico. Auk, 60, No. 2,
Apr., 1943: 280-282. (Xenotriccus and Spodiornis),

Dixon, Joseph S. Birds Observed between Point Barrow and Herschel Island on
the Arctic Coast of Alaska. Condor, 45, No. 2, Mar., 1943: 49-57, figs. 13-18.

Goodwill, E. V. The Summer Birds of the Medsen Area, Patricia District,
Ontario. Canad. Field-Nat., 56, Nos. 8 and 9, Nov.-Dee., 1942 [1943]: 131-133.

Grater, Russell K. Bird Notes from Southwestern Utah. Condor, 45, No. 2,
Mar., 1943: 75-76.

Hayward, C. Lynn. Notes on the status of the Red Crossbill in Utah. Auk, 60,
No. 2, Apr., 1943: 276-278.

Jewett, Stanley G. A New Horned Lark from the State of Washington. Auk, 60,
No. 2, April, 1943: 262-263. (Otocoris alpestris alpina, new subsp.).

Mackworth-Praed, C. W. Nature and Nomenclature. Ibis, 85, Apr., 1943: 223-
224.

Mayr, Ernst. The Zoogeographic Position of the Hawaiian Islands. Condor, 45,
No. 2, Mar., 1943: 45-48.

Norton, Arthur H. European Teal in Maine. Auk, 60, No. 2, Apr., 1943: 283-
284.

Peters, James L. First Supplement to the List of Types of Birds Now in the
Museum of Comparative Zoology. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., 92, No. 2, Mar.,
1943: 53-104.

Pettingill, Olin Sewall, Jr. Birds’ Eggs Collected by George Griffin at Grand
Manan, New Brunswick. Canad. Field-Nat., 57, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 13.

Phillips, Allan R. Critical Notes on Two Southwestern Sparrows. Auk, 60, No.
2, April, 1943: 242-248. (New forms: Aimophila botterii texana from Texas;
A. b. goldmani from Nayarit; Melospiza melodia bendirei from Arizona).

Rand, A. L. Larus kumlieni and Its Allies. Canad. Field-Nat., 56, Nos. 8 and 9,
Nov.-Dee., 1942 [1943]: 123-126, map. (A revision of the Glaucous, Iceland,
and Herring Gull complex of North America).

Robbins, Samuel D., Jr. A Review of Wisconsin’s Bird-life in 1942. Passenger
Pigeon, 5, No. 1, Apr., 1943: 1-5, photo.

Shortt, T. M. Correlation of Bill and Foot Coloring with Age and Season in the
Black Duck. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 1, Mar,, 1943: 3-7, pi. 1.

Shortt, T. M. and H. S, Peters. Some Recent Bird Records from Canada’s East-
ern Arctic, Canad. Jour. Res., 20, Nov., 1942: 338-348, map.

Snyder, L. L. Summer Birds of the Sault Ste. Marie Region, Ontario. Trans. Roy.
Can. Inst., 24, part 1, 1942: 121-153.

Todd, W. E. Clyde, List of the Hummingbirds in the Collection of the Carnegie
Museum. Annals Carnegie Mus., 29, Art. 12, 1942: 271-370.

Todd, W, E, Clyde. Critical Remarks on the Trogons, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., 56,
Feb., 1943: 3-16.

Van Tyne, Josselyn. A peculiar Goshawk from Labrador. Auk, 60, No. 2, April,
1943: 267-268. (Apparently Accipiter g. gentilis) .

Webster, J. Dan. The Downy Young of Oyster-catchers. Wils. Bidl., 55, No, 1,
Mar., 1943 : 40-46.

Wetmore, Alexander. Evidence for the Former Occurrence of the Ivory-billed
Woodpecker in Ohio. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 1, Mar., 1943: 55.

Zimmer, John T, and Ernst Mayr. New Species of Birds Described from 1938 to
1941. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943: 249-262.

Evolution and Speciation

Amadon, Dean. Specialization and Evolution. Amer. Nat., 77, Mar,, 1943: 133-
141.

140

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

Population

Allan, Philip F. and Palmer R. Seme. A Hawk Census on Texas Panhandle
Highways. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 1, Mar., 1943: 29-39, 2 figs.

Hiatt, Robert W. A Frequency Distribution of Eastern and Western Kingbirds
in Montana. Great Basin Nat., 3, Nos. 3 and 4, Dec., 1942 [1943]: 109-114, pi.
1 {Tyr annus tyr annus and T. verticalis) .

Kenyon, Karl W. Birds Found Dead on the Beach in San Diego County, Cali-
fornia. Condor, 45, No. 2, Mar., 1943: 76-77.

Lack, Davh). The Age of Some More British Birds. Brit. Birds, 36, No. 10, Mar.,
1943: 193-197.

Lack, David. The Age of the Blackbird. Brit. Birds, 36, No. 9, Feb., 1943: 166-
175. {T Urdus merula).

Laskey, Amelia R. Some Age Records for Banded Birds. Migrant, 14, No. 1,
Mar., 1943: 5-8.

Moffitt, James. Twelfth Annual Black Brant Census in California. Calij. Fish
and Game, 29, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 19-28.

See also Techniques: Allen.

Migration

Snyder, L. L. The Snowy Owl Migration of 1941-42. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 1,
Mar., 1943: 8-10, 1 fig.

Williams, C. S. and E. R. Kalmbach. Migration and Fate of Transported Water-
fowl. Jour. Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 2, April, 1943: 163-169.

See also Population: Allan and Sime; Life History and Behavior: Ludwig.

Ecology

Friedmann, Herbert. The Natural History Background of Camouflage. Smith-
sonian Inst. War Background Studies No. 5, 1942: 1-17, pis. 1-16.

Johnston, Verna R. An Ecological Study of Nesting Birds in the Vicinity of
Boulder, Colorado. Condor, 45, No. 2, Mar., 1943: 61-68.

Munro, J. Competition between Mountain Bluebirds and Hairy Woodpeckers.
Condor, 45, No. 2, Mar., 1943: 74.

Richardson, Frank. Relations between Birds, Highways, and Snows in Nevada.
Condor, 45, No. 2, Mar., 1943: 77.

Walkinshaw, Lawrence H. Snakes Destroying Birds’ Eggs and Young. IFf/j.
Bull., 55, No. 1, Mar., 1943: 56.

Life History and Behavior

Aldous, Shaler E. Sharp-tailed Grouse in the Sand Dune Countr>^ of North-
central North Dakota. Jour. W’ildlife Manag., 7, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 23-31,
pis. 1-2, fig. 1.

Ball, Stanley C. Chimney Swifts at play. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943: 269-270.

Beck, D. Elden. Life History Notes on the California Gull. Great Basin Nat., 3,
Nos. 3 and 4, Dec., 1942 [1943]: 91-108, pis. 1-4. (In Utah).

Bullock, D. S. Duck Hawk at sea. Auk, 60, No. 2, Apr., 1943: 274.

Carr-Lewty, R. a. Reactions of Birds to Aircraft. Brit. Birds, 36, No. 8, Jan.,
1943: 151-152.

Dow, Jay S. A Study of Nesting Canada Geese in Honey Lake Valley, California.
Calif. Fish and Game, 29, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 3-18, figs. 1-10.

Einarsen, Arthur S. Specific Results from Ring-necked Pheasant Studies in the
Pacific Northwest. Trans. 7th N. Amer. Wildlife Conf., 1942: 130-146.

Gilkey, Arthur K., W. David Loomis, Bruce M. Breckenridge, and C. Howard
Richardson. The incubation period of the Great Horned Owl. Auk, 60, No. 2,
April, 1943: 272-273.

June, 1943
Vol. 55, Xo. 2

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

141

Harrell, Byron E. Minnesota Nesting Records, 1942. Flicker, 14, No. 4, Dec.,
1942: 33-40.

Herbert, Rich.ard and Roger T. Peterson. Duck Hawk eyries in southern states.
Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943: 274.

Hollom, P. a. D. Bank Swallows nesting in artificial holes. Auk, 60, No. 2 April,
1943: 270-271.

Holscher, Clark E. Observations on the Montana Horned Owl. Condor, 45, No.
2, Mar., 1943: 58-60, figs. 19-20.

Hutchison, Scott, Alfred Clebsch, et al. How Birds Spend Their Winter Nights.
Migrant, 14, No. 1, Mar., 1943: 1-5.

Ludwig, C. C. Mourning Doves. Jack Pine Warbler, 21, No. 2, April, 1943: 56-57.
Mickey, Frances Welton. Breeding Habits of McCown’s Longspur. Auk, 60,
No. 2, April, 1943: 181-209.

Morley, Averil. Sexual Behavior of British Birds from October to January.
Ibis, 85, April, 1943: 132-158.

Nickell, Walter P. Observations on the Nesting of the Killdeer. Wlls. Bull., 55,
No. 1, Mar., 1943: 23-28, 2 figs.

Nickell, Walter P. Secondary Uses of Birds’ Nests. Jack Pine Warbler, 21,
No. 2, April, 1943: 48-54, figs. 1-3.

R.and, a. L. Some Irrelevant Behavior in Birds. Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943:
168-171.

Ross, Winifred M. How a Tree-creeper Built Its Nest. Brit. Birds, 36, No. 6„
Nov., 1942: 110-111. (Certhia familiaris britannica) .

Spencer, O. Ruth. Nesting Habits of the Black-billed Cuckoo. Wils. Bidl., 55,
No. 1, Mar., 1943: 11-22.

Stewart, Robert E. Post-breeding pugnacity of the Pine Warbler. Auk, 60,
No. 2, April, 1943: 271.

Terrlll, L. McI. Nesting Habits of the Yellow Rail in Gaspe County, Quebec.

Auk, 60, No. 2, April, 1943: 171-180, pis. 5, 6.

Tucker, B. W. Aerial Evolutions and Soaring of Cormorants. Brit. Birds, 36, No.

6, Nov., 1942: 114-115. (Phalacrocorax carbo).

Whitaker, Lovie M. Roosting Habits of the Verdin. Wils. Bidl., 55, No. 1,
Mar., 1943: 55-56.

See also Physiology : Bartsch; Edwards.

Food of Birds

Beer, James. Food Habits of the Blue Grouse. Jour. Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 1,
Jan., 1943: 32-44, figs. 1-4.

Bryant, Harold C. Birds Eat Snow. Condor, 45, No. 2, Mar., 1943: 77.
Hamilton, W. J., Jr. Spring food of the Robin in central New York. Auk, 60,
No. 2, April, 1943: 273.

Hawbecker, Albert C. Sparrow Hawk Preys on Sanderling. Condor, 45, No. 2,
Mar., 1943: 74.

Kittaais, Walter H. October foods of Ruffed Grouse in Maine. Jour. Wildlife
Manag., 7, No. 2, Apr., 1943: 231-233.

Knowlton, G. F. Raven eats Mormon cricket eggs. Auk, 60, No. 2, April,
1943: 273.

See also Techniques: Gerstell.

Techniques {including banding)

Allen, D. L. A Pheasant Inventory Method Based upon Kill Records and Sex
Ratios. Trans. 7th N. Amer. Wildlife Co7if., 1942: 329-333.

Davison, Verne E. A Calendar System of Record Keeping for Sportsmen. Jour.
Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 2, Apr., 1943: 129-133, fig. 1.

142

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

Gerstell, Richard. The Place of Winter Feeding in Practical Wildlife Manage-
ment, Pennsylvania Game Comm., Research Bull. No. 3, 1942 (121 pp.).

Kelker, George Hills. A Winter Wildlife Census in Northern Wisconsin. Jour.
Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 2, Apr., 1943: 133-141, fig. 1.

Ota, Robert K. and Harry Beckman. A Simple Bird Holder for Use in Avian
Malaria Studies. Science, 97, April 23, 1943: 384.

Soper, J. Dewey. A method of remaking old bird skins. Auk, 60, No. 2, Apr.,
1943: 284-286.

Van Tyne, Josselyn. Some Problems for Michigan Bird Students. Jack Pine
Warbler, 21, No. 1, Jan., 1943: 3-6.

Wood, A. A. Cold Storage as an Aid to the Busy Ornithologist. Canad. Field-Nat.,
56, Nos. 8 and 9, Nov.-Dee., 1942 [1943]: 137-138.

See also Anatomy: Hochbaum; Petrides; Wright.

History, Biography, Bibliography, and Institutions

Chapman, Frank M. Birds and Man. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. Guide Leaflet No.
115, 1943. 52 pp., illus.

Hayward, C. Lynn. John Hutchings and Robert G. Bee — Pioneer Utah Valley
Naturalists. Great Basin Nat., 3, Nos. 3 and 4, Dec., 1942 [1943]: 86-90.

McDermott, John F. Audubon’s “Journey up the Mississippi.” Jour. III. State
Hist. Soc., 35, No. 2, June, 1942: 148-173.

Porter, Margaret D. A Bibliography of the Published Writings of Outram Bangs.
Bidl. Mus. Comp. Zool., 92, No. 2, Mar., 1943: 105-118.

Stevens, O. A. Elmer T. Judd, North Dakota Ornithologist. Wils. Bull., 55,
No. 1, Mar., 1943: 51-53.

Taylor, Mrs. H. J. An Iowa Ornithologist: T. C. Stephens. Iowa Bird Life, 13,
No. 1, Mar., 1943: 2-6, 2 photos.

Tyler, Winsor M. In Memoriam: Glover Morrill Allen. Auk, 60, No. 2, Apr.,
1943: 163-168, pi. 4.

WiTHERBY, H. F. Hubert Lynes: A Biographical Sketch. Ibis, 85, Apr., 1943:
198-215, pi. 5.

Zimmer, John T. Myron Harmon Swenk, 1883-1941. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 1,
Mar., 1943: 47-50.

Paleontology

Mh-ler, Loye. The Pleistocene Birds of San Josecito Cavern, Mexico. Univ.
Calif. Publ. Zool., 47, No. 5, 1943: 143-168.

Miller, Loye and Ida DeMay. The Fossil Birds of California. An Avifauna and
Bibliography with Annotations. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., 47, No. 4, 1942:
47-142.

June, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 2

THE WILSON BULLETIN

143

REPORT OF THE MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE
During 1942, as a result of the combined efforts of the officers, the Membership
Committee, and various members of the Club, 172 members were added to the
Wilson Ornithological Club: 7 Life, 7 Sustaining, 26 Active, and 132 Associate
Members.

Members of the Committee and others whose efforts added to the Wilson Club
rolls during the year were Roger Tory Peterson, 14; George B. Thorp, 8; John
T. Emlen, Jr., Joseph C. Howell, Thomas G. Scott, and Ruth D. Turner, 6 each;

A. B. Brooks, 5 ; J. W. Aldrich, Virginia S. Eifert, Gordon Fredine, Z. P. Metcalf,
William Montagna, Aretas A. Saunders, and Wayne Short, 4 each; Daniel L. Leedy
and Burt L. Monroe, 3 each; James L. Baillie, David Damon, Mrs. Jack Hagar,
H. W. Hann, A. Sidney Hyde, George H. Lowery, M. B. Skaggs, and Wendell
Taber, 2 each; William C. Baker, Edna Becker, Logan Bennett, James H. Bruns,

B. W. Cartwright, Roland C. Clement, Clifford V. Davis, Murl Deusing, John H.
Fales, Franklin C. French, A. F. Ganier, F. N. Hamerstrom, Jr., Charles O.
Handley, Jr., George B. Happ, Dorothy Hobson, William Jenner, Victor E. Jones,
Herbert Kaufman, Karl Maslowski, Clara Alma Moore, Theodora Nelson, Eugene
P. Odum, Frederick L. Ott, John Pearce, W. E. Scott, P. R. Sime, Mabel Slack,
Charles F. Walker, and James B. Young, one each.

The following officers also assisted in adding new members during 1942: Mau-
rice Brooks, Olin Sewall Pettingill, Jr., George Miksch Sutton, Gustav Swanson,
and Josselyn Van Tyne.

Respectfully submitted,

December 31, 1942 Richard Lee Weaver, Chairman

Arizona . . .
California .

Colorado . .
Connecticut
Georgia . . .
Illinois ....

Indiana

Iowa

Kentucky . . .

Maine

Maryland . . .
Massachusetts

Michigan . . . .

Minnesota

Missouri .
Nebraska

MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE, 1943:

..Man R. Phillips
.John T. Emlen
Frank A. Pitelka
. Gordon Alexander
.-Aretas A. Saunders
.Eugene P. Odum
.Virginia S. Eifert
S. Charles Kendeigh
R. M. Strong
.Dorothy Hobson
.Geo. O. Hendrickson
George B. Thorp
.Gordon Wilson
.Howard L. Mendall
. Philip F. Allan
. Bartlett Hendricks
John Pearce
.H. W. Hann
L. H. Walkinshaw
George J. Wallace
. Arnold B. Erickson
O. S. Pettingill, Jr.

. Paul D. Dalke
• R. Allyn Moser

Richard Lee Weaver, Chairman

New Hampshire . . . Louise Forsythe
Douglas E. Wade

New Mexico -Alton A. Lindsey

New York Lawrence I. Grinnell

Harold D. Mitchell
Dayton Stoner
Ruth D. Turner

North Carolina . . . Z. P. Metcalf
North Dakota .... Stanley Saugstad

Ohio Lawrence E. Hicks

Milton B. Trautman

Penn.sylvania Logan J. Bennett

Edwin T. Moul
South Carolina . . . Harold S. Peters
South Dakota .... Gerald Spawn

Utah William H. Behle

Ross Hardy

Vermont Wendell P. Smith

Virginia C. O. Handley, Jr.

Washington, D.C. .John W. Aldrich
West Virginia .... Maurice Brooks

Wisconsin Murl Deusing

Walter E. Scott

Wyoming Otto M. McCreary

Canada James L. Baillie, Jr.

Doris Huestis Speirs

THE WILSON BULLETIN

June, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 2

NEW LIFE MEMBER

Edward Me Ilhenny Simmons, now
attending Newman High School in New
Orleans, has studied natural history all
his life under the direction of his grand-
father, Edward Avery Me Ilhenny. He
has a considerable library covering orni-
thology, mammalog>% and general nat-
ural history' subjects, and is an Annual
Member of the American Museum of
Natural History and of the National
Audubon Society, a Life Member of
the American Ornithologists’ Union,
and the American Society of Mam-
malogists. Home address — Avery Is-
land, Louisiana.

Wilson Ornithological Club Libr.\ry
The following gifts have been received recently:

Emmet R. Blake: 1 pamphlet
William B. Evans: 1 book
Horace Groskin: 1 reprint
George O. Hendrickson: 26 reprints
Frank J. Hinds: 2 magazines, 6 reprints
S. Charles Kendeigh: 2 reprints
Robert B. Lea: 1 reprint
V. E. Shelford: 1 reprint
O. A. Stevens: 1 pamphlet
Herbert L. Stoddard: 8 reprints
Dayton Stoner: 4 reprints, 1 pamphlet
G. C. Toner: 4 magazines
Richard L. Weaver: 2 reprints
Gordon Woods: 4 reprints

TO OUR CONTRIBUTORS

Our members are asked to submit articles for publication in the Bulletin.
Manuscripts will be accepted with the understanding that they have not been
published or accepted for publication elsewhere.

Manuscript. Manuscripts should be typed on paper of good quality and of
letter size (8^ x 11). Write on one side only and use double spacing. The title
should be brief and carefully constructed so as to indicate clearly the subject.
Ordinarily the scientific names of the birds treated should be given and should
appear early in the article. Most articles should have a brief summary at the end.

Illustrations. Photographic prints, to reproduce well as half-tones, should
have good contrast and detail. Please send prints unmounted, and attach to
each print a brief but adequate legend. Do not write heavily on the backs of
photographs.

Bibliography. Literature cited should ordinarily be listed at the end of
articles. These citations should be complete and references to them in the text
should be made by the year of the citation and the exact pages referred to.

Proof, Galley proof will be submitted to authors and must be returned
promptly. Expensive alterations in copy after the type has been set must be
charged to the author.

Reprints, The Club is unable to furnish free reprints to authors. Arrange-
ments will be made, however, for reprints to be made at cost. A scale of costs,
based on the number of pages, is given below. Orders for reprints should accom-
pany the returned galley proof. Charge will be made for a minimum of 100 reprints.

REPRINT SCHEDULE OF THE WILSON BULLETIN

1 page

2 pp.

4 pp.

8 pp. 12 pp.

Each

Additional
16 pp. 4 pp.

100 copies

$1.95

$2.10

$2.40

$4.15 $5.90

$7.00 8^

Each Additional
100 copies

70c

85c

1.40

2.20 2.90

3.50 SSc

Covers: $3.85 for first

100 copies;

$1.40

for additional

100 copies.

Vol. 55 SEPTEMBER, 1943 No. 3

Wi)e fusion PuUetm

Published by the

(Z^mtttolosical Club

Ann Arbor, Michigan

CONTENTS

Red-throated Loon Sutton PI. 3

The Wing Molts of Adult Loons: A Review

OF THE Evidence George Miksch Sutton 145

Autumn Feeding and Flocking Habits of the

Mourning Dove in Southern Missouri A. Starker Leopold 151
Nesting Habits of the Common Redpoll Lawrence I. Grinnell 155
Bird Weights as an Aid in Taxonomy Dean Amadon 164

Some Physiological Variations in the
Black-capped Chickadee
General Notes
Editorial

Ornithological Literature

Wilson Ornithological Club Library

Reports

New Life Members

Eugene P. Odum 178
192

197

198
208

214

215

THE WILSON BULLETIN

is published quarterly in March, June, September, and December, as the official
organ of the Wilson Ornithological Club, at Ann Arbor, Michigan, and is sent to
all members not in arrears for dues. The subscription price is $2.00 a year,
invariably in advance, in the United States. Single numbers, 50 cents. Outside
of the United States the rate is $2.25. Single numbers, 60 cents. Subscriptions
should be sent to the Treasurer.

All articles and communications for publication, books and publications for
review, exchanges, and claims for lost or undelivered copies of the magazine, should
be addressed to the Editor.

The current issue of The Wilson Bulletin is printed by the Ann Arbor Press,
Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Entered as second class matter July 13, 1916, at Ann Arbor, Michigan, under
Act of Congress of March 3, 1879.

THE WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

Founded December 3, 1888. Named after Alexander Wilson, the first American
ornithologist.

The officers for the current year are:

President — S. Charles Kendeigh, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois.
First Vice-President — Olin Sewall Pettingill, Jr., Carleton College, Northfield,
Minnesota.

Treasurer — Milton B. Trautman, Stone Laboratory, Put-in-Bay, Ohio.

Secretary — Maurice Brooks, University of West Virginia, Morgantown, West
Virginia.

Editor — Josselyn Van Tyne, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Associate Editors — Margaret M. Nice and F. N. Haraerstrom, Jr.

Assistant Editor — G. Reeves Butchart.

Membership dues per calendar year are: sustaining membership, $5.00; active
membership, $3.00; associate membership, $2.00.

Plate 3

Southampton Island, 1929

George Miksch Sutton del.

RED-THROATED LOON BRINGING FOOD TO ITS YOUNG

THE WILSON BULLETIN

A QUARTERLY MAGAZINE OF ORNITHOLOGY
Published by the Wilson Ornithological Club

Vol. 55 13,^1^ SEPTEMBER, 1943 No. 3

“^THE WING MOLTS OF ADULT LOONS:

A REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE

BY GEORGE MIKSCH SUTTON

A DULT loons are generally believed to undergo two molts a year —
a postnuptial and a prenuptial. Opinions differ as to whether
both these molts are complete, however; and a careful comparison of
published statements and examination of specimens has led me to
suspect that there is but one really complete molt per year; that the
so-called ^complete prenuptial molt’, may be only a molting of body
plumage concomitant with a much delayed ‘postnuptial’ molting of
remiges; that certain individual loons may undergo a complete post-
nuptial molt on or near their breeding grounds, whereas other indi-
viduals may, as a result of delayed nidification, be obliged to move
southward in full breeding dress; that, in short, the whole molting
program may vary so greatly that, unless one can catch and mark a
loon in the late summer flightless stage of the molt, and capture the
same bird a few months later, again in a flightless stage of the molt,
one has no way of being certain that an individual loon ever accom-
plishes a complete molt in late summer or fall, and another complete
molt the following spring.

In the fall of 1929, while I was on Southampton Island, Hudson ^
Bay, I was impressed with the fact that many young Red-throated
Loons {Gavia stellata) and Pacific Loons {Gavia arctica pacifica) did
not leave their nesting ponds until about the middle of September.
One brood of young Red-throated Loons lingered as late as September
23, keeping a hole about 15 feet in diameter open in the ice (Sutton,
1932:20). Here the parent birds, which brought fish regularly from
salt water a mile or so away, were obliged to alight and take off as
best they could until the young birds were strong enough to fly to the
sea.

When did those parent Red-throated Loons reach the flightless stage
of their post-nuptial molt? Obviously not in the summer of 1929.
They had to have their remiges on them all that summer. Their first
set of eggs had been destroyed, perhaps by an Arctic fox, so their
brood was late. Nor was their case exceptional. Many other pairs
were as late as they. In their well ordered tundra world it was as

146

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September. 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

normal for them to be delayed as it was for the foxes and lemmings to
be at or near a peak of abundance that year.

Those parent loons may have begun their postnuptial molt im-
mediately after getting their young safely to sea. They may even
have completed it before moving southward from Hudson Bay. But
it would not surprise me to learn that they reached their wintering
grounds in virtually complete breeding plumage, passed slowly into
winter body plumage, and eventually completed this postnuptial molt
by dropping their frayed, faded remiges about the time the prenuptial
molting of the body feathers began. Witherby (Witherby et al., 1940:
112 ff.). Bent (1919:47 ff.), and other writers make it quite clear that
molting loons as well as loons in full breeding dress are found on the
wintering grounds. A bird in new breeding plumage, with partly
grown remiges, would certainly appear to be in the last stages of a
complete prenuptial molt — that is obvious. What disturbs me is that
we do not know that this same bird lost all its remiges the preceding
fall. We are only guessing. It would be easy enough to discuss the
possibility of two complete molts per year with a great series of molt-
ing specimens at hand; less easy to account for two molts; impossible
to prove, from the specimens alone, that a given individual actually
accomplishes them. Why should loons have them? Do loons need
two sets of remiges per year while ducks, geese, and swans do not?
Both groups are water birds, have the same body-temperature prob-
lems, much the same migration problems, near the same degree of
feather wear; hence they might be expected to be clothed similarly.
There is plenty of evidence to show that loons do go through a flight-
less period; no evidence, so far as I know (and I have examined loons
in a good many collections), that they molt their wings feather by
feather as hawks, for example, do. But the question is (as at the
outset) : Do they molt all the remiges at once, and hence become
flightless, tmce a year? Authors have been assuming too much: be-
cause flightless birds have been taken in the fall and also in the spring,
they have assumed that all loons have two complete molts per year.

The loons are a small and homogeneous order. The fact that breed-
ing range, general program of migration and nesting are much the
same throughout the order makes it easy to believe that the four species
molt similarly, though this is not necessarily the case. Let us see
what various authors have to say about the molts of the four species
of loons.

Gavia stellata. Bent (1919:77) states that adult Red-throated
Loons have “two annual molts; a partial prenuptial molt, involving
at least all of the feathers on the forepart of the body. ... I
have seen the beginning of this molt as early as December 28, but
usually it is accomplished during March and April; and a complete
postnuptial molt, during the latter part of the summer, produces the
adult winter plumage [which] ... is often not complete until late in the

George M.
Sutton

WING MOLTS OF LOONS

147

season. I have seen birds in very much worn plumage and only par-
tially molted in December; this plumage is worn for a comparatively
short time and the molt into it is often incomplete and sometimes not
accomplished at all. I have seen a bird in full spring plumage in
October and another, in the same month, in regular winter plumage
with the full, rich red throat of the nuptial plumage. Fall adults are
scarce in collections and, if we had them in large series, we might be
surprised to know to what extent old birds retain part or all of their
spring plumage during the fall.” Forbush (1925:28) says that adults
“apparently have a complete prenuptial molt and a complete post-
nuptial molt.” Witherby (Witherby et ah, 1940:127) says that the
winter plumage is “acquired by complete moult Oct.-Dec. Primaries,
primary-coverts and secondaries are moulted simultaneously but wing-
coverts normally. . . . Another moult takes place March-May, .... but
material is insufficient to decide if remiges are moulted again as in
autumn.”

As I have pointed out above, the Red-throated Loon’s postnuptial
molt is certainly not always a late summer phenomenon. Breeding
birds get their young ones out to salt water as promptly as they can;
but if nesting is delayed it appears that molt is also delayed — until
fall or later. Witherby (1940:123) says concerning this matter: “dates
of assumption of summer and winter plumage vary greatly; traces of
summer plumage may still be retained in January, and in March or
April all stages from full winter to three-quarters summer plumage may
be seen together.” In a series of 12 adults collected August 3 to Sep-
tember 17, 1897, by the Me Ilhenny Expedition in the vicinity of
Point Barrow, Alaska, 11 showed “no molt whatever”; one female,
collected September 17, had completed the molt, though the primaries
still retained “portions of the sheaths” (Stone, 1900:6).

Gavia arctica pacifica. Bent (1919:69) states that the postnuptial
molt of the Pacific Loon is complete, that the prenuptial molt “involves
practically all the contour feathers”; whereas Witherby (Witherby
et ah, 1940:22) describing the closely related G. a arctica, says that
“specimens available do not show moult of remiges” in the postnuptial
molt, “though this may occur,” and is sure that the prenuptial molt,
which takes place February to May, is complete, the primaries, pri-
mary-coverts, and secondaries being then molted simultaneously. For-
bush (1925:27) flatly asserts that both molts are complete.

According to what I witnessed on Southampton Island, I should
say that most Pacific Loons have no time for a flightless period in
late summer. They are busy flying in with fish for their young until
fall. Whether they molt near their breeding ponds I cannot say. I
did not record the species in 1929 after September 27; saw no shed
feathers about the breeding ponds; neither saw nor heard of a bird
in flightless condition (Sutton, 1932:14). I should say that the post-
nuptial molt could not well have started before October 1 in most

148

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

individuals. Just where the birds were by that date is a question.
Probably they were on their way south. Since the winter home of the
Pacific Loon is said to be “the Pacific coast of North America from
Puget Sound to Lower California” (Peters, 1931:35), one thinks of
the fall migration from Southampton Island as a long flight, or series
of flights from lake to lake perhaps, across western Canada; and one
wonders whether that trip may not customarily be taken before the
remiges are molted. It is, I believe, significant that of 49 adult speci-
mens collected July 5 to September 20, 1897-98 by the Me Ilhenny
Expedition to Point Barrow, Alaska, only four had molted their rem-
iges. These four were in “full winter dress” (Stone, 1900:5).

Gavia immer. Concerning the Common Loon, Bent (1919:52)
says: “The adult winter plumage ... is worn for only a short time,
as in the second year bird; specimens in this plumage are very scarce
in collections and it is difficult to find one that is not either molting
into it or out of it; the postnuptial molt into it begins sometimes by
the last of August, but sometimes not until October; and the pre-
nuptial molt out of it may begin in November or later in the winter
and may not be completed until spring. Apparently some individuals,
perhaps very old birds, do not assume this winter plumage at all, for
I have seen birds in fully adult breeding plumage in September, Octo-
ber, and November.” Forbush, (1925:17, 18) uses this passage from
Bent almost verbatim. Witherby (1940:115) believes that the winter
plumage “is acquired by complete moult Aug. (sometimes July) to Jan.
Primaries, primary-coverts and secondaries are moulted simultaneously
but wing-coverts and innermost secondaries normally. Sometimes some
old summer body feathers, wing-coverts and innermost secondaries
are retained until next moult. . . . Another complete moult similar to
that of autumn takes place Feb.-May.”

These statements make it clear that an adult Common Loon is
molting three-quarters of the time. For a short period, in summer
(part of May, all of June, part of July) they are apt to be in com-
plete breeding dress. The rest of the time they are in more or less
mixed plumage. But when is the postnuptial molt, which begins
“sometimes July,” finished? May not the dropping of the remiges
often be delayed until the following winter or spring?

In this connection it is probably significant that published records
of flightless molting Gav'm immer are so few. Forbush (1925:18) tells
us of one he picked up at Nantucket on March 12, 1921. J. B. May
(1930:412) describes several examined by him in Massachusetts April
1 to 4, 1930, and reports one “in the gray plumage” shot by Sidney
Chase at Nantucket on February 21, 1892. There is apparently no
record of a flightless Common Loon found in late summer or fall. Have
flightless late summer Gavia immer been handled repeatedly but not
reported because they were considered in no way unusual? Or have
ornithologists continued merely to assume, without investigating the

George M.
Sutton

WING MOLTS OF LOONS

149

matter thoroughly, that all loons go through a flightless stage at the
nesting lake as soon as the young are abroad?

Gavia adamsii. “The seasonal molts and plumage of the adult
[Yellow-billed Loon] are, evidently, practically the same as in the
common loon. . . . The molt into the winter plumage is very irregular
and much prolonged, and the plumage is worn for only a short time. . . .
[Collett, 1894] refers to a specimen taken on September 22 in which the
molt had begun, others taken in October and November in transitional
stages, and one taken on October 5 in which the summer plumage was
almost entirely retained. . . . The two molts are so prolonged and so
irregular that they may almost be said to overlap” (Bent, 1919:62).
W^itherby (1940:118) says of the postnuptial molt that there are “very
few moulting examples available,” but that the Yellow-billed “appears
to moult” as in the Common Loon, that is, completely; he seems sure
that the prenuptial molt is complete.

It is evident that individuals of the species may complete a late
summer postnuptial molt on or near the breeding grounds since an
adult bird was collected by the Me Ilhenny Expedition at Point Barrow,
Alaska, on September 29, which had “new wings . . . only half grown”
(Stone, 1900:5); but it is quite believable that, had this individual
lived, it would not have molted its remiges again the following spring.

Remarks

The above brief review has been presented not as proof that adult
loons molt their remiges only once a year, but rather to show that fur-
ther careful observations must be made before we can be sure that they
molt their remiges twice a year. Of great importance is the recording
of all adult loons known to be in flightless condition as a result of
molt. Ornithologists who happen to live near nesting lakes of Gavia
immer should observe the birds carefully in late summer and early
fall, ascertaining whether they are actually flightless at any time, and
checking on the observation by gathering molted remiges. A technique
of capturing loons for examination and banding needs to be worked
out.

It may be years before an adult loon, flightless because of molt,
is captured and banded (or marked in some other way), and captured 6
to 8 months later, again in flightless condition because of molt. Until
that feat is accomplished we may well refrain from statements that
imply two complete molts per year in any Gaviiform species.

Literature Cited

Bent, Arthur Cleveland

1919 Life histories of North American diving birds. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull.,
107:47-82.

Forbush, Edward Howe

1925 Birds of Massachusetts and other New England states. Vol. 1. Mass.
Dept. Agric., Boston.

150

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

May, John B.

1930 Simultaneous loss of primaries in prenuptial molt of loon. Auk. 47:412-
414.

Peters, James Lee

1931 Check-list of birds of the world. Vol. 1. Harvard University Press.
Cambridge, Mass.

Stone, Witmer

1900 Report on the birds and mammals collected by the Me Ilhenny Expedi-
tion to Pt. Barrow, Alaska. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 52:4—49.
Sutton, George Miksch

1932 The birds of Southampton Island. Mem. Carnegie Mus., 12, pt. 2, sec.
2, 275 pp.

WiTHERBY, H. F., F. C. R. JouRDAiN, N. F. Ticehurst, and B. W. Tucker
1940 The handbook of British birds. Vol. 4. Witherby, London.

MINNE.4P0LIS, Minnesota

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

THE WILSON BULLETIN

151

AUTUMN FEEDING AND FLOCKING HABITS OF THE
MOURNING DOVE IN SOUTHERN MISSOURI

BY A. STARKER LEOPOLD

During the course of several years’ hunting in south-central
Missouri, some observations on the autumn habits of the Mourn-
ing Dove {Zenaidura macroura) have been accumulated that seem
worth recording. The dove is not an abundant bird in the Ozark up-
lands, but from 1939 through 1942 I have taken 234 Mourning Doves
during legal shooting periods, nearly all in one locality three miles
southeast of West Plains, Howell County. Records of each trip have
been kept in a hunting journal, and these form the basis for the fol-
lowing notes.

Feeding Habits

It has been pointed out by Moore and Pearson (1941), and noticed
by many others, that Mourning Doves do not scratch for their food;
since they are unable to cling to upright stalks and twigs, they are
limited, with occasional exceptions (Bent, 1932:408), to the selection
of food lying available on the surface of the ground. There are constant
adjustments in the fall feeding habits of doves, apparently conditioned
by the changing availability of surface foods. The following examples
illustrate how the birds adapt their foraging in accordance with the
limitations imposed by weak legs and feet.

In the accompanying table are enumerated the principal crop con-
tents of the doves killed during this period. Quantitative analyses of
crop content were not made, but all the most prominent foods are re-
corded. It will be seen that during September of 1939, and of 1940,
the birds fed mostly on foxtail (Setaria viridis), which often grows abun-
dantly in corn fields, and is admirably suited to the foraging needs of
doves. The seeds ripen in August and almost immediately fall to the
ground, where they are readily available until the fall rains have washed
them into the soil. After this has occurred the doves turn their attention
to other foods as they become available, including barnyard grass
{Echinochloa crusgalli), pigweeds {Amaranthus, sp.), ragweed {Am-
brosia artemisiifolia) , dove weeds {Croton sp.), and various cultivated
crops indicated in the table, all of which ripen somewhat later, but like
foxtail shed their seeds onto the ground, either naturally or during
processes of crop harvest. In September of these years, however, fox-
tail was the most important food. This plant has been elsewhere re-
ported as a prominent dove food: Dutcher (1903) found as many as
6,400 seeds in one crop; and Knappen (1938) found foxtail to be the
dominant July and August dove food in the southeast.

In 1941 and 1942, however, due perhaps to changed conditions of
rainfall or temperature, there was no foxtail crop in this area, and the
doves had to adjust their September feeding accordingly. Wheat, bar-

152

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

TABLE 1

Principal Contents of the Crops of 234 Mourning Doves Killed in the
Vicinity of West Plains, Howell County, Missouri

Date

No. of
birds

Principal crop contents

1939

Sept. 10

6

Foxtail {Setaria viridis)

Sept. 14

8

Foxtail

Sept. 16

6

Foxtail

Oct. 7

5

Foxtail

Oct. 15

4

Mostly soybeans and cowpeas; some ragweed {Ambrosia
artemisiifolia), smartweed {Polygonum sp.), pigweed
{Amaranthus sp.), and foxtail
Corn, cane, barnyard grass {Echinochloa crusgalli)

Oct. 31

7

1940

Sept. 2

5

Mostly wheat; some foxtail

Sept. 8

17

Foxtail

Sept. 10

3

Foxtail

Sept. 22

13

Dove weed {Croton sp.)

Sept. 26

7

Foxtail and barnyard grass

Sept. 29

2

Dove weed

Oct. 4

3

Cowpeas and corn

Oct. 17

2

Ragweed, barnyard grass and pigweeed

1941

Sept. 6

10

Wheat, dove weed

Sept. 7

5

Wheat

Sept. 14

20

Wheat, pigweed

Sept. 28

10

Cane, barnyard grass

Oct. 3

8

Mostly cane; smartweed in two crops

Oct. 4

16

Millet {Setaria italica)

Oct. 5

14

Cane; a little smartweed and pigweed

1942

Sept. 2

9

Wheat, millet, barley and dove weed; -traces of corn
Wheat, barley and millet

Sept. 5

15

Sept. 12

4

Mostly millet; a little wheat

Sept. 16

1 1

Cane; traces of pigweed, red (?) clover

Sept. 18

24

Cane; traces of pigweed in three crops

ley, and millet {Setaria italica) were gleaned from the summer stubbles
until the later weeds and crops ripened. Winter wheat, which ripens in
June, largely meets the summer needs of doves, and is mentioned by
Bent (1932) as a universally favorite food. But the limited supply of
waste grain on the ground diminishes by late summer, and the doves
readily turn to other foods when they can be had. In foxtail years this
change is made in August, but when the foxtail fails to make a crop,
it is September before other suitable foods appear in quantity.

The change to a newly available source of food may occur very
quickly. On September 5, 1942, a concentration of approximately 200
doves was found in a wheat stubble, and the crops of 15 captured birds
were filled largely with wheat. A week later, on September 12, practi-
cally no birds remained in this stubble, and it was September 16 before

A. Starker
Leopold

HABITS OF MOURNING DOVE

153

I again found the local population, this time in a field of standing cane
a half mile from the wheat field. All the birds were feeding on frag-
ments of cane seed, which were dropped to the ground by thousands of
blackbirds as they fed on the upright heads. The almost complete shift
of the doves from wheat to cane, occurring apparently between Septem-
ber 5 and 12, was made possible in this instance by the “threshing” of
the seeds by blackbirds. Cane is an important fall and winter food here,
as it is in Alabama (Moore and Pearson, 1941), but is normally avail-
able to doves only after cutting.

Interestingly enough, Korean lespedeza {L. stipulacea), which has^
been widely introduced in southern Missouri during the past decade and
is now a favorite quail food, is apparently not used by doves. It has
not been found in any of the crops examined, even of birds taken during
October when the seeds are lying abundantly on the ground. Either
doves find it unpalatable (suggesting another limitation on the utiliza-
tion of foods besides availability), or they have not yet learned to use it.

Flocking Habits

In August, the doves are widely distributed over the agricultural
sections of Howell County, only the very favorable feeding grounds at-
tracting concentrations of any consequence. At that time the flocks
are loosely organized, behaving as Bent (1932:409) has described:
“As we watch a number of doves feeding in a stubble field we soon see
that there is no very strong tie binding together the members of the
company — no such bond as holds together a flock of sandpipers. . . .
The doves are spread out over the ground . . . feeding . . . like grazing
cattle. . . . The flock when alarmed, instead of moving off as a unit,
breaks up and the birds retreat individually or in pairs.”

However, with the first cold rains in September some of the doves
migrate, and a gradual change becomes apparent in the social relations
of the remaining birds. Large concentrations form on a few of the best
feeding grounds, and practically all the birds assemble at one or another
of these favored points. By October 1 there are no doves in three-
fourths of the late summer range, and the total population of a whole
valley may congregate on one farm, or even in a single field. The flocks
tend to cling together more closely. A small number of doves winter in
this region, and the wintering birds are found almost entirely in concen-
trations of 50 or more individuals, usually on bottomland fields. Strays
and small isolated flocks occur, but are unusual.

During the autumn period, when some of the doves are migrating
and the remainder are forming into the typical winter concentrations, I
have often observed particularly well-organized flocks of 10 to 20 birds
whose members have, in my experience, always proved to be adult
males. These male flocks fly in close formation, very much like sand-
pipers, to use Bent’s comparison, and the birds are wary and hard to
approach. Flushing or even shooting will not cause one of these units to

154

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 3

break up more than momentarily. On October 15, 1939, four birds were
killed out of such a flock, and gonad examination proved all to be adult
males, the testes averaging over 6 mm. in length, which is twice the size
of testes in young birds. On October 3, 1941, two birds were shot from
a similar flock of 12, and these also were adult males. This flock was
seen two days later with 10 members, which would suggest some degree
of stability in its make-up. The earliest date on which I have observed
a male flock was September 16 (1942), and one of these birds also
proved to be an adult. Therefore, in addition to increasing gregarious-
ness among the doves as fall progresses, there seems to be a partial
segregation of adult males into small, closely united flocks. All adult
males are not found in such flocks, for even in mid-October many have
been killed along with females and young.

Summary

The autumn feeding and flocking habits of Mourning Doves were
studied in south-central Missouri from 1939 through 1942.

Mourning Doves, being unable to scratch or to cling to vertical
stalks, select their food from seeds available on the surface of the
ground. The periodic adjustments in their fall feeding habits are ap-
parently conditioned by changing availability of surface foods.

Wheat fulfills the Mourning Dove’s needs until the stubbles become
nearly exhausted. The birds then change to foxtail if a crop has been
produced; if not, they make shift on the stubbles until the later weeds
and crops ripen.

Mourning Doves apparently reject Korean lespedeza, although quail
prefer it.

Part of the local Mourning Doves migrate, and an increasing degree
of gregariousness is evident among the remaining birds. Winter concen-
trations begin to form on the best feeding grounds in September.

There is a tendency toward sexual segregation among the wintering
doves, some of the adult males forming into separate flocks.

Literature Cited

Bent, Arthur Cleveland

1932 Life histories of North American gallinaceous birds. V. S. Nat. Mus.
Bull. No. 162.

Butcher, William

1903 The Mourning Dove. Nat. Assoc. Audubon Soc. Educ. Leaflet 2 (3 pp.,
1 pU.

Knappen, Phoebe

1938 Preliminary report on some of the important foods of the Mourning
Dove in the southeastern United States. Trans. Third North Amer.
Wildlife Co«/.: 776-781.

Moore George C., and Allen M. Pearson

1941 The Mourning Dove in Alabama. Ala. Coop. Wildlife Res. Unit (37 pp.).

State Conservation Commission, Jefferson City, Missouri.

THE WILSON BULLETIN

155

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3
<v

^ NESTING HABITS OF THE COMMON REDPOLL '

BY LAWRENCE I. GRINNELL

IN June and July, 1940, I visited Churchill, Manitoba, with Ralph
S. Palmer, to study and photograph nesting birds. “Churchill stands
at the junction of two life zones. It is precisely at the limit of tree
growth, where the spruce forest dies out on the arctic tundra and both
types of biological association are in contact. The country south of
the townsite is bare, mossy tundra. . . . Fronds of juniper, crowberry,
and lowly willow . . . compose the principal shrubby elements of the
flora. Dwarf spruces . . . stand widely scattered or grouped. . . . Inland,
the trees increase in number and in size, especially on warm, well
drained declivities and along the river, where the bush is more or less
continuous” (Taverner and Sutton 1934:8). Between June 2 and
July 22, I made a detailed study of the nesting habits of the Common

*

Figure 1. Observation and photographic blind on platform placed near
Redpoll nest. Churchill, Manitoba,

Redpoll {Acanthis 1. Unaria). The study was concentrated mainly
within a mile radius of camp (two small cabins situated two miles
southeast of Churchill), but several trips in search of Redpolls were
made further afield, the whole study area extending from a point near

^ The writer makes grateful acknowledgment to Ralph S, Palmer for the accom-
panying photographs and for help in collecting the data; also to Arthur A. Allen for
invaluable advice and guidance.

156

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

the grain elevator in Churchill five miles eastward to the Gravel Pit,
the highest elevation (about 100 feet) in the neighborhood. We made
detailed observations, mostly from blinds, on three female Redpolls with
eggs or nestlings, on 1 7 days, for a total of 46 hours, including all hours
of the day from 3 a.m. to midnight: one nest between June 10 and
17, a second between July 10 and 20, and a third between July 17
and 21.

Pre-nesting Redpolls

From June 2, when we first recorded Redpolls, to June 10, we
saw Redpolls daily but not abundant^: several solitary birds, a few'
pairs, an occasional flock of seven or less. In town they w^ere
usually perched on the top branches of the still bare dwarf willow^s
(3 to 6 feet in height), or feeding on the ground near houses.
Out near camp, during this period. Redpolls were more numerous
among the thin lines or small clumps of dwarf Black Spruces than
among the willows fringing the ponds of the open tundra. When
perching they generally occupied a conspicuous position, 6 to 10
feet up, on a spruce top or on the tip of a prominent branch. A
favorite feeding place was on the ground, just below the ridge of
Churchill’s water pipe-line, on its lee (south) side, where they fed
on dry grass seeds. They were often in more or less close associa-
tion with Tree, White-crowned, Gambel’s and Savannah Sparrows,
and Horned Larks. We recorded fewer Hoary Redpolls {Acanthis
hornemanni exilipes) than Common Redpolls (about one Hoary to
every 25 Common). In 1931, Taverner and Sutton (1934:73) found
the two forms about equally abundant at Churchill; in 1930 the
Hoary occurred in “somewhat smaller numbers” than the Common.

Nests

We made intensive efforts to find Redpoll nests, and it was sur-
prising in view of the relative abundance of Redpolls that w'e found
only nine of the season’s nests. (We found 13 Redpoll nests from
previous seasons.) Taverner and Sutton (1934:74) reported “roving
bands” of Common Redpolls, wLich were probably “non-breeding
individuals and birds on incubation relief.” The nine nests contained
a total of 33 eggs. Three nests were deserted before the eggs hatched
or before the young were fledged. The nests with parent birds still
present were all Common Redpoll nests. Of the total 33 eggs dis-
covered, 24 (72 per cent) hatched; 13 of these 24 nestlings (39
per cent of the total number of eggs) survived up to nest-leaving
time. This survival percentage corresponds to the 40 per cent ob-
tained by Kendeigh (1942) near Cleveland, Ohio, for large numbers
of nests of two other small Fringillids, the Song and Chipping
Sparrows.

Lawrence
I. Grinnell

NESTING OF THE REDPOLL

157

The 22 nests (both new and old) were placed 3 to 7 feet above the
ground, in either dwarf trees or shrubbery on the open tundra. Five of
the nine 1940 nests were in trees or shrubbery at the edges of lakes or
ponds. The kind of nest tree was noted for 21 nests: 12 were built in
dwarf spruces, 5 in dwarf willows, 3 in dwarf birches, one in a dwarf
larch. The exact positions of 14 nests were noted: 9 saddled on more
or less horizontal branches, 5 built in crotches. Using four categories,
excellent, good, fair, and poor, the concealment of five (out of 19 nests
for which degree of concealment was noted) was excellent. These were

Figure 2. Redpoll nest, saddled on bough, showing willow down used in the
bulk of the nest structure.

all placed in dwarf spruces, most of them saddling a horizontal bough,
shaded and concealed by another horizontal bough directly above. The
concealment of one was good, of eight, fair, of five, poor. The poorly
concealed nests were almost all built during June in deciduous bushes,
such as dwarf willows or birches, before the leaves had matured. We
found no nests in the dense bush, and none on the ground, though
Jourdain reported (Witherby et al., 1938:66) that exceptionally Red-
polls nest in grass tussocks.

The shortest distance between any two active nests was about a
hundred yards, though one active nest was placed in a dwarf spruce
within a foot and a half of an old nest. Taverner and Sutton (1934:73)

158

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
V’^ol. 55, No. 3

found Hoary and Common Redpolls nesting within a stone’s throw of
each other.

In all nine of the 1940 nests, the bulk material was chiefly dried
grasses, though in one nest, small twigs had also been used. Brown or
white Willow Ptarmigan {Lagopus lagopus albus) feathers were used in
the lining of eight nests, plant-down in five, hair in one, and lemming
fur in one. The measurements of seven of the 1940 Redpoll nests are
given in the accompanying table.

Measurements of Seven Redpoll Nests

Diameter

Top interior
Top exterior

Range

43^ - 6 cm.
8 - 10 cm.

Average

5.1 cm.
8.7 cm.

Depth

Inside

3 - 4 cm.

3.2 cm.

Outside

* 5 - 8 cm.

6.1 cm.

Weight

10.8-26.7 gm.

17.8 gm.

Egg-Laying,

Incubation, and Brooding Periods

In Alaska, . Dice (1918:130) found the egg-laying interval to
be one day; I found it to vary from one to two days, though one

day was more usual. I was able to obtain accurate data on the

incubation periods of only two sets: one, a set of five, hatched in
10 days (July 2 to 12); the other, a set of three, hatched in 10
or 11 days (July 10 to July 20 or 21). Jourdain (Witherby et al.,
1938:66) also found the incubation period to be 10 or 11 days. I
determined the length of the brooding period at one nest: 11 or 12

days, July 11 to 22. Incubation and brooding were performed by

the female; Dice (1918:130) states that “apparently the male has
no function in the home life of the Redpoll other than to fertilize
the eggs” (though I found, as reported below, that the male some-
times fed the nestlings).

Nestlings

The activity of the adult female sometimes extended from about
3 A.M. to 10:30 p.M. Tables 1 and 2 give the average attentive
periods (time at the nest) and inattentive periods (time away from
the nest) and average feeding intervals for the three nests and for
different times of day. The attentive periods of the female at the
nest ranged from a minimum of less than a minute to a maximum
of one hour, 24 minutes (an average of 22.8 minutes); p>eriods away
from the nest ranged from a minimum of less than a minute to a maxi-
mum of one hour, 16 minutes (an average of 20.9 minutes).

Lawrence
I. Grinnell

NESTING OF THE REDPOLL

159

TABLE 1

Attentiveness of Female Common Redpolls, Churchill, Manitoba, 1940

No. of
Periods
at Nest*'

Total
Time
at Nest

Av. Length
of Period
at Nest

No. of
Periods
off Nest*

Total
Time
off Nest

Av. 1 ength
of Period
off Nest

Nest 1 (June 10-17)
Nest 2 (July 10-20)
Nest 3 (July 17-21)

2SV2

153^

5 hrs. 50 min.
11 37

4 29

13.7 min.

44.9

16.3

26

18

15H

4 hrs. 25 min.

7 33

8 43

10.2 min.

25.2
33.7

All Nests

S1V2

21 hrs. 56 min.

22.8 min.

593^

20 hrs. 41 min.

20.9 min.

* Including fractional periods at beginning and end of observation time, which are
counted as half-intervals.

TABLE 2

Average Feeding Intervals for Common Redpoll Nestlings,
Churchill, Manitoba, 1940

Intervals by Nest

Nest 1 June 10-17, nestlings aged 0 to 8 days
Nest 2, July 10-20, nestlings aged 0 to 10 days
Nest 3, July 17-21, nestlings aged 6? to 11? days

17 min.
36
20

Average for all nests

24 min.

Intervals by Three-hour Periods

3-6 A.M.

8 min.

12-3 P.M.

19 min.

6-9

28

3-6

20

9-12

29

Morning average

21^ min.

Afternoon average

193^ min.

Between 3 and 6 a.m., the female was busily engaged in search
of food for the young, and was usually at the nest only momentarily,
for feeding and nest cleaning. The feeding intervals (8 minutes)
from 3 to 6 a.m. were very short as compared with other times of
day. The female stayed very close at the nest between 6 a.m. and
noon, feeding the young on the average every 28 minutes. Between
noon and 3 p.m., the average period away from the nest was ap-
preciably longer than the average period at the nest: 29 minutes
as compared with 17. The average feeding interval during these
hours was 19 minutes. The average attentive period at the nest
from 3 to 9 p.m. was 18 minutes, close to the total average atten-
tive period (21 minutes); but from 9 p.m. to midnight, the maxi-
mum average attentive period was reached: 80 minutes. It is to
be assumed that the female remained continuously at the nest from
midnight to 3 a.m., though the nests were not under observation dur-
ing those hours.

160

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

Nest 1 was observed from June 10, when it contained one egg
and 3 young from less than a day- to a day-old, to June 17. The
female spent 57 per cent of the total hours she was observed (10
hours, 15 minutes) at the nest. Nest 2 was observed from July 10,
when it contained 5 eggs (two of which hatched on the two follow-
ing days) to July 20. The female, spent 60 per cent of the total
hours she was observed (19 hours, 10 minutes) at the nest, though
she was seen to do no actual brooding on either July 18 (ob-
served 1:30 to 3:30 p.m.) or July 19 (observed 1:55 to 3:55 p.m.).

Figure 3. Female Redpoll preening.

On July 20, she was absent from the nest during the entire 70
minutes of observation (1:20 to 2:30 p.m.). Nest 3 was observed
from July 17, when it contained 5 young about 6 days old, to July
21, when the young were fledged. The female at this nest spent
only 34 per cent of the hours she was observed (13 hours, 12
minutes) at the nest. The average feeding interval at this nest was
20 minutes, as compared with 36 minutes for Nest 2 and 17 minutes
for Nest 1.

Dividing nestling period into three stages: early (age one to
four days) middle (5 to 7 days), and late (8 to 10 days), the
average interval between feedings was found to be 38, 23, and 19
minutes, respectively. Nestlings were fed sometimes by regurgitation,
as in the closely related Pine Siskin (Dales and Bennett, 1929:76),

Lawrence
I. Grinnell

NESTING OF THE REDPOLL

161

Figure 4. Female Redpoll cleaning nest.

Figure S. Redpoll nestling, aged 11 days, just before first flight.

162

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

sometimes directly. Feeding was usually performed by the female,
but occasionally, and contrary to the findings of Dice (1918:130)
in Alaska, the nestlings were fed by the male. Frequently the male
fed the female at the nest. The female, before accepting the food
from the male, opened and shut her bill rapidly several times, and
while taking the food, she vibrated her wings continuously; Gross
(1938:255) mentions this behavior as characteristic of the Eastern
Goldfinch also. After accepting the food, the female regurgitated and
fed the young. In the case of a rosy-breasted male and its mate, one
parent would come alone to the nest, feed the brood of five, then fly
off; the other parent would come almost immediately afterward and
also feed the brood.

Nests were frequently cleaned by parent birds, usually immediately
after feeding the young; the parent sometimes swallowed the excreta,
sometimes carried them away.

The chart shows the daily average growth in w^eight of the nestlings.
The figures given for ages one to seven days are the average weights
of four to six nestlings; w^eights for ages 8 to 11 days are weights of
single individuals. By far the greatest percentage gain in weight oc-
curred on the second, third, and fourth days (increases of 66, 60, and
40 per cent respectiv^ely) ; no gain in w^eight was recorded on the
tenth and eleventh days.

!Most female Redpolls found on nests were not very shy. They
generally allow^ed an approach to within three or four feet (sometimes
to within two feet) before flushing. When flushed, they usually flew
away at once to a considerable distance. Sometimes, however, if an
intruder was standing near the nest when a female returned with food,
she would perch in a conspicuous spruce top and utter the nasal,
questioning tu-wee note.

Lawrence
I. Grinnell

NESTING OF THE REDPOLL

163

Summary

The nesting habits of the Common Redpoll {Acanthis 1. Unarm)
were studied at Churchill, Manitoba, from June 2 to July 22, 1940.

Common Redpolls were relatively abundant. Nine of the season’s
nests were found, containing a total of 33 eggs. Seventy-two per cent
of the eggs hatched; 39 per cent of the eggs resulted in fledglings.
Placement and structure of the nests are described.

The egg-laying interval varied from one to two days, though one
day was the more usual. The incubation period was 10 to 11 days;
the nestling period, 11 to 12 days. Incubation and brooding were
performed by the female.

The active day sometimes extended from 3 a.m. to 10:30 p.m.
The attentive and inattentive periods ranged from less than a minute
to over one hour, averaging respectively 22.8 minutes and 20.9 minutes.

The maximum activity (feeding and nest cleaning) occurred be-
tween 3 and 6 a.m.; the maximum brooding (except from midnight
to 3 A.M., when the nests were not observed) between 6 a.m. and
noon, and between 9 p.m. and midnight.

Nestlings were fed usually by the female, sometimes by regurgita-
tion, sometimes directly. They were fed occasionally by the male.

According to the stage of nestling development, average intervals
between feedings were: 38 minutes (age one to four days) ; 23 minutes
(age 5 to 7 days) ; and 19 minutes (age 8 to 10 days).

The nests were frequently cleaned, usually immediately after the
young were fed.

Daily increase in weight of nestlings is recorded.

Literature Cited
Dales, Marie and W. W. Bennett

1929 Nesting of the Pine Siskin in Iowa with remarks on regurgitative
feeding. Wils. Bull., 41:74-77.

Dice, Lee R.

1918 Notes on the nesting of the Redpoll. Condor, 20:129-131.

Gross, Alfred O.

1938 Nesting of the Goldfinch. Bird-Lore, 40:253-257.

Kendeigh, S. Charles

1942 Analysis of losses in the nesting of birds. Jour. Wildlife Management,
6:19-26.

Taverner, Percy A. and George M. Sutton

1934 The Birds of Churchill, Manitoba, Ann. Carnegie Mus., 23:73-75.
WiTHERBY, H. F., F. C. R. JOURDAIN, N. F. Ticehurst, B. W. Tucker
1938 The handbook of British birds. Vol. 1. London.

Laboratory of Ornithology, Cornell University, Ithaca,

New York

164

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

BIRD WEIGHTS AS AN AID IN T.AXONOMY ^

BY DEAN AMADON

T N recent years several ornithologists have pointed out that bird
weights are a valuable aid in many problems. Among general
papers on this subject may be mentioned those by Mrs. Nice (1937,
Chap. 3; and 1938); Baldwin and Kendeigh (1938); and Zedlitz
(1926). All of these, as well as most other writers that have dealt
with this subject, have been interested primarily in physiological
problems, such as daily, monthly, and seasonal weight rhythms;
weight changes during growth ; and weight as related to various aspects
of metabolism. Referring to such studies, Baldwin and Kendeigh (1938:
458) write: “A surprisingly large number of records of the weight of
birds is required before reliable interpretations can be made.” Un-
fortunately such statements have led to a general belief that in taxo-
nomic work, where it would indeed be unusual to have a large series
of weights available for each of the forms included in any given study,
weights are too variable to be useful. A few taxonomists have pub-
lished weights of birds, but usually only as an incidental part of
their studies. The present paper summarizes and compares the various
methods in common use for measuring general size,- and attempts to
evaluate weight as an index of general size, and as a standard for use
in comparing the relative dimensions of parts, organs, and appendages.
The importance in taxonomy of such an index and standard may be
summarized as follows:

1. For direct comparison oj variations in general size, A kind of
variation in birds very frequently used by taxonomists to distinguish
geographical forms is a difference in general size (measured in various
ways). A number of subspecies are based solely on this difference, and
a still larger number are based on this difference plus other distinctions
such as color. Of 27 subspecies of non-passerine birds which I have dis-
cussed in recent papers, 6 are based solely upon differences in general
size (as reflected in measurements of appendages) ; 8 upon size and
color; 11 upon color alone; and 2 upon differences in proportions. Sub-
species of passerine birds are less often based on size variation, but
this may be due to the greater difficulty in detecting such variation in
small birds. Very frequently a species shows geographical size varia-
tion even though it is too slight, too gradual (altitudinal or latitudinal
dines — “Bergmann’s Rule”), or too irregular in distribution to justify
the naming of subspecies. Mayr (1942:37) lists several instances of
such variation.

^ I am greatly indebted to Ernst Mayr for his careful revisions of the manuscript.

* Alternative but less commonly employed terms are “total size” and “basic size”.

Dean

Amadon

BIRD WEIGHTS IN TAXONOMY

165

2. As a standard of comparison for measurements of parts and ap-
pendages. The usual “taxonomic” measurements of birds — lengths of
wing, tail, culmen and tarsus — are all taken from appendages. Ob-
served variation in such dimensions may indicate variation in general
size, independent variation in the appendages themselves, or a com-
bination of the two. For example, two subspecies, A and B, might have
the following measurements:

Tail

Wing

Tail /Wing Ratio

A

50

75

2/3

B

50

100

1/2

If A and B are the same in general size, the variation in wing length
and in tail /wing ratios is entirely due to B’s having a longer wing.
Knowing this, a biological explanation may be sought; perhaps B is
more migratory or lives at higher altitudes. But if B, in general size,
is larger than A by one-third, then wing length is correlated with
general size, and an explanation for the variation in relative tail
length may be sought. It thus becomes apparent that we usually
cannot fully evaluate the biological significance of geographical varia-
tion in measurements of appendages without first relating these
measurements to general size.

Linear Indices of General Size

The following linear indices of general size have been used or
proposed by taxonomists working with birds:

1. Total length. This would be a very useful index of general size
except that in birds it cannot usually be taken with reasonable ac-
curacy, because: (a) birds’ necks are relatively long and curved, and
the longitudinal axis of the head meets that of the neck at an angle.
The success with which this curvature is eliminated in measuring
total length is affected, both by the technique of the observer and
by the condition of the specimen, to such an extent as to make this
measurement extremely variable; (b) as usually defined, total length
includes tail length, and the tail often varies in size independently of
other measurements; (c) the length of the neck and head (especially
the bill portion) not infrequently varies independently of other
measurements, very noticeably in such long-billed genera as Hemigna-
thus of the Drepaniidae. A “body length,” obtained by subtracting
tail length from total length (and in long-billed genera, by subtracting
also the bill length) would provide a more reliable index than total
length.

When taken from museum skins, total length is even more subject
to error, since such specimens are little more than tubes of skin whose
length varies with the amount of stuffing put in and the amount of
stretching which occurs in skinning. However, when the size differences
to be measured are comparatively large, total length taken from

166

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 3

selected skins may prove useful. Chapman (1940:422, 426) used it
with worthwhile results in his study of Zonotrichia, by “selecting
when possible, series prepared by the same collector,” and even con-
cluded that total length when taken from such selected skins is more
reliable than when taken, by various collectors, from birds in the flesh.

2. Body length. To provide a standard measurement that can be taken
more accurately than total length, Chapin (1929:8) proposed ‘length
of body’, defined as: “the distance in a straight line from the anterior
surface of the shoulder to the vent, or, if the bird is already skinned,
to the tip of the small bone (pubis) which extends down in the belly
wall close to the vent.” I know of only one collector who has recorded
this measurement for any considerable number of specimens, and ap-
parently no one has used it in a published study. Though it may well
prove to be useful in restricted problems, ‘length of body’ is not a
generally acceptable index of general size. The feathers interfere
with the taking of this measurement, especially in birds with long,
dense plumage. It cannot be taken from skins, and would be rather
difficult to take from live birds. Collectors would probably prefer to
take it from the skinned bodies of birds, but then comparison of
measurements taken from skinned birds with those taken from un-
skinned birds would introduce a further element of error. Finally,
there are many birds so large that this measurement could not be
taken wuth any dividers of a size usually available.

3. Measurements of appendages. Lack of a good index of general
size has obliged some ornithologists to use one appendage as a standard
of comparison for another. Such a practice is in general unsatisfactory
because, though one appendage is often correlated with another —
for example wing and tail lengths frequently increase or decrease pro-
portional amounts — each appendage often varies independently of
other measurements. Though it cannot be assumed that in any given
case the size of an appendage is correlated with general size, however
defined, the usual measurements, especially wing and tail lengths, seem,
more often than not, to be at least partially correlated with it. When
it is stated that one subspecies is larger than another, usually only
measurements of appendages are given as evidence of the difference.
As a rule the taxonomist has noted that specimens of one race appear
to be or are obviously larger in “general size,” but has made no actual
measurement of the general size. Sometimes it is evident that one ap-
pendage is more closely correlated with “general size” than another.
Thus in comparing races of Zonotrichia capensis, Chapman (1940:
424-427) found a pronounced increase in wing length without a
proportionate increase in tail length, which he found to be more or
less correlated wdth general size (defined as total length). He was,
then, able to use tail length as a rough measure of the relative increase
in wing length. But obviously the use of a consistently reliable index
of general size as a basis of comparison w’ould be preferable to the

Dean

Amadon

BIRD WEIGHTS IN TAXONOMY

167

use of measurements of appendages, whose apparent correlation with
general size or with each other is sometimes deceptive.

4. Measurements oj hind-limb. Although the femur, the tibia, and the
tarsus are segments of an appendage, there is evidence that their
measurements are frequently correlated with “general size.” Linsdale
(1928:311) has shown graphically that in the Mariposa Fox Sparrow
{Passerella iliaca mariposae)^ variation in length of tibia roughly
parallels variation in weight. Since he found length of femur and tarsus
to be closely correlated with that of tibia, their variation also would,
in this subspecies, parallel variation in weight. Hence he used length of
tibia as an index of general size and expressed all other measurements
in terms of it (p. 357). Miller (1941:358) found inter-racial correla-
tion of tarsus and weight in the genus Junco. These findings suggest
that the hind-limb segments of birds sometimes follow Wolf’s Rule
(bones tend to increase in size in proportion to increases in the weight
they support). Yet length of hind-limb is obviously affected by other
factors, such as habits of the species; and related species of about
the same general size, as shown by weight, differ noticeably in
length of hind-limb. The tarsus is the only longer hind-limb segment
that can be measured in museum skins. It is often rather difficult to
measure accurately, especially in species in which the tarsus is short
or feathered. Consequently, length of hind-limb segments is usually
not a satisfactory index of general size.

5. Measurements oj skeleton. Several measurements which give a
reliable index of general size can be taken from the trunk skeleton of
birds. Engels (1940:367 ff.) used two such measurements in his study
of the thrashers (Toxostoma) . He emphasized the difficulties and fal-
lacies which usually attend studies of variation in the proportions of
appendages when differences in general size are ignored (p. 368). But
relative scarcity of bird skeletons in collections will often preclude the
use of measurements taken from them in avian systematics.

Thus we see that all the usual measurements employed by bird
taxonomists are linear measurements, either too variable to be reliable
indicators of general size, or unobtainable in large series. When they
are apparently correlated with general size, it is impossible to determine
how close the correlation is without recourse to some direct measure-
ment of general size. When an estimate of general size must be based
on linear measurements, body length ( defined as total length minus tail
length, and in special cases, minus bill length) is usually the most
reliable, unless series of skeletons of the forms to be compared are
available.

Weight as an Index of General Size

Precision oj weight as an index. Since birds are three-dimensional
objects, mass or volume as an index of general size would seem more
logical than linear measurements. In such irregularly shaped, feather-

168

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

clad objects, volume cannot be directly measured, but weight is easily
recorded. It is an index of the mass of a bird and an indirect index of
its volume, since closely related birds, such as are usually compared
in taxonomic studies, may be assumed to have the same specific
gravities. But even in the comparison of distantly related groups,
weight is the best available index of general size. In comparing diverse
avian types as, for example, herons with quail or songbirds, or with
members of other classes, to use a linear dimension would obviously not
yield valid results. But the comparative size of organs such as the brain,
heart, or pituitary, can be determined by using ratios derived from the
weight of the organ as compared with the total weight of the bird.

Differences in general size of solids will always be reflected more
accurately by an index such as weight, which is proportional to the
mass or volume of the object, than by any single linear measurement
(as a simple example: in two cubes with edges respectively 2 and 3
units, the difference in volume is 19 times as great as the difference in
edges). Table 1, which gives the absolute and relative differences in
wing length, body length, and weight for subspecies of Nycticorax
caledonicus, Chen hyperborea and Pinicola enucleator, for species of
Cacomantis, and for male and female of AccipHer jasciatus vigilax, shows
that the same is true for weights of birds as compared with their linear

TABLE 1

Comparisons of .Absolute and Relative Differences in Wing Length,
Body Length, and Weight

Wing Length (mm.)

Body Length (mm.)

Weight (gm.)

Nycticorax

caledonicus caledonicus
caledonicus mandibularis

Dlff: 7.6 %

2d* 291,304 (298)

\0d': 267-290 (277)

Diff: 17.9%

Icf: 884 ( 884)

3d": 700-800 ( 750)

Chen

hyperborea atlantica
hyperborea hyperborea

Diff:4.7%
200": 430-485 (450)
45d": 395-460 (430)

Diff: 8.9%
13cj": (675)

12d": (620)

Diff: 49.5%

13d": 3175-4735 (3626)
17d": 1815-2835 (2425)

A ccipiter
jasciatus vigilax
jasciatus vigilax

Diff: 13.9%

59: 273-287 (278)
lOd": 237-253 (244)

Diff: 15.5%
59: (231)

8d": (200)

Diff: 77.3%
59:459-502 ( 477)

lOd": 240-309 ( 269)

Cacomantis
p. pyrrophanus
variohsus addatdus

DifT: 16.4%

9cf: 139-145 (142)
17d": 116-126 (122)

Diff: 10.6%
7c?’: (115)

12d": (104)

Diff: 26.5%

7d": 43.5-55.8 (48.2)
8d": 34.0-42.0 (38.1)

Pinicola

enucleator leucura
enucleator eschatosus

Diff: 9.9%
d"*: 116-128 ( ? )
37d": 106-115 (111)

Diff: 35.4%

5d": 70-83 ( ? )

9d": 52-61 ( ? )

Percentages are amounts by which the larger member of each pair exceeds
the smaller in each measurement. (Since the mean was not given for some of the
measurements of Pinicola, the percentages for this species were calculated from the
averages.) Figures in parentheses are the means of the measurements.

* Number of specimens not stated.

Dean

Amadon

BIRD WEIGHTS IN TAXONOMY

169

measurements. The measurements given in the table are from the
following sources: Nycticorax (Amadon 1942a: 4-5); Chen (Kennard
1927:88-89); Accipiter (specimens in Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist.); Ca-
comantis (specimens in Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., in part recorded by
Amadon 19426:16, 20); Pinicola (wing lengths from Griscom 1934:7;
weights from Van Tyne 1934:530). The body length was found by
subtracting tail length from total length; this measurement was taken
from skins in the case of Accipiter and Cacomantis ; from birds in the
flesh (by Kennard) in Chen. In the three genera for which body
lengths are given, the difference between forms as compared in this
measurement is, as was to be expected, markedly less than the difference
in their weights. The same is true here of wing length as compared with
weight, but since wing length may vary independently, subspecies may
differ in mean length of wing though not (or to a less significant extent)
in weight. When wing length is correlated with general size (however
defined), forms will often be more sharply differentiated by weight,
despite its somewhat greater variability (see below) than by wing
length. The two races of Pinicola compared in the table seem to be an
example of this; Van Tyne (1934:530) has commented on the marked
difference in the weights of these two races.

Since differences in general size seem to be reflected more accurately
and sensitively by weight than by linear dimensions, it should be
possible by a comparison of weights to detect differences in general
size which are too slight to produce a measurable difference in linear
dimensions. Data to test this probability are scarce, but Mayr
(1931:668-669) has published weights and linear measurements of
Melanocharis (Dicaeidae) which are suggestive. In Melanocharis
versterii maculiceps , females are significantly larger than males in
both wing length and weight; in Melanocharis longicauda captata, the
wing lengths of the sexes do not differ appreciably, but the females are
significantly heavier. The measurements of the two forms are shown
in the accompanying table. To determine whether the differences in
v/eight in M. 1. captata and in both weight and wing length in M. v.

M. V. maculiceps

M. 1. captata

Wing (mm.):
Weight (gm.) :

6 d 59.0-64.0 (61.8)|5 9 66.0-71 (69.0)
5 d 12.5-lS.S (14.0)|S ? 16.5-20 (18.5)

7 d 64-67 (65.9) llO $ 64-67 (65.5)
6 d 13-15 (13.9)1 6 ? 14-16 (15.4)

maculiceps are statistically significant in view of the rather small size
of the samples involved, the test” was used (Simpson and Roe
1939:207 ff.). In all three cases this test indicated that the observed
differences are almost certainly significant (less than one chance in a
hundred that they are not, in each case). The slight difference in the
wing lengths of males and females of M. 1. captata is, of course, not
significant.

Blanchard (1941:10-11), in her study of Zonotrichia leucophrys,
found no significant difference in the lengths of wing, tail, or other

170

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

appendages in the two races pugetemis and nuttalli. Yet she found
nuttalU to be significantly heavier; for males the difference was 2.59
grams or about 10 per cent of the total weight. Blanchard interpreted
this to mean that the lengths of the appendages are not correlated
with general size in these subspecies, but it seems equally possible
that even if such correlation exists, the difference in general size is
too slight to be detected in the appendicular measurements.

An example of the opposite type of variation in which two sub-
species differ in the lengths of appendages but not in weight was pub-
lished by Grinnell (1926:406-408). In comparing two races, Sitta
carolinensis aculeata and 5. c. alexandrae, of the White-breasted
Nuthatch, he found that although S. c. alexandrae weighs no more than
S, c. aculeata, all of its appendages — wing, tail, culmen, tarsus and hind
toe — are, on the average, significantly longer.

Variability of weight. Although weight is in many respects the
most logical and sensitive index of general size available, it is affected
by several factors such as variation in the amount of fat present, and
the contents of the alimentary system. Hence many have assumed
that weights are too variable to be useful in taxonomic work, but the
few taxonomists who have actually used weights in their studies have
not found this true. Miller (1941:255) writes, “Despite the numerous
factors which affect the weights of birds. . . , the moderate variability
of this measurement, compared with that of mammals, makes it fairly
reliable.” For the weights of 100 males of Junco oreganus montanus,
collected during the breeding season, he found that: “The coefficient of
variability was 5.2 per cent, which is about twice that of wing length
but equal to that of some of the toe and bill measurements.” Linsdale
(1928:312), after discussing the factors other than geographical
variation which affect weights of the Fox Sparrow, concluded: “The
exact amount of the effect of each of these factors has not yet been
determined, but it is thought that they have little effect on the means
of large series.” Regarding geographical variation in weight he
said (p. 315): “It is easily seen that the average body-weight of
these samples is a useful characteristic, to be used along with others
for making racial distinctions.”

The relative variability of w^eights is best determined by computing
the coefficient of variability V (Simpson and Roe, 1939:122). Results
for a number of bird forms are given in Table 2.

The species represented in the table are a mere handful, and all of
them are passerines. Since the variability of linear dimensions seems
to be much the same for all groups of birds, it is very likely that the
variability of w^eights will also prove to be fairly constant. Some of the
extraneous factors influencing weights may, however, be more marked
in some groups than in others. Van Tyne has pointed out to me that
seasonal fluctuation in the amount of fat present is greater in some

Dean

Amadon

BIRD WEIGHTS IN TAXONOMY

171

species and groups than in others. Y. Hagen (1942) in an extensive
paper on bird weights, which became available after the present one was
in press, gives considerable information on this question. Since he was
working with a local collection, his discussion of weights as related to
taxonomy is little more than suggestive.

TABLE 2

Sample Values of the Coefficient of Variability (F) for Bird Weights

Species

Number

V

Au-

thor-

ity

Junco oreganus montanus

100 breeding d*

5.2

1

Zonotrkhia leucophrys nuttalli

17 breeding d*

6.54

2

Zonotrichia leucophrys nuttalli

28 wintering adult d*

8.55

2

Zonotrichia leucophrys nuttalli

19 wintering immature d*

4.28

2

Zonotrichia leucophrys nuttalli

21 wintering immature $

7.25

2

Zonotrichia leucophrys pugetensis

43 wintering adult d*

8.75

2

Passerella iliaca brevicauda

30 d*

6.21±0.54

3

Passerella iliaca brevicauda

18 $

8.41±0.95

3

Passerella iliaca mariposae

38 d*

5.60±0.45

3

Passerella iliaca canescens

16 d*

5.33±0.64

3

Pachycephala schlegelii obscurior

13 adult d"

5.07

4

Pachycephala soror klossi

11 adult d*

4.16

4

Ptiloprora g. guisei

18 d*

6.41

4

Authorities: (1) Miller, 1941:255; (2) Blanchard, 1941:120, 121; (3) Linsdale,
1928:313; (4) Mayr, 1931:665, 672 (raw data, calculation mine).

The variability of volumes or weights will, to some extent, represent
the cumulative variabilities of the linear dimensions of the object, and
will inevitably have a larger value than that of any one linear dimen-
sion. It is usually advisable to use the cube roots of weights rather
than the weights themselves as a standard of comparison for linear
measurements (see below). Extracting the cube roots has the effect of
reducing the variability to a value comparable with that of linear dimen-
sions. For example, available weights of Pachycephala soror klossi
have a F of 4.16; for the cube roots of the same weights V is only 1.38;
V for the wing lengths of the same sample is 1.55.

Uses of Weights in Analyzing Measurements

The measurements usually used by the avian taxonomist are all of
appendages. Since the independent variation of appendages is often
masked by variation in general size, the general size factor must some-
how be eliminated. The simplest method of doing this is to express the
appendicular measurements in terms of (that is, as a ratio or percentage
of) general size, thus transforming the general size in the forms to be
compared to the common base 100. The transformed measurements
may then be compared with the assurance that the differences observed
are independent of general size.

172

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

When weight is used as the index of general size, as is advocated
here, it is not valid to compare ratios derived from linear measurements
divided by weights. As noted above, weights vary in proportion to the
cube of the linear dimensions, and this distorts the value of the ratios.
The distortion could be corrected either by cubing the linear measure-
ments or by taking the cube root of the weights. Since the object is to
compare linear dimensions, the first alternative is not acceptable. Fur-
thermore, the approximation to volumes (or weights) by cubing linear
dimensions has inherent difficulties, the most important one being that
the error of the measurements is thereby increased (cubed). The op-
posite is true when cube roots are extracted. This was illustrated above
for weights of Pachycephala soror. The cube root of weight may be
considered to be of the same magnitude as a linear index of general
size,^ but more reliable and usually less variable, since it is a general-
ized quantity (like weight itself), which is independent of variation
in body form or proportions. For example, in a comparison of the
relative length of intestine in a pelican and a quail to show correlation
of length of intestine with food habits, ratios derived by taking length
of intestine over weight (or cube root of weight) would constitute a
basis for significant comparison, whereas use of any linear measurement,
such as body length, in species of such different body form, would
give misleading results.

The method of calculating the ratio of any given linear measure-
ment to cube root of weight will vary according to the completeness of
the data available. The simplest method is to take the ratio of the
measurement (e. g., wing length) over the cube root of weight for
each specimen; the mean of the series is then taken. When working
with published data, however, such detailed individual measurements
and weights will rarely be available. It is then necessary to base the
ratio upon available means or averages of the measurements. If the
weights and linear measurements are taken from different individuals,
and especially if different localities are involved, the specifications for
the samples should be fully stated as well as the reasons for consider-
ing them to belong to a population homogeneous as to size. Sumner
(1920), who was working with abundant, laboratory-raised material
of Perotnyscus, illustrates several satisfactory methods of dealing with
statistical material, of which the most precise is that involving the use
of regression coefficients.

® Although Teissier (1931) used cube root of weight in a study of relative growth
in the mealworm, the only use of this quantity in the analysis of linear measurements
of vertebrates up to the present time, so far as I know, is that of Romer and Price
(1941:7 ff.) in their monograph on the Pelycosaurs. For these fossil reptiles, no actual
weights, of course, were available. An estimated relative weight factor or weight index
was ingeniously obtained by assuming that the average area of the vertebral centrae
in a given species, since the vertebrae supported the animal’s weight, would be
proportional to its weight (Wolf’s rule). The cube roots of these weight indices were
then taken and used as a standard of comparison for measurements of the skull, and
various bones of the body and limbs, with valuable results.

Dean

Amadon

BIRD WEIGHTS IN TAXONOMY

173

After the mean ratio (linear dimension over cube root of weight)
for each population included in the study has been secured by any
acceptable statistical method, the ratios for the various populations
may be directly compared. Comparison is facilitated if all the ratios
are multiplied by the factor necessary to increase the largest to 100.
The relative magnitude of the dimension in the various populations
can then be read off directly as percentages.

The following examples are given to illustrate the use of cube
root of weight in analyzing measurements of birds:

1. Wing/ tail proportions in the Fox Sparrow. The Fox Sparrow is of
interest because in the northeastern subspecies, which breeds from
Newfoundland to Alaska, the wing is considerably longer than the
tail, while the reverse is true in several races of the California and
Great Basin mountains. Subspecies of the intervening areas of the
west are more or less intermediate. A considerable variation in general
size (as shown by weight) occurs among these races, and it has not
yet been demonstrated whether the difference in tail/wing ratio is
the result of increase in relative tail length or decrease in relative
wing length in the southern races. To determine this, the general size
factor was eliminated by expressing the measurements as ratios of

TABLE 3

Comparison of Absolute and Relative Wing and Tail Lengths in Eight
Subspecies of the Fox Sparrow (Passerella iliaca)

Wing

Tail

Weight

Wing Ratio

Tail Ratio

jP. i. iliaca

88.5 mm.

71.7 mm.

40.7 gm.

97.9

77.3

P. i. altivagans

81.2

76.1

30.9

98.5

89.9

P. i. sinuosa

81.0

73.1

32.5

96.6

84.9

P. i. schistacea

80.4

80.6

28.9

99.7

97.3

P. i. fulva

80.8

82.2

30.1

98.8

97.9

P. i. brevicauda

83.4

84.3

34.4

97.6

96.1

P. i. monoensis

82.8

85.0

31.3

100.0

100.0

P. i. stephensi

83.4

85.2

34.5

97.5

97.0

The ratios were derived by taking: wing X 8.198 over cube root of weight;
tail X 7.985 over cube root of weight (the numerical factor given for the
numerator being the one necessary to increase the largest included ratio to 100).

cube root of weight. In Table 3, these ratios are given for eight sub-
species, together with the absolute measurements. The weights are
from Linsdale (1926:314) and Wetherbee (1934:60). Other measure-
ments are from Swarth (1920:182). All data are for males. Because
available weights of P. i. iliaca included both sexes, I have corrected
them on the basis of Linsdale’s statement that males of this species
average 2 per cent heavier than females. Since the present objective
is primarily to illustrate a method, it has not seemed necessary to repeat
here the specifications of the samples upon which Table 3 is based.
The weights of P. i. iliaca are from specimens trapped in New England
(Wetherbee) ; the wing and tail lengths of this subspecies are from

174

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

four Alaskan specimens, but since they agree quite closely with
measurements taken from eastern specimens, as published by Wether-
bee and others, it seemed acceptable to use a ratio based on samples
from even such widely separated localities, the geographical variation in-
volved, if any, being negligible in comparison with the inter-racial varia-
tion to be analyzed. For a number of races Swarth gave measurements
taken from several series collected at separate localities; in such cases I
used the largest sample in the table.

Comparison of the relative wing and tail lengths given in Table 3
immediately reveals certain things which the absolute measurements
do not. The eastern race, P, i. iliaca, is seen to have a longer wing
only because its general size, as shown in weight, is larger; relatively,
its wing is no longer than that of the other races. In fact, wing length
is closely correlated with general size, as shown in weight, in all eight
races. The tail of P. i. iliaca is much shorter, and that of P. i. alti-
vagans and P. i. sinuosa considerably shorter, relative to weight, than
the tails of the other five races. Swarth believed P. i. iliaca to be more
closely related to P. i. altivagans than to P. i. sinuosa^ and it is interest-
ing that the relative tail length does not agree exactly with this
division. The other five races were placed by Swarth in a schistacea
group” because of resemblances in color and in other characters, and
this grouping receives additional support from the fact that relative tail
length is almost the same in these five races. Though P. i. monoensis
exceeds all the other races in relative length of both appendages, the dif-
ference, as compared with other members of the schistacea group, is so
slight that we may assume that it is not significant. The general conclu-
sion is that the geographical variation observed in tail/wing proportions
of the Fox Sparrow is to be ascribed to variation in the relative length
of tail. Clearly it is necessary to know this before attempting to
find a biological explanation of the change in proportions.

2. The cuckoos of the genus Cacomantis. Out of eight subspecies of
two closely related species of this genus, seven were found (Amadon,
19426:17-20)“^ to have a wing/tail ratio of about .96, but in the eighth
(C. variolosus addendus of the Solomon Islands) the ratio was only .88.
Weights, which were available for C. v. addendus and for one of the
other forms (C. p. pyrrophanus of New Caledonia), made possible an
analysis of this difference in wing/tail proportions:

Wing Tail Wing Ratio Tail Ratio

C . v . addendus 121.8 mm. 138.8 mm. 92.78 100.00

C. p. pyrrophanus 142.2 148.3 100.00 98.62

The ratios were derived by taking: wing X 2.56 over cube root of weight;
Tail X 2.42 over cube root of weight.

* This reference may be consulted for the size of samples, weights and other
detailed data used here. The methods used in that study needed improvement by
transforming the ratios to the base 100; it would also have been better to use mean
ratios derived from linear measurements and weights taken from a series of individuals,
and to exclude the specimens for which weights were not available.

Dean

Amadon

BIRD WEIGHTS IN TAXONOMY

175

It is evident that relative tail length is essentially the same in the two,
and that the difference in wing/tail proportions has been produced by
a change in relative wing length. Since it is C. v. addendus that differs
from all the related forms studied, we may assume that it, and not
C. p. pyrrophanus, has changed, but there are no life history data
available to suggest whether the relative shortening of the wing in
C. V. addendus is correlated with habits.

3. Relative weights of Snow Geese. In his study of the Snow Geese,
Kennard (1927) stated that the Greater Snow Goose is “a much
stockier and more heavily built bird” than the Lesser Snow Goose,
and published weights and measurements to illustrate this difference,
which he considered an important part of the evidence supporting his
contention that the two are distinct species. However, Kennard failed
to point out that a difference in weights greater than the difference in
linear dimensions is to be expected, even when the body forms of two
birds to be compared are alike. If the cube roots of the weights are
used, a valid comparison designed to test Kennard’s conclusion can
be made. Analysis of his data for adult males shows that the Greater
Snow Goose exceeds the Lesser by 10.5 per cent in wing length, 8.9
per cent in body length and 14.3 per cent in cube root of weight.
The greater difference in the cube root of the weights does indicate
that the Greater Snow Goose is a “stockier” bird than the Lesser, but
the disparity is seen by this method to be too slight to be necessarily
considered a specific character, for subspecies may differ in body pro-
portions just as they do in other morphological characters.

In the examples given here, the significance of the difference in
ratios is apparent; when necessary, the significance of such difference
can be determined by various statistical tests similar to those recently
elaborated by Reeve (1940) for studies of allometric variation in
proportions.

Recording of Weights

The greatest difficulty in the use of weights in systematic work is
the fact that they cannot be taken from study skins. Recording of
weights on specimen labels should be made a routine part of museum
collecting. This has long been done at the Museum of Vertebrate
Zoology under the progressive leadership of the late Joseph Grinnell
and at a few other institutions such as the University of Michigan
Museum of Zoology. Weights should also be recorded during banding
work. In order to increase the value of weights for taxonomic studies
and for the still more stringent requirements of physiological studies,
information recorded for each bird weighed should include locality,
date, time of day, sex, status of species (migrant or resident) and (if
the specimen is collected) the contents of the alimentary system, size
of gonads, and amount of fat present.

In publications on the taxonomy of birds, weights should be given

176

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

whenever available, preferably in a way which will permit them to be
individually correlated with measurements of appendages. Perhaps
the only paper in which this has been done for large numbers of speci-
mens is Mayr’s report (1931) on the birds of the Saruwaged and
Herzog Mountains of New Guinea. Weights should be recorded in
grams, but when the cube root of weight is used, the relative values
sought are unaffected by the unit or system of measurement employed,
provided it is the same in all the forms to be compared.

Summary

A reliable measurement or index of general size is needed in avian
taxonomy both as a direct measure of differences in general size and as
a standard of comparison for measurements of appendages.

Linear indices of general size are usually either too variable to be
reliable, or are not available in sufficiently large series to be of general
use. Weight has moderate variability and reflects differences in general
size more sensitively than do linear measurements.

When used as a standard of comparison for linear measurements,
the cube root of weights should ordinarily be used.

The use of weights in taxonomic studies is demonstrated.

Weights of birds should be recorded whenever possible, to aid in
taxonomic and other problems.

Literature Cited

Amadon, D.

1942a Birds collected during the Whitney South Sea Exj)edition. XLIX.
Amer. Mus. Novit., No. 1175.

19426 Birds collected during the Whitney South Sea Expedition. L. Amer.
Mus. Novit., No. 1176.

Baldwin, S. P. and S. C. Kendeigh

1938 Variations in the weight of birds. Auk, 55:416-467.

Blanchard, Barbara D.

1941 The White-crowned Sparrows {Zonotrichia leucophrys) of the Pacific
seaboard; environment and annual cycle. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool.
46:1-178.

Chapin, J. P.

1929 The preparation of birds for study. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. Guide
Leaflet, No. 58.

Chapman, F. M.

1940 The post-glacial history of Zonotrichia capensis. Bull. Amer. Mus.
Nat. Hist., 77:381-438.

Engels, W. L.

1940 Structural adaptation in thrashers (Mimidae: genus Toxostoma) with
comments on interspecific relationships. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., 42:
341-400.

Grinnell, J.

1926 A new race of the White-breasted Nuthatch from Lower California.
Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., 21:405-410.

Griscom, L.

1934 The Pine Grosbeaks of eastern North America. Proc. New England
Zool. Club, 14:5-12.

Dean

Amadon

BIRD WEIGHTS IN TAXONOMY

177

Hagen, Y.

1942 Totalgewichts-Studien bei norwegischen Vogelarten. Archiv fiir
Naturgeschichte, 11 (n.f.) ; 133-173. (Concluding portion of paper; first
part not seen) .

Kennard, F. H.

1927 The specific status of the Greater Snow Goose. Proc. New England
Zool. Club, 9:85-93.

Linsdale, J. M.

1928 Variations in the Fox Sparrow (Passerella iliaca) with reference to
natural history and osteology. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., 30:251-392.

Mayr, E.

1931 Die Vogel des Saruwaged- und Herzoggebirges (NO-Neuguinea).
Mitt. Zool. Mus. Berlin, 17:639-723.

1942 Systematics and the origin of species. Columbia University Press,
New York.

Miller, A. H.

1941 Speciation in the avian genus Junco. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., 44:
173-434.

Nice, Margaret M.

1937 Studies in the life history of the Song Sparrow, I. Trans. Linn. Soc.
New York, 4:1-247.

1938 The biological significance of bird weights. Bird-Banding, 9:1-11.
Reeve, E. C. R.

1940 Relative growth in the snout of Anteaters. A study in the application
of quantitative methods to systematics. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond. 110A:47-
80.

Romer,*A. S. and L. W. Price

1940 Review of the Pelycosauria. Geol. Soc. of Amer. Special Papers, No.
28:1-538.

Simpson, G. G. and Anne Roe

1939 Quantitative zoology. McGraw-Hill, New York.

Sumner, F. B.

1920 Geographic variation and mendelian inheritance. Jour. Exper. Zool.,
30:369-402.

SWARTH, H. S.

1920 Revision of the avian genus Passerella, with special reference to the
distribution and migration of the races in California. Univ. Calif.
Publ. Zool, 21:75-224.

Teissier, G.

1931 Recherches morphologiques et physiologiques sur la croissance des
insectes. Trav. Stat. Biol. Roscoff, 9:29-238.

Van Tyne, J.

1934 Pinicola enucleator eschatosus in Michigan and Ohio. Auk, 51:529-530.
Wetherbee, K. B.

1934 Some measurements and weights of live birds. Bird Banding, 5:55-64.
Zedlitz, O.

1926 Vogelgewichte als Hilfsmittel fiir die biologische Forschung. Jour. f.
Ornith., 74:296-308.

American Museum of Natural History, New York City

178

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

SOME PHYSIOLOGICAL VARIATIONS IN THE
BLACK-CAPPED CHICKADEE

BY EUGENE P. ODUM

IN addition to field observations already reported (Odum, 1941-42),
I carried out, in 1939-40, a series of laboratory experiments on
Black-capped Chickadees {Penthestes atricapillus) at the Huyck Pre-
serve, Rensselaerville, New York.* Birds were “borrowed” from their
natural environment for short periods of laboratory study, and returned
uninjured to the field. Since the purpose was to measure the normal
wild condition as nearly as possible, birds were kept captive no longer
than necessary, never longer than overnight. All birds were banded
with colored and numbered bands.

The Black-capped Chickadee provides an especially favorable sub-
ject for combination field and laboratory study, since it is easily trapped,
is present throughout the year, and since short laboratory confinement
seems not to affect its normal behavior out-of-doors or its lack of fear
towards man. The measurements made so far only scratch the surface of
possible physiological work with this species. The following variables
were studied: wing and tail lengths, weight, body temperature, heart
rate, breathing rate, and muscle tremors. The latter three variables were
measured simultaneously with a special apparatus, the cardio-vibro-
meter, which has been described elsewhere (Odum and Kendeigh, 1940;
Odum, 1941). Simple statistical analysis was made when data seemed
to warrant it. Since many samples were small, special formulas for
small samples were employed in determining standard errors (see Arkin
and Colton, 1939).

Distinguishing of Sexes

Although colored alike, the sexes in the living Black-capped Chicka-
dee can be easily distinguished during the nesting season by behavior
and by the presence of a “brood patch” in the female. At other seasons
there is apparently no consistent difference in plumage or behavior,
though males appear to be slightly larger, as earlier workers have re-
corded. The maximum wing lengths (measured with the primaries flat-
tened against the ruler) of 36 Black-capped Chickadees measured in
this study ranged from 61 to 69 mm. The sex of 22 was determined by
breeding behavior. Of these, 13 were males, and their wings measured
consistently more than 64 mm.; 9 were females, and their wings meas-
ured consistently less than 65 mm. Consequently, careful wing measure-
ment was an aid in sexing: in the 14 birds whose sex had not been
determined by behavior, wing measurements of 66 mm. or more were
taken as indicating males; those of 63 mm. or less, females; the sex of

* I am indebted to the officers of the Edmund Niles Huyck Preserve for the oppor-
tunity to conduct the experiments, and to S. Charles Kendeigh for critical reading
of the manuscript.

Eugene
P. Odum

PHYSIOLOGY OF CHICKADEE

179

birds with wing measurements between 66 and 63 mm. remained unde-
termined. Tail length varied from 60 to 65 mm., but because of the
large overlap in measurements and variation in length due to wear,
tail measurements were not an aid in sexing.

Body Weight

Weight records are summarized according to sex and season in
Table 1. Average figures for the Black-capped Chickadee at Gates

TABLE 1

Black-capped Chickadee Weights in Grams

Jan/Feb

Mar/Apr

June

Total

Standard

Deviation

No.

Av.

No.

Av.

No.

Av.

No.

Av.

Male

21

12.4

7

12.7

7

11.4

35

12.2

±0.68

Female

8

11.9

5

11.6

5

10.8

18

11.5

±0.70

Rensselaerville,

Both sexes

29

12.2

12

12.2

12

11.2

53

12.0

±0.75

N. Y.

Sex

difference

0.5

1.1

0.6

0.7

±0.20

Both sexes

36

11.5

42

11.1

10

10.4

88

11.2

±0.95

Gates Mills,

Locality

Ohio

difference

0.7

1.1

0.7

0.8

±0.15

Mills, Ohio (Baldwin and Kendeigh, 1938), are included for compari-
son. In order to minimize daily fluctuations, all Rensselaerville weights
were taken in the late afternoon, at or near the theoretical maximum in
the daily rhythm of weight. Three things of general interest seem to
be indicated by these data:

1. Males averaged heavier than females at all seasons investigated
(a fact also reported by Baldwin and Kendeigh, 1938). The average
difference (0.7 gms.) is statistically significant, since it is more than
three times as large as the standard error (0.2 gms.). However, because
of the considerable overlap and general variability, weight in this
species is not a reliable means of distinguishing sex.

2. Rensselaerville chickadees weighed more than Gates Mills birds.
The difference (0.8 ± 0.15 gms.) is easily significant provided we as-
sume that the sex factor and daily rhythm factor are eliminated in the
averages; and the difference is to be expected since Rensselaerville has
the more northern climate. There appears to be a gradual southward
decrease in size as indicated by wing measurements in the Black-capped
as well as in the Carolina Chickadee, Penthestes carolinensis (see Todd
and Sutton, 1936), and there is presumably also a north-south weight
gradient, although this has not yet been demonstrated.

3. No difference was found between average winter and average
spring weights. January and April records on the same individuals also
failed to show any significant difference. But the difference between
winter and June weights is significant (1.0 ± 0.19 gms.). Since most

180

THE WILSON' BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

June weights represent birds feeding young it is not known whether
the decrease is correlated only with season or is perhaps partly the result
of strenuous feeding activities. Seasonal variation in weight is well
known, most passerines being heavier in winter than in summer (Nice,
1938; Baldwin and Kendeigh, 1938). In the generalized curve (based
on a number of species) given by Baldwin and Kendeigh (1938), weight
decreases 7 per cent from January to April and 1 1 per cent from Janu-
ary to June. Zedlitz (1926), however, has reported that certain Euro-
pan Paridae {Parus [Penthestes] atricapUlus borealis, and P. palustris)
as well as the Magpie {Pica pica) are exceptions to this general rule.
The White-breasted Nuthatch (Baldwin and Kendeigh, 1938) and
Tufted Titmouse (Nice, 1938) seem to show comparatively little sea-
sonal variation in weight. From incomplete data on American chicka-
dees it seems that the seasonal weight rhythm may not be so pro-
nounced as in many other passerines, but since there is a complexity of
factors affecting weight, far more data are needed before significant
conclusions can be drawn. It should be emphasized that a few weight
records from scattered localities are of no value in this connection;
large series of weights from local populations are needed.

Heart and Breathing Rates

Methods. Because of the great variability of the heart and breathing
rates in small birds it is necessary to determine some sort of stabilized
rate — a standard or “basal” rate — if useful comparisons are to be made.
The basal heart and breathing rates are defined as the average rates
when the bird is in a post-absorptive (though not starved) condition, in
darkness, away from human presence, and at a controlled (or specified)
temperature. The same apparatus and general procedures as described
in an earlier publication (Odum, 1941) were used to determine basal
rates for the study birds. The individual to be tested was captured in
the late afternoon, weighed and measured, kept in the dark for two to
three hours, then placed on the sensitive perch within the temperature
control chamber. By a simple technique previously described (Odum,
1941), it was easy to get the birds to remain voluntarily on the perch
indefinitel^v, in darkness, and entirely free from outside disturbances.
Figure 1 is a flashlight photograph of part of the experimental appara-
tus, showing a Chickadee resting on the perch crystal in the temperature
chamber. The bird is sleeping in the typical pose assumed at lower air
temperatures, that is, with head turned back, bill buried in scapular
feathers, and feathers fluffed out (the same pose as that observed out-
of-doors). The recording apparatus and earphones (in order to keep
informed of the bird’s general behavior) were in another room. After
allowing half an hour or more for the bird to become adjusted to the
conditions, records were made at about 15-minute intervals for the next
several hours. Thus, all records were made between 8 p.m. and 12 p.m..

Eugene
P. Odum

PHYSIOLOGY OF CHICKADEE

181

Figure 1. A flashlight photograph of a Black-capped Chickadee sleeping on
the perch attached to the piezo-electric crystal (left) within the temperature cham-
ber. The bird has its head turned back, bill buried in scapulars, and feathers
greatly fluffed out.

three to seven hours after the last feeding and during the normal roost-
ing time, the period that has previously been found most satisfactory
for basal-rate determination. Birds were tested at three temperatures —
90 ± 1.5°F. (32.2°C.), 70 ± 2°F. (21.1°C.), and 43 ± 2°F. (7.5°C.)
— each individual usually being tested at two temperatures successively;
90° was thought to be approximately thermal neutral (temperature at
which to expect the lowest rate of metabolism); 43° was selected as
the lowest conveniently obtainable temperature; 70° is an intermediate
point and the usual value of “room temperature.” Unfortunately, the
low temperature could not be duplicated during the summer.

In analyzing the graphic records and computing averages, I used the
standardized procedure previously described (Odum, 1941). Since
breathing rate is relatively slower than heart rate, the number of read-
ings for breathing rate were fewer than those for heart rate, but the
averages cover the same period of time. Thirty-four determinations of
basal heart and breathing rates, taken from 14 individuals (of which
four were measured twice), are given in Table 2. Whereas statistically,
this is a small number of records, it is so far the largest series for adults
of any wild species to be obtained under comparable controlled condi-
tions.

182

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 3

Sex differences. Since most of the birds studied were males, no con-
clusion can be drawn regarding the sex factor in heart and breathing
rates. Differences, if any, are probably small. Consequently, the sex
factor is ignored in most of the following discussion.

Variability. It is interesting to analyze variability since it is a
notable characteristic of the heart and breathing rates in small birds.
In Figure 2, the variations (during a period of 36 seconds) in the heart
rate of a typical individual under the controlled conditions described
above are given in detail; readings taken during and between each

Figure 2, Inherent variations in the heart rate of a typical Black-capped
Chickadee (male, June 21). Variations correlated with breathing are superim-
posed on large oscillatory variations (smoothed curve).

breathing cycle are plotted together with a smoothed curve (repre-
senting three “oscillatory” variations), to show the two types of in-
herent variation in heart rate characteristic of the study birds: 1. Varia-
tion which is correlated with the inflation and deflation cycle of the
lungs, the heart rate usually decreasing slightly at the peak of the in-
flation part of the cycle and increasing between cycles. (In mammals,
on the contrary, heart rate usually increases during inflation and slows
down during deflation — Anrep, Pascual, and Rossler, 1936.) 2. “Oscil-

latory” fluctuations (Odum, 1941), a more pronounced, slower, and
rhythmic (though not usually regular) type of variation. Oscillatory
fluctuations may sometimes be related to pauses in breathing (re-
moval of the inhibitory influence of lung inflation mentioned above), or
to the action of periodic muscle tremors,^ but frequently there is no
apparent cause (though they are presumably correlated in some way
with vagus periodicity). The degree of oscillatory fluctuation varies
considerably with individuals; often it can be detected by ear. Inherent

1 Tremors are defined as coordinated, semi-rhythmic partial muscle contractions or
changes in muscle tone which, when pronounced, produce visible shivering. See Odum,
1942:618 or 1941:312.

TABLE 2

Basal Heart and Breathing Rates or Black-capped Chickadees

183

p."& I’HYSTOLOGY OF C?I1CKADEK

1 Temperature 70=*=2°F.

Breathing

Rate

Q

in

• O • \0 00

! ro ro ! CN

Lo o o

00 vd vd o

lo lO vO

CN ^ ^ -o lO

Heart

Rate j

Q

in

CN fO <M fO

• o’ id fd

lO C<l fo CN fO

00 O 00 OMO

Tf ro uo lO

lO LO lo LO lO LO

00 0\ O lO lO

fO CN ’-H

1 Temperature 43=*= 2°F. |

Breathing

Rate

Q

m

•f^t^0^O^~’-l00f0C^00O

! fd rd fd cd fd vd rd >d cs

OoOrO'Or^’-HCsrot^CNvOiO

rdovcN-dfd-^'ovfdt^cdcdvd

r^'O'O'OvO'O'Ot^Ot^r—io

rot^'0»ov0o0'0r~o00t^i0

Heart

Rate

Q

in

POOOOsOCNOsiO'^fOOOOt^

oda\r'^odos’-Hididoo’'>-Hfd'd

CNT-H?NfOfOrOCNrtirM'^T^rO

rrOlMOOOr'l'rt^t'-OOiOO'^

rHiooO»-tOOOCNfNfOioror^

OiOiO'O'OiOO'OiO'O'O'O

iz;

^t^OioO'^Osr^i>-t^OLO

^CNCSCNCNCN'.-I'^'r-I^CNT-I

'temperature 90=*= 1.5°F. j

Breathing

Rate

Q

in

Os) t-h On O vO vO lO rt O ’-1 0\ \0 t-- .

fdid'didi>^‘d‘dot^idcd'd'd 'd''-< *

%

O O ro O <T5 NO ro ro O

oo’ o" id -H o’ ,-H td o^ vo’ CN vd 00 00 id ’-i

OOOOOOOOOOOOnOOOn. t^t^o OOOIO

00 00 00 ’-H On ^ ro On 00 00 ON On On lO

Heart

Rate

Q

m

NO On <N — 1 On On lO lO O NO tJi ro

<d o’ id oo’ t^’ --H cs) rd 00 On o ’-i id id Nd

■>-H rs) CN »-H T-H r<5 S-H ,-H t-H fs) O) CN CN S-H

00 T-I oo NO NO lO 00 1^ O oo 00 NO !>. NO

t-h s-H rrj T*i lo 00 00 NO NO CN ro

lO-^iOfO^fOd^TfrtiTfrorr'^ lOiOiO

rO) On lO lO fO 00 On CN fO O lO »-i O lO

fO CN CN r<0 fO lO rO CN CN Cs) ro ^

Date

Jan. 19
Jan. 22
Jan. 27
Feb. 8
Feb. 13
Feb. 16
Mar. 2
Mar. 7
Mar. 15
Apr. 8
Apr. 9
Apr. 11
Apr. 12
Apr. 18
Apr. 24
Jun. 11
Jun. 20
Jun. 21

Sex

A-. n~. rv.

'b'b'b'b'bcH-'brN.'b'bot-'b'boi-CH-'b'b'b

Individual j

1 PQ >H Pi; pq >H PQ o p!^ pq m HH ^ o

= number readings. M = mean sD = Standard deviation.

184

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

variations are of interest for at least two reasons: first, they indicate
that the heart rate is rarely uniform, and second, a series of readings
should be taken in order to avoid any confusion of inherent variations
with variations resulting from external factors.

TABLE 3

Variation in Heart and Breathing Rate in Black-capped Chickadees

Average

Number of

Coefl&cient of

Individuals

Variation

A. Intra-individual Variation

Heart rate: at 90°F.

13

4.53

at 43°F.

12

5.53

Breathing rate: at 90°F.

13

8.50

at43°F.

11

5.91

B. Inter-individual Variation

Heart rate: at 90°F.

13

12.50

at 43°F.

12

6.36

Breathing rate: at 90°F.

13

13.10

at 43°F.

11

7.60

In Table 3 the variation in the regular sample readings is indicated
by means of coefficients of variation, which simply give a picture of the
variation around the mean values. Winter and spring records are com-
bined in order to bring out the effects of temperature and individual
variation. Several points of interest are indicated as follows: 1. Heart
rate varied somewhat more within the individual at 43° than at 90°,
apparently because of the action of periodic tremors. At 90° no tremors
were recorded, but at 43 short tremor periods often occurred, accom-
panied by heart rate fluctuations. The relation of tremors to heart rate
and temperature regulation has been discussed elsewhere (Odum, 1941;
1942). 2. Variation in heart rate between different individuals was
greater at 90°, a possible indication that 90° is not a good thermal
neutral point. 3. Breathing rate, both intra- and inter-individually, was
more variable at 90° than at 43°, probably because of the function of
the breathing rate in heat loss as explained below. 4. Breathing rate
seemed to be slightly more variable generally than heart rate, especially
at high temperatures. 5. Basal rates for both heart and breathing were
more constant within the individual than between individuals, indicat-
ing that both may be considered individual characteristics, as in man.
Accordingly, in testing the effect of various factors it is better to use the
same individuals if possible. If different individuals are used a larger
series is desirable.

Effect of temperature on heart and breathing rates. Average basal
rates for all individuals which were tested at the three temperatures
during winter and spring are plotted in Figure 3. The principal
points shown by these data seem to be: 1. As would be expected, heart

Eugene
P. Odum

PHYSIOLOGY OF CHICKADEE

185

rate increased with a drop in air temperature. The increase seems to be
less between 70° and 43° than between 90° and 70°. In winter the
average increase in heart rate between 90° and 43° was about 10 per
cent, indicating a high tolerance of low temperatures. As can be seen
from Table 2, every individual showed a distinct increase in heart rate
when changed from a high to a low temperature, although the degree
of response varied. 2. It was surprising at first to find that the breath-
ing rate was higher at 90° than at 70° or 43° (a seemingly opposite

Figure 3. Average standard heart and breathing rates of Black-capped
Chickadees at three air temperatures (°F.) during winter and spring. The lines
connecting the averages do not necessarily follow the trends (actually unknown)
between temperatures. Records at 70°F. are scanty and therefore their averages are
not strictly reliable.

response from heart rate). All individuals showed this reaction (Table

2) . The explanation is apparently not hard to find, however. Since the
lungs and air sacs are one of the principal means of heat loss in birds,
the breathing rate is an important part of the heat loss mechanism. Ken-
deigh (1939) has shown that an abrupt increase in water loss occurs at
about 100°F. in both adult and nestling House Wrens; an abrupt in-
crease in breathing rate also occurs in that species at the same tempera-
ture (Odum, 1941). In the English Sparrow, however, this critical point
is lower — about 85° (Kendeigh, 1934:322). In Black-capped Chicka-
dees the pronounced increase in breathing rate (presumably correlated
with increase in water loss) apparently begins somewhere between 70°
and 90° ; 90° is, then, above the critical point. This explains both the
high rate and great variability of breathing at this temperature (Table

3) ; some readings ran as high as 140 per minute, though at the same
time the heart rate was low.

As to the internal mechanism, acceleration of breathing at high
temperatures might be reflexive (occurring before a rise in body tem-
perature, as in the dog) or central (that is, due to direct stimulation by

186

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

blood temperature rise, of hypothalamic temperature regulation centers).
Actual measurement of body temperature of the study birds would
have produced many unwanted disturbances, but judging from previous
experiments and the low level of heart rate recorded at those tempera-
tures, it would seem unlikely that air temperatures as low as 80° or
90° F. would in this species produce a rise in body temperature.
Perhaps, therefore, acceleration of breathing at high temperatures in
the Black-capped Chickadee begins reflexively, and this mechanism is
augmented by the central ‘‘panting” mechanism whenever the body
temperature rises. The acceleration of breathing which occurs at low
temperatures, on the other hand, can probably be ascribed to increased
metabolism and the well-known carbon dioxide mechanism.

The difference in behavior of birds at different temperatures was
also striking. At both 43° and 70° (in summer as well as in winter)
birds invariably assumed the pose shown in Figure 1, but at 90° the
birds did not fluff out their feathers or turn their heads back (the
means usually employed to decrease heat loss). Individuals were also
more restless at 90°, moving slightly every minute or so, indicating that
they were not so comfortable as at the lower temperatures.

Figure 4. Basal heart and breathing rates at three seasons. (1) Heart rate at
90®F. (2) Breathing rate at 90“F. (3) Heart rate at 43°F.

Eject oj season. Seasonal variations in heart and breathing rate are
shown in Figures 3 and 4 and Table 2. Because of the small amount
of data, only limited comparisons can be made. The basal heart rate at

Eugene
P. Odum

PHYSIOLOGY OF CHICKADEE

187

90° was higher in June than in winter or spring. The average increase
was 89 ± 25.1 beats per minute. The difference was also significant
when males only were compared. Higher heart rate in summer as com-
pared with the rate in winter at the same temperature is probably cor-
related with increased metabolism, since basal heart rate is often a good
index to metabolism. Kendeigh (1934) found that in English Spar-
rows the rate of metabolism (as indicated by percentage weight loss)
was greater in summer than in winter.

The breathing rate at 90°, on the other hand, was lower in June
than in spring or winter (Figure 4). This is undoubtedly related to
more rapid heat loss in summer, which may result, at least in part, from
less dense plumage and lower weight (Kendeigh, 1934:335). In other
words, the critical point previously mentioned (temperature at which
breathing shows an abrupt increase) shifts upward in summer, and
90° air temperature no longer results in a high rate of breathing.

Examination of Figure 3 suggests that heart rate may begin to in-
crease in the spring, especially at 43°, since readings for April were
usually higher than winter averages. As already pointed out, differences
are perhaps more likely to be significant if readings from the same in-
dividual are compared. Accordingly, four individuals that had been
measured in winter were again tested in April under the same conditions,
and the probable significance of the differences was calculated. In April,
basal heart rate was significantly higher in all four individuals at 43°,
but in only two at 90°. Furthermore, when all data were pooled (irre-
spective of individual) in order to obtain a large number of readings, the
average spring increase at 90° was 16 zb 10.4 (probably not significant),
whereas the increase at 43° was 52 ± 11.7 (probably significant).
Thus the heart-rate/temperature curve is flatter in winter than in spring
(Figure 3).

Discussion. The following generalizations seem to be justified: At
intermediate air temperatures, though not at high temperatures, heart
rate and breathing rate probably vary directly with each other, and in-
versely with the temperature. As far as present information goes, basal
heart rate may be considered an index to heat production; breathing
rate is also related to heat production, but at temperatures above
thermal neutral it becomes a rough index to heat loss in birds (as well as
in certain mammals). Consequently, the measurement of these vital
rates and determination of critical points may reveal much about the
bird’s response to environmental conditions and its limits of tolerance.
The differences between species in these respects may help to explain
differences in behavior and distribution. For example, the critical tem-
perature at which breathing shows an abrupt increase is about 100°F.
in House Wrens but is appreciably lower in English Sparrows and in
Chickadees in winter. Seasonal differences are also striking. In Chicka-
dees the critical point just mentioned seems to shift upward in summer,
downward in winter. Likewise, heart rate levels change with the season,

188

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

being higher in summer (when the heart rate is presumably correlated
wdth a higher rate of metabolism) and lower in winter. As previously
reported (Odum, 1941-42), survival time without food is much higher
in winter than in summer. In winter, decrease in heart rate, in meta-
bolism, and in heat loss enable the Chickadee to resist low temperatures.
That is, food and shelter are by no means the only considerations in
survival. Kendeigh, for example, found that the House Wren, even
when food and shelter were amply provided in large cages (where the
birds lived successfully through the summer), was unable to survive

Figure 5. Heart rate (HR), breathing rate (BR), body temperature (BT), and
weight (\VT) of six ages of nestling Black-capped Chickadees at two air tem-
peratures (95°F. and 70°F.).

Eugene
P. Odum

PHYSIOLOGY OF CHICKADEE

189

northern Ohio winter conditions, presumably because they were unable
to make the proper physiological adjustments to temperature. It should
be remembered, of course, that the basal rates studied in this paper are
but outward manifestations (or net results) of complex internal re-
sponses. Seasonal changes, for example, are probably ultimately related
to endocrine changes.

Development of Nestlings

Data on heart rate, breathing rate, body temperature, each at two
air temperatures (95°F. and 70° F.), together with the body weight of
six ages of nestling Black-capped Chickadees are plotted in Figure 5
for easy comparison. Physiological development of the nestling Chicka-
dee seems not to differ in any important respect from that of the House
Wren (Kendeigh, 1938; Odum, 1941) even though the adults may
differ. Consequently, only a few points need be mentioned here: 1. As
in other altricial species, the Chickadee changes from a cold-blooded to
a warm-blooded organism during its nest life. The transition is gradual,
but changes are more rapid during the middle third of the 16- to 18-day
nest life. Between seven and nine days, the two curves for body tem-
perature (at 70° F. and 95 °F.) approach each other (Figure 5, and
the two curves for heart rate, as well as those for breathing rate, cross,
strikingly illustrating the reversal in the response to temperature.
2. Nestlings (unlike adults in winter) have heart rate and breathing
rate closely correlated at the two temperatures used in this study;
95° is for nestlings, therefore, probably below rather than above the
critical point in the functioning of the heat loss mechanism. 3. The
range of basal heart and breathing rates in nestlings is relatively
great when different ages and temperatures are considered, illustrating
the great sensitivity of nestlings to small changes in air temperature.
4. The highest heart and breathing rates were recorded at about nine
days; muscle tremors were also most intense at this age. As described
elsewhere (Odum, 1942), the heat production mechanism seems to de-
velop more rapidly than the ability to control heat loss. At nine days,
the feather covering of the nestlings is still poor; consequently, heat
loss is poorly controlled, and this probably accounts for the high heart
and breathing rates.

Summary

Wing and tail lengths, body weight, body temperature, heart rate,
breathing rate, and muscle tremors (the latter three variables being
measured with the cardio-vibrometer) of wild Black-capped Chickadees
were studied.

Wings (“maximum measurement”) varied from 61 to 69 mm., with
wings of males as a rule longer; hence wing measurements were an
aid in sex distinction. Tail measurements varied from 60 to 65 mm.,
and were not an aid in sexing.

190

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

Males averaged 0.7 zh 0.2 gms. heavier than females. Rensselaer-
ville (New York) birds averaged 0.8 ± 0.15 gms. heavier than Gates
Mills (Ohio) birds, when records from the same months were compared.
The study birds weighed less in June than in winter, but weight dif-
ferences between winter and spring were not significant.

There are two types of inherent, more or less rhythmic, variation
in heart rate, one correlated with breathing, the other probably of
variable cause.

Basal heart and breathing rates were measured at three tempera-
tures, 43°, 70°, and 90° F. With rising temperature heart rate decreased,
but at 90° breathing rate increased; this acceleration (probably re-
flexive) is undoubtedly related to the special role of breathing rate in
the control of heat loss, 90° being above the critical temperature, es-
pecially for Black-capped Chickadees in winter.

Heart rate probably may be considered a rough index to heat pro-
duction, and breathing rate a rough indicator of heat loss.

Heart rate was consistently and significantly higher in summer,
and usually higher in spring, than in winter. Breathing rate, on the
other hand, at 90° was lower in summer than in winter. These changes
indicate an important seasonal adjustment of basic physiological rates
(including the rate of metabolism), and are undoubtedly significant in
the species’ successful adaptation to changing seasonal conditions.

Physiological development of the nestlings was similar to that of the
House Wren. Weight increase followed a sigmoid curve. Temperature
regulation was established gradually, the most rapid changes taking
place during the middle third of nest life. A peak in both heart rate
and breathing rate was reached at about nine days of age, after which
both decreased as the control over heat loss became more effective.

Literature Cited

Anrep, G. V., W. Pascual, and R. Rossler

1936 Respiratory variations of the heart rate, Proc. Royal Soc. London,
119(B) :191-230.

Arkin, H, and R. R. Colton

1939 An outline of statistical methods. Barnes and Noble, N.Y.

Baldwin, S. P. and S. C. Kendeigh

1938 Variations in the weight of birds. Auk, 55:416-467,

Kendeigh, S. Charles

1934 The role of environment in the life of birds. Ecol. Mon., 4:299-4^17.

1939 The relation of metabolism to the development of temperature regula-
tion in birds. Jour. Exper. ZooL, 82:419-438.

Nice, Margaret M.

1938 The biological significance of bird weights. Bird Banding, 9:1-11.
Odum, Eugene P.

1941 Variations in the heart rate of birds: a study in physiological ecology.
Ecol. Mon., 11:299-236.

1941-42 Annual cycle of the Black-capped Chickadee. Auk, 58:314-333;
518-535; 59:499-531.

1942 Muscle tremors and the development of temperature regulation in birds.
Amer. Jour. Physiol., 136:618-622,

Eugene
P. Odum

PHYSIOLOGY OF CHICKADEE

191

Odum, Eugene P. and S. C. Kendeigh

1940 The cardio-vibrometer: a new instrument for measuring the heart rate
and other body activities of animals. Ecol., 21:105-106.

Todd, W. E. C. and G. M. Sutton

1936 Taxonomic remarks on the Carolina Chickadee, Penthestes carolinensis.
Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash., 49:69-70.

Zedlitz, O.

1926 Vogelgewichte als Hilfsmittel fur die biologische Forschung. Jour. f.
Ornith., 74:296-308.

Department of Zoology, University of Georgia, Athens

192

THE WILSOX BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

GEXER.\L NOTES

Herring Gull attack on normal Golden-eye. — On several days prior to April
11, 1943, an American Golden-eye {Bucephala clangula americana) fed by di\*ing
in the breaking waves in front of our home on the east shore of Put-in-Bay Harbor,
South Bass Island, Ohio. The bird was a young male in changing plumage and
therefore readily distinguishable from its fellows. I saw him in flight several times,
and he appeared to be normal in every respect.

On the evening of April 11 he again appeared in front of our home, feeding
about 50 feet offshore at the point where the huge waves began to curl and break.
He usually waited until a wav’e was about to break over him before he dived.
While he was di\dng, an adult Herring Gull {Larus argentatus smithsonianus) came
fl\'ing along the shore, swooped down and attempted to grasp the duck with its
bill. The duck escaped capture with a quick dive. This was repeated several times
until finally the gull succeeded in obtaining a firm hold near the base of the duck’s
right "wung. Both birds began to struggle furiously, the duck attempting to dive,
the gull to drag the duck toward shore. Occasionally both birds were almost sub-
merged by the breaking waves. After about two minutes the duck broke free and
dived, coming up some 100 feet away, and the gull again attacked. The duck
escaped by di\’ing, and swam under water for several yards. On appearing at the
surface he flew away. The gull started in pursuit, and coming up with the
duck, made repeated though unsuccessful attempts to knock it down into the
water. The duck began to out-distance the gull, which then gave up the chase.
I have seen Herring Gulls attack wounded or dWng birds but never before have
I seen one attack an apparently normal individual. — Milton B. Tr.\utm.\n, F. T.
Stone Laboratory, Ohio State University, Put-in-Bay, Ohio.

Vermilion Flycatcher at St. Marks, Florida. — Observations made during the
past three years at the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, St. Marks, Florida,
indicate that the Vermilion Flycatcher {Pyrocephalus rubinus mexicanus), is less
rare — at least in northwestern Florida — than the single record from earlier years
would indicate.

On December 26, 1940, while making a Christmas bird census, D. V. Gray
and L. S. Givens observed a Vermilion Flycatcher, and collected it the folloudng
day. The specimen was identified by H. L. Stoddard of Thomasville, Georgia. .Ac-
cording to A. H. Howell’s “Florida Bird Life” (1932:327), the only other record
of this spedes for Florida was a bird collected at Tallahassee on March 25, 1901,
by R. W. Williams. In mid-December, 1941, and during the first week of Januar>',
1942, a A'ermilion Flycatcher was again observed on the St. Marks Refuge, by
H. L. Stoddard. On December 10, 1942, Givens observed a female Vermilion Fly-
catcher there; and on December 24, while making a Christmas bird census, he saw
an adult male and collected a female (probably the same bird seen December 10).
In the same general location Givens again observed an adult male and female on
Januar>' 1, 1943. These two birds were seen repeatedly at the Refuge throughout
the winter of 1942-43. The last record was of a male seen by Givens, J. J. Lynch,
and Clarence Cottam, not far from headquarters, on March 14, 1943. — L.^wrence
S. Givens, Cl.\rence Cott.vm, and Don.ald V. Gr.4y, U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.

A wren singing the songs of both Bewick’s and the House Wren. — On April
18, 1943, at my home in the northern part of Columbus. I was surprised to
hear a wren singing the songs of both the House Wren {Troglodytes aedon) and
of the Bewick’s Wren {Thryomanes bewicki). The bird uttered the notes of
one species for a few minutes, then changed to the notes of the other. Each song
seemed perfectly characteristic of the species indicated. I heard the bird sing

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

GENERAL NOTES

193

only one of the two principal types of Bewick’s song: the one which has
been whimsically transcribed as “Eat a piece of che-ee-eeze !”

After singing for several minutes from three perches in the tree tops, the
bird dropped to the ground, where I obtained a fairly satisfactory view of it,
although the obstructing stems of shrubbery in which it was foraging prevented
critical study. In appearance, it seemed a typical Bewick’s Wren, with a con-
spicuous, whitish superciliary line, white tips to the outer tail-feathers, and the
characteristic “tail-wobbling” habits, except that the tail seemed a trifle shorter
than that of the average Bewick’s Wren, and the flirting of the tail was not so
free. Unfortunately my attempt to collect the bird was unsuccessful.

Two possible explanations readily present themselves: (1) the bird was a
hybrid, and (2) it was a Bewick’s Wren with the ability to mimic the House
Wren. Without the bird in the hand, the question must remain a matter of
speculation.

The ranges of the two species, geographical and ecological, overlap only to a
slight extent. At Columbus, the House Wren is abundant, Bewick’s infrequent. It
is under such conditions, namely, where one of two species in question is rare in
a given locality, the other abundant, that hybridism seems to occur most fre-
quently, since an individual of the rare species then has less opportunity of
finding a mate of its own kind. The Blue-winged Warbler {Vermivora pinus) and
the Golden-winged Warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera) are a case in point. I have
listened critically on many occasions to songs of the Bewick’s Wren and have
never heard one which varied far from the usual types. They were always
characteristic and never showed the faintest suggestion of mimicry. — Edward S.
Thomas, Ohio State Museum, Columbus.

Notes on a Captive Redstart. — From June 13 to 30, 1942, I studied the
growth and activities of a juvenile Redstart (Setophaga ruticilla) that I captured
when it flew from its nest in an isolated 25-foot Norway maple {Acer platanoides)
located about 75 feet from a wooded park in Washington, D. C. The nest was
situated 15 feet above the outside traffic lane of a principal street, on a small
branch that sloped steeply upward. An old Redstart nest, apparently of the
previous year, occupied a similar site a few feet away in the same tree. The recent
nest, when first discovered May 28, contained eggs; on June 4, it contained two
eggs and one small young; and on June 13, two young, which flew from the nest
when nearby leaves were touched. While I was photographing the two young on
the ground, a heavy thunder storm began. One fledgling flew to a perch on a
protected branch, but the other remained exposed to the weather. The parent
Redstarts, which had been fluttering excitedly about attempting to lead the young
to cover, went away. I took the wet young bird home and retained it for study
until June 30, when I released it because of the failure of my mealworm supply.

Growth. At 10 days of age, the rectrices, whose tips were barely visible beyond
their coverts, began to break out of their sheaths. The yellow patches on the tail
feathers became completely exposed on the twentieth day. The remiges seemed to
grow at equal rates. At 13 days of age, the yellow areas of the wings first appeared
as narrow wing-bars, showing about one mm. beyond the greater primary coverts.
These yellow patches were fully visible at 26 days of age, projecting 8 mm. beyond
the coverts; the distal secondary was 45 mm. long at 16 days of age and measured
47 mm. on all succeeding days.

Post-juvenal Molt. At 22 days of age the slate gray juvenal plumage of the
occipital and dorsal tracts was being replaced in quantity by olive-green first-
winter plumage. The underwing coverts, yellow in color, also began to appear at
this time; previously the underwing areas had been naked. The post-juvenal molt
was thus begun before the juvenal plumage was fully acquired. According to
Dwight {Annals N. Y. Acad. Sci., 13, 1900:288), the post-juvenal molt of the
Redstart does not include the flight feathers.

194

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

Calls. A loud, vigorous chip and a lower, but still extremely noisy, chippering
food call comprised the vocal efforts heard during the study period. From about
14 days of age, the formerly indefinite chipper began to conform to the song pat-
tern of the adult: an ascending, increasingly loud chip-chip-chip-chip-chirp. The
bird snapped its bill occasionally, especially when being fed.

Feeding Habits. I fed the Redstart mealworms in quantity (it would accept
4 or 5 an hour) until all available sources were exhausted. Mushy egg yolk,
mashed commercial turtle food (largely ant pupae and small bivalves), and
canary “vitamin” seed mixture were offered as alternates.

On several occasions the Redstart squeezed itself through the bars of its cage
in order to beg food from a captive juvenile Cardinal. At these times, each bird
would beg food from the other, with open mouth and quivering wings, until tired.

At 16 days of age, the young Redstart keenly watched a house fly as it flew
about the cage, but made no attempt to catch it. Though the Redstart occasionally
picked up small fragments of food, it at first showed no interest in mealworms
crawling before it. But at 25 days of age, after several vain attempts, it caught
and ate one worm. It would not follow a worm, however, when the worm moved
out of reach. The bird seemed able to recognize the several foods offered it,
preferring mealworms, dead or alive, above all. Egg yolk was usually acceptable,
but vitamin and turtle foods were consistently refused. Upon release at the edge
of its home woods, it immediately picked at minute dots on nearby leaves and
made a circular flight in weak pursuit of a passing gnat.

Flight. In contrast to juvenile Cardinals studied in captivity, the extremely
buoyant flight of the young Redstart was amazingly expert. The Cardinals, for
almost a week after leaving the nest, were able to fly only along straight, some-
times slightly climbing, routes when escaping capture. Invariably, blind collision
with a wall or other barrier terminated their flights. The Redstart, however,
from its first attempt, apparently selected its next perch and then landed accurately
upon it. On the first day out of the nest, it was seen to look over its shoulder,
squirm about to secure a good footing, and then spring into the air to land on a
perch a foot behind and above it. On the second day it could climb at a 45°
angle on flights of 6 to 15 feet. By the ninth day out of the nest, it could hover
expertly and even when hovering, move backward a few inches in the air. (These
habits became established in Cardinals only when they were several weeks older.)
At this age, it would dart about, hummingbird-Uke, hovering at several points,
in a cage one cubic foot in size.

“Crawfishing.” For a period of two or three days after capture I noted a
peculiar habit, best described as “crawfishing,” whenever the bird was lifted from
its perch and placed on a flat surface. It would extend its wings as far forward
as possible, draw in its head, spread its tail, and run rapidly backwards until
halted by collision or until (after moving 2 or 3 feet) it became tired. The exact
reason for this reaction was not apparent, but it seemed probable that it was in
some way connected with an instinct to withdraw into the nest when the feet are
not in a perching position. It did not seem purely a question of balance. This re-
action was not tested upon soil or a rough surface, and I saw no evidence of it
when the birds were originally captured and photographed on a lawn. The habit
was less apparent on the second day out of the nest, and it stopped by the fourth.

Intelligence. In addition to its apparent deliberation before flying, the superior
intelligence of the Redstart was illustrated by its ability to search for an opening
in its cage and to make its way out. Whereas captive Cardinals and Quails would
remain perched or repeatedly and blindly attempt exits through openings obviously
too small, the Redstart made no futile attempts but searched until it found a
practical way of escape. Such an escape route, once discovered, was tried per-
sistently without further searchings until it was blocked. Undoubtedly, more
formal experiments would reveal similar superiority of the Redstart, over Cardi-
nals and Quails at least, in escaping from simple mazes. — George A. Petrides,
American University, Washington, D. C.

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

GENERAL NOTES

195

Cowbird carrying away and eating a bird’s egg in the evening. — On May
28, 1943, I was looking out of a window of my house near Ann Arbor and saw
a female Cowbird {Molothrus ater) flying toward the house from a field of tall
grass and winter wheat about 40 feet away. When the bird was about 10 feet
from the house, flying about a foot above the ground, a small white oval which
it was carrying in its beak dropped to a small patch of hard clayey soil. It was
a sm^ll white egg, similar in size and color to the egg of the Song Sparrow. The
Cowbird alighted, punctured the shell with its beak, and began to sip the albumen.
After a time she removed the yolk whole, swallowed it, and then finished sipping
the albumen. By this time the shell had broken into two pieces, and one piece
had rolled a few feet down a slight incline. The Cowbird ate the part of the shell
near her, then moved down the slope and finished the other. I carefully examined
the ground after she had flown away but failed to find any trace of shell. I noticed
a male Cowbird within three or four feet of the female while she was puncturing
the egg and eating its contents, but he flew away before she had finished eating
the two pieces of shell. This incident occurred at about 5:15 p.m. E.S.T., though
Hann (Wilson Bulletin, 53, 1941:220) has reported that Cowbirds regularly remove
an egg of the host “during the forenoon,” usually of the day before laying their
own egg. — Ada L. Olson, University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor.

Abnormal feather loss by Cardinals. — Some years ago George Miksch Sutton
recorded (Oologist, 34, 1917:216) a specimen from Texas of a Cardinal (Rich-
mondena cardinalis) with completely featherless head. Amelia R. Laskey tells me
of two occurrences of baldness among the 1.621 Cardinals she has banded over a
period of 12 years at Nashville, Tennessee. They were females, banded (1) August
20, 1936 (recorded as “almost baM”; plumage normal when taken aeain in De-
cember), and (2) July 10, 1939 (“head bald, except for crest”; not taken again).
Milton B. Trautman has reported (Univ. Mich. Mus. Zool. Misc. Publ. No. 44,
1940:397) some late summer Cardinals with completely bald heads at Buckeye
Lake, Ohio. He tells me further that most of these were observed between mid-
August and mid-September, though he once noted an individual with pronounced
feather loss by July 4.

Recently I observed an extreme case of this kind and was able to learn some-
thing of the attendant circumstances. A male Cardinal was banded December 26,
1934, by Thomas H. Weller at his home in Ann Arbor. On July 20, 1941, it
appeared at my home (three-quarters of a mile to the northeast) and has since
lived in the neighborhood. It feeds at my window feeding shelves, and I can
observe it closely and regularly. Early in June, 1942, I noticed that it was losing
feathers from the head. By late June, the head, except for two or three crest
feathers, and the upper neck were bare. On July 3 the bird was a “vulture
Cardinal” such as Sutton has described, with the head covered only with dark
gray, wrinkled skin. I saw no other indication of parasites or disease, and the
bird’s behavibr was normal. Its appearance, though rather repulsive, apparently
did not interfere with nesting activity, for on August 7, it brought a full-grown
young to the shelf and fed it. On September 1, when it reappeared, after a two
week’s absence, feather growth had begun again about the base of the culmen.
This continued, spreading back over the head and neck, until, by September 28,
the normal feathering was entirely restored. The bird stayed through the winter
and spring, and this year, its tenth summer at least, it has remained perfectly
normal in appearance and has not yet (August 12) begun the regular post-nuptial
molt.

Thus we have a record of a Cardinal at least eight years old, losing all of the
feathers from its neck and head in June, remaining bald, but living normally
through the whole summer, growing a complete new set of head feathers in 28
days, and remaining fully feathered during at least the following I0j4 months. —
JossELYN Van Tyne, University of Michigan Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor.

196

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

Gambel’s Sparrow in Kentucky. — During the winter of 1942-43 we trapped
17 sparrows (Zonotrichia leucophrys) on Meade Avenue one-half mile south of
Louisville in Jefferson County, Kentucky — 12 immatures and 5 adults. Four of
the adults were typical White-crowned Sparrows (Z. 1. leucophrys) with the super-
ciliary stripe extending only to the eye, but in the fifth, a bird banded on January
6, 1942, the stripe extended all the way to the bill, the diagnostic character of
Gambel’s Sparrow (Z, 1. gamheli). At the time we banded the bird we noted that
it was always alone while feeding and was the only individual of the species to
visit a high feeding tray. Since the bird had returned for the second winter, it
was probable that it wintered regularly in Kentucky with our usual flock of White-
crowned Sparrows. We have had returns of six White-crowned Sparrows during
the last two winters — which would indicate that at least some members of this
flock return to the same spot in Jefferson County year after year; repeats during
December, January, late March, April, and May indicate that individuals tend to
remain through the winter in the same location (except possibly during February
and early March, for we have found no White-crowned Sparrows then) .

The Gambel’s Sparrow noted above was collected on December 21, 1942, and
is in the collection of the University of Louisville. As far as we have been able to
ascertain, no earlier record of this western subspecies has been published for Ken-
tucky.— Harvey B. Lovell, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.

A bald Song Sparrow. — On February 26, 1932, a male Melospiza melodia in
normal plumage arrived at Columbus, Ohio, and I banded him ten days later.
From his prompt ejection of two residents in possession (one a yearling, the
other a two-year-old of a markedly non-aggressive nature), I assumed that the
newly banded male had nested there before. On May 24, when his first young
were five days out of the nest, his forehead, chin, cheek, lores, and part of the
crown were bare of feathers. On June 9, I found his second nest, and I then
noted that his head was entirely bare except for a small tuft on the crown. I
did not see him again that season, but in 1933, he arrived on March 2 in perfect
plumage. A few days later he was driv»^en off by the destruction of cover on
the study area.-— Margakkt M. Nice, .‘^708 Kenwood .Avenue, Chicago, Illinois.

IMPORTANT GIFT TO THE LIBRARY

The Wilson Ornithological Club Library has just received a valuable gift from
R. M. Barnes, of Lacon, Illinois, for 33 years editor of The Oologist. The gift
includes 725 copies of natural history magazines, most of them published by
amateur naturalists during the last century. Some journals published but a single
number, others lasted several or even many years, but all have since become rare
items. Certain of these are now of hardly more than antiquarian interest, but a
number of them contain the early contributions of men who became well known
ornithologists. Their early records of contemporary wildlife conditions are now
carefully studied in the attempt to reconstruct a picture of the former numbers
and distribution of American birds.

Mr. Barnes, realizing long ago the value of these publications, began to collect
them, and in 1915 he published in The Oologist an extensive bibliography of such
journals by Frank L. Burns, former editor of The Wilson Bulletin.

The Wilson Club Library already contained the beginnings of a collection of
these journals, but progress was slow until Mr. Barnes added his support to our
project. The Club is thus further indebted to Mr. Barnes who had already given
it his steady support as a member for 35 years.

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

THE WILSON BULLETIN

197

EDITORIAL

War conditions again prevent our holding an Annual Meeting. The election of
officers will be carried out by mail as was done last year. We have not yet been
notified of the appointment of the Nominating Committee, but that may be
expected shortly, and we shall be glad to forward to that committee the suggestions
and opinions of members sent in our care.

Annual Meetings have always been of vital importance to the growth of the
Club. There is real danger that the Club may lose ground during the war unless
our members give the Club special support in its membership campaign and in its
publishing and other activities.

We are sorry to report that the pressure^ of his duties in the U. S. Army Air
Corps has caused George Miksch Sutton to resign from his position as President
of the Club. His place is taken by Vice-President S. Charles Kendeigh of Cham-
paign, Illinois.

Ornithological News

Our Associate Editor, Frederick N. Hamerstrom, Jr., has joined the U. S. Army
Air Corps and is now at Randolph Field, Texas, where he is doing research in
aviation physiology.

The 1943 annual meeting of the American Ornithologists’ Union has been can-
celed, but the Council will meet in New York, on October 20, to transact necessary
business.

Following the death of Bayard Christy, founder and editor. The Cardinal has
ceased publication. The Audubon Society of Sewickley Valley (Pennsylvania) had
published the journal under Christy’s distinguished editorship since January, 1923.

OBITUARY

Norman A. Wood, Emeritus Curator of Birds in the University of Michigan
Museum of Zoology, died at Ann Arbor, September 7, 1943, at the age of 86. He
had been a member of the University faculty for 48 years and had done extensive
field work on birds and mammals in Michigan, North Dakota, Florida, and China.

William E. Saunders, dean of Ontario ornithologists, died in London, June 28,
1943, at the age of 82. A very active and skillful field naturalist, his remarkable
knowledge not only of birds but also of mammals and plants was widely rec-
ognized. He was President of the Wilson Ornithological Club in 1912 and 1913.

Bayajrd H. Christy of Sewickley, Pennsylvania, died June 20, 1943. He will
perhaps be best remembered as founder and editor (through all of its 21 years) of
The Cardinal, for it reflected so well his unusual ability as a writer and editor, his
knowledge of birds, his interest in history, his zeal and courage as a wildlife con-
servationist, and his high scientific standards.

James Moffitt, Curator of Birds and Mammals in the California Academy of
Sciences, was killed in an airplane crash at Dutch Harbor, Alaska, on July 2, 1943,
while serving with the U. S. Navy. He had published extensively on game birds,
especially water fowl, and was an authority on the geese of North America.

198

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

Ecology and Management of the Mourning Dove, Zenaidura macroura (Linn.) ,

IN Cass County, Iowa. By H. Elliott McClure. Agric. Exper. Sta. Iowa State

College Research Bull. No. 310, 1943:355-415.

Thirty months were spent on the study reported in this bulletin: during 1938
and 1939 visits were made every other day to all nests on the 160 acres in Lewis,
Cass County, Iowa, and on 60 acres on farms and other sites near Lewis; during
1940, nests on 10 acres in Lewis and 5.5 acres of farms were visited every day.
In all, “nearly 4,000 nestings” were recorded. Bands were put on 1,643 young
from 4 to 9 days old; some young were raised by hand; “several” of these later
bred in cages.

Of the 36 tables in the bulletin, a full 10 are devoted to the trees in which the
Mourning Dove nested; but they give little information beyond the fact that except
for evergreens, which were especially favored, most of the trees “were used in
accordance with their abundance” (p. 373). The Doves benefited from Robins as
nesting neighbors because of the latter’s aggressiveness toward enemies, but suf-
fered from over-abundance of English Sparrows, which “usurped the available
nest sites,” especially on the farms. The chief known causes of nesting losses were
unfavorable weather. Blue Jays, fox squirrels, and cats. The percentage of eggs
(we are not given the actual numbers) to produce successful young (young that
reached the age of 14 days) was 54, 44, and 38, respectively, for the 3 years, aver-
aging 45 per cent, a figure which corresponds to the success of passerines in open
nests. The average number of young raised per nest was 1.82; the average per-
centage of nestings that succeeded was 48. The bulletin includes information on the
growth of the young, on food, parasites, and migration, as well as suggestions for
management — planting of trees, provision of water, control of Passer domesticus.

The bulletin has proved difficult to read, partly because of its condensed form
and the author’s failure to explain various techniques and tables, and partly because
nowhere is there a tabulation of the number of all the nestings, eggs laid, hatchings,
and young fledged each year for town and country, with percentages of success
and failure. Tables 35 and 36 are impossible to understand without recourse to
the author’s paper in The Auk (59, 1942:64-75), in which actual figures for nestings
are given for 1938 and 1939, but this essential article is not, strangely enough,
cited in the bibliography of the bulletin.

It is unfortunate that the author did not thoroughly acquaint himself with the
published material on the life history of his subject before starting on his project.
It is certainly hard to believe that some eggs hatched in 11 days and others in
20 (p. 382) ; the known co-ordination between hatching of squabs and the appear-
ance of pigeon milk in the parental crops would certainly preclude such a spread.
He makes the surprising statement that “usually 24 hours elapsed between eggs,
but sometimes they were laid 12 hours apart” (p. 381, italics mine). In my
article on the nesting of this species in Oklahoma, published in 1922 and 1923 {Auk,
39:457-474; 40:37-58), I cite Charles O. Whitman (Behavior of Pigeons, III.
Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. No. 257, 1919), who stated that with the Mourning
Dove the first egg is laid in the late afternoon of one day and the second on the
morning of the second day after. This was the case with my captive bird that
laid 15 eggs {Condor, 33, 1931:148-150). McClure’s statements as to the intervals
of egg laying could not have been based on wild birds since he did not visit nests
twice a day. If his captive Doves laid at such amazingly short intervals, he should
have marshalled his evidence and published this contradictory experience as such,
not as normal behavior.

As to instances of three eggs in a nest, McClure gives the wrong interpretation
(p. 391) ; the extra egg comes from another bird, or the nest owner lays an egg
from her next clutch — six days after the second egg of the first set.

A calculation (p. 409) of the speed of migration is based on the assumption

Vor5"s^No^^3^ ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

199

that a bird started when 19 days old. Although the author’s captive birds weaned
their young at 16 days, it does not follow that wild young are cast adrift so
early. I have seen well grown young, apparently about a month old, still fed by
their parents, and McClure himself reports (p. 389) that the “growth of flight
and tail feathers continued until the young were over a month old.” It does not
seem probable that young start migration before the age of 4 weeks.

When the author deals with the success of nests, he is on sure ground. But
as soon as he talks about the number of pairs involved, at once an unknown enters.
It is very difficult to estimate the number of pairs in a crowded population of this
species; yet the accuracy of such estimates is of fundamental importance in the
matter of the number of broods attempted and calculations of “production,” both
in the study area and in the county. In the bulletin, the technique used for esti-
mating is not described. In the 1942 paper we read (p. 65): “The greatest number
of nests existing in one day during the summer was taken as indicating approxi-
mately the number of nesting pairs for the area.” On page 74 we are told: “Cen-
susing by this method ... at best can only be a somewhat closer estimate than a
guess.” And the reader must take care not to -accept the “estimates” or “guesses,”
presented in the tables and summaries in the bulletin, as proved facts.

McClure considers that the Mourning Dove population in Iowa trebles each
year (p. 361). His technique for estimating populations (by counting active nests
and using ratios derived in the 1942 paper mentioned above) is illustrated on pages
410-412 of the bulletin. He gets astonishingly high figures: if 20 active nests are
found on 20 acres in June “after 5 days of mild weather,” 6.6 X 20 = 132, the
total nesting attempts (6.6, from Table 35, being the observed ratio of daily active
nests in June to the season’s yield) ; 50% X 132 = 66, the successful nestings
expected; 66 X 1.82 = 120.12, the total young production (1.82 being the average
number of young raised per nest) ; 1.1 X 20 = 22 breeding pairs (1.1, from Table
36, being the supposed ratio of active pairs seen nesting in June to the total
breeding stock) ; allowing a 10% variation, and correcting for loss (3 to 10 per
cent), “the total number of birds expected by the end of the season is 133-175
from 20 acres.” In other words, the original 44 birds have trebled at the least,
quadrupled at the most.

In Table 22 of the bulletin, however, estimates of the population on the 220
acres gave seasonal averages of 5.4, 5.1, and 4.6 nesting attempts; these calcula-
tions credit them with 6 (132 attempts for 22 pairs). Further analysis of Table
22 shows the average number of breeding pairs to be not 290 (as given in the
1942 paper), but 340, which divided by 260 (the average number of active nests
per day in the observation area), gives 1.3 instead of the 1.1 used in his illustra-
tion. This revised factor gives 26 pairs to 20 nests, so that the “total number of
birds expected by the end of the season” would be only 2.7 to 3.5 times the
original population, while the nesting attempts would average 5. That the
area (220 acres) on which Table 22 was based is the same as the area covered
in the 1942 paper, was confirmed for me by the author. As shown in Table 22,
he revised his opinions as to the number of pairs involved, but republished the
tables of ratios (Tables 7 and 8, 1942, become Tables 35 and 36, 1943) without
revision, and moreover he uses the unrevised ratios to illustrate his method. But
even with the above corrections, I still believe the author’s figures for the number
of nesting attempts and for population increase are too high; I believe he under-
estimated the number of pairs in town, as well as underestimating the percentage
loss of juveniles and adults.

The overestimate of population increase not only weakens the paper and shakes
the reader’s confidence in the rest of the results — it plays directly into the hands
of the hunters, and this in the case of a bird gravely endangered over a large part
of its range. The author has done a great deal of hard and faithful labor in con-
nection with this study, and he has obtained worthwhile data. They would have
been far more valuable if he had studied the pertinent literature and acquainted

200

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September. 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

himself with the biology of the species chosen, and also if he had used more care
in his calculations. — Margaret M. Nice.

The Biotic Provinces of North America. By Lee R. Dice, University of Mich-
igan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1943: 6^ X lo in., viii + 78 pp., 1 map.
$1.75.

Science is a process of discovering and sorting facts and drawing generalizations
from them. New ways of classifying data are always welcome since they may
bring to light new scientific principles. Students have proposed various systems
for sorting information on the distribution of plant and animal organisms in North
America, but only two receive major attention at the present time: the life-zone
and the biome systems. In this new book. Dice outlines another scheme of clas-
sification, his major units being “biotic provinces,” which are subdivided into
“biotic districts,” “life-belts,” and “ecologic associations.” A folding map shows
the boundaries of the biotic provinces of North America. The book discusses each
biotic province in respect to its name, synonyms, boundaries, topography, climate,
soil, vegetation, general characteristics of its mammals and birds, and its sub-
divisions, (though the subdivisions are not worked out completely). Whether or
not this system is worthwhile would seem to depend on its being more applicable
to the facts than the life-zone and the biome concepts or on its being based on
a philosophy so different that new principles are brought to light.

Life-zones are based on the distribution of taxonomic units, chiefly genera and
species of animals; biomes on climax plant and animal communities; a biotic
province is a “considerable and continuous geographic area . . . characterized by
the occurrence of one or more important ecologic associations that differ, at least
in proportional area covered, from the associations of adjacent provinces. In gen-
eral . . . characterized also by peculiarities of vegetation type, ecological climax,
flora, fauna, climate, physiography, and soil” (p. 3). Actually, however. Dice
here bases his classification of biotic provinces “to a very large extent on the
vegetation” and there are no long lists given of indicator species of animals, since
“available descriptions of the associations of North America are wholly inade-
quate.” In fact, “the limits of geographic range of species and races of plants and
animals are not fully satisfactory criteria for determining the boundaries of biotic
provinces and districts” (pp. 5-6).

In order that the provinces may fulfill Dice’s primary requirement of being
“continuous geographic areas” without the interspersion or overlapping of com-
munities usually found in distribution maps of large biota, they are made to
include groupings of plants and animals of great diversity. For example, instead of
the Carolinian province extending westward into the prairie as tongues of deciduous
forest along the rivers, the Illinoian province is made to include both types of
vegetation, prairie and oak-hickory forest. Then again, in the mountains a single
province may include a whole series of life-belts, for example, the Navahonian
province, which includes alpine meadow, subalpine forest, montane forest, chapar-
ral, pinyon-juniper woodland, and arid grassland. On the other hand, some asso-
ciations usually considered as single units by other ecologists, for example, the
mixed prairie, are here divided into as many as four biotic provinces. Although
both are professedly based largely on the character of the vegetation, the bound-
aries of the biotic provinces and those of the biomes or their subdivisions, rarely
coincide.

Biotic provinces as a classification are an improvement over life-zones in that
the trans-continental belts of the latter are broken up south of the coniferous
forests of Canada. Although the Canadian, Carolinian, and Austroriparian prov-
inces show some correlation with the Alleghanian, Carolinian, and Austroriparian
faunal areas in the eastern part of the country, there is no such correlation be-
tween provinces and the major faunal areas in the west. In mountainous areas,
division by life-zones shows the effect of altitude on distribution better than divi-

September 1943 ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

VOl. 55, o

201

sion by provinces does, since “life-belts” (more or less comparable with life-zones)
are relegated to minor subdivisions of the provinces.

Names assigned to the biotic provinces are taken largely from the literature,
mostly but not entirely upon a priority basis. These names go back for their
origin to C. Pickering 1830, R. B. Hinds 1843, J. G. Cooper 1859, J. A. Allen
1871, E. D. Cope 1873, E. W. Nelson 1887, while a few are new. For the most
part the names are geographical, which is a weakness.

The reviewer believes that while the concept of biotic provinces shows some
improvement over life-zones (except when applied to mountainous areas) it is
not so flexible nor so usable, nor is it based on such fundamental principles as
the biome concept. Furthermore, the criteria used in determining the boundaries
of the provinces are often vague, and the nomenclature is cumbersome. Probably
no system will come into general and accepted use unless the delimitation of its
units and its nomenclature are immediately obvious in the field because based on
conspicuous features of the biota. — S. Charles Kendeigh.

The Wn.D Turkey in Virginia: Its Status, Life History and Management. By
Henry S. Mosby and Charles O. Handley. Virginia Commission of Game and
Inland Fisheries, Richmond, Va., 1943: 6 X 9 in., xx + 281 pp., 2 col. pis.,
67 figs. $1.00.

This reviewer begins with a distinct bias in favor of the Wild Turkey, and
would, had he been contemporary, almost certainly have been in full agreement
with Benjamin Franklin’s desire to make the Wild Turkey our national bird. It
is a real pleasure, therefore, to welcome the first comprehensive monograph which
has dealt with all phases of the bird’s history, life history, and management. The
book is a competent and workmanlike job, and will undoubtedly benefit the object
of its study.

Although it deals primarily with the Wild Turkey in Virginia, the volume will
have a very much wider apphcation and usefulness. The Turkey ranges through-
out Virginia, which is a remarkable epitome of all of eastern United States, since
it includes conditions. that approach the sub-tropical at the Virginia Capes, has a
wide segment of the piedmont, an excellent sample of the ridge and valley province,
and, on the Allegheny Plateau, remnants of spruce forest which are near- Canadian.
We are given information about the distribution of the bird under this wide
variety of conditions.

It is good news that Virginia, despite the age of its settlements, had in 1938,
2,020 flocks of Wild Turkeys, made up of 22,575 individuals. The larger number
of the state’s counties still have a Turkey population, the heaviest concentrations
being on the east slopes of the Blue Ridge. The relationship between extensive
forest areas and Turkey populations is clearly brought out; where there are not
large forests the birds have not persisted.

The authors have had unusual success in artificial propagation of Wild Turkeys,
and they have evolved a number of techniques which are being widely adopted
by commercial game raisers. Their discussion of management is, therefore, par-
ticularly valuable. The statement, “It has been demonstrated that the Wild Turkey
responds to management to a marked degree,” is elaborated with suggestions for
food plantings, predator and disease control, emergency feeding, refuges, and such
matters. The authors are on sound ecological ground when they discuss the man-
agement of forests for the Wild Turkey. The book includes a suggested policy and
program for Wild Turkey management in Virginia which will be of great value
to game commissions of other states.

It is through such monographs as this that game management demonstrates
its validity as a field of scientific endeavor. Sound ornithology is supplemented by
economic evaluation of an animal in relation to man. Both pure and applied
science benefit from this happy combination. — Maurice Brooks.

202

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, Xo. 3

The Birds of Britain. By James Fisher. William Collins Sons and Co.. London,
1942: 6% X in., 48 pp., 16 pis. (12 colored) and 22 figs. 45. 6d.

James Fisher again shows his unusual ability as an ornithological writer by
producing under this well-worn title an original and stimulating little book.

He makes no attempt to provdde assistance in the identification of British
birds, but wisely confines himself to presenting attractively and compactly an
expert’s summar>' of Britain’s avifauna, past and present, its peculiar features, the
observers (beginning with Matthew Paris in 1251), and finally, an indication of
modern trends and probable future developments of bird study in Britain.

The book is illustrated with 38 rather good reproductions (nearly a third of
them in color) of bird portraits by some 20 artists, ranging from Daniel King
(c. 1652) to A. W. Seaby (1930). The pictures have been ingeniously chosen to
both illustrate the text and give a ver>’ good insight into the development of bird
illustration in Britain.

Any ecologist in this country will read the book with particular interest and
will wonder whether our continent too is bound for such drastic and complete
alteration of the original landscape as Britain has undergone.

This attractive book will provide Americans w^ho are going to England in
such numbers these days with the perspective so invaluable to any bird student
when encountering a new avifauna. — J. Van Tyne.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Physiology {including weights)

Rollo, Marie and L. V. Domm. Light Requirements of the Weaver Finch. 1.
Light Period and Intensity. Auk, 60, Xo. 3, July, 1943: 357-367, figs. 1-4.
(Pyromelana franciscana) .

Tucker, B. W. Brood-Patches and the Physiolog>' of Incubation. Brit. Birds, 37,
Xo. 2, July, 1943:22-28.

Anatomy {including plumage and molt)

Leopold, A. Starker. The Molts of Young Wild and Domestic Turkeys. Condor,
45, No. 4, July, 1943:133-145, figs. 35-38.

Linduska, J. P. a Gross Study of the Bursa of Fabricius and Cock Spurs as Age
Indicators in the Ring-necked Pheasant. Auk, 60, Xo. 3, July, 1943:426-437,
pi. 11, figs. 1-7.

Michener, Harold and Josephine R. Michener. The Spring Molt of the Gambel
Sparrow. Condor, 45, No. 3, May, 1943:113-116.

Miller, Loye. Notes on the Mearns Quail. Condor, 45, Xo. 3, May, 1943:104-
109, fig. 28.

Distribution and Taxonomy

Aldrich, John W. and Herbert Friedmann. A Re\dsion of the Ruffed Grouse.

Condor, 45, No. 3, May, 1943:85-103, figs. 26-27.

Behle, William H. Birds of Pine Valley Mountain Region, Southw'estern Utah.

Bull. Univ. Utah, 34, Xo. 2, Aug., 1943:1-85, figs. 1-13.

Brooks, Maurice. Birds of the Cheat Mountains. Cardinal, 6, Xo. 2, July, 1943:
25-45. (West Va.)

CuMLEY, Russell W. Geographic Variation of the Pigeons of the Genus Columba.

Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:408-425, figs. 1-3.

Dice, Lee R. Biotic Pro\dnces of North America. Univ. Mich. Press, Ann Arbor.
1943. viii -{- 78 pp., map. $1.75.

Hoff, C. Clayton. Improving Taxonomic Literature. Jour. Tenn. Acad. Sci., 18,
No. 2, April, 1943:201-203.

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

203

Mayr, Ernst. Criteria of Subspecies, Species and Genera in Ornithology. Annals
N. Y. Acad. Scl, 44, art. 2, June 8, 1943:133-140.

Mayr, Ernst and James Bond. Notes on the Generic Classification of the Swal-
lows, Hirundinidae. Ibis, 85, July, 1943:334-341.

Miller, Alden H. A New Race of Canada Jay from Coastal British Columbia.
Condor, 45, No. 3, May, 1943:117-118. (Perisoreus canadensis pacificus, new
subsp.) .

Odum, Eugene P. Some Possible Range Extensions in North Georgia. Oriole, 8,
No’s 1-2, Mar. and June, 1943:6-8.

Pettingill, Olin S. and Edw.ard F. Dana. Notes on the birds of western North
and South Dakota. Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:441-444.

Simpson, Doris C. Late Summer Birds of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Jour. Tenn.
Acad. Sci., 18, No. 2, April, 1943:197-200. (At Montreat, near Asheville, N.C.)

Stan WELL- Fletcher, John F. and Theodora C. Some Accounts of the Flora and
Fauna of the Driftwood Valley Region of North Central British Columbia.
Brit. Columbia Prov. Mus. Occ. Papers No. 4, May, 1943:1-97, 5 pis. (birds,
pp. 43-78).

Sutton, George Miksch. Records from the Tucson Region of Arizona. Auk, 60,
No. 3, July, 1943:345-350.

VAN Rossem, a. J. Description of a Race of Goldfinch from the Pacific North-
west. Condor, 45, No. 4, July, 1943:158-159. (Spinus tristis jewetti, new subsp.
from Ashland, Oregon.)

Van Tyne, Josselyn. Roseate Spoonbills Transported Northward by Ship. Wils.
Bull., 55, No. 2, June, 1943:127.

Wetmore, Alexander. The Little Brown Crane in Ohio. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 2,
June, 1943:127. (Bones from archeological excavations.)

Wetmore, Alexander. The Birds of Southern Veracruz, Mexico. Proc. U. S. Nat.
Mus., 93, 1943:215-340.

Wing, Leonard. Relative distribution of Mallard and Black Duck in winter. Auk,
60, No. 3, July, 1943:438-439, map.

See also Population: Allan and Sime, Brooking, Stewart; Ecology: Crouch;

Life History and Behavior: Caldwell.

Population

Allan, Philip F. and Palmer R. Sime. Distribution and Abundance of the Mis-
sissippi Kite in the Texas Panhandle. Condor, 45, No. 3, May, 1943:110-112,
figs. 29-30.

Brooking, A. M. The Present Status of the Whooping Crane in Nebraska. Nebr.
Bird Rev., 11, No. 1, Jan.-June, 1943:5-8.

CoTTAM, Clarence. Is the Starling population decreasing in northastern United
States? Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:439-440.

Good, E. E. and C. A. Dambach. Effect of Land Use Practices on Breeding Bird
Populations in Ohio. Jour. Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 3, July, 1943:291-297.

Mason, Edwin A. Six-Year Old Tree Swallow. Bird Banding, 14, Nos. 1 and 2,
Jan.-Apr., 1943:45.

Mason, Edwin A. Eight-Year Old Barn Swallow. Bird Banding, 14, Nos. 1 and 2,
Jan.-Apr., 1943:45.

ScHORGER, A. W. Extinct and Endangered Mammals and Birds of the Upper Great
Lakes Region. Trans. Wis. Acad. Sci. Arts and Letters, 34, 1942 [1943] :23-44.

Smith, Harry M. Size of Breeding Population in Relation to Egg-laying and Re-
production Success in the Eastern Red-wing (Agelaius p. phoeniceus) . Ecol.,
24, No. 2, April, 1943:183-207.

Stewart, Robert E. A Comparative Study of the Breeding Bird Population of the
Shenandoah Mountains, Virginia. Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:388-396.

Wallace, George J. The 1940 Nesting Population at Pleasant Valley Sanctuary,
Lenox, Massachusetts. Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:403-407.

204

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

Migration

Coffey, Ben B., Jr. Post-juvenal Migration of Herons. Bird Banding, 14, Nos.
1 and 2, Jan.-April, 1943:34-39, 4 maps.

Griffin, Donald R. Homing Experiments with Herring Gulls and Common Terns.

Bird Banding, 14, Nos. 1 and 2, Jan.-April, 1943:7-33, figs. 1-4.

Neff, Johnson A. Homing Instinct in the Dwarf Cowbird in Arizona. Bird Band-
14, Nos. 1 and 2, Jan.-April, 1943:1-6.

Nichols, J. T. On a Case of Reversed Migration. Bird Banding, 14, Nos. 1 and
2, Jan.-April, 1943:46-47.

Ecology

Crouch, James E. Distribution and Habitat Relationships of the Phainopepla.

Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:319-333, pis. 8-10.

McClure, H. Elliott. Ecology and Management of the Mourning Dove, Zenaidura
macroura (Linn.), in Cass County, Iowa. Agric. Exper. Sta. Iowa State College
Research Bull. No. 310, 1943:335-415.

Paton, C. I., and Kenneth Williamson. Bird and Snail Associations. Ibis, 85,
July, 1943:348.

Sanders, Earl. Development of a Bob-white Management Area in Southern Iowa.
Iowa State College Research Bull. No. 317, May, 1943:699-726, figs. 1-2.

See also Population: Stewart; Life History and Behavior: Crouch, Pitelka.

Life History and Behavior

Allen, Amelia Sanborn. Additional Notes on the Birds of a Berkeley Hillside.
Condor, 45, No. 4, July, 1943:149-157.

Bagg, Aaron M. Snow Buntings burrowing into snow drifts. Auk, 60, No. 3,
July, 1943:445.

Baker, Gerald F. Notes on the Wild Turkey in Western Kentucky. Kentucky
Warbler, 19, No. 3, Summer, 1943:25-27.

Bellrose, Frank, Jr. Two Wood Ducks incubating in the same nesting box.

Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:446-447, pi. 12 (lower fig.).

Bond, James. Nidification of the Passerine Birds of Hispaniola. Wils. Bull., 55,
No. 2, June, 1943:115-125.

Brackbill, Hervey. a Nesting Study of the Wood Thrush. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 2,
June, 1943:77-87.

Brimley, C. S. Birds Rebuild When Nest Is Destroyed. Chat, 7, No. 3, May,
1943:41-44. (Yellow-throated Warbler, Pine Warbler, Prairie Warbler, Blue-
gray Gnatcatcher.)

Brooks, Allan. An Unusual Attitude in a Hawk. Condor, 45, No. 3, May, 1943:
119.

Brooks, S. C. Speed of Flight of Mourning Doves. Condor, 45, No. 3, May, 1943:
119.

Broun, Maurice. Swimming Ability of Young Robins. Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:
445-446.

Brown, Louis G., and Frank C. Bellrose, Jr. Use of Nesting Boxes for Wood
Ducks by Other Wildlife. Jour. Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 3, July, 1943:298-306,
pi. 15.

Caldwell, Dorothy W. et al. The Purple Martin. Some Notes on Its Habits and
its Distribution. Schenectady Bird Club Bulletin No. 2, July, 1943, 12 pp.
Calvert, William J., Jr. The Bachman’s Sparrow. Aud. Mag., 45, No. 4, July,
1943:203-208. (Song.)

Clebsch, Alfred. Prothonotary Warbler vs. Cowbird. Migrant, 14, No. 2, June,
1943:42.

Clebsch, Alfred. Some Observations on the Grasshopper Sparrow. Migrant, 14,
No. 2, June, 1943:28-31.

September 1943 ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

Vol. 55, No. 3

205

Edson, J. M. a Study of the Violet-green Swallow. Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:
396-403.

Evenden, Fred G., Jr. Flight Speed of the Mourning Dove. Condor, 45, No. 3,
May, 1943:119.

Fleetwood, Raymond J. Chimney Swifts Roosting in Well. Bird Banding, 14,
Nos. 1 and 2, Jan.-Apr., 1943:44.

Friedmann, Herbert. Further Additions to the List of Birds Known to be Para-
sitized by the Cowbirds. Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:351-356.

Guth, Louis G. Nesting of Purple Martins. Migrant, 14, No. 2, June, 1943:41-42.

Hammond, Edward K. Some Unusual Bird Nesting Records for the Chicago Re-
gion, Chicago Nat., 6, No. 2, June, 1943:41, 44.

Hebard, Frederick V. The Southern Pileated Woodpecker of Southeastern Georgia.
Oriole, 8, Nos. 1 and 2, March-June, 1943:1-3.

Hiatt, Robert W. A Singing Female Oven-bird. Condor, 45, No. 4, July, 1943:
158.

Hosking, Eric J. Some Observations on the Marsh-Harrier. Brit. Birds, 37, No. 1,
June, 1943:2-9, pis. 1-4. {Circus aeruginosus.)

Jamison, Conrad. Cowbird Eggs in a Water-thrush Nest. Migrant, 14, No. 2, June
1943:42. (Louisiana Water-thrush in Tenn.)

Knott, Norm.an P., Chester C. Ball, and Charles F. Yocum. Nesting of the
Hungarian Partridge and Ring-necked Pheasant in Whitman County, Wash-
ington. Jour. Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 3, July, 1943:283-291, fig. 1.

Laskey, Amelia R. The Nesting of Bluebirds Banded as Nestlings. Bird Banding,
14, Nos. 1 and 2, Jan.-April, 1943:39-43.

Laskey, Amelia R. A Flicker Feeding Her Fledgling. Migrant, 14, No. 2, June,
1943:42-43.

Lovell, Harvey B., and Ethel W. Observations at a Bird-banding Station in
Louisville. Kentucky Warbler, 19, No. 3, Summer, 1943:36-39.

Low, Jessop B. Coots Killed Under Unusual Circumstances. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 2,
June, 1943:127-128.

Mason, Edwin A. Tree Swallow Mates with Son. Bird Banding, 14, Nos. 1 and 2,
Jan.-April, 1943:45.

Meyer, Henry, and Ruth Reed Nevius. Some Observations on the Nesting and
Development of the Prothonotary Warbler, Protonotaria citrea. Migrant, 14,
No. 2, June, 1943:31-36.

Middleton, Mary Paine. Some Observations of the I.oggerhead Shrike in Lincoln
County. Nebr. Bird Rev., 11, No. 1, Jan.-June, 1943:1-4.

Miller, Richard F. The Pied-billed Grebe. A Breeding Bird of the Philadelphia
Region. Cassinia, 32, 1942 [19431:22-34, one pi.

Mosby, Henry S., and Charles O. Handley. The Wild Turkey in Virginia: Its
Status, Life History and Management. Va. Comm. Game and Inland Fisheries,
Richmond. 1943. xx -f 281 pp., 2 col. pis., 67 figs. $1.00.

Norris, Robert. Diving of a Long-billed Marsh Wren. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 2,
June, 1943:132.

Odum, Eugene P. ‘Courtship Feeding’ in the Black-capped Chickadee. Auk, 60,
, No. 3, July, 1943:444-445.

Orr, Ellison. The Bartramian Sandpiper in Northeast Iowa. Iowa Bird Life, 13,
No. 3, Sept., 1943:38-40, 1 pi.

Pennie, Ian D. Display of Black-throated Diver. Brit. Birds, 37, No. 1, June,
1943:18. {Gavia a. arctica.)

PiTELKA, Frank A. Territoriality, Display, and Certain Ecological Relations of the
American Woodcock. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 2, June, 1943:88-114, figs. 1-10.

Rand, A. L., and R. M. Breeding Notes on the Phainopepla. Auk, 60, No. 3,
July, 1943:333-341.

Ryves, B. H. An Investigation Into the Roles of Males in Relation to Incubation.
Brit. Birds, 37, No. 1, June, 1943:10-16.

206

THE WILSOX BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, Xo. 3

Sawyer, Edmund J. A Theor>- on the Tipping and Bobbing Habit in Birds. Mur-
reUt, 24, Xo. 2, May-Aug., 1943:25-26.

ScHRANTz, F. G. Xest Life of the Eastern Yellow Warbler. Auk, 60, Xo. 3, July,
1943:367-387.

Smith, Thomas P. Xesting Hawks of Jefferson County, and Adjacent Territor>*.
Kentucky Warbler, 19, X'o. 3, Summer, 1943:28-31, photo. (Ky.)

Spofford, Walter R. Peregrines in a West Tennessee Swamp. Migrant, 14, Xo. 2,
June, 1943:25-27, 1 pi.

Stubbert, D. Display of Merlin. Brit. Birds, 37, Xo. 1, June, 1943:17-18. {Falco
columbarius aesalon.)

Sutton, George Miksch, and Olen Sewall Pettengill, Jr. The Alta Mira Oriole
Fringilhds. Univ. Mich. Mus. Zool. Occ. Papers Xo. 474, July 31, 1943:1-14.

Sutton, George Miksch, and Oeen Sew.ule Pettengell, Jr. The Alta Mira Oriole
and Its Xest. Condor, 45, Xo. 4, July, 1943:125-132, figs. 32-34. {Icterus
gularis tamaulipensis in Tamaulipas).

Ta\*erner, P. a. Do Fishes Prey upon Sea-Birds? Ibis, 85, July, 1943:347.

Thorpe, W. H. A Type of Insight Learning in Birds. Brit. Birds, 37, Xo. 2, July,
1943:29-31.

Tr-acy, J. C. The Breeding Birds of the Cresheim Valley in Philadelphia, 1942.
Cassinia, 32, 1942[1943] :35-41.

Trae’tman, Melton B. Xormal Flight of a Black Duck after Healing of Wing
Fractures. U'i/s. Bull., 55, Xo. 2, June, 1943:126, fig. 1.

Weyg.andt, Cornelie'S. Consider the Swan. Cassinia, 32, 1942 [ 1943] : 1-21.

WiLEEUMS, Cech. S., and Marges C. Xelson. Canada Goose Xests and Eggs. Auk,
60, Xo. 3, July, 1943:341-345.

Ye-atter, Ralph E. The Prairie Chicken in Illinois. Bull. III. Nat. Hist. Sttrv., 22,
art. 4, May, 1943:377-416, 1 pi., figs. 1-18.

See also Anatomy: Miller; Population: Smith, Wallace; Ecology: McClure.

Food of Birds.

Bellrose, Frank C., Jr., and Harry G. Anderson. Preferential Rating of Duck
Food Plants. Bull. III. Xat. Hist. Surv., 22, art. 5, May, 1943:417-433, 1 pi.,
figs. 1-16.

CoTT.AM, Clarence. Greater Yellow-legs as a Fish-eater. ir;7s. Bull., 55, Xo. 2,
June, 1943:128.

Dalke, P-al'e D. Effect of Winter Weather on the Feeding Habits of Pheasants
in Southern Michigan. Jour. WUdlije Manag., 7, Xo. 3, July, 1943:343-344.

Evenden, Fred G.. Jr. Food-washing Habit of the Dipper. Condor, 45, Xo. 3,
May, 1943:120.

Fisher, Robert J. Winter Feeding Station Tests of Grains in Washington. Jour.
WUdlije Manag., 7, Xo. 3. July, 1943:344-345.

Gl.ading, Ben, D.aniel F, Tellotson, and David M. Selleck. Raptor Pellets as
Indicators of Food Habits. Calif. Fish & Game, 29, Xo. 3, July 1943:92-121,
fig. 30.

Selleck, David M., and Ben Guvding. Food Habits of Xesting Barn OaaIs and
Marsh Hawks at Dune Lakes, California, as Determined by the “Cage Xest”
Method. Calif. Fish & Game, 29, Xo. 3, July, 1943:122-131, figs. 31-32.

Terres, John K., and E. W. J.ameson, Jr. Plague of Mice as Food for Short-
eared Owls, iri/5. BiUl., 55, Xo. 2, June, 1943:131.

Tryon, C. a., Jr. The Great Gray Owl as a Predator on Pocket Gophers. Wils.
BuU., 55, Xo. 2, June, 1943:130-131.

Techniques {including banding)

Griscom, Ludlow. Xotes on the Pacific Loon. Bull. Mass. .Aud. Soc., 27, Xo. 4,
May. 1943:106-109, 1 fig. (Mass, records; methods of field idem.)

vol'Ts''no.%^ ornithological literature

207

Lagler, Karl F. Neglected Sources of Data. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 2, June, 1943:
132.

Ludwig, C. C. Keeping Bird Banding Records. Inland Bird Banding News, 15,
No. 3, June, 1943:15, 17.

Osborn, Ben. Wildlife and Habitats in Young County, Texas, by a New Method
of Survey. Jour. Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 3, July, 1943:241-256, fig. 1.

Rand, A. L. On Deciphering Worn Bands. Bird Banding, 14, Nos. 1 and 2, Jan.-
April, 1943:44.

See also Anatomy: Linduska; Distribution and Taxonomy: Hoff; Migration:
Griffin.

History, Biography, Bibliography, and Institutions

Avtnoff, a. Bayard Henderson Christy. Cardinal, 6, No. 2, July, 1943: unnum-
bered pi. and 2 pp. following p. 36.

Barbour, T. et al. Glover Morrill Allen. Jour. Mamm., 24, No. 3, Aug., 1943:
297-304, 1 pi.

English, P. F. Howard Marshall Wight. Jour. Wildlife Manag., 7, No. 3, July,
1943:348-350. (With a full bibliography of his scientific publications.)

Ford, Edward R. The Bird Collection of the Chicago Academy of Sciences. Chi-
cago Nat., 6, No. 2, June, 1943:37-40.

Miller, R. C. James Moffitt, 1900-1943. Gull, 25, No. 8, Aug., 1943:31-32, 1
photo. (A somewhat longer biographical account with Moffitt’s complete bibli-
ography is published, presumably by the same author, in [Calif.] Academy
[of Sciences] News Letter No. 44, Aug., 1943.)

Newman, Robert, and Quentin Kramar. Bibliography of Publications Relating
to the Birds of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware 1942. Cassinia, 32,
1942[1943]:50-52.

Poole, Earle. Wharton Huber: 1877-1942. Cassinia, 32, 1942 [1943] : 42-43, 1 pi.

Taylor, Mrs. H. J. Iowa’s Woman Ornithologist Althea Rosina Sherman. Iowa
Bird Life, 13, No. 2, June, 1943:18-36, 9 photos.

Paleontology

Wetmore, Alexander. Remains of a Swan from the Miocene of Arizona. Condor,
45, No. 3, May, 1943:120.

Wetmore, Alexander. Fossil Birds from the Tertiary Deposits of Florida. Proc.
New Engl. Zool. Club, 22, June, 1943:59-68.

Wetmore, Alexander. An Extinct Goose from the Island of Hawaii. Condor, 45,
No. 4, July, 1943:146-148, fig. 39.

Wetmore, Alexander. The occurrence of feather impressions in the Miocene de-
posits of Maryland. Auk, 60, No. 3, July, 1943:440-441.

See also Distribution and Taxonomy: Wetmore.

208

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

THE WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB LIBRARY

The proposal that the Wilson Ornithological Club establish a library was first
made by Frank C. Pellett of Hamilton, Illinois, and was brought before the annual
meeting of the Club in Ann Arbor in 1928. A committee consisting of T. C.
Stephens, Frank C. Pellett and Myron H. Swenk was appointed to consider the
matter, and after two years of study and negotiations an agreement was signed
by officers of the Wilson Club and the University of Michigan, establishing the
Library in the University Museum of Zoology {Wilson Bulletin, 43, 1931:77-78).
In a report of the Committee made in March, 1931, a request was made for gifts
of reprints, periodicals, books, or entire libraries dealing with ornithology and
related subjects; according to the agreement these were to be catalogued, filed,
and kept as a unit among the book collections in the Museum. The library was
to be open to the staff of the Museum of Zoology and to members of the Wilson
Club in Ann Arbor; transportation costs one way were to be paid by the Museum
on items borrowed by other members.

The growth of the library has been steady; from a mere yard of books on a
shelf, the books and reprints have come to occupy twenty-eight feet of shelf
space, and the periodicals about thirty-five feet. Books, reprints, and serials have
been contributed; and fifty-five periodicals are currently received as gifts and
in exchange for The Wilson Bulletin. A catalogue of about two thousand cards
covers the main items, and a book plate, designed by George Miksch Sutton, marks
each bound volume.

According to agreement, a catalogue (or list) of the items in the Library was
to be prepared by the Museum and published by the Wilson Club for the informa-
tion of the members. Since the manner of listing was a little uncertain, I volun-
teered to prepare a preliminary list for publication in the Bulletin. A complete list
of all items, including reprints, would require about forty pages of fine print.
Whether this will be prepared later by the Museum and published separately, or
in the Bulletin, will depend on the wishes of the members, their response to this
preliminary list, and the availability of the required funds. To make such a
catalogue would require considerable work, and should not be undertaken until
normal times, when ample help can be secured. I hopje that the present list will
be helpful to members in using the library. Members are invited to send inquiries
about particular reprints desired, later accessions, or other details. All communica-
tions should be addressed to “The Wilson Club Library, Museum of Zoology, Ann
Arbor, Michigan.”

I hope that contributions to the Library will continue as they have in the
past, and I shall be glad to have suggestions from members of the Club concerning
the improvement of the Library and its facilities.

Library Committee,

Harry W. Hann, Chairman

The following gifts have been received recently:

R. M. Barnes: 725 periodicals
Frances Hamerstrom: 37 periodicals
Harry W. Hann: 1 book
Thomas D. Hinshaw: 1 book
Verna R. Johnston: 10 reprints
George A. Petrides: 2 pamphlets
Alma H. Prucha: 34 periodicals
A. W. Schorger: 1 reprint
O. A. Stevens: 3 reprints

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

WILSON CLUB LIBRARY

209

Abbott, C. G., The home-life of the
Osprey. 1911.

Audubon, J. J., The birds of America
(edited by William Vogt). 1937.

Bailey, B. H., The raptorial birds of
Iowa. 1918.

Bailey, F. M., Among the birds in the
Grand Canyon Country. 1939.

Baldwin, S. P., H. C. Oberholser and
L. G. Worley, Measurements of birds.
1931.

Bangs, O., Types of birds now in the
Museum of Comparative Zoology.
1930.

Barnes, V., Jr. and W. H. Phelps, Las
aves de la peninsula de Paraguana.
1940.

Barrows, W. B., The English Sparrow
in North America. 1889.

Beckstein, J. M., Cage and chamber-
birds. 1856.

Beebe, W., The Arcturus adventure.
1926.

Beetham, B., Photography for bird-
lovers. 1911.

Bent, A. C., Life histories of North
American gulls and terns. 1921.

Bent, A. C., Life histories of North

American shore birds (Pt. I). 1927.

Bent, A. C., Life histories of North

American gallinaceous birds. 1932.

Bent, A. C., Life histories of North

American flycatchers, larks, swallows,
and their allies. 1942.

Bergtold, W. H., A guide to Colorado
birds. 1928.

Bonhote, J. L., Birds of Britain. 1907.

Brand, A. R., Songs of wild birds. 1934.

Brandt, H., Texas bird adventures.

1940.

Bready, M. B., The European Starling
on his westward way. 1929.

Brewster, W., The birds of the Lake
Umbagog region of Maine, Parts 1
& 2. 1924, 1925.

Burns, F. L., The ornithology of Ches-
ter County, Pennsylvania. 1919.

Chance, E. P., The truth about the
cuckoo. 1940.

Chandler, A. C., A study of the struc-
ture of feathers, with reference to
their taxonomic significance. 1916.

Chapman, F. M., Autobiography of a
bird lover. 1933.

Chapman, F. M., Bird-life. 1899.

Chapman, F. M., Bird studies with a
camera. 1900.

Chapman, F. M., Handbook of birds of
Eastern N. A. 1907 and 1912 edi-
tions.

Commons, Marie A., The log of Tana-
ger Hill. 1938.

Cory, C. B., Birds of eastern North
America. 1899.

Cottam, C., Food habits of North
American diving ducks. 1939.

Coues, E., Key to North American
birds. 1884.

Cuming, E. D., British birds, Passeres
vol. 1, 2. 1913, 1914.

Daglish, E. F., How to see birds. 1932.

Danforth, S. T., Los pajaros de Puerto
Rico. 1936.

Dawson, W. L., Birds of California
(Sunset ed., 4 vols.). 1923.

Dugmore, A. R., Bird homes. 1900.

Du Puy, W. A., The nation’s forests.
1938.

Eckstein, G., The canary, a history of
a family. 1936.

Ehrhart, O., Das sterbende Moor. 1930.

Elliot, D. G., Wild fowl of North
America. 1898.

210

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September^ 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

Evans, A. H,, Turner on birds. 1903.

Finley, W. L., American birds. 1907.

Fisher, A. K., Hawks and owls of the
United States in their relation to agri-
culture. 1893.

Fleming, J. H., Birds of the Toronto
region. (In J. H. Faul, Nat. Hist, of
the Toronto region). 1913,

Forbush, E. H,, Game birds, wild-fowl
and shore birds of Massachusetts and
adjacent states. 1912.

Goddard, H. C., W. H. Hudson: bird-
man. 1928.

Grinnell, J., and T. I, Storer, Animal
life in the Yosemite. 1924.

Gruenberg, B. C., Story of evolution.
1935.

Hagen, W., Erp, die Geschichte einer
VVildente, 1938.

Harting, J. E., The ornithology of
Shakespeare. 1871.

Hebard, F. V,, Winter birds of the Oke-
finokee and Coleraine. 1941.

Heilmann, G., Origin of birds. 1927.

Hellmayr, C. E. and B, Conover, Birds
of the Americas, Pt. 1, No. 1. 1942.

Henshaw, H. W., F. H. Kennard, and
W. W. Cooke, Common birds of town
and country. 1918.

Hesse, R., W. Allee, K. Schmidt, Eco-
logical animal geography, 1937.

Hibbert-Ware, Alice, Little Owl food
inquiry. 1938.

Hiesemann, M., How to attract and
protect wild birds. 1912.

Holton, V., The Beeps. 1939.

Hornaday, W. T., Taxidermy. 1892.

Howe, R. H., Every bird. 1896.

Ingersoll, E., Alaskan bird-life as de-
picted by many writers, 1914.

Jefferies, R,, Wild life in a southern
county. 1889.

Johnson, G., Nature’s program. 1926.

Jones, Lynds, Birds of Ohio. 1903.

Kalela, O., Uber die Regionale Ver-
teilung der Brutvogelfauna im Fluss-
gebiet des Kokemaenjoki. 1938.

Keyser, L., Birds of the Rockies. 1902.

Knaak, K., Ti-it, die Geschichte eines
Eisvogels. 1938.

Knowlton, F. H., Birds of the world.
1909.

Krider, J., Forty years notes of a field
ornithologist. 1879.

Langille, J. H., Our birds in their
haunts. 1884.

Leopold, A., Game survey of the North
Central States. 1931.

Lockley, R. M., I know an island. 1938.

Loeser, J. A., Animal behavior. 1940.

McCook, H. C., Tenants of an old
farm. 1902.

McCreary, O., Wyoming bird life, 1939.

Marks, J. and J. Moody, A holiday
with the birds. 1910.

May, J. B., Hawks of North America,
1935.

Miller, O. T., First book of birds. 1901.

Mivart, St.G., Birds: the elements of
ornithology. 1892.

Nehrling, H., Our native birds (2 vols.).
1893.

Newman, E., A dictionary of British
birds (from Montagu). 1866.

Nice, Margaret M., Life history of the
Song Sparrow. 1. 1937.

Nicoll, M. J., Handlist of the birds of
Egypt. 1919.

Oberholser, H. C., Bird life of Louisi-
ana, 1938.

Orton, Kennedy, Notes on the Pere-
grine Falcon. 1935.

Parker, Eric, Ethics of egg collecting.
1935.

Parham, H. J., A nature lover in British
Columbia. 1937.

Patten, B. M., Embryology of the
chick. 1927,

Payne, R. S., The Baltimore Oriole and
a biographical sketch of .\udubon.
1923.

Pearson, T. G., The bird study book.
1917.

Pearson, T. G., Adventures in bird pro-
tection. 1937.

Peattie, D. C., Singing in the wilder-
ness. A salute to J. J. .\udubon. 1935.

Perisho, E. C., and S. S. Visher, The
geography, geology and biology of
South Dakota. 1912.

Peterson, R. T., Field guide to the
birds. 1934.

Pickwell, G. B., The Prairie Horned
Lark. 1931.

Pirnie, M. D., Michigan waterfowl
management. 1935.

Pitt, Frances, Birds and the sea. 1935.

Porter, Gene S., What I have done with
birds. 1907.

Pratt, A., Lore of the Lyrebird. 1937.

Randolph, V., ,\-B-C of biology. 1927.

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

WILSON CLUB LIBRARY

211

Reed, C. A., North American birds eggs.
1904.

Richmond, W. K., Quest for birds. 1934.
Ridgway, R., Manual of North Amer-
ican birds. 1887.

Riley, J. H., Birds from Siam and
Malay Peninsula. 1938.

Roberts, T. S., Logbook of Minnesota
bird life, 1917-1937. 1938.

Roosevelt, T., African game trails. 1910.
Rossell, L., Tracks and trails. 1928.
Sage, J. H., L. B. Bishop, and W. P.

Bliss, The birds of Connecticut. 1913.
Saunders, A. A., Bird song. 1929.
Sclater, W. L., A history of the birds
of Colorado. 1912.

Sears, P. B., This is our world. 1937.
Shaw, Lloyd, Nature notes of the Pike’s
Peak region. 1916.

Shufeldt, R. W., Osteology of birds.
1909.

Silloway, P. M., Sketches of some com-
mon birds. 1897.

Stoddard, H. L., The Bobwhite Quail,
its habits, preservation and increase.
1932.

Stoner, D., Ornithology of the Oneida
Lake region. 1932.

Sutton, G. M., An introduction to the
birds of Pennsylvania. 1928.

Taverner, P. A., Birds of Canada. 1938.

Thienemann, J., Rossitten, Drei Jahr-
zehnte auf der Kurischen Nehrung.
1930.

Thienemann, J., Vom Vogelzuge in
Rossitten. 1931.

Thomson, J. A., Everyday biology.
1924.

Vogt, W. (see J. J. Audubon)

Walter, H. E., and A. H., Wild birds
in city parks. 1910.

Weed, C. M. and N. Dearborn, Birds
1904.

Weed, C. M. and N. Dearborn, Birds
in their relations to man. 1903.

Wetmore, A., Birds of Argentina, Para-
guay, Uruguay, and Chile. 1926.

Wetmore, A., and B. H. Swales, Birds
of Haiti and the Dominican Repub-
lic. 1931.

Williams, H. S., Private lives of birds.
1939.

Wright, H. W., Birds of the Boston
Public Garden. 1909.

Wood, C., An introduction to the lit-
erature of vertebrate zoology. 1931.

Reprints

Authors represented by five or more reprints (the figure following each author’s
name indicates the number of his reprints in the Library):

Allen, A. A., 7.
Allen, J. A., 11.
Bangs, O., 52.

Beal, F. E. L., 16.
Beebe, W., 9.

Behle, W. H., 7.
Bergtold, W. H., 10.
Bissonnette, T. H.,
IS.

Brooks, M. C., 5.
Burger, W., S.
Burns, F. L., 9.
Chapman, F. M., 6.
Cooke, M. T., 5.
Cooke, W. W., 9.
Coues, E., 9.

Craig, W., 8.
Danforth, S. T., 12.
De Lury, R. E., 6.
Dixon, J., 5.
Errington, P. L., 50.
Fisher, A. K., 5.
Forbush, E. H., 17.

Fox, A. C., 14.
Friedmann, H., 30.
Grinnell, J., 36.
Hamerstrom, F. N.,

Hann, H. W., 5.
Harper, F., IS.
Hausman, L. A., 11.
Henshaw, H. W.,
11.

Hicks, L. E., 31.
Johnson, R. A., 7.
Jones, Lynds, 6.
Judd, S. D., 5.
Kalmbach, E., 5.
Kelso, L., 8.
Kendeigh, S. C., 7.
Laskey, A. R., 8.
Lincoln, F. C., 14.
Lucas, F. A., 6.
McAtee, W. L., 116.
Mearns, E. A., 17.
Merriam, C. H., 6.

Miller, R. C., 5.
Nelson, E. W., 9.
Nice, M. M., 87.
Norton, A. H., 5.
Oberholser, H. C.,
111.

Odum, E. P., 8.
Pearson, T. G., 21.
Pellett, F. C., 6.
Pettingill, O. S., 8.
Pitelka, F. A., 11.
Richmond, C. W.,
14.

Riddle, O., 23.
Ridgway, R., 29.
Riley, J. H., 9.
Robertson, J. M., 8.
Shufeldt, R. W., 27.
Slipp, J. W., 19.
Stejneger, L., 9.
Stephens, T. C., 6.
Stevens, O. A., 6.
Stoddard, H. L., 5.

Stoner, D., 22.
Strong, R. M., 6.
Sumner, E. L., 5.
Swarth, H. S., 12.
Swenk, M. H., 5.
Taverner, P. A., 15.
Townsend, C. W.,
40.

Trautman, M. B.,
13.

Van Tyne, J., 40.
von Bloeker, J. C.
Jr., 5.

Walkinshaw, L. H.,
15.

Weed, C. M., 6.
Wetmore, A., 34.
Winterbottom, J.
M., 22.

Woodbury, A. M.,

6.

Worth, C. B., 14.
Wright, H. W., 12.

212

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

WILDLIFE CONSERVATION

War and Waterfowl

Duck hunting is natural; it is part of our way of life. There is no explaining
it, and few hunters could put in words their reasons for wishing to hunt this fall.
No explanation is necessary; anyone who has felt a north wind clipping over his
left shoulder in a certain hide on a certain marsh understands. But a few duck
hunters have become a bit panicky over the prospects of hunting during this year
of war. Here are some of the arguments they have given to justify an open season
and the use of shells this coming autumn:

1. Duck meat can replace domestic meat in the present meat shortage.

2. Unless we “harvest the crop” there will be an over-population of waterfowl
which will:

(a) exhaust the natural food supply and ruin the range, as over-populations
of deer and cattle do;

(b) become a serious threat to cultivated crops;

(c) provide an opportunity for the illegal “market hunter” to reestablish
himself.

3. Duck hunting would provide a necessary relief for war-torn nerves.

I have no right, of course, to speak of conditions beyond my own bailiwick;
my horizon like that of most of us is limited. But my horizon happens to be
limited by duck marsh. As far as I can see from my front porch stretches one of
the finest waterfowl breeding marshes in the land. I, and the other members of
this small marsh-side community, feel a bit closer to ducks, perhaps, than the
average sportsman. Ducks are part of our lives, not just for a few days in autumn,
but through much of the year. A failure to understand the fascination of ducks
and duck hunting does not, therefore, lie at the root of what I have to say for
myself and this community in answer to the arguments outlined above.

Wild duck as meat. — I agree that some forms of game should find a place in
our war economy, but I do not agree that ducks should be placed on a plane with,
for example, deer on an over-populated range. One sporting editor remarks that
since duck hunters bag “one duck for every four shells fired, it becomes obvious
that they are alleviating the meat shortage at the average cost of about eight cents
a pound.” Hunters who can bag duck meat for eight cents a pound are few and
far between. Dressed for the table, a two pound duck (a good average for mixed
bags) weighs one and one-quarter pounds, and provides about a pound of meat
(including skin and fat). Shooting dollar-a-box shells, 40 to the bag of ten ducks,
the cost of duck meat is sixteen cents a pound in shells alone. But few hunters
can shoot ducks on the cost of shells; most must travel a distance to their duck
marsh, and the cost in gas, and wear on car and tires is just as much a part of
the price of duck meat as brass and powder. Even in this fine duck hunting region
duck meat costs the hunter from twenty-five cents to a dollar a pound. Add a
guide, club fees, or a rented canoe, as many gunners do, and the cost per pound
mounts. Most hunters will admit that duck meat is luxury fare. Whatever the
cost per pound may be in dollars and cents (which are plentiful these days) the
real cost of wild duck meat is in gas, brass, powder and rubber — all vital war
necessities.

The supposed threat of overpopulation. — First, it is true that there has been a
general build-up in waterfowl numbers these last few years. To say, however,
that failure now to reap the harvest of these gains means destruction of the
natural food supply and range is to admit that our restoration program is sadly
off balance. Here on the breeding grounds we are still restoring wasted marsh-
lands; we are developing new management techniques; we are controlling the
spring fires so disastrous to nesting waterfowl; we are shooting crows wherever

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

WILD LIFE CONSERVATION

213

their spring nesting concentrations prove a heavy drain on waterfowl. Have we
gone too far in this? Have we already produced more ducks than the country can
maintain? The answer is, of course, no. One hears of three-fold and four-fold
increases in waterfowl numbers. Increase over what? Isn’t it increase over the
lowest figure in North American waterfowl history? Populations are still far
short of the numbers that poured down the flyways in a not so distant past, even
short of the goal set at the beginning of the present restoration program. Among
the members of this small marsh community, and they include many duck hunters
and guides, there is the general feeling that “this will be a good year for ducks;
with the scarcity of shells and fewer hunters, this will be the year ducks can make
a real come-back.” We say this because we know, despite the annual reports of
vast gains, that the marshes reaching from our doorsteps to the horizon are still
sadly underpopulated with nesting waterfowl. There are Mallards, yes, and Pin-
tails. But ask anyone on the breeding grounds about the Canvasback, Redhead,
Lesser Scaup or Ruddy Duck. They have increased; they have been saved from
extinction for the present; but their numbers are still distressingly small and their
future uncertain. This prairie marsh, many like it, and still others to be restored
could maintain far more breeding ducks than now return each spring from the
wintering grounds.

Mallards, Pintails, Black Ducks, and other species in some localities will feed
upon cultivated crops this autumn and winter. Even during the years of the
“duck depression,” damage to grain fields in some localities was a problem. Such
farm feeding is not evidence of depleted natural food supplies. In this region.
Mallards and Pintails annually feed on stubble fields, despite the fact that their
loafing waters provide a plentiful stand of wild duck food. Now, as in the past,
this is purely a local problem; it will not be relieved by placing control in the
hands of gunners. Crop damage is most serious in a delayed harvest. This year
the harvest in some regions will be delayed because of shortage of man-power.
If duck hunters truly have the welfare of ducks and crops in mind, they will give
their spare time to help with the harvest in regions where there is a combination
of man shortage and farm-feeding w’aterfowl.

I doubt that any force can again bring wild ducks to the market table. There has
always been, even during the scarcity of ducks, an underground traffic in wild
duck, but the stringent laws and the strong public opinion against the sale of wild
ducks are such that talk of the return of the market hunter seems the mere shout
of the propagandist, not a valid threat.

Recreational value of duck hunting. — Most of us agree that duck hunting is
one of the finest “escapes from the toils of life.” But it is doubtful whether the
recreational value of duck hunting in war time is worth the cost in time and in
essential war materials. Duck hunting as recreation this autumn is a matter for
the individual and his conscience. However few or many shells he may be allowed,
it is for him to decide how many shells he will use, and how much time he can
spare from the task at hand.

* * * *

This last decade has seen a remarkable cycle of events. The danger of the ex-
termination of many duck species was recognized nine or ten years ago. A tre-
mendous effort was then begun in the United States and Canada to restore the
dwindling populations, and ducks have since shown encouraging gains. As part
of the restoration program, stringent restrictions were placed upon seasons, number
taken, and methods of hunting. Some of these have recently been relaxed. There
is now pressure for further relaxation — for longer seasons, bigger bags, for the
return of live decoys and baiting, and for the opening of refuges to shooting. Such
demands are a natural accompaniment to the up-swing in waterfowl numbers.
But these demands are coming while we are at war, and I doubt whether there

214

THE WILSON BULLETIN

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

are hunters and shells enough to constitute any serious present threat to water-
fowl. The real threat is not in the number of ducks which might be shot this
autumn but from war-time changes in policy which might seriously affect ducks
in a post-war world.

As this issue of the Wilson Bulletin appears, the regulations for the new season
are on paper. We have confidence in those who plan them. We are content to
count officialdom among our members, as indeed it is; yet if we as ornithologists
fail to put forward sound, democratic opposition to the sportsman pressure groups,
we are no less responsible for imprudent changes in policy than the groups which
forced them through. It is our responsibility, individually and collectively, to keep
informed on the waterfowl situation just as we keep up to-date on developments
in nomenclature or life history study. And it is our obligation through the remain-
ing years of war and after the war to take an active part in the planning and
maintaining of sound waterfowl policy. — Albert Hochbaum.

Wildlife Conservation Committee
Frederick N. Hamerstrom, Jr., Chairman

REPORT OF THE AUDITING COMMITTEE

The Auditing Committee has checked the accounts of Gustav Swanson, Trea-
surer of the Wilson Club for 1942, and the financial report published in The Wilson
Bulletin for March, 1943, and hereby expresses its approval of the state of these
accounts.

Respectfully submitted,

Charles F. Walker

August 12, 1943 Thomas H. Langlois

AFFILIATED SOCIETIES

We are glad to report that the Wisconsin Society for Ornithology has recently
voted to affiliate with us, and we hope to have an account of their organization in
a later issue.

An increasing demand for news of the affiliated societies has come from the
Wilson Club membership. Suggestions and data should be sent to Dr. Gordon M.
Meade of Rochester, New York, Chairman of the Committee on Affiliated Societies.
We present below brief accounts of the history and aims of. the Virginia Ornitho-
logical Society and the Inland Bird Banding Association.

The Virginia Society of Ornithology was founded in December, 1929. Be-
cause of transportation difficulties the annual meeting was not held in 1942, and
it is doubtful, for the same reason, whether it can be held this year. Activities
therefore, have centered around the publication of the mimeographed bulletin The
Raven, and the Society has such an enthusiastic group of members that the can-
cellation of the annual meeting has had no serious effects. Local groups in such
cities as Norfolk, Richmond, and Roanoke continue to get together for meetings
and for field trips.

The officers of the Society are: President, A. O. English, Roanoke; Vice-presi-
dent, William B. Mcllwaine Jr., Petersburg; Secretary, Dr. Florence S. Hague,
Sweet Briar; Treasurer, T. L. Engleby, Roanoke.

In spite of the fact that bird observation in Virginia goes back through three
centuries, only certain small areas of the state have been thoroughly worked.
There is a great deal still to be learned about distribution in Virginia — even of
some of the more common birds — and the chief task which the Society of Orni-
thology has set itself is the gathering of data on which an accurate and compre-
hensive publication on the birds of Virginia can be based. — Florence S. Hague,
Secretary.

September, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 3

LIFE MEMBERS

215

The Inland Bird Banding Association held a meeting in conjunction with the
Wm. I. Lyon Bird-banding Council at the Chicago Academy of Sciences on March
20, 1943. A full day and evening program on bird banding and other bird studies
was given. The following officers were elected: president, C. C. Ludwig, Lansing,
Michigan; vice-president and treasurer, M. J. Magee, Sault Ste Marie, Michigan;
vice-president, Philip A. DuMont, Evanston, Illinois; vice-president, Paul A.
Downing, Highland Park, Illinois; secretary, O. A. Stevens, Fargo, North Dakota.

A history of the Inland Association was published in the Wilson Bulletin for
September, 1940. A news letter. Inland Bird Banding News, issued quarterly since
1929, was last year changed to a bi-monthly. Arrangements have been made with
the Eastern Bird-banding Association whereby members of each association receive
the news letters of both organizations. One feature of the Inland News during the
past two years has been a series of summaries of the progress of banding in the
various states of the Inland region. — O. A. Stevens, Secretary.

NEW LIFE MEMBERS

Myron T. Sturgeon became inter-
ested in birds while an undergraduate
at Mount Union College, Alliance, Ohio.
He majored in geology and paleontol-
ogy, receiving the Ph.D. from Ohio
State University in 1936. He is at pres-
ent assistant professor of geology at
Michigan State Normal College, Ypsi-
lanti, where he gives courses in orni-
thology as well as in geology and
general zoology. During the summers
he assists with the class in Game Orni-
thology given by the Michigan Depart-
ment of Conservation Training School
at Higgins Lake, and serves as assistant
geologist for the Geological Survey of
Ohio.

George Mtksch Sutton graduated
from Bethany College and received the
Ph.D. from Cornell University. He was
Assistant Curator of Birds at Carnegie
Museum 1919-1924, and State Orni-
thologist of Pennsylvania 1925-1929.
He has been a very active field man
and has published many papers on the
life histories, plumage, and taxonomy
of birds, based on the data gathered
during his expeditions to widely sep-
arated localities from northern Hudson
Bay to southern Mexico. He is, of
course, not only an ornithologist, but
an outstanding painter of bird pictures.
He has been Curator of Birds at Cor-
nell since 1932 and is now on leave of
absence serving as Captain in the U. S.
.Army Air Corps.

TO OUR CONTRIBUTORS

Our members are asked to submit articles for publication in the Bulletin.
Manuscripts will be accepted with the understanding that they have not been
published or accepted for publication elsewhere.

Manuscript. Manuscripts should be typed on paper of good quality and of
letter size (8J4 x 11). Write on one side only and use double spacing. The title
should be brief and carefully constructed so as to indicate the subject clearly.
Ordinarily the scientific names of the birds treated should be given and should
appear early in the article. Most articles should have a brief summary at the end.

Bibliography. Literature referred to in the text should be cited by author’s
name, year of publication, and exact pages of the particular reference. Such
citations should ordinarily be listed in full at the end of the paper.

Illustrations. Photographic prints, to reproduce well as half-tones, should
have good contrast and detail. Please send prints unmounted, and attach to
each print a brief but adequate legend. Do not write heavily on the backs of
photographs.

Proof. Galley proof will be submitted to authors and must be returned
promptly. Expensive alterations in copy after the type has been set must be
charged to the author.

Reprints. The Club is unable to furnish free reprints to authors. Arrange-
ments will be made, however, for reprints to be made at cost. A scale of
costs, based on the number of pages, is given below.

REPRINT SCHEDULE OF THE WILSON BULLETIN

Each

Additional

1 page

2 pp.

4 pp.

8 pp.

12 pp.

16 pp.

4 pp.

100 copies

... $1.95

$2.10

$2.40

$4.15

$5.90

$7.00

85c

Each additional
100 copies

70c

85c

1.40

2.20

2.90

3.50

55c

Covers: $3.85 for first 100 copies; $1.40 for additional 100 copies.

Charge will be made for a minimum of 100 reprints.

Orders for reprints should accompany the returned galley proof. Contributors
are asked not to pay for reprints in advance. Bills for reprints, transportation,
and tax are sent to authors by the press.

1

I

ip

Vol. 55 DECEMBER, 1943 No. 4

t.

f

,

WiX^m PuUetm

Published by the

l^ilfion d^rnitfjological Clui)

Ann Arbor, Michigan

CONTENTS

Canada Jay

Fred G. Bard PI. 4

Relationships of the Canada Jays in the Northwest

John W. Aldrich

217

A Study of Wild and Hand Reared Killdeers Emma Davis

223

Ring-billed Gulls of the Great Lakes

Frederick E. Ludwig

234

General Notes

245

Editorial

248

Ornithological Literature

249

Membership Roll

257

Reports

282

Index to Volume 55, 1943

284

THE WILSON BULLETIN

is published quarterly in March, June, September, and December, as the official
organ of the Wilson Ornithological Club, at Ann Arbor, Michigan, and is sent to
all members not in arrears for dues. The subscription price is $2.00 a year,
invariably in advance, in the United States. Single numbers, SO cents. Outside
of the United States the rate is $2.25. Single numbers, 60 cents. Subscriptions
should be sent to the Treasurer.

All articles and communications for publication, books and publications for
review, exchanges, and claims for lost or undelivered copies of the magazine, should
be addressed to the Editor.

The current issue of The Wilson Bulletin is printed by the Ann Arbor Press,
Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Entered as second class matter July 13, 1916, at Ann Arbor, Michigan, under
Act of Congress of March 3, 1879.

THE WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

Founded December 3, 1888. Named after Alexander Wilson, the first American
ornithologist.

The officers for the current year are:

President — S. Charles Kendeigh, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois.
First Vice-President — Olin Sewall Pettingill, Jr., Carleton College, Northfield,
Minnesota.

Treasurer — Milton B. Trautman, Stone Laboratory, Put-in-Bay, Ohio.

Secretary — Maurice Brooks, University of West Virginia, Morgantown, West
Virginia.

Editor — Josselyn Van Tyne, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.
Associate Editors — Margaret M. Nice and F. N. Hamerstrom, Jr.

Assistant Editor— G. Reeves Butchart.

Membership dues per calendar year are: sustaining membership, $S.00; active
membership, $3.00; associate membership, $2.00.

Plate 4

Prince Albert, Sask., April 7, 1940

Photographed by Fred G. Bard

CANADA JAY

THE WILSON BULLETIN

A QUARTERLY MAGAZINE OF ORNITHOLOGY
Published by the Wilson Ornithological Club

Vol. 55 DECEMBER, 1943 No. 4

RELATIONSHIPS OF THE CANADA JAYS IN THE
NORTHWEST

BY JOHN W. ALDRICH

I 'HE separation of the North American jays of the genus Perisoreus ^
into two distinct species seems to be accepted by most ornitholo-
gists. The A. O. U. Committee on Nomenclature has retained the list-
ing of two species through the latest edition of the Check-list (1931:220-
221), although other authors, including Howe (1902:105), had ap-
parently with good reason, accepted a conspecific status for these birds.
Hellmayr (1934:66-70) also treats the forms as conspecific; Miller
(1943:117) argues in favor of two separate species.

There seems to be no evidence that in habits, call notes, or habitat,
there is any significant difference distinguishing one population from
any other. Furthermore, in size (see Table 1) and in coloration the
populations seem to intergrade geographically in a manner typical of
racial variation. Apparently the two characters that have been as-
sumed to be specific, separating the obscurus from the canadensis
group, are the immaculate underparts and the white shaft streaks of
the dorsal plumage in obscurus (Ridgway, 1904:365). I have found,
however, that specimens from central northern Washington in the Bio-
logical Surveys Collections^ demonstrate a continuous intergradation of
these characters, and a total of 42 specimens from central northern
Washington and central southern British Columbia not only completely
bridge the gap between the obscurus and canadensis complexes, but
also represent an undescribed race, easily separable from all others,
which I propose to call:

Perisoreus canadensis connexus^ new subspecies
COLUMBIAN JAY

Type. — Adult $, No. 271630, U. S. National Museum (Biological
Surveys Collection) ; Bald Mountain, northwestern Okanogan County,
Washington, altitude 6,800 feet; September 6, 1920; George G. Cant-
well; original number 1062.

I!), ^14

1 For use of the generic name Perisoreus in place of Cractes (Billberg, 1828:14),

218

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 4

Subspecific characters. — In adult plumage, similar to Perisoreiis
canadensis fumifrons, but larger of wing, and slightly darker above,
with white areas of head more extensive and less clouded with smoky
brownish, entire underparts more whitish; like the neighboring Peri-
soreus canadensis bicolor, but darker above and more whitish below,
with white areas of head more restricted, and dorsal white shaft streak-
ing more pronounced; approaching Perisoreus canadensis griseus, but
slightly larger, with more grayish dorsal coloration, and white shaft
streaks reduced, white areas of head more extensive, and underparts
more suffused with brownish gray; different from Perisoreus canadensis
albescens chiefly in the darker dorsal coloration; like Perisoreus cana-
densis pacificus, of central western British Columbia, but paler above
and below, with white areas of head more extensive, and more pro-
nounced dorsal white shaft streaking.

In juvenal plumage connexus differs from fumifrons in being light-
er throughout; from bicolor, it is distinguishable chiefly by the color
of the head, which in bicolor exhibits considerable whitish on the occi-
put, and in connexus is entirely gray; it is somewhat lighter above than
griseus, particularly with respect to head color; it is darker, especially
on the head, then albescens, I have seen no juvenile specimens of paci-
ficus.

Measurements. — Adult male (15 specimens from Okanogan
County, Washington) : wing, 142.0-lSl.S (146.7) mm.; tail, 136.0-152.0
(143.4); total culmen, 23.0-25.5 (24.4); tarsus, 34.0-37.8 (35.9); mid-
dle toe without claw, 16.0-18.'5 (17.8). Adult female (10 specimens
from Okanogan County, Washington): wing, 140.0-149.0 (144.4); tail,
135.0-152.0 (140.8); total culmen, 23.0-25.5 (24.5); tarsus, 34.0-36.5
(35.3); middle toe without claw, 15.5-18.0 (17.2).

Range. — Resident in the Lodgepole Pine-Engelmann Spruce Associ-
ation, Canadian Life Zone, in the mountains of central northern
Washington, central southern, central, and central eastern British Co-
lumbia, and central western Alberta.

Discussion. — Specimens from Glacier, Whatcom County, Wash-
ington , are somewhat intermediate, having slightly more dusky

used by Ridgway (1904:750) and by Hartert and Steinbacher (1932:22), I am guided by
the opinion of the A. O. U. Committee on Nomenclature (1908:394).

2 The 12 critical specimens in this collection were taken by Walter P. Taylor and
George G. Cantwell, in their “Boundary Expedition” across northern Washington in the
summer and early autumn of 1920.

For the loan of additional specimens I am indebted to: Jossel^ Van Tyne, of the
Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, for an excellent series of birds collected
by Leonard Wing in the summer of 1940 at Conconully, in Okanogan County, Wash-
ington; Stanley G. Jewett, who kindly sent me specimens which he took in northern
Washington; Major Allan Brooks, who lent important specimens from British Columbia;
and Alden H. Miller, of the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California,
for topotypes of P. c. pacificus.

John W.
Aldrich

CANADA JAYS

219

TABLE 1

Measurements (in mm.) of Perisoreus

Subspecies

Wing

Tail

Total

Culmen

Tarsus

Middle toe
without
claw

cT

ohscurus

142.5-147.0

138.5-143.0

23.5-25.5

34.5-36.0

17.0-17.8

( 5)

(144.9)

(141.4)

(24.4)

(35.3)

(17.4)

griseus

137.5-149.5

130.0-142.5

22.0-25.5

33.0-37.5

16.0-18.0

(31)

(143.0)

(136.7)

(23.7)

(35.3)

(16.9)

connexus

142.0-151.5

136.0-152.0

23.0-25.5

34.0-37.8

16.0-18.5

(15)

(146.7)

(143.4)

(24.4)

(35.9)

(17.8)

rathbuni

136.0-143.0

129.0-134.0

22.8-25.0

33.5-37.0

16.5-17.5

( 6)

(139.9)

(131.3)

(23.7)

(35.4)

(17.0)

albescens

143.0-148.5

141.5-148.0

22.0-27.0

35.5-38.0

16.0-18.0

. (14)

(145.6)

(144.0)

(24.8)

(36.7)

(17.0)

bicolor

138.5-157.0

137.0-152.0

23.0-27.5

35.0-38.5

16.0-18.5

(22)

(146.5)

(143.6)

(25.1)

(37.0)

(17.1)

fumifrons

138.5-148.0

138.0-149.5

23.5-27.5

34.0-40.0

15.5-18.5

(40)

(142.4)

(144.5)

(25.6)

(37.1)

(16.9)

capitalis

146.5-159.5

137.0-153.0

25.5-27.5

36.0-37.5

16.0-18.5

(18)

(152.1)

(144.0)

(26.2)

(36.8)

(17.6)

$

obscurus

132.5-139.5

126.5-136.5

22.0-25.0

33.0-36.0

15.5-17.5

(12)

(136.6)

(130.8)

(23.2)

(34.5)

(16.7)

griseus

135.0-143.5

130.0-140.5

22.0-25.0

33.0-36.0

15.0-18.0

(24)

(140.0)

(135.0)

(23.5)

(34.4)

(16.0)

connexus

140.0-149.0

135.0-152.0

23.0-25.5

34.0-36.5

15.5-18.0

(10)

(144.4)

(140.8)

(24.5)

(35.3)

(17.2)

rathbuni

133.0-140.0

128.5-131.0

22.5-24.5

34.5-35.0

15.5-17.5

( 6)

(136.4)

(129.8)

(23.5)

(34.8)

(16.5)

albescens

137.0-143.0

133.0-145.0

23.0-27.0

34.5-37.0

14.5-17.5

. (15)

(140.5)

(138.3)

(24.6)

(35.7)

(16.1)

bicolor

140.0-149.0

136.0-150.0

22.8-25.5

34.5-38.5

15.5-18.0

(25)

(143.9)

(142.1)

(24.3)

(36.2)

(16.4)

fumifrons

132.0-142.0

132.5-145.5

23.0-27.0

33.5-37.5

15.0-18.0

(39)

(136.9)

(138.9)

(24.5)

(35.7)

(16.3)

capitalis

143.0-157.0

137.0-148.0

25.0-27.5

35.0-38.0

16.0-19.0

(12)

(149.5)

(142.0)

(26.6)

(36.9)

(17.0)

Figures in parentheses under the subspecies name indicate the number of specimens
measured.

wash below, and white shaft streaks less pronounced than typical
griseus. However, in these characters, as well as in the reduction in
amount of white on the head, they are closer to griseus than to con-
nexus.

(The distribution of the various races in Western North America is
shown on Map 1. The distribution of the eastern races seems to have
been adequately worked out by Austin, 1932:157.)

P. c. bicolor (Miller, 1933:289) extends into northeastern Washing-
ton and southeastern British Columbia, from northern Idaho; and spec-
imens referable to that race have been taken as far west as eastern Oka-
nogan County (Tunk Mountain), Washington, and Okanogan Lake,

220

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Map 1. Distribution of western races of Perisoreus canadensis. Solid dots indi-
cate localities of one or more specimens examined in the present study; circles
represent other records of occurrence; and dots enclosed by circles are type lo-
calities.

British Columbia, where this race evidently intergrades rather abruptly
with connexus. Southwestward in the Cascades the transition from
connexus to griseus apparently also is rather abrupt. The type speci-
men of griseus came from Keechelus Lake in Kittitas County, Washing-
ton, and birds from Mount Stewart seem to be perfectly typical of that

John W.
Aldrich

CANADA JAYS

221

race. A single specimen from the head of Big Creek near Lake Chelan
is as dusky below as connexus, but with respect to dorsal and head col-
oration is perfectly typical of griseus, and probably on the whole is
closer to that race, as is also a juvenile specimen from Lucerne on Lake
Chelan. The surprising thing is, as Miller (1943:117) has pointed out,
that there is not complete intergradation between griseus and bicolor in
Oregon, though their ranges approach one another there rather closely.
It is worthy of note, however, that specimens from the Maury Mountains
and Howard in central Oregon, although definitely referable to bicolor,
are lighter on the underparts than typical birds of that race and sug-
gest a partial intergradation with griseus at that point. The amazing
plasticity of this species in the northwestern United States is indicated
by the occurrence of no less than five races in the state of Washington.
The type localities of four of these are within the state.

Specimens from the Canadian Rockies in British Columbia and
western Alberta are perplexing in that they are geographically situated
within a circle formed by the five races — fumijrons, albescens, bicolor,
connexus, and pad ficus, and, therefore exhibit combined characters
which have induced some investigators, including Miller (1943:118), to
refer them to canadensis. Such a course, however, postulates a discon-
tinuous range for canadensis, since present investigations show that
albescens intervenes. Not that this in itself militates against consid-
ering them the same as canadensis, but the birds are not like typical
canadensis of southeastern Canada and northeastern United States,
being distinctly more grayish above and below than that race. They
are much too dark to be called albescens, averaging even slightly darker
than fumifrons, from which race they differ also in having a more whit-
ish forehead. They are distinctly paler than typical pad ficus (Miller,
1943:117) from the Rainbow Mountains of British Columbia. Al-
though not typical of connexus, averaging somewhat darker below,
they seem to be closer to that race than to any other, and have been so
placed.

Specimens from northwestern British Columbia, as far south as
Thutade Lake, seem to be referable to fumifrons, although Swarth
(1922:229) thought specimens from Telegraph Creek differed from
fumifrons, and referred them to canadensis. The area of intergradation
between fumifrons and connexus is apparently broad in that region, and
pronounced interdigitation of characters undoubtedly occurs. This is
also the case in western Mackenzie, between fumifrons and albescens.

Literature Cited
American Ornithologists’ Union

1908 Fourteenth supplement to the American Ornithologists’ Union check-list
of North American birds. Auk, 25:343-399.

1931 Check-list of North American birds, 4th ed. Lancaster, Pa.

222

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Austin, O. L., Jr.

1932 The birds of Newfoundland Labrador. Mem. Nuttall Ornith. Club, 7.

Billberg, G. J.

1828 Synopsis faunae Scandinaviae 1 (2): 1-208 (Photostat copy in U. S.
Nat. Mus.)

Hartert, E., and F. Stetnbacher.

1932 Die Vogel der palaarktischen Fauna, Erganzungsband. Berlin.

Hellmayr, C. E.

1934 Catalogue of birds of the Americas. Field Mus, Nat. Hist., Zool. Ser.,
13 (7):1-531.

Howe, R. H., Jr.

1902 A study of the genus Perisoreus. Osprey, 6:103-106.

Miller, A. H.

1933 The Canada jays of northern Idaho. Trans. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist.,
7:289-297.

1943 A new race of Canada jay from coastal British Columbia. Condor,
45:117-118.

Ridgway, R.

1904 The birds of North and Middle America. Bull. U. S. Nat. Mus., 50
(3): 1-801.

SWARTH, H. S.

1922 Birds and mammals of the Stikine River region of northern British
Columbia and southeastern Alaska. Univ. Calif. Publ. Zool., 24:125-
314.

Fish and Wildlife Service, U. S. Department of the Interior,
Washington, D. C.

September 27, 1943

To the Editor of The Wilson Bulletin:

I have received so many inquiries as to when the next volume of my series of
Bulletins on the Life Histories of North American Birds will appear, that I am
reporting, for the benefit of the readers of The Wilson Bulletin, that no more
volumes need be expected to appear until after the war. There are, however, two
completed volumes in Washington, awaiting publication; and another, the 17th, is
nearing completion here. These three include all the birds on the 1931 Check-list
from the jays to the vireos, inclusive.

I am now starting to gather information for the 18th volume, which is to
contain the wood warblers, and am appealing to my friends, who have so kindly
sent me photographs and notes for the previous volumes, to send me similar
material now for the warblers. I am very grateful for what help I have had in
the past in this cooperative work, and would greatly appreciate further contri-
butions.

140 High Street,
Taunton, Massachusetts

A. C. Bent

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

THE WILSON BULLETIN

223

A STUDY OF WILD AND HAND REARED KILLDEERS

BY EMMA DAVIS

IT has long been accepted that, in common with many other shore
birds, the male of the Killdeer (Oxyechus vocijerus) takes part in
incubating the eggs and perhaps in caring for the young. Audubon
(1835:193) in writing of this species uses the expression, “the parents
who sit alternately on the eggs,” but he cites no specific observation.
The statement was apparently accepted without substantiation until
Pickwell (1930:501-502) reported two incubating males which he had
collected in 1929. In the Finger Lakes District of New York, I have
carried on an investigation of this and related problems by intensive
observation of marked birds at six nests and of unmarked birds at nine
other nests during three successive breeding seasons. One of these nests
was that of birds reared in captivity. I am deeply indebted to A. A.
Allen of Cornell University for help and guidance in my work.

Wild Birds

During the first season I confined myself largely to a close study
of three nests. From an observation blind set up within three feet of
each nest, I made daily observations as long as the nests were occupied.

Egg laying and incubation. I found the first nest April 19, when it
contained only one egg. The second egg was laid April 20, the third
April 22, and the fourth April 23. On May 15, while incubation was
in progress, I marked one of the attending birds by spraying its breast
with red color as it sat on the nest. It soon became clear that as the
period neared its close the marked bird was assuming the greater pro-
portion of the task. At 9:45 a.m. on May 20 all four eggs had hatched,
giving an incubation period of about 27 days.

Exchanging places. None of the Killdeers I observed made any
elaborate ceremony of changing over. When returning to resume in-
cubation after an “off” period, the mate would usually announce its
coming by a signal call in the air, a long dee-ee-ee with rising inflection.
The sitting bird would answer with a loud killdee killdee and flutter
its wings but remain on the nest; or it would call pup pup pup softly
and toss dried weed stems about. The mate would always alight about
30 or 40 feet away and come on foot to the nest. Sometimes when it
reached the nest the sitting bird would rise and walk away. At other
times it would remain on the nest until it appeared that the mate with
lowered head and breast was shoving it off. Both birds engaged in soft
duckings as they exchanged places. Often the sitting bird would run
to meet the mate when it alighted, and the pair would copulate. Then
the mate would go to the nest and begin incubation. At other times the
sitting bird would leave the nest before the mate returned and, after
running 30 or 40 feet, would fly away. The length of the attentive

224

THE WILSON BULLETIN

Deoimber, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

periods varied from 15 to 90 minutes. The bird relieved of duty some-
times remained near, feeding within a radius of a hundred yards, or
standing quietly within a few feet of the nest. Sometimes it flew off
an eighth of a mile to a common feeding ground where several Killdeers
were usually to be found.

Behavior on the nest. During the long periods of sitting, the Kill-
deers played with the nesting materials. The sitting bird would pick
up dried stems of weeds and toss them about or, taking one of the
small stones that rimmed the nest in its beak, it would lean over and
repeatedly tap the ground with the stone. Sometimes it relaxed and
slept. On hot days the incubating bird often stood over the eggs instead
of sitting. The birds altered the position of the eggs at times by vigorous
movements of the wings and feet. From the blind I could hear the eggs
tapping against each other. Rarely the bird half rose and moved them
with its beak. When the chicks began peeping in the shell the parent
would cluck quietly as if in answer.

Hatching. At the nests I studied, the Killdeer chicks could be heard
peeping in the shell from 18 to 48 hours before they emerged. My
records show that pipping of shells occurred from 18 to 36 hours before
the birds actually hatched. The period from the hatching of the first
chick to the hatching of the last varied from 6 to 16 hours. The parents
picked up the shell and flew away with it almost immediately after
the hatching.

Care oj young. On the day the eggs hatched I enclosed a space
around the nest about six feet in diameter with a 12-inch fence of
roofing-tin so that the young could not escape. They were confined
within this area for 18 days. Fly larvae for food and water for drinking
and bathing were provided.

Since Killdeers almost invariably approach the nest on foot, the
fence presented a real obstacle to this pair, but they soon solved the
problem by hopping to the top from the outside and down again on the
inside. Here they attended their offspring, readily accepting the un-
natural conditions. Near nightfall, however, on the first six days, they
made frantic endeavors to lead the young away from the nest site. One
parent would come into the enclosure, give the brood call, a harsh pup
pup pup, then hop to the top of the fence and down on the outside,
obviously expecting the brood to follow. It would continue this per-
formance for an hour or more, pausing only for brief periods of brooding.
There was a flat stone about two inches high within the’ enclosure, which
the parents used for a “take off.” After watching several tirnes, the
downy young began running to the same stone, flapping their diminutive
wings and trying to jump over the fence at the spot where the parent
had disappeared. I did not observe whether these performances con-
tinued longer than the six days. At night the parent could be found

Emma

Davis

KILLDEERS

225

brooding the young within the enclosure. Apparently no effort was ever
made by the adults at this or other nests similarly enclosed to lift the
young over the obstruction, as some species of rails do (Pettingill,
1938:414; Allen, 1934:202). In my observations of Killdeers I saw
nothing to indicate that the young were ever carried by their parents
as suggested by Pickwell (1925:492, 496).

Brooding, guarding against enemies, and warning of danger appear
to be the extent of the parents’ responsibilities. These duties are per-
formed with a high degree of success. Of five broods I confined within
uncovered enclosures, with no protection against hawks or other preda-
tors, only one brood came to grief. The indications were that these
young had been eaten by a cat.

Figure 1. Young Killdeers within the enclosing fence the day after hatching.

For the first few days after the eggs hatched, both parents were
on hand; as the chicks grew older they were left more and more to
the care of one parent, but the mate very soon appeared whenever the
bird on duty gave the danger call, a sudden sharp and rapid dee-dee-
dee-dee.

Attentiveness at other nests. At the second and third nests in 1931
my results were the same as at the first. By marking for identification
I found one bird of each pair to be the more attentive during the latter
part of the incubation period and afterwards to the young. At two nests

226

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

in 1932, observed through the incubation period, I again noted one of
each pair to be the more attentive. Circumstances prevented me from
collecting these “attentive” individuals to ascertain their sex. The
sexes in this species are practically identical in plumage and size. Hiett
and Flickenger (1929:321), after observing unmarked pairs in the
mating act, concluded that female Killdeers are larger than the males.
But the measurements of adult males and females given by Ridgway
(1919:100) indicate a variation in size too slight to be relied upon for
field identification of sexes.

Hand Reared Killdeers 1932

From each of the two nests in 1932, I took three eggs as soon as I
saw signs of hatching and put them into an incubator. All but one of
the eggs hatched normally.

I kept the young Killdeers in large cardboard cartons for several
days. Small, portable brooders furnished warmth. When I lowered
the brooder into a box the young would run to meet it, uttering the
soft dee dee note I had heard used by wild Killdeer chicks at the begin-
ning of a brooding period. They would rest under the brooder a few
minutes, run out to eat or drink, and then run back to the brooder.

At first I gave them only fly larvae for food. When they were 10
days old I offered them lean beef ground fine and hard boiled egg run
through a sieve. This proved acceptable and became their staple diet.
Occasionally I added sour milk and ground liver. The food was placed
in shallow pans, and an abundant supply was kept before the birds at
all times. Water and gravel were always available.

Five newly hatched Killdeers picked up in the field were put in with
the incubator birds and reared with them. Each of the captive birds
was banded. At the end of a week I put the young in a turkey pen.
This was placed above the ground on uprights, thus minimizing the
danger of predators. The walls on two sides and part of the roof were
replaced by half-inch wire netting to ensure light and air. The floor
space (3x18 feet) was spread with a thick layer of garden soil, sand,
and gravel. Wide, shallow pans of water made tolerable wading pools.
An observation blind set up beside the pen made it possible to watch
what went on inside at any time.

One of the birds, a weakling at birth, died when seven days old;
another died when six weeks old from an infection which entered by
way of an injured toe. The others thrived and grew into normal healthy
Killdeers.

When cold weather came. Professor Allen kindly offered to winter
the birds in a brooder house that gave adequate protection and oppor-
tunity for exercise. The place was not heated, but the drinking water
was kept from freezing by the use of small burners under the pans. The
winter food consisted of a commercial pheasant meal with generous
additions of hard-boiled egg.

Emma

Davis

KILLDEERS

227

Hand Reared Killdeers 1933

All but one of the birds survived the winter, and with no significant
loss of weight. In early March I again assumed their care, housing
them in the same quarters they had occupied the summer before.

Courtship behavior. By the middle of April all of the birds were
exhibiting what appeared to be courtship behavior. At times they would
crouch on the ground and raising the tail and hind part of the body
would sway slightly from side to side while uttering a loud rapid
kUliee killiee, a call with a different rhythm from the usual killdee kill-
dee. At other times they picked up from the floor of the coop the small
stones commonly used for nesting material by Killdeers in this locality
and dropped them at random. There was also considerable fighting
among the members of the flock. So far I could discern no appreciable
differences in behavior pattern. Experimentally I segregated any two
that showed interest in each other, not knowing whether they were
male or female.

Making the nest. On May 7, after three weeks of these seemingly
aimless performances, one of the birds began definite nest making. For
three days bird No. 107 had defended a certain small mound of earth
where it would sit in the incubating position and give the loud mating
call of killiee killiee. In making the nest the bird crouched low on this
spot rotating slowly as it scratched the dirt loose with its feet and threw
it out of the scraped area with vigorous backward kicks, all the while
loudly calling killiee killiee. At intervals it sat quietly in the nest giving
the soft pup pup call which is used during incubating and brooding.
I cannot say how long was required for the actual scraping since it was
impK)ssible for me to observe continuously on that day, but on frequent
visits from 8 a.m., when the nest making began, until 8 p.m., I found
the bird occupied with the nest. At 8 p.m. the nest cavity was the size
and shape usual in Killdeer nests, but it had no lining. The next day.
May 8, I removed the other birds and placed them in a different cage,
then segregated each in turn with No. 107. During this time No. 107
continued to run to the nest at frequent intervals, assume the courtship
posture, and give the courtship call. It also continued the scraping and
kicking motions. On May 12 when I put No. 105 in the coop with
No. 107 these demonstrations ceased.

Mating behavior. On May 14 I saw the two segregated birds copu-
lating; No. 107, the bird that had made the nest, was unmistakably the
male. With none of the Killdeers I observed was the act of coition
either preceded or followed by a special ceremony; and it was seldom
accompanied by sound, never by fluttering of wings. Sometimes the
male ran to the female, who would stand motionless with lowered head
while he hopped lightly upon her back. Again the female would run

228

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

to the male, face away from him, and stand waiting. Conjunction was
very brief. Throughout the entire period of nest building and incuba-
tion, Killdeers copulate frequently; I have seen several pairs repeat the
act three or four times a day, sometimes twice within an hour. My
captive birds w’ere last seen copulating on the day the eggs hatched.
This pair, No. 105 and No. 107, were the only ones of the captive birds
to pair or make a nest although two of the other birds continued a
gradually diminishing courtship behavior for several weeks.

Egg-laying, incubation, and brooding. On May 17 the female con-
tributed a few small stones for the nest. I never saw the birds placing
these stones, but eventually the nest came to have a definite lining.
Sometimes, after incubation began, the female would get up from the
eggs and standing a foot or two away would toss the small stones over
her shoulder in the direction of the nest. On ^lay 19 the nest contained
the first egg. The next morning I found it in a far corner of the coop
with the shell broken, probably by a deer mouse. A second egg was
laid on May 22, a third on May 24, and a fourth on May 26. While
marking the eggs for identification I accidentally punctured the shell
of one, leaving only two in the nest. But on May 28 the female laid
her fifth egg. All five eggs had been perfect in shape and appeared to
be normal in size.

Figure 2. One of the captive-bred Killdeers feeding from the author’s hand.

Emma

Davis

KILLDEERS

229

During the laying stage the female had little concern for the nest.
She was seldom disturbed by my presence and would stand quietly
watching me. Often she ate from my fingers. The male would sneak to
the nest and cover the eggs when I drew near, but would tolerate my
hand at the nest and even permit me to lift one side of his body to
show the eggs to a visitor. On two occasions he lunged at me, but did
not strike me. As incubation progressed the female became more solici-
tous for the welfare of the nest, but she was never so uneasy as the
male. At this time both birds used the broken wing tactics when I
appeared, but would soon desist, and one would return quietly to the
nest even while I remained near. Observations were not continuous,
but visits were frequent enough to satisfy me that the male assumed
an equal share if not the greater part of the incubation duties.

At 6 A.M. on June 211 found two of the eggs hatched. Late in the
afternoon the two chicks had left the nest and had hopped over a
three-inch partition inadvertently left in the coop and were making no
effort to get back. For a time the female took care of the unhatched
egg while the male brooded the young. Presently she apparently lost
interest and merely looked on while the male hurried back and forth,
alternately brooding the young for a few seconds, and sitting on the
neglected egg. By 8:15 it seemed that he also had abandoned the egg;
I put it into the incubator, where it hatched at 8 a.m. June 22.

Figure 3. The male Killdeer brooding his four-day old offspring in the coop.

230

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1945
Vol. 55, No. 4

For the first two or three days the female assisted in brooding the
young. After that she left them almost completely in the care of the
male. She seldom brooded them, and she kept at a distance from them.
This behavior recalls the frequent absence of one parent from the nests
observed in the fields during the preceding two years. Yet she was
always ready to defend the young, giving the warning call and flying at
me if I made a motion to pick them up. The captive birds expressed
solicitude in the manner of wild birds but not to the same degree.

On June 29 three downy Killdeers which had hatched in the incu-
bator from eggs found in the field, were put into the coop. The adult
birds adopted them at once and gave all six birds the same care. They
continued to brood until the young were 23 days old.

The young. In appearance and behavior all three offspring of the
captive birds were entirely normal. They were not weighed until they
were nine weeks old, at which time their average weight (67.7 grams)
was 2.4 grams more than that of the three adopted birds. At seventeen
weeks their average weight (83 grams) was 0.5 grams less than that
of their parents taken at the same weighing. In the Cornell University
collection, five adult specimens averaged 93.3 grams; 14 adult speci-
mens in the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology collection aver-
aged 87.6 grams.^ Other measurements (culmen, tarsus, middle toe,
wing, and tail) of the captive bred birds at 17 weeks were very close
to the average given by Ridgway (1919:100) for 34 adult Killdeers.

Activities of the Young

Exercising, preening, and relaxing. When only a few hours old the
chicks run with surprising strength and swiftness. On the first day they
begin to stretch and flap their wings. At this age they also preen their
down. When sunning themselves in their hours of relaxation, the young
Killdeers from the day of hatching often assume the resting posi-
tion of loons, grebes and other primitive birds. At such times they sit
back on their heels, holding the body up at right angles to the long
outstretched tarsi. I have never seen adult Killdeers take this posture.
My notes do not record it after the nineteenth day.

Roosting. At night I always found my Killdeers standing or sitting
flat on the floor of the coop or in the water pan, though there was ample
opportunity for them to use perches from 6 inches to two feet high.
In winter they often sat flat in the straw that covered the floor. During
sleep the head was often turned and the beak slipped under the scapular
feathers. At nightfall Killdeers call to each other, especially when dis-
turbed. One will give the dee-ee-ee note with rising inflection; another

^ I am indebted to George M. Sutton of Cornell University and to Josselyn Van Tyne
of the University of Michigan for this information on the weights of wild Killdeers. The
weights are the averages of adult birds of both sexes collected during the summer.

Emma

Davis

KILLDEERS

231

Figure 4. A characteristic resting posture of young Killdeers.

will call killdee softly as if in answer. After a few seconds the calls are
repeated. At intervals the parents give the pup pup call used as the
brood call.

Brooding. Until they are two or three days old Killdeers are
brooded for short periods at frequent intervals. Thereafter, daytime
brooding is limited to the cool hours of morning and evening and to
spells of cloudiness or showers. The brood call of the young is a thin
peep peep, with a creaking sound difficult to describe but unmistakable.
The parent answers with a peep pup pup, peep pup pup. Frequently
the parent gives the call first as an invitation to brood. Then the
young answer and run to the parent. The note of the young as they
snuggle under the parent is a soft dee-ee with a purring quality.

Bathing. I observed a Killdeer taking a full bath when it was 1 7 days
old. The birds I watched usually began the bath by bobbing the whole
body in a series of up and down jerks that dipped the hind parts into the
water. At the same time the feathers were spread away from the vent.
Less frequently they sat down in the water and leaned from one side
to the other, then dipped in the beak and threw the water over the back
with a jerk of the head. The wings were not fluttered in the bath.

232

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Adults bathed several times a day in warm weather. Sometimes they
bathed when there were crystals of ice in the water. I never saw Kill-
deers take a dust bath.

Feeding. Within a few hours after they leave the shell Killdeers
begin to peck at small objects around the nest, but they do not really
eat until the second day. The parents that I observed never fed the
young or called attention to morsels of food. Several times I observed
a curious performance, first described in my notes when the incubator
birds were four weeks old and I had brought them a large pan of mud
scooped from the edge of a pond: “The bird stands in the pan and
presses the mud with one foot after the other. The foot that is patting
is extended in advance of the other. Meanwhile the bird watches the
mud closely. Now and then it probes with its beak. Often it brings
out a small worm or a larva. Sometimes the weight of the body is
added to the force exerted by the foot.” Later, on three occasions I saw
this soil patting by birds of different broods in the wet ground around
the water pan. Once I saw one of my captive Killdeers tapping as it
sat on its tarsi. Audubon (1835:194) mentions the Killdeer “patting
the moist ground to force out the inhabitants,” and Nice (1942:95)
also describes a Killdeer that “lightly pawed the soft mud with one
foot, then the other.” Kirkman (1937:84), Colthrup (1923:170), and
other writers have described this behavior as a method used by a num-
ber of gulls and shore birds to obtain worms.

(It was my expectation to continue experimenting with Killdeers in
the hope of rearing succeeding generations in captivity, but late in De-
cember, 1933, the birds I had were destroyed in a fire.)

Summary

The breeding habits of wild Killdeers were studied in 1931 and
1932 at 15 nests in the Finger Lakes District of New York.

The two sexes shared in incubation and care of the young. Sexes
were indistinguishable in the field, but the birds at six nests were
marked, and one of each pair was observed to be more attentive during
the latter part of the incubation period and in the care of the young.

The adult birds continued normal care of the young even though
the nests were fenced in to prevent escape of the young.

Parental care consisted of brooding, guarding against enemies, and
warning of danger. The young were never fed by the parents.

In 1932 five eggs taken from nests in the field were hatched in an
incubator and the young Killdeers hand reared along with five young
Killdeers hatched in the field.

In 1933 two of the captive birds mated and produced three young.

The male made the nest. During egg-laying the male was more
solicitous for the eggs than the female. He shared at least equally in

Emma

Davis

KILLDEERS

233

the incubation. When the young were several days old the male assumed
almost entire care of the brood.

The young were brooded for 23 days.

The three young hatched in captivity seemed entirely normal.

Literature Cited

Allen, Arthur A.

1934 The Virginia Rail and the Sora. Bird Lore, 36:196-204.

Audubon, John James

1835 Ornithological biography, vol. 3. Adam & Charles Black, Edinburgh.
COLTHRUP, C. W.

1923 Black-headed Gulls’ method of obtaining worms. Brit. Birds, 16:170
(See also pp. 193, 228, 292, and 316 of the same volume).

Hiett, Lawrence D., and Frederick R. Flickinger

1929 Speaking of Killdeer. Bird Lore, 31:319-323.

Kirkman, F. B.

1937 Bird behavior. T. Nelson & Sons, London.

Nice, Margaret M.

1942 [Review of “On Piping Plover Feeding,” by J. T. Nichols], Bird-
Banding, 13:95.

Pettingill, Olin Sewall, Jr.

1938 Intelligent behavior in the Clapper Rail. Auk, 55:411-415.

PiCKWELL, Gayle

1925 The nesting of the Killdeer. Auk, 42:485-496.

1930 The sex of the incubating Killdeer. Auk, 47:499-506.

- Ridgway, Robert

1919 The birds of North and Middle America. Bull. V. S. Nat. Hist. Mus.
No. 50:99-103.

113 North Quarry Street, Ithaca, New York

234

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

RING-BILLED GULLS OF THE GREAT LAKES

BY FREDERICK E. LUDWIG

I 'HE Ring-billed Gull (Larus delawarensis) is one of the most inter-

esting of the gulls that breed in the Middle West. The earliest
breeding record of this gull for the Great Lakes area is that of Langille
(1884:428), who reported it nesting on one of the Western Islands
(Georgian Bay) “in immense numbers.” Van Winkle (1893:114), Boies
(1897:18), and Butler (1898:573) also reported it as breeding exten-
sively on certain islands of the Great Lakes. But it was described by
other authors (Gibbs, 1879:495; White, 1893:222; Mcllwraith,
1894:47) as merely a migrant in the area during the last quarter of
the nineteenth century; and, except for Saunders’ report (1907:74) of
breeding in large numbers in 1905 on an island in Georgian Bay and
on one in northern Lake Huron, in 1906, there were no further pub-
lished nesting records for the Great Lakes area until 1926, when Wil-
liam I. Lyon (1926:247; 1927:182) banded at least 67 Ring-bills on
St. Martins Shoals in a colony which he found to be some four times
larger on his next visit in 1927. During the intervening years, the
Ring-bill was reported merely as a common migrant through the area
(Kumlien and Hollister, 1903:10; Fleming, 1906:442; J. Claire Wood,
1908:325), and as having “formerly” nested on the islands of Lakes
Huron and Michigan (Barrows, 1912:54; Bent, 1921:139). The ab-
sence of breeding records during this period of some 20 years, and the
fact that ^^an Tyne worked at Hessel in Les Cheneaux Islands, only
eight miles from the Shoals, during the summers of 1917 through 1920,
without even a sight record of a Ring-billed Gull make it very prob-
able that the Ring-bill did not nest in this area between the end of last
century and about 1926, when Lyon discovered the colony established
at St. Martins Shoals.

This paper is based mainly on the data I collected with C. C. Lud-
wig and C. A. Ludwig over a period of nine years (1933 to 1941), dur-
ing which we banded 18,259 Ring-billed Gulls. The return records from
these gulls were reported to us by the United States Fish and Wildlife
Service, and data were supplied to us by other banders who have worked
with Ring-billed Gulls, namely: G. W. Luther, William I. Lyon, H. E.
MacArthur, Irvin Sturgis, Duke Trempe, and Josseljm Van Tyne.^ Al-

1 Josselyn Van Tyne of the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology has aided
in the research work and the work necessary to compile a bibliography. The United
States Lake Survey and the Department of Mines and Resources, Ottawa, Canada, sup-
plied many maps and charts necessary for the work.

[As the Bulletin goes to press, we learn from Harrison F. Lewis that Ring-billed
Gulls have been banded by Howard H. Krug, Adam Brown, and Lawrence Tyler on Lake
Huron and Georgian Bay, and on Lake Ontario by others. Their data has apparently not
been included in this paper, but the author is with the U. S. Navy in the southwest Pa-
cific, and we are unable to consult him on apparent omissions and discrepancies. We
feel, however, that the material will prove of interest and value to bird students in its
present form, and we hope to publish a supplementary paper later. — Ed.]

Frederick
E. Ludwig

RING-BILLED GULLS

235

together some twenty-nine thousand Ring-bills have been banded in the
Great Lakes area.

Nesting Distribution in the Great Lakes Region

Ring-billed Gulls have been banded on at least 26 islands in the
Great Lakes area. The colonies fall roughly into three main groups:
( 1 ) Michigan colonies on Lake Huron ; ( 2 ) Michigan colonies on upper
Lake Michigan; (3) Ontario colonies on Lake Huron (chiefly North
Channel and Georgian Bay). Table 1 shows the number (when known)
of Ring-bills banded on each island visited since 1926. Only islands
with nesting colonies of Ring-bills at the time of visit and islands that
had at some previous time supported a nesting colony are listed in the
table. Since detailed data were not available from all banders, totals
given must be taken as approximations only.

The Michigan colonies in Lake Huron (Group 1) have been by far
the largest of all the nesting groups. Beginning in 1926, Lyon visited
the St. Martins Shoal colony annually, banding Ring-bills there each
year (except 1929) until 1934, when the colony failed. With C. C. and
C. A. Ludwig, I began visiting St Martins in 1937, and it was not until
1939^ that we found the Ring-billed Gulls nesting there again.

On Goose Island, about 25 miles east of St. Martins Shoal, large
numbers of Ring-bills were nesting in 1937 and only a few in 1938. In
1939, when the nesting was resumed at St. Martins, no Ring-bills nested
on Goose Island, and none during the succeeding years.

In 1931, G. W. Luther found these gulls nesting in numbers on an
unnamed island near Canoe Pointy Drummond Island, Chippewa
County. He banded gulls there yearly until 1934, when this colony
also failed, and no colonies were noted in the immediate vicinity until
1941, when Luther found a large colony on Huron Bay Shoals.

In 1933, there was a rather small colony on Scarecrow Island, Al-
pena County, Michigan. In 1934, the year the St. Martins and Drum-
mond Island colonies failed, the Scarecrow Island colony was about
three times as large as in 1933, and in 1935, about 18 times as large.
Since that time the population has remained fairly constant. It is the
largest single colony of Ring-bills in the Middle West.

The upper Lake Michigan colonies (Group 2) have been studied in
detail since 1934. Lyon had made regular banding trips in the area
since 1926, but Ring-bills were first found nesting on Delta County is-
lands in 1933, and on various of the Beaver Islands in 1935 and 1936.
The growth of this comparatively new nesting area is shown in Table 1.

It is interesting to compare this history of Ring-bills in the Great
Lakes region (shown in greater detail in Table 1) with the summary

* Lewis (1941:27) reports that in 1939 “an exceptionally late spring” caused the
Ring-billed Gulls which arrived at the St. Augustin sanctuary (north shore of the Gulf
of St. Lawrence) to leave “about a week after their arrival,” and that “they did not
return at any time during the summer of that year, nor were they discovered nesting else-
where.”

TABLE 1

Ring-billed Gulls Banded in the Great Lakes Region 1926-1941

236

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Abbreviations: G. B. — Georgian Bay B — Birds banded; number not known.

N. C. — North Channel O — Island visited; no Ring-billed Gulls on island.

L. H. — Lake Huron

TABLE 2

Returns on Ring-billed Gulls Banded in the Great Lakes Region

Frederick
E. Ludwig

RING-BILLED GULLS

237

June

\o »-• »-• O »-• es ro »-i

PI

May

es CS ^ •.-H .-H ’-H — 1

00

CN

Apr.

0<NCS CS CS ^ ^ •.-<

33

Mar.

O CS fO ^ CN ^

30

Feb.

1

1

26

1

1

3

4

2

1

1

2

45

Jan.

rO

59

Dec.

'O rrj _t ^ _ cs es ^ cs

00

>

o

SO ^ i-H ro — 1 es

45

Oct.

^ ^ \0 lO to (S CS <-i CS ^ IT)

ro r-l

-

Sept.

pg 00 PJ r#5 fO ’-I ^ PO

44

Aug.

PI PI -H 00 ^ lOlO

lO

July

PO ^ \0 ^ ro PI

P-

cs

4th-10th

PO

3rd yr.

^ ^ _ ..H PO

2nd yr.

PI ,-1 lO PO P<0 PI O ^ fsj ^ ^ ^ OI ^ cs PI

PI

62

1st yr.

^ \0 O ^ PI O ^ lO irj P- 00 PI PO ^ >0 ppj PO VO PI PI

00 -HP!

192

1-6 mo.

p. o P'S ’-t 00 PO O' ^ PO ^ PPJ 00 00 PI ^ ’-1 VO ^ o.

PO ^ O ^ f/5 ^

lo

CN

STATE OR
PROVINCE

Alabama

Arkansas

Connecticut

Florida

Georgia

Illinois

Indiana

Kentucky

Louisiana

Massachusetts

Maryland

Michigan

Missouri

Mississippi

New Brunswick

New Jersey

New York

North Carolina

Ohio

Ontario

Pennsylvania

Quebec

Saskatchewan

South Carolina

Tennessee

Texas

Virginia

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Totals

The first five columns give the number of returns during the first six months after banding (June through December), and the first,
second, third, and fourth to tenth calendar year after banding. The remaining columns show the distribution (when known) of the same
returns according to month. Because of the incompleteness of present available data these figures must be taken as indicative only of
general trends.

238

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

by Harrison F. Lewis (1941:22) of the Ring-bill colonies on the north
shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence; Audubon found a colony of 22
nests there in 1833; in 1884, M. Abbott Frazar reported a few colonies
in the vicinity of Cape Whittle; but apparently, as in the Great Lakes
area, there were no further records until 1915, when Charles W. Town-
send found a colony near Pointe du Maurier. Lewis notes, as Frazar
had, “examples of the scattering of a large colony into several smaller
groups, nesting on as many different islands.” He adds: “Sometimes
these changes are due to evident causes . . . and sometimes the reasons
for them are obscure.” During the five-year lapse at St. Martins the
mean water level was lower than usual ; otherwise the lapse remains un-
explained. The data seem to indicate that colonies of Ring-billed Gulls
have scattered from the St. Martins Shoal group of colonies throughout
upper Lake Michigan, upper Lake Huron, and Georgian Bay.

Returns

Table 2 gives the number of Ring-bills banded per year and
the returns received from them, but these data are incomplete since not
all returns to other banders have yet reached us. On the 18,259 Ring-
billed Gulls I have banded with C. C. and C. A. Ludwig, there have
been 496 returns, or 2.7 per cent. On the rather similar Herring Gull, of
which we have banded 19,564, there have been 739 returns or 3.8 per
cent. The returns furnish important data on distribution by age and sea-
son, on winter and summer range, on migration routes, and on mortality.

Distribution of the Gulls After Banding

Table 2 and Maps 1 to 3 illustrate the distribution of the Ring-
billed Gulls after banding, as shown by the return records. All of these
birds were banded as nestlings in the Great Lakes area. Recoveries
were made in 4 provinces of Canada and in 25 states.

Map 1 shows the distribution during the first six months after band-
ing. The greater proportion of the returns from banded young (174 out
of 275) were from areas bordering on the Great Lakes, namely, Michi-
gan, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Ontario. Most of these returns occurred in
the first four months of life. Late in the fall, a rather large number of
the young were returned from the south Atlantic and the Gulf states.

Map 2 shows the distribution during the first calendar year after
banding (after December 31 of the year of banding). Out of 192 re-
turns, 86 were from Florida, 19 from the other Gulf states, 30 from the
south Atlantic states. Some of the first year birds spend all of the year
after banding in the south; hence the large proportion of the returns
from that area. Some, however, return north and are taken in the Great
Lakes area.

Map 3 (distribution during the second calendar year after banding)
also shows a large proportion of the returns (25 out of 62) to be from
Florida, a number from other southern states. But of these 62 returns.

Frederick
E. Ludwig

RING-BILLED GULLS

239

48 were made during the period of January through June; hence the
large number from the south.

The returns made during the third through the tenth calendar year
after banding (Table 2) are too small to give reliable indications of dis-
tribution. It should be noted, however, that the oldest returns (5, 6, 7,
and 10 year returns) came from the nesting areas in the Great Lakes.

Winter and Summer Range

It is interesting to study the returns according to month (Table 2)
in relation to the territory from which they were returned. There are

Map 1. Distribution of Ring-billed Gull returns during the first six months
after banding. Numerals replace black dots in areas where there are too many
returns to be plotted without overlapping. The principal breeding grounds where
these young were banded are shown by crosses. (Maps by courtesy of The His-
torical Publishing Company, Topeka, Kansas.)

240

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Map 2. Distribution of the Ring-billed Gull returns during the first calendar
year after banding. Numerals replace black dots in areas where there are too many
returns to be plotted without overlapping. The principal breeding grounds where
these young were banded are shown by crosses.

two states from which there are returns every month in the year: Flor-
ida and Michigan. Most of the Florida returns come during the win-
tering period (November to April inclusive), when there is a large
concentration of both immatures and adults in Florida and a consider-
able number throughout the south, particularly in the Gulf states. The
winter concentration of Ring-billed Gulls is much higher in Florida
than in any other state. The ocean beaches are literally lined with these
gulls, and many are captured or found dead by the winter tourists.
There are scattered recoveries in the south, however, during the other

Frederick
E. Ludwig

RING-BILLED GULLS

241

Map 3. Distribution of Ring-billed Gull returns during the second calendar
year after banding. The principal breeding grounds where these gulls were banded
are shown by crosses.

seasons, even during the nesting season. These are immatures which
may be considered “wandering migrants” during the first year after
banding. The returns from Michigan as well as the returns from the other
Great Lakes areas, grouped as a unit, are numerous from June through
November, particularly numerous in August, September, and October.
Many of these are, of course, returns from gulls in the first six months
of life, when the mortality is high. Three returns for each winter
month from Michigan and scattered returns from the other Great Lakes
areas during the winter period (December to May inclusive) indicate
that some Ring-bills winter in the region.

242

THE WILSON BULLETIN

D-'cemlKT. 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

There are nine winter records for Michigan: Alpena, December 1,
1931; Charlevoix, December 27, 1936; St. Joseph, December 27, 1939;
Straits of Mackinac, January 27, 1930; Saginaw, January 13, 1939;
Lake St. Clair, January 18, 1939; Frankfort, February 27, 1931;
Grand Haven, February 15, 1932; Sturgeon Bay, Emmet County, Feb-
ruary 3, 1935. The records from the Straits, Sturgeon Bay, Charlevoix,
Alpena, and Frankfort are north of the published winter range of the
species in Michigan.

There is a very small scattering of returns in wdnter from other
northern states (Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, New Jer-
sey, New York, and Pennsylvania). The records were, unfortunately,
not checked by correspondence with those who sent in the returns. It
is possible, therefore, that some of the northern winter returns were
from birds that died in the fall and were found in the winter.

Returns from the south Atlantic states (Maryland, North Carolina,
South Carolina, and Virginia), grouped as a unit, also cover all months
of the year (except July). They are meager in fall, fairly numerous in
winter and spring — with 12 returns for May and June. Particularly in-
teresting are the four returns from North Carolina made during the
breeding season of the third year after banding — ^pointing to the possi-
bility of a nesting colony of Ring-billed Gulls on the North Carolina
coast.

Migration Routes

Fall and spring returns from the upper Ohio River and along the
Mississippi (Illinois, Missouri, and Arkansas) would seem to indicate
that one main migration route of the Ring-billed Gull parallels these
rivers. Spring and fall returns from Ontario, Quebec, New York, and
Pennsylvania suggest another main migration route along the St. Law-
rence waterway and Hudson River to the south Atlantic states. Rec-
ords from New Brunswick may perhaps indicate an alternative route
from the waterway to the Atlantic coast. (See Table 2 and Maps 1
to 3.)

Mortality

Since by far the largest number of the returns are from birds found
dead, the figures in Table 2 are a rough index to mortality. We find
that, as in other species of birds, mortality is highest in the first six
months of life, followed closely by mortality in the first calendar year
after banding. The figures for the Great Lakes areas (Michigan, On-
tario, Ohio, and Wisconsin) show large numbers of returns in August;
a smaller number in September; and a second large wave in October.
The August returns are presumably the weaker birds, which die soon
after the nesting. By September this lethal selection process is more
or less complete, and food and weather conditions are favorable, so
that fewer birds die. But in October the weather stiffens, food becomes

Frederick
E. Ludwig

RING-BILLED GULLS

243

scarcer, and larger numbers of the gulls are found dead. Through the
rest of the year the number of recoveries in these areas is comparatively
small.

The data on the circumstances of recovery, available for 483 of the
returns, are of some interest here. Most of these (263) were from birds
found dead, 57 from birds found sick or injured, 48 from birds shot by
hunters or trappers. Sixty-three were from birds, apparently normal,
which were captured alive; many of these are returns from Florida,
where, during their winter stay, these gulls become quite tame, some of
them being recovered three or four times in the same locality by dif-
ferent people. Twelve returns were from birds killed by automobiles or
other vehicles; seven from birds caught on fishermen’s lines; seven from
birds taken as scientific specimens. A scattering of the returns (eight)
are from birds killed by cats or dogs; by flying into a high tension wire
or flagpole; or by choking on fish.

The oldest Ring-billed Gull we have recorded was ten years old, but
consecutive banding has not yet been carried on long enough to enable
us to estimate the average length of life of the Ring-bill.

Summary

After an interval of some 20 years; the Ring-billed Gull was again
reported nesting in the Great Lakes region about 1926.

Between 1926 and 1941, at least twenty-nine thousand Ring-billed
Gulls were banded in the region.

The data indicate that from the earliest of these recent colonies,
St. Martins Shoals, the Ring-billed Gulls scattered throughout upper
Lake Michigan, upper Lake Huron, and Georgian Bay; they have been
found nesting on at least 26 islands in the region.

The colonies do not always remain stationary, but sometimes shift
from island to island.

A colony on Scarecrow Island, Alpena County, Michigan, has be-
come the largest single colony in the Middle West.

Winter returns from banded Ring-billed Gulls extend the known
winter range northward; summer returns indicate that some of these
gulls spend all their first year in the south.

Four returns from North Carolina, made during the breeding season
of the third year after banding, point to the possibility of a nesting
colony of Ring-billed Gulls on the North Carolina coast.

Fall and spring returns indicate migration routes along the upper
Ohio River and the Mississippi, and along the St. Lawrence waterway
and Hudson River.

Returns indicate that mortality is highest in the first six months
of life, followed closely by mortality in the first calendar year after
banding.

The oldest Ring-billed Gull we have yet recorded was ten years old.

244

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Literature Cited

Baillie, James L., Jr., and Paul Harrington

1936 The distribution of breeding birds in Ontario. Trans. Roy. Can. Inst.,
21, pt. 1:1-150.

Barrows, Walter Bradford

1912 Michigan bird life. Mich. Agric. Coll., Lansing, Mich.

Bent, A. C.

1921 Life histories of North American gulls and terns. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull.
113.

Boies, A. H.

1897 The birds of Neebish Island, St. Mary’s River, Mich. Bull. Mich.
Ornith. Club, 1:17-20.

Butler, Amos William

1898 The birds of Indiana. 22nd Ann. Rep. (1897) Ind. Dept. Geol. and
Nat. Resources.

Fleming, James H.

1906 Birds of Toronto, Ontario. Auk, 23:437-453 (Pt. 1 only).

Gibbs, Morris

1879 Annotated list of the birds of Michigan. Bull. U.S. Geol. and Geogr.
Surv. of the Territories, 5, No. 3:481-497.

Kumlien, L. and N. Hollister

1903 The birds of Wisconsin. Bull. Wis. Nat. Hist. Soc.<, 3 (new series).
Langllle, James Hibbert

1884 Our birds in their haunts. Cassino, Boston.

Lewis, Harrison F.

1941 Ring-billed Gulls of the Atlantic coast. Wils. Bull., 53:22-30.

Lyon, William I.

1926 Banding gulls and terns on upper Lake Michigan. Wils. Bull., 38:244-
248.

1927 Bird banding in 1927 on Lakes Michigan and Huron. Wils. Bull.,
39:178-184.

McIlwraith, Thomas

1894 The birds of Ontario. Briggs, Toronto.

Saunders, W. E.

1907 Ring-billed Gull. Wils. Bull., 19:73-74.

Van Winkle, E.

1893 Caspian or Imperial Tern. Oologist, 10:114-115.

White, Stewart Edward

1893 Birds observed on Mackinac Island, Michigan, during the summers of
1889, 1890, and 1891. Auk, 10:221-230.

Wood, J. Claire

1908 Bird notes from southeastern Michigan. Auk, 25:324-327.

320 Sperry Building, Port Huron, Michigan

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

THE WILSON BULLETIN

245

GENERAL NOTES

Whooping Cranes at Shoal Lake, Manitoba. — On April 26, 1943, I saw nine
white birds flying north over East Shoal Lake, Manitoba. They were about a mile
away, flying low over the water. Their profiles were obscured by the far shore-
line so that positive identification was impossible, but I was certain they were
neither Whistling Swans nor White Pelicans, both of which are rather common
here during spring migration.

Later in the morning I walked north up the lake shore to the rich hay meadow
at the “narrows” where, as I mounted the rise from the shoreline, I saw nine
Whooping Cranes {Grus americana) some 200 yards distant. Although only my
head and shoulders were visible to the birds, they took alarm. In circular flight
slower than that of the Sandhill Crane, they gained an altitude of about 300 feet,
then struck due north. Without glasses I could not be certain of the number of
adults and young birds in the band, but at least three were adults.

Shoal Lake has been my home since 1889. Up until the late nineties Whooping
Cranes were not uncommon migrants through the Interlake region of Manitoba.
Flocks of 20 and 30 were common, and as children we were told the white birds
were Sandhills in full maturity. Tall and wary, they were difficult to approach,
and I know of only one or two being shot in those early days. I saw these birds
in small numbers each year up until 1924, except 1915, 1916, and 1917, when none
passed through. Since 1924 I have seen them but twice, three in 1934 and the nine
birds this year. — F. C. Ward, 1933 William Avenue, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.

Least Tern in southeastern Michigan. — High water in Lake Erie this year
turned a field in Erie Township, Monroe County, Michigan (10 mUes north of
Toledo), into an area of shallow pools and mud flats separated from the lake by
a hundred yards of slightly higher ground. The shore of the region is largely
marshy, with frequent narrow strips of sandy beach. At this field in July the
common birds were Ring-billed Gulls, Bonaparte’s Gulls, Forster’s Terns, Common
Terns, and Black Terns, along with occasional Herring Gulls and Caspian Terns.

On June 19, 1943, I saw what I believed to be a Least Tern in this field, but
circumstances prevented my being certain of the identity. On July 10, Louis W.
Campbell and I took a Least Tern there — an adult male of the Mississippi Valley
race. Sterna albifrons athalassos (described by T. D. Burleigh and G. H. Lowery,
Jr., in La. State Univ. Mus. Zool. Occ. Paper No. 10, 1942). There have been
several published reports of the Least Tern in Michigan, but no evidence had been
found to confirm the reports, and there was strong reason to suspect that the

supposed Least Terns were actually immature Black Terns (see B. H. Swales,

Wils. Bull., 25, 1913:32^33). This appears to be the first specimen of Least Tern
taken in Michigan, though Campbell collected two immature females nearby, on

the Lake Erie shore in Lucas County, Ohio, on September 16, 1934.

I am indebted to George H. Lowery, Jr., for the identification of this specimen,
which is now in the University of Michigan Museum of Zoology. — Harold May-
field, 3311 Parkwood Avenue, Toledo, Ohio.

The carpels of red spruce blossoms as food for birds. — ^During the past sev-
eral years I have been paying particular attention to the belt of red spruce forest
{Picea rubens) which clothes some of the higher mountain peaks in West Virginia,
particularly with reference to the presence of crossbills and other northern finches
in this forest. I have visited certain areas at all seasons of the year and have
found the blooming season of the spruces to be, by far, the best time to find these
birds of northern association.

246

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55. Xo. 4

This season ordinarily covers the first three weeks in June; June 10 is, generally
speaking, near the height of the blossoming period. At this time the young spruces
bear, during most years, a light to heavy crop of ovulate strobili containing numer-
ous bract-like carpels which are coated with a waxy or resinous substance that
is distinctly sweet to the taste. On many of the carpels this substance forms beads.
The coated carpels are eaten avidly by both Red and White-winged Crossbills
{Loxia curvirostra and L. leucoptera) , and by Pine Siskins {Spinus pinus) . These
strobili, many of which never ripen into cones, are much more in evidence on
young spruces (15 to 25 years old) than on older trees, and they are much more
likely to occur annually than are mature cones. It is therefore much easier to
estimate crossbill populations during June than at any other time at which I have
tried it. I have found Red Crossbills in certain spruce patches during every June
for the past five years.

On some of our visits during June, 1940, and again in 1941, Cedar Waxwings
(Bombycilla cedrorum) were observed feeding habitually on these coated carpels
The crop of one individual collected in the act of feeding was stuffed with the
carpels, and the body had the same accumulation of very firm fat which had been
observed in the Red Crossbills collected there at that season. Cedar Waxwings
have on a number of occasions been observed to feed on the petals of apple
blossoms, but this is, so far as I am aware, the first recorded occurrence of their
eating red spruce carpels. — Maurice Brooks, Division of Forestry, West Virginia
University, Morgantown, West Virginia.

Ilex collina fruits as bird food. — On some of the higher mountains of Virginia
and West Virginia there grows a very attractive deciduous holly which has re-
cently been described as Ilex collina Alexander. Since this description was pub-
lished subsequent to the appearance of Van Dersal’s “Native Woody Plants of the
United States, Their Erosion Control and Wildlife Values” (JJ. S. Dept. Agric.
Misc. Publ. No. 303, 1938), there are no food records in that volume referable to
this species. Even the largeleaf holly (I. longipes) , with which the present species
was long confused, is without data, so far as its use by wildlife is concerned.

Ilex collina, which I have called ‘mountain long-stem holly’ for want of a better
name, is abundant in parts of the Allegheny Plateau, particularly at elevations of
3,000 feet or above. In the Cheat Mountains of West Virginia it occurs to 4,000
feet. During September and October it ripens immense crops of large, pulpy, long-
pediceled drupes. Many of these persist on the shrubs until after the first of
January; others fall to the ground and are eaten by birds and other animals.

In the winter of 1942-43 a number of trips were made for the purpose of
observing the winter use made by animals of these fruits, and autumn observations
have been made during several years. Thus far I have observed Ruffed Grouse
(Bonasa umbellus), Catbirds (Dumetella carolinensis) , Robins {Turdus migra-
torius), Wood Thrushes {Hylocichla mustelina), Olive-backed Thrushes (H. ustu-
lata), and Cedar Waxwings {Bombycilla cedrorum) feeding on the fruits, and I
have excellent evidence that wild Turkeys {Meleagris gallopavo) also use them.
During a period when snow was on the ground in December, 1942, I visited a
number of spots where this holly grew, and found that grouse had been scratching
at every one of them, and at one clump a flock of Turkeys had completely
trampled the area.

So far as I am aware, this holly is not now commercially available, although it
is being propagated from cuttings which I have furnished the Soil Conservation
Service. It seems to offer considerable promise as a winter food in Appalachian
mountain areas where weather conditions are severe, and where glaze is a constant
menace to birds and other wildlife. — Maurice Brooks, Division of Forestry, West
Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia.

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

GENERAL NOTES

247

Starling nesting in Colorado. — The Starling (Sturnus vulgaris) was first
definitely recorded for Colorado on December 17, 1938, by R. B. Rockwell {Wils.
Bull., 51, 1939:46). The following year Niedrach and Rockwell (“Birds of Denver
and Mountain Parks,” 1939:133) recorded the Starling as a winter resident in
Colorado and cited a number of records.

On May 6, 1942, I saw a small flock of Starlings near Greeley. A. M. Bailey
saw an individual on June IS, 1943, near Derby, Adams County, and one on
August 3, 1943, at Lakeside Park, Denver.

On May 16, 1943, just beyond the south boundary of Lowry Field, Denver,
I saw a Starling carrying food. The bird made several trips, and I traced her to a
delapidated silo. In one of the cracked tile of the silo, about two-thirds of the
way up from the inside base, the Starling was rearing its young. I was unable to
see them, but they called quite vociferously immediately before and during feeding.
The old bird was wary and made only three trips with food in the period (about
one hour) I was able to spend at the spot. A week later. May 23, 1943, I returned
to the same neighborhood and saw two young Starlings perched in some willows
about a hundred yards north of the silo. — George H. Breiding, 487 National
Road, Fulton, Wheeling, West Virginia.

The Kentucky Warbler in the Toronto region. — On May 8, 1943, the writers
with other members of the Toronto Ornithological Club, observed a Kentucky
Warbler {Oporornis jormosus) along the northern border of the Holland River
Marsh, four miles southwest of Bradford, Simcoe County, Ontario. The bird, a
male in full spring plumage, was feeding on the ground under hemlocks at the edge
of a swampy woods. It was collected by O. E. Devitt. The specimen, now in the
Royal Ontario Museum of Zoology, is the third for Ontario, the first for the
Toronto region.

Published records of the occurrence of this species in Canada are comparatively
few. An early Quebec record of a pair reported by John Neilson during early
July, 1879, is mentioned by Montague Chamberlain (“Catalogue of Canadian
Birds,” 1887:106), but this record has been questioned since by several authorities
(see Fleming, Can. Field-Nat., 51, 1937:13). A specimen taken near Bryanston,
Middlesex County, Ontario, by Robert Elliott on May 16, 1898, is now in the
W. E. Saunders collection (John Macoun, “Catalogue of Canadian Birds,” Pt. 3,
1904:633). A second specimen was collected by A. A. Wood near Strathroy, On-
tario, on May 25, 1931 {Can. Field-Nat., 46, 1932:209).

The following sight records made by reliable observers have also come to our
attention: an individual observed by George Kennedy in Queen’s Park, Toronto,
on May 12, 1933; another reported by Ralph Hicks at Ashbridges’ Bay, Toronto,
on May 27, 1938; one seen by George North at Hamilton on May 3, 1942; and
one by R. V. Lindsay at High Park, Toronto, on May 10, 11, and 12, 1943. —
W. W. Smith and O. E. Devitt, 218 Eglinton Avenue, East, Toronto, Ontario.

Wilson Ornithological Club Library
The following gifts have been recently received:

Marie V. Beals — 4 reprints
William H. Behle — 5 reprints
Mary A. Bennett — 1 reprint
Arthur C. Bent — 5 books
Earle A. Brooks — 1 book
William Henry Burt — 1 reprint
Herbert Friedmann — 2 books, 14 re-
prints

Leon Kelso — 3 pamphlets, 5 reprints, 1
journal

Amelia R. Laskey — 1 reprint
W. L. McAtee — 12 pamphlets
Ernst Mayr — 1 reprint
Margaret M. Nice — 4- books, one reprint
Russell T. Norris — 60 periodicals and
reprints

Katie M. Roads — 2 books, 8 journals
Robert M. Stabler — 6 journals
T. C. Stephens — 48 journals
Dayton Stoner — 7 reprints

248

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

EDITORIAL

The Treasurer will send out the 1944 dues notices shortly after the publication
of the December Bulletin. It will save the Treasurer’s time and the Club’s funds
if members will pay their dues promptly or notify the Treasurer of their intention
to continue their membership.

War conditions inevitably result in a certain number of defective copies of
Bulletins being mailed to members. Please report these to the Editor who will see
that they are promptly replaced with good copies.

We are again indebted to Ruth D. Turner for preparing the annual Bulletin
index. For other editorial assistance during the year we wish to thank Dean Ama-
don, J. J. Hickey, Margaret B. Hickey, Harrison F. Lewis, Ernst Mayr, Olin S.
Pettingill, Jr., George M. Sutton, Milton B. Trautman, and Frank N. Wilson.

Most back numbers of the Bulletin are available at the editorial office. Mem-
bers are allowed a ten per cent discount when ordering more than one copy.

Ornithological News

Contrary to the first announcement, the American Ornithologists’ Union held
the regular annual business meeting in New York on October 20. All officers were
re-elected. New Council members chosen were: Ludlow Griscom, Alden H. Miller,
and Harry C. Oberholser. S. Charles Kendeigh and Austin L. Rand were made
Fellows, and the following five Members were elected: Dean Amadon, Robert J.
Niedrach, Frank A. Pitelka, Julian K. Potter, and Terence M. Shortt.

The Brewster Medal was awarded to Alden H. Miller for his book, “Speci-
ation in the Avian Genus Junco.”

William Vogt has been appointed Chief of the Conservation Section of the Pan
American Union and will be traveling extensively in Central and South America
in the interest of wildlife conservation.

Ernst Mayr is preparing a manual on the birds of the southwest Pacific.

Herbert Brandt has taken over the Cleveland Bird Club’s “Bird Calendar,”
changed its name to “Bird-Life,” and is publishing it as a printed and handsomely
illustrated octavo magazine. The “bird calendar” material appears as a section
of the new magazine. The current volume is numbered 39, continuing the “Bird
Calendar” series.

The name of Field Museum of Natural History is being changed to Chicago
Museum of Natural History.

Arthur J. Sessing, of Minneapolis, and Cliff Hudson, of Racine, Wisconsin, just
returned from a U. S. Government mission to Hudson Bay, bringing back with
them some of the first wildlife photographs taken on Coats Island.

Brian Roberts, of the Scott Polar Research Institute, Cambridge, England, and
author of notable papers on penguins, was in America this past fall on a mission
for British Naval Intelligence. He visited Washington, Minneapolis, Ottawa, Bos-
ton, and New York, meeting many members of the Wilson Club during the course
of his conferences in these cities.

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

THE WILSON BULLETIN

249

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

A Guide to Bird Watching^ By Joseph J. Hickey, Illustrated by Francis Lee
Jaques. Oxford University Press, New York, 1943: X 8^4 in., xiv + 262

pp. $3.50.

The keynote of this exciting book is given in the first two sentences of the
preface: “Bird watching embraces individual enterprise on the one hand, collective
effort on the other. Above all else, it is marked by a ready exchange of experi-
ence, by a high regard for truth, and by a conviction that wild birds express the
most spectacular development of nature.”

For the first time we have a real guide to the study of the live bird in its
environment, a guide written with freshness and humor, and teeming with prob-
lems. The first paragraphs of Chapter One, “How to Begin Bird Study,” are
masterpieces in depicting the sheer delight of bird study — its drama, the reward
of discovery. “Each species offers a new glimpse of creation, each carries its own
reward.” And no one should miss the fun in the section on bird names, or the
excellent trick for avoiding confusion by “privately calling” one water-thrush the
“white Louisiana,” the other the “yellow northern.”

The five chief chapters are entitled: The Lure of Migration Watching; Ad-
ventures in Bird Counting; Explorations in Bird Distribution; The Romance of
Bird Banding; and The Art of Bird Watching. Each subject is treated adequately
from the standpoint of the field student; a sound theoretical basis is laid, and
opportunities are pointed out for both individual and cooperative study. In Chapter
Two the author’s examination of the recoveries of 61 fledgling Robins in sub-
sequent breeding season shows a definite tendency towards return to the vicinity
of the birth place. In Chapter Three the disposition to under-estimate the number
of small birds in a flock and to over-estimate the number of large birds is men-
tioned. Thrilling tales are given of counts of bird roosts of many species and of
migrating hawks. Changes in local bird life are discussed here while changes over
the continent, due to the white man, are given in a striking table (p. 177).

One of the author’s special fields of interest is that of “ecological distribution.”
Here there are a number of original tables: 19, “Some foraging areas of birds in
the nesting season,” based on over 100 pairs of 14 species; 20, showing the lowest
singing perches accepted by 17 species, suggesting the intriguing problem of specific
height of such perches; and 18, a comparison of Nutcracker invasions in Europe
and Crossbill in Massachusetts, showing a year for year correspondence, although
due on the one hand to failure of cedar nuts in Siberia, and on the other to pine-
cone seeds in North America. Various factors in habitat selection are discussed,
and an excellent treatment of the subject of succession given.

The “inauguration of systematic bird banding about 1920” was an even greater
revolution in bird study than “the substitution of field glasses for the collector’s
gun, around 1900.” Bird banding can be divided into three stages: the ringing
of fledglings, the trapping of adults, and color banding. A survey of the results
of the different methods is given, and excellent suggestions offered for making the
most of the unique opportunity of banding, both by individuals and by cooperative
effort. The author’s organization of color banding of young Herring Gulls ac-
cording to year and birth place is a fine example of collective action.

In the last chapter the author tells us: “The great mysteries of bird life still
crowd our very doorsteps. We are still living in an age of wonder.” The table
on page 168 — “Handbook Information Still Wanted on North American Birds” —
is a vivid illustration of how little we yet know. The sections on “The student
and his bird club,” “Co-operative bird watching; research partnerships; organized
inquiries” all emphasize the friendly contacts that are so characteristic of most
students of birds. Excellent advice is given on publishing observations; “wordiness
and insufficient data” are two of the commonest weaknesses, and a timely note

250

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

is added: “Above all, do not pad the bibliography.” Finally in “Bird Watching
and America” there is a straightforward statement of the responsibility of the bird
watcher for the preservation of birds.

The 30 tables are well chosen and invitingly labeled “Some Examples and
Results of Bird Watching.” Five important appendices are included. The first is
a unique contribution illustrated by sketches of models made by Charles A. Urner
of shore bird tracks, as well as a detailed key to such tracks. A table summarizing
the results of breeding bird censuses in North America arranged according to
habitats is given in Appendix B. An exceedingly suggestive and detailed “Outline
for a Life-History Study” constitutes one of the notable contributions of the book.
Thirty-two pages are devoted to an annotated list of bird books in fourteen
categories, and ten pages to a regional list of bird clubs in the United States and
Canada; both of these sections will be of great value to the beginner in bird
watching. A good index completes the volume. And in our enthusiasm over the
text we must not forget Mr. Jaques’ charming and spirited sketches.

Mr. Hickey has reached the goal he set himself: “It is the chief purpose of this
book to show how bird watching can be made to last a lifetime, and to yield to
the very end the same full measure of enjoyment.” — Margaret M. Nice.

Studies in the Life History of the Song Sparrow, II: The Behavior of the
Song Sparrow and Other Passerines. By Margaret Morse Nice. Trans. Linn.
Soc. of New York, 6, Sept. 1943: viii 329 pp., 1 pi. and 6 text figs. $2.00
on direct order from The Linn. Soc. of New York, % Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist.,
Central Park West at 79th St., New York, 24, N. Y.

The second part of Mrs. Nice’s “Studies in the Life History of the Song Spar-
row” is a work of much wider interest and value than the first part, admirable
as that one is. It is, as the author says in her foreword, “primarily a treatise on
the behavior of passerine birds with the Song Sparrow as the chief example,” and
its initial chapter is a general discussion of bird behavior in which the approach
to the particular species, Melospiza vielodia, is outlined, and the main points of
view adhered to in the analysis of the subsequent material are established. Mrs.
Nice is convinced of the general accuracy and trustworthiness of Konrad Lorenz’s
theories and interpretations of avian activity, and arranges her data and presents
her conclusions largely within the limits imposed by this conviction. If any gen-
eral criticism may be made of her work it must be of the soundness of her judg-
ment in so completely accepting Lorenz as a guide. Yet, who has so far appeared
on the ornithological horizon to offer more suggestive and stimulating general
concepts of bird behavior, or ones that help to clarify so many individual parts
of the total picture? To the data Mrs. Nice presents on the Song Sparrow no
one can take exception. No one else knows as much about the bird as she does. A
large part of the material is new to ornithological literature and therefore cannot
be critically compared with previous information, but there is no reason to doubt
its validity. Seven years of intensive, meticulous and intelligent field and aviary
studies have yielded a rich harvest of detailed, individualized, observational data
both quantitatively and qualitatively incomparably in advance of what we have
for any other bird species. Added to this we have in the present book a great
number of interpretations and suggestive comments that are in themselves a digest
of a vast and not always readily assimilable literature. In other words, Mrs.
Nice’s book presents more information than we have ever had about any single
species, more thoroughly analyzed, and more completely integrated with current
knowledge and modern concepts of animal behavior. To the serious student it
will long be a basic work.

It is impossible in a short review to do more than list the main topics dis-
cussed. The book is so full of “meat” that the most that can be done here is to
point out the wealth of material presented and to hope the interested readers of
this notice will avail themselves of this new source of data and digest of ideas.
The book is divided into 22 chapters and 5 appendices. The first chapter is a

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

251

general discussion of bird behavior, as already remarked, and treats of the perti-
nent observations by other students of the subject, the status of birds in com-
parison with other animals, the distinction between innate and learned behavior,
and the Lorenzian concepts of releasers, signals, and the role of the companion.
Chapter II describes the development of the young Song Sparrow in detail ; chapter
III takes up the discussion of the activities of the young bird, while the fourth
chapter attempts to distinguish between those elements in its activities which are
innate and those that are learned. The next chapter is a digression from the par-
ticular species to a comparative survey of the course of development in passerine
birds generally. In the sixth chapter we return to the Song Sparrow and are given
an account of the young bird after it leaves its parents, involving such topics as
the postjuvenal molt, fall migration, the premature appearance of breeding be-
havior. The title of this chapter “The Young After Independence” might well have
been altered to read either “The Young Bird After Dependence” or “The Young
Bird After Achieving Independence,” but this is a small matter that will not mis-
lead the reader of the book. Subsequent chapter headings are. Song Sparrow
Society in Fall and Winter (involving social integration, dominance) ; Awakening
and Roosting; The Song of the Adult Male; Song in Female Birds; Development,
Inheritance, and Function of Song; The Male and His Territory; The Function of
Territory; The Male and His Mate; Relations of the Pair to Each Other and
Their Neighbors; the Problem of Pair Formation; The Nest; The Eggs; Care of
the Young; Defense of the Young; Enemy Recognition; and Innate and Learned
Behavior in the Adult. Each chapter is divided into numerous sections, and each
has a convenient summary. As an example of the detailed nature of the presenta-
tion we may transcribe from the table of contents, the arrangement of material
in one of the chapters:

Chapter XI. Development, Inheritance and Function of Song.

A. The Five Stages of Development of Song Sparrow Song

1. Observations on Wild Birds

a. The progress of seven residents banded in the nest

b. Song development in some other Song Sparrows

c. Territory situations and song in juvenile birds

2. Development of Song in the Hand-raised Song Sparrows

B. Inheritance of Song in the Song Sparrow

1. Do Song Sparrows Sing Like Their Fathers and Grandfathers?

2. How Much Do Song Sparrows Imitate Each Other?

3. The Case of the Hand-raised Birds

C. Juvenile Songs of Other Species

1. The Age at Which Young Birds Start to Sing

2. The Character of the Song of Young Birds

D. Inheritance and Imitation in Other Species

E. The Evolutionary Trend

F. A Definition of Song

G. Function of Song in the Song Sparrow

H. Some Theories as to the Function of Song in Birds

1 . Early Theories

2. Advertising Song

3. Song as a Signal

4. Song as an Emotional Outlet

I. The Function of Song in Birds

J. Summary

Where in the literature of ornithology have we ever had such material so care-
fully assembled and so critically appraised and integrated? And, be it remembered,
this is but one out of some twenty-two chapters! Each chapter would make a
notable paper in itself and each could stand elaboration. As a matter of fact the
one main trouble with the book is that it is too condensed. One tires of telegraphic
terseness and wishes for a bit of conversational discourse.

252

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 4

The five appendices are concerned with the following topics; Chief Vocaliza-
tions of the Song Sparrow; Dominance, Singing, and the Challenge (Puff-Sing-
Wave Posture) in Hand-Raised Birds; Behavior Upon the First Arrival of Fe-
males; Some Samples of Coition in 1929; and List of Orders and Passerine Fami-
lies in which Distraction Display (Injury Feigning) has been Reported.

A bibliography and two indices, one to subjects, and one to species, complete
this modestly issued but most significant book. Its author and the Linnaean
Society are to be congratulated on the publication of the most searching study
yet made of any wild bird. — Herbert Friedmann.

The Life of the Robin. By David Lack. H. F. and G. Witherby Ltd., London,
1943: 4^ X 6^ in., 200 pp., 6 pis., 2 text figs. 7s 6d.

No one should make the mistake of thinking that the author of this very
attractive and readable little book has been forced to sacrifice clarity or scientific
precision for the sake of attracting and holding popular interest. Laymen with any
taste for natural history will find the book delightful and absorbing reading; on
the other hand, ornithologists will immediately recognize it as a wholly dependable
scientific treatise. Lack’s first reports on his work on the English Robin (in the
Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, The Ibis, and British Birds)
brought high praise from scientific reviewers, but those serials are not readily
available to many American students. Fortunately this book provides the student
with an inexpensive and amazingly complete summary of the Robin study.

Especially valuable are the chapters on song, fighting, territory, and age. The
discussion of song and its function effectually disposes not only of the popular
notion that the Robin sings because it is “happy” but also of the more scientifically
respectable belief that the male Robin sings to please the female. Warning to
rivals is, Lack decides, the principal use of the Robin’s song. The male sings only
on his territory, where his song advertises his presence and warns away intruders,
usually obviating the necessity of an actual fight. When it does come to a fight
the male on his own territory is normally victorious. As Lacks puts it, victory
“goes not to the strong but to the righteous, the righteous, of course, being the
owner of property.”

The hold of the Robin on the English people is vividly shown by a wealth of
well-chosen quotations taken from an extraordinarily wide range of sources. Some
of the quotations illustrate quaint misconceptions, but others give evidence of
rather shrewd observation of biological phenomena several centuries ago.

In refreshing contrast to many recent popular bird books, this one is well
documented. By placing most of the references, grouped according to the chapters
to which they refer, in an appendix, the author avoids distracting the reader with
a multitude of footnotes and yet provides the serious student with clues to the
author’s scientific sources.

Lack’s experience should provide inspiration to any ambitious student of birds
and their habits. When Lack began his investigation the English Robin was con-
sidered the best known bird of that bird-minded country, but four years of study
by simple techniques, such as color banding, resulted in the discovery of a number
of new and important facts and generalizations. A similarly thorough study of
our even more common American Robin still remains to be done. — J. Van Tyne.

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

253

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Physiology {including weights)

Odum, Eugene P. Some Physiological Variations in the Black-capped Chickadee.

Wils. Bull., 55, No. 3, Sept., 1943:178-191, figs. 1-5.

Kelso, Leon. The Bird’s Electrostatic Field. Biol. Leaflet No. 20, (1 p.).

See also Distribution and Taxonomy: Amadon; Lije History and Behavior:
Ryves.

Anatomy {including plumage and molt)

Nice, Margaret M. A bald Song Sparrow. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 3, Sept., 1943:196.
Stabler, Robert M. An Analysis of Six Successive Molts of an American Goshawk.

Amer. Falconer, 2, No. 2, July, 1943:9-12.

Sutton, George Miksch. The Wing Molts of Adult Loons: A Review of the
Evidence. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 3, Sept., 1943:145-150, pi. 3.

Van Tyne, Josselyn. Abnormal feather loss by Cardinals. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 3,
Sept., 1943:195.

Distribution and Taxonomy

Amadon, Dean. Bird Weights as an Aid in Taxonomy. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 3,
Sept., 1943:164-177.

Bond, Richard M. Variation in Western Sparrow Hawks. Condor, 45, No. 5,
Sept.-Oct., 1943:168-185, figs. 46-50. {Falco sparverius guadalupensis n. subsp.
from Guadalupe Id.).

Bray, Reynold. Notes on the Birds of Southampton Island, Baffin Island and
Melville Peninsula. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:504-536, text-fig. 1.

Brodkorb, Pierce. Two New Flycatchers of the Genus Elaenia. Univ. Mich.
Mus. Zool. Occ. Papers No. 478, Nov. 5, 1943:1-4. {E. flavogaster saturata
and E. viridicata paciflca n. subspp. from Chiapas).

Cahalane, Victor H. Notes on Birds of the Kodiak- Afognak Island Group. Auk,
60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:536-541.

Friedmann, Herbert. A new race of the sharp-tailed grouse. Jour. Wash. Acad.
Sci., 33, No. 6, June, 1943:189-191. {Pedioecetes phasianellus caurus n. subsp.
from Fairbanks, Alaska).

Friedmann, Herbert. A new wood quail of the genus Dendrortyx. Jour. Wash.
Acad. Sci., 33, No. 6, Sept., 1943:272-273. {D. macroura diversus n. subsp. from
Jalisco, Mexico).

Hammond, Edward K. Unusual breeding records from the Chicago region. Auk,
60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:599-600.

McIlhenny, E. a. Major Changes in the Bird Life of Southern Louisiana during
Sixty Years. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:541-549.

Nickell, Walter P. Some 1943 Notes on the Birds of Camp Sherwood. Jack-
pine Warbler, 21, No. 3, July, 1943:78-82, pi. 9. (Charlevoix County, Mich.).
Potter, L. B. Bird Notes from South-western Saskatchewan. Canad. Field-Nat.,
57, Nos. 4-5, Apr .-May, 1943:69-72.

Rand, A. L. On Some British Columbia Birds. Canad. Field-Nat., 57, Nos. 4-5,
Apr.-May, 1943:60-63.

Slipp, John W. Notes on the Shore Birds of Washington. Condor, 45, No. 5,
Sept.-Oct., 1943:197-199.

Erratum

A printer’s error in the September Bulletin made the first Sutton title on page
206 of the Bibliography section quite unintelligible. The correct reference is given
in the same section (p. 255) of the present issue.

254

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 4

Stewart, Robert E., and Brooke Meanley. Bachman’s Sparrow in Maryland.

Auk, 60. No. 4, Oct., 1943:605-606, pi. 16.

Thomson, A. Landsborough et al. Discussion on “Physiological Races.” Bull.

Brit. Ornith. Club, 63, July 23, 1943:73-80.

Todd, VV. E. Clyde. The Western Element in the James Bay Avifauna. Canad.

Field-Nat., 57, Nos. 4-5, Apr.-May, 1943:79-80.

Todd, W. E. Clyde. Studies in the Jacamars and Puff-birds. Annals Carnegie Mus.,
30, art. 1, Oct. 20, 1943:1-18.

Tracy, J. Ch.arles. Altitudinal nesting and breeding-range extension of the Wood
Thrush. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:591-593.

Twomey, Arthur C. Mellon Carnegie Museum Expedition to the Mackenzie
Delta. Carnegie Mag., 17, No. 4, Sept., 1943:99-110, 11 photos, map.

Wood, Norman A. Many Holboell’s Grebes Caught in Fishermen’s Nets at James
Bay. Jack-pine Warbler, 21, No. 3, July, 1943:88. (At St. James, Beaver Id.
Mich.).

Van Cleave, Harley J. An Index to the Opinions Rendered by the International
Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Amer. Midi. Nat., 30, No. 1, July,
1943:223-240.

See also Ecology: Brecher.

Evolution and Speciation

Schmidt, Karl P. Corollary and Commentary for “Climate and Evolution.”
Amer. Midi. Nat., 30, No. 1, July, 1943:241-253.

Migration

Ball, Robert E. Migrant Gray-cheeked Thrushes in song. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct.,
1943:595-596.

Cooke, May Thacher. Returns from Banded Birds: Miscellaneous Recoveries of
Interest. Bird-Banding, 14, No. 3, July, 1943:67-74.

Mason, Edwin A. Recoveries from Migrating Bronzed Grackles. Bird-Banding,
14, No. 3, July, 1943:76.

Middleton, Raymond J. Winter Returns of Eastern Tree Sparrow {Spizella
arborea arborea) at Norristown, Pennsylvania. Bird-Banding, 14, No. 3,
July, 1943:64-67.

See also Distribution and Taxonomy: Wood; Life History and Behavior:
Brown and Goodwin.

Ecology

Aldrich, John W. Biological Survey of the Bogs and Swamps in Northeastern
Ohio. Amer. Midi. Nat., 30, No. 2, Sept., 1943:346-402, figs. 1-21. (Includes
avifauna) .

Brecher, Leonard C. The Relation of Vegetational Life-forms to the Distribution
of Breeding Birds. Kentucky Warbler, 19, No. 4, Fall, 1943:41-49, 2 maps.

Life History and Behavior

Andresen, C. White-throated Swift Nesting in Active Quarry. Condor, 45, No. S,
Sept.-Oct., 1943:201.

Bartholomew, George A., Jr. Contests of Double-crested Cormorants for Perch-
ing Sites. Condor, 45, No. 5, Sept.-Oct., 1943:186-195.

Blain, Alexander W. On the Nesting of the Arctic Three-toed Woodpecker in
Northern Michigan. Jack-pine Warbler, 21, No. 3, July, 1943:72-74, fig. 1.
Broun, Maurice, and Ben V. Goodwin. Flight-speeds of Hawks and Crows.

Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:487-492, pi. 13.

Carr-Lewty, R. a. The Aerodynamics of the Drumming of the Common Snipe.
Brit. Birds, 36, No. 12, May, 1943:230-234. {Capella g. gallinago).

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

ORNITHOLOGICAL LITERATURE

255

CoRDiER, Charles. A Record of the Successful Breeding of the Quetzal {Pharo-
machrus mocinno costaricensis) in Captivity. Zoologica, 28, Sept., 1943:105-106.

Daneel, a. B. The Speed and Height of Bird Flight. Ostrich, 14, No. 2, Aug.,
1943:61-64. (South Africa).

Grinnell, Lawrence I. Nesting Habits of the Common Redpoll. Wils. Bull., 55,
No. 3, Sept., 1943:155-163, figs. 1-5.

Lambert, Gordon. Predation Efficiency of the Osprey. Canad. Field-Nat., 57,
Nos. 4-5, Apr.-May, 1943:87-88.

Lanyon, Wesley E. The Bluebird and the Tree Swallow Studied at Hanover.
Bull. Aud. Soc. New Hampshire, 14, No. 3, Sept., 1943:1-3.

Linduska, J. P. Cooper’s Hawk carrying a nest of young Goldfinches. Auk, 60,
No. 4, Oct., 1943:597, pi. 14 (right fig.).

Lovell, Harvey B. The Nest of a Kentucky Warbler. Kentucky Warbler, 19,
No. 4, Fall, 1943:51-52.

Low, Jessop B. Wrens use duck down as nest lining. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:
593-594.

McKay, A. K. Cowbird behavior. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:596-597.

Marshall, Nelson. Factors in the Incubation Behavior of the Common Tern.
Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:574-588.

Meanley, Brooke. Nesting of the Upland Plover in Baltimore County, Maryland.
Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:603, pi. 15.

Munro, J. a. Studies of Waterfowl in British Columbia. Mallard. Canad. Jour,
Research, 21, Aug., 1943:223-260, figs. 1-3.

Nethersole-Thompson, Caroline and Desmond. Nest-Site Selection by Birds.
Brit. Birds, 37, No. 4, Sept., 1943:70-74; No. 5, Oct., 1943:88-94.

Petrides, George A. Notes on a Captive Redstart. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 3, Sept.,
1943:193-194.

PiRNiE, Miles D. Bird-house Nuthatches. Jack-pine Warbler, 21, No. 3, July,
1943:71-72, pi. 7. {Sitta carolinensis nesting).

Richardson, Frank. Mallophaga on Young White Pelicans. Condor, 45, No. 5,
Sept.-Oct., 1943:201-202, fig. 52.

Ryves, B. H. An Examination of Incubation in Its Wider Aspects Based on Ob-
servation in North Cornwall. Brit. Birds, 37, No. 3, Aug., 1943:42-49.

Smith, Wendell P. Some Yellow Warbler Observations. Bird-Banding, 14, No. 3,
July, 1943: 57-63.

Sutton, George Miksch. Notes on the Behavior of Certain Captive Young
Fringillids. Univ. Mich. Mus. Zool. Occ. Papers No. 474, July 31, 1943:1-14.

Thomas, Edward S. A wren singing the songs of both Bewick’s and the House
Wren. Wils. Bull., 55, No. 3, Sept., 1943:192-193.

Trautman, Milton B. Herring Gull attack on normal Golden-eye. WUs. Bull.,
55, No. 3, Sept., 1943:192.

Van Coevering, Jack. Prairie Dancers. Fauna, 5, No. 3, Sept., 1943:75-77, 5
photos. (With unusual photographs of Prairie Chicken. Fletcher Settlement,
Kalkaska Co., Mich., 1941.)

Walker, Lewis W. Nocturnal Observations of Elf Owls. Condor, 45, No. 5,
Sept.-Oct., 1943:165-167, figs. 44, 45.

Weaver, Richard Lee, and Franklin H. West. Notes on the Breeding of the
Pine Siskin. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:492-504.

Wood, Dale T. Some Unusual Nesting Habits. Condor. 45, No. 5, Sept.-Oct.,
1943:201.

Worth, C. Brooke. Notes on the Chimney Swift. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:
558-564.

See also Food and Feeding Habits: Leopold.

256

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Food and Feeding Habits

Alcorn, J. R. Flight-Feeding of the Ring-billed Gull. Condor, 45, No. 5, Sept.-
Oct., 1943:199-200.

CoTTAM, Clarence. Unusual feeding habit of grackles and crows. Auk, 60, No. 4,
Oct., 1943:594-595.

Danforth, Ralph E. Winter insect food of chickadees. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct.,
1943:595.

Knowlton, G. F., and F. C. Harmston. Grasshoppers and crickets eaten by Utah
birds. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:589-591.

Leopold, A. Starker. Autumn Feeding and Flocking Habits of the Mourning
Dove in Southern Missouri. WUs. Bull., 55, No. 3, Sept., 1943:151-154.

Population

Emlen, John T., Jr. Sex Ratios in Wintering Gambel White-crowned Sparrows.

Condor, 45, No. 5, Sept.-Oct., 1943:196, fig. 51.

Harding, Katherine C. An Eight Year Old Song Sparrow. Bird-Banding, 14,
No. 3, July, 1943:77.

Mason, Edwin A. Size of Robin Broods. Bird-Banding, 14, No. 3, July, 1943:75-
76.

See also Migration: Cooke.

Techniques {including banding)

Latham, Roger M. A Simple Method of Sexing Day-old Ringneck Pheasant
Chicks. Pennsylvania Game Comm. Research Circ. No. 2, 1942:1-10, figs. 1-3.
McCabe, T. T. An Aspect of Collectors’ Technique. Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:
550-558.

History, Biography, Bibliography, and Institutions

Abbott, Jacob Bates. An Artist Looks at Wilson. Frontiers, 8, No. 1, Oct., 1943:
10-13, illus. (Alexander Wilson).

Brimley, H. H. Thomas Gilbert Pearson. Chat, 7, No. 4, Sept., 1943:50-52, 1 pi.
Chapman, Frank M. William Henry Hudson, American. Aud. Mag., 45, No. 5,
Sept.-Oct., 1943:264-269, 1 pi.

Fisher, Albert K. Leonhard Stejneger. Copeia, 1943, No. 3, Oct. 15:137-141.
Huston, McCready. Poet with Fowling Piece. Frontiers, 8, No. 1, Oct., 1943:6-9,
illus. (Alexander Wilson).

Linsdale, Jean M. Work with Vertebrate Animals on the Hastings Natural His-
tory Reservation. Amer. Midi. Nat., 30, No. 1, July, 1943:254-267, figs. 1-7.
(Includes list of 37 bird species especially studied).

Stevens, O. A. Audubon’s Journey up the Missouri River, 1843. North Dakota
Hist. Quart., 10, No. 2, Apr., 1943:63-82, 3 pis.

Paleontology

Wetmore, Alexander. A second specimen of the fossil Guillemot, Miocepphus.
Auk, 60, No. 4, Oct., 1943:604.

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

THE WILSON BULLETIN

257

OFFICERS, COMMITTEES, AND MEMBERS OF THE
WILSON ORNITHOLOGICAL CLUB

Officers, 1943

President George Miksch Sutton *

First Vice-President S. Charles Kendeigh

Second Vice-President Olin Sewall Pettingill, Jr.

Secretary Maurice Brooks

Treasurer Milton B. Trautman

Editor Josselyn Van Tyne

Additional Members of the Executive Council
Elective Members

Lawrence H. Walkinshaw Eugene P. Odum

Burt L. Monroe

Past Presidents

Lynds Jones R. M. Strong Josselyn Van Tyne

Frank L. Burns Albert F. Ganier Margaret M. Nice

T. C. Stephens J. W. Stack Lawrence E. Hicks

Jesse M. Shaver

Editor

Associate Editor
Associate Editor

Editorial Staff of “The Wilson Bulletin”

Josselyn Van Tyne

Margaret M. Nice

F. N. Hamerstrom, Jr.

Committees, 1943

Membership Committee. Richard L. Weaver, Chairman (succeeded in November,
1943, by Frederick M. Baumgartner). Full membership of this committee will
be published in March.

Illustrations Committee. W. J. Breckenridge, Chairman, Roger T. Peterson, Rich-
ard P. Grossenheider, Karl Maslowski, Terence M. Shortt

Endowment Fund Committee. George B. Thorp, Chairman, Olin Sewall Pettingill,
Jr., James B. Young, Bernard W. Baker, Harold D. Mitchell

Affiliated Societies Committee. Gordon M. Meade, Chairman, George H. Lowery,
Jr., S. C. Kendeigh, A. F. Ganier

Library Committee. Harry W. Hann, Chairman, Lynds Jones, R. M. Strong,
Arthur E. Staebler

Index Committee. Ruth D. Turner, Chairman

Wildlife Conservation Committee. F. N. Hamerstrom, Jr., Chairman (succeeded
in November, 1943, by Douglas E. Wade), Ludlow Griscom, Rudolf Bennitt,
Margaret M. Nice, Miles D. Pirnie, Paul L. Errington, H. L. Stoddard, John
W. Handlan, Richard Rough, Leonard W. Wing, Harrison F. Lewis, Charles
A. Dambach, Milton Trautman, Seth Low, Wallace Grange, William J. How-
ard, Gustav Swanson

Representative on the American Ornithologists* Union Council. Maurice Brooks

♦ As announced in the September Bulletin, the pressure of his duties in the U. S.
Army Air Corps caused George Miksch Sutton to resign from his position as President
of the Club, and his place was taken by Vice-President S. Charles Kendeigh.

258

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

**** — Honorary Member. — Life Member. ** — Sustaining Member.

* — Active Member, Others — Associate Members.

♦Abbott, Dr. Cyril Edward, Biology Department, Doane College, Crete,

Nebraska 1937

Adams, I. C., Jr., 214 N. Eighth St., Columbia, Missouri 1933

Addy, Cfharles] Efdward], 167A. State St., Newburyport, Massachusetts 1941
Adelson, Richard Hfenry], 34 VVensley Drive, Great Neck,

Long Island, New York 1938

♦Aldrich, Dr. John Warren, Fish and Wil/dlife Service, Washington, D.C. 1931

Alexander, Donald Child, 127 Durant St., Lowell, Massachusetts 1937

Allan, Philip F[arley], 6537 Broad St., Brookmont, Maryland,

Washington 16, D.C 1939

♦Allen, Prof. Arthur Augustus, Fernow Hall, Ithaca, New York 1914

Allen, Durward Leon, Rose Lake Wildlife Experiment Station,

East Lansing, Michigan 1933

Allen, Francis H[enry], 215 La Grange St., West Roxbury, Massachusetts 1941
Allen, Sgt. Robert W., 4th Malarial Survey Unit, APO 3665

% Postmaster, San Francisco, California 1936

Allen, Theodore, 2520 Mulberry Ave., Muscatine, Iowa 1942

Allin, Dr. Albert Efllis], Provincial Laboratory, Fort William,

Ontario, Canada 1943

♦Alperin, Irwin, 1100 E. 19th St., Brooklyn, New York 1939

Alpert, Bernard, 170 Broadway, New York City 1939

Amadon, Dean, American Museum of Natural History, Central

Park West at 79th St., New York City 1935

Amidon, Mrs. Hilda Farnum, 282 Sigourney, Hartford, Connecticut 1942

♦Ammann, Lt. George Andrew % Dr. O. H. Ammann, 272 Rockaway

Ave., Boonton, New Jersey 1935

Anderson, Anders Harold, Route 5, Box 488, Tucson, Arizona 1937

Anderson, Miss Helen, Wausau Public Library, Wausau, Wisconsin 1941

Anderson, Sgt. John M., East Orwell, Ohio 1938

Anderson, Dr. Rudolph Martin, National Museum of Canada,

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 1937

Anthes, Clarence Alvin, 713 Hamilton Ave., Waukesha, Wisconsin 1939

Anthony, Mervil, U.S.V.H., Marion, Indiana 1943

Appleton, John Sparhawk, Simi, California 1936

♦Armstrong, Miss Virginia, Musketaquid Road, Concord, Massachusetts ..1939

Arnold, Elting, Box 27, RFD 3, Wilson Lane, Bethesda, Maryland 1941

♦Ashton, Randolph, 800 Crown St., Morrisville, Pennsylvania 1941

♦Austin, Dr. Oliver Luther, P.O. Box 236, Tuckahoe, New York 1930

Ayer, Mrs. Nathan Edward, 1300 Hillcrest Dr., Pomona, California 1936

Baechle, Rev. John W., C.P.P.S., St. Joseph’s College,

Collegeville, Indiana 1943

Baer, Miss Myrtle W., 1237 N. Jefferson St., Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1941

♦Bailey, Alfred Marshall, Colorado Museum of Natural History,

City Park, Denver, Colorado 1928

Bailey, Miss Arta Ifndiana], 624 Franklin Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1941

1 This list is compiled as of November 1, 1943. The Secretary would appreciate
immediate notification of any omission of names, changes in address, or errors in the
spelling of names, the use of titles, the class of membership, and the exact year of first
election to membership.

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

259

**Bailey, Harold H[arris], 820 Alhambra Circle, Coral Gables, Florida ..1908

Bailey, Mrs. H. M., 1919 Douglas St., Sioux City, Iowa 1918

Baillie, James Little, Jr., Royal Ontario Museum of Zoology,

Queens Park at Bloor St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada 1938

Baird, James, St. Mark St., Jamaica Plain, Boston 30, Massachusetts ..1943

***Baker, Bernard William, Marne, Michigan 1938

*Baker, John Hopkinson, 1006 Fifth Ave., New York City 1930

Baker, Miss Mary Wfadell], S3 S. Harris Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1943

Baker, Rollin Harold, Box 171, Eagle Lake, Texas 1938

*Baker, William Calvin, 559 Euclid Ave., Salem, Ohio 1931

Baldwin, Mrs. Amy G., 6335 Kimbark Ave., Chicago, Illinois 1943

Barbee, Miss Louise S., 4322 Lindell Blvd., St. Louis, Missouri 1942

Barbour, Mrs. Charlotte Alice, Lisbon, New Hampshire 1942

Barkalow, Frederick Schenck, Jr., 207 Washington Ave.,

Marietta, Georgia 1936

**Barnes, Hon. Richard Magoon, Lacon, Illinois 1908

Barnes, William Bryan, Room 10, State House Annex,

Indianapolis, Indiana 1941

Barry, Harry Lfouis], % Mrs. F. L. Livengood, 1649 Glenn Ave.,

Columbus, Ohio 1941

*Bartel, Karl [Emil] Edgar, 2528 W. Collins St., Blue Island, Illinois 1934

*Bartlett, Guy, Rosendale Rd., RFD 1, Schenectady, New York 1938

*Bartsch, Dr. Paul, United States National Museum, Washington, D.C. . . 1894
♦Batchelder, Charles Foster, 7 Kirkland St., Cambridge, Massachusetts ...1917
Batchelder, Edgar Marden, 690 Lynnfield St., Lynn, Massachusetts .... 1941
Bates, Mrs. Frances Ward, 331 Washington St.,

East Walpole, Massachusetts 1942

Battell, Mrs. Harriet Chapman, 2812 Arbor St., Ames, Iowa 1942

Baumgartner, Dr. Frederick Milton, A. & M. College, Stillwater, Oklahoma 1935
Bay, Jfens] C Christian], % John Crerar Library, 86 East Randolph

St., Chicago, Illinois ...1939

**Bean, Oakley R., Rural Mail Carrier 3, Rockville, Indiana 1943

Beard, Mrs. Allen Shelby, Stony Hollow Farm, Algonac, Michigan 1942

Beardslee, Clark Smith, 132 McKinley Ave., Kenmore, New York 1942

Beardsley, Miss Margaret Hortense, 736 Lafayette Ave., Ravenna, Ohio . . 1941
Beatty, Harry Andrew, Box 472, Christiansted, St. Croix, Virgin

Islands, U.S.A 1936

Beck, Rollo Howard, Planada, California 1943

Becker, Edna Eflizabeth], Address unknown 1939

Becker, George Charles, Port Edwards, Wisconsin 1941

Bedell, Miss Marie L., 1430 West 20th St., Lorain, Ohio 1940

*Beebe, Ralph, 4169 Tenth St., Ecorse, Michigan 1924

*Beeghly, James Leon, R.D. 1, Lee Run Road, Poland, Ohio 1933

Behle, Dr. William Harroun, Department of Biology, University of

Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 1935

Belcher, Paul Eugene, 988 Jefferson Ave., Apt. 3, Akron, Ohio 1938

*Bellrose, Frank Jr., Illinois Natural History Survey, Havana, Illinois ...1935

Bennett, George Noel, 9219 Newburg Rd., Plymouth, Michigan 1943

*Bennett, Logan Johnson, 206 Forestry Bldg., Pennsylvania State

College, State College, Pennsylvania 1934

*Bennett, Miss Mary Allison, 623 East Carroll St., Macomb, Illinois ....1933
*Bennitt, Rudolf, Department of Zoology, University of Missouri,

Columbia, Missouri 1932

260

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Benson, Mrs. Mary Heydweiller, Feura Bush Road, RFD 1,

Delmar, New York 1937

♦Bent, Arthur Cleveland, 140 High St., Taunton, Massachusetts 1893

Bergstrom, E. Alexander, 95 Evergreen Ave., Hartford 5, Connecticut ...1943
♦Berthel, Russell Mfessner], Cottage Park, White Bear Lake, Minnesota 1939
♦♦Billington, Cecil, 21060 Thirteen Mile Road, Birmingham, Michigan ....1939
Binnington, Miss Nora Louise, 6006 Cabanne Place, St. Louis, Missouri . .1941

Birkeland, Henry, Roland, Iowa 1934

Bishop, Howard Elmer, 206 W. Packer Ave., Sayre, Pennsylvania 1941

♦♦Bishop, Dr. Louis Bennett, 450 Bradford St., Pasadena, California 1903

Bissonnette, Tfhomas] Hfume], Trinity College, Hartford, Connecticut . .1939

Black, Charles Theodore, Route 3, Grand Ledge, Michigan 1935

♦Blain, Dr. Alexander Willis, 2201 Jefferson Ave., E., Detroit, Michigan ..1902

Blair, Charles H., 209 Ellery Ave., Jackson, Michigan 1943

♦Blake, Emmet R[eid], Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, Illinois 1939

Blincoe, Ben Joseph, Route 1, Dayton, Ohio 1919

♦Boggs, Ira Brooks, Morgantown, West Virginia 1938

♦Bole, Benjamin Patterson, Jr., 2717 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, Ohio 1938

Bolt, Benjamin Franklin, 1110 Armour Blvd., Kansas City, Missouri 1914

Bond, Richard Marshall, 3607 S.W. Mt. Adams Drive, Portland, Oregon. .1936
Borell, Adrey Edwin, Soil Conservation Service, Box 1314

Albuquerque, New Mexico 1936

♦Borror, Donald Joyce, Department of Zoology and Entomology,

Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1927

Boulton, Rudyerd, 3317 Dent Place, Washington, D.C 1942

Bowdish, Beecher Scoville, Demarest, New Jersey 1921

Bowen, Leon W., 77 Evergreen Ave., Bloomfield, New Jersey 1942

Bowers, J. Basil, 381 51st St., Oakland, California 1942

♦Bowman, Lawrence Lincoln, Route 2, Ambler Rd., Canton, Ohio 1935

Boyd, Alvin Lee, Sig. Detach. Sat. Camp, Box 216, Pescadero, California. 1943
Boyd, Miss Elizabeth Mfargaret], Mount Holyoke College, South

Hadley, Massachusetts 1941

♦Brackbill, Harvey [Groff], 3201 Carlisle Ave., Baltimore 16, Maryland ..1942

Bradley, Homer L., Chautauqua Refuge, RFD 2, Havana, Illinois 1939

Brand, Charles Salmon, 10 Brewster Terrace, New Rochelle, New York . .1941

Brandenburg, Miss Arminta Alice, State Hospital, Toledo, Ohio 1941

♦♦Brandreth, Courtenay, Ossining, New York 1939

♦Brecher, Leonard C Charles], 1900 Spring Dr., Louisville, Kentucky 1939

♦Breckenridge, Dr. Walter John, Museum of Natural History,

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 1929

Breeze, F. J., Delphi, Indiana 1943

Breiding, George H., 487 National Road, Fulton, Wheeling, West Virginia. 1942

Brereton, Dr. E[wart] LCount], Box 99, Barrie, Ontario, Canada 1943

♦♦♦Bretsch, Clarence, 690 Broadway, Gary, Indiana 1925

Brigham, Edward Morris Jr., Route 1, Box 348, Battle Creek, Michigan .1931

♦Brigham, H. Storrs Jr., 3817 Sedgwick Ave., New York City 1942

Brignac, Miss Rita, Sunflower Junior College and Agricultural High

School, Moorhead, Mississippi 1939

Brimley, Clement S., Division of Entomology, North Carolina

Department of Agriculture, Raleigh, North Carolina 1942

Bristow, Harry Sherman Jr., Pine Avenue, Cedars, Delaware 1942

♦Brodkorb, [William] Pierce, Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor, Michigan. . 1936
Brooking, Aflbert] Mfunsell], Hastings Museum, Hastings, Nebraska ...1941
♦Brooks, Aflonzo] Bfeecher], French Creek, West Virginia 1931

December, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

261

Brooks, Dr. Earl, Noblesville, Indiana 1941

*Brooks, Earle Amos, 166 Plymouth Rd., Newton Highlands,

Massachusetts 1933

*Brooks, Maurice Graham, Division of Forestry, West Virginia

University, Morgantown, West Virginia 19.26

Broun, Maurice, The Northfield, East Northfield, Massachusetts 1935

*Brouwer, Dr. Pearl Thompson, 2287 N. Lake Drive, Milwaukee,

Wisconsin 1942

Brown, Clarence D., 222 Valley Rd., Montclair, New Jersey 1938

Brueggemann, Miss Anna L., 584 Sheridan Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1943

*Bruns, James Henry, 724 Whitney Bldg., New Orleans, Louisiana 1941

*Bryens, Oscar McKinley, RED 1, McMillan, Luce County, Michigan 1924

Buchanan, Forest Wendell, Amsterdam, Ohio 1939

*Buckheister, Carl W., 1006 Fifth Avenue, New York City 1943

Buckstaff, Ralph Noyes, Oshkosh Public Museum, Oshkosh, Wisconsin ..1941
Bujak, Boleslaus Joseph, 2547 N. St. Louis Ave., Logan Square

Station, Chicago 47, Illinois 1936

Bundy, Mfalcolm] Ffoland], R.R. 2, Atlanta, Indiana 1941

**Burelbach, Maj. Martin J., 510 West 4th St., Chattanooga, Tennessee ..1942

Burland, Lee Jfohnson], Ballston Lake, New York 1939

♦Burleigh, Thomas Dearborn, Fish and Wildlife Service, Baton

Rouge, Louisiana 1922

♦♦♦♦Burns, Franklin Lorenzo, Berwyn, Pennsylvania Founder

Burroughs, Raymond Darwin, Game Division, Department of

Conservation, Lansing, Michigan 1937

♦Burt, Dr. William Henry, Museum of Zoology, University of

Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 1928

♦Burtch, Verdi, Branchport, New York 1924

Bussewitz, Albert William, 10 Straub St., Rochester 13, New York 1943

♦Butchart, G. Reeves, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 1943

♦Butler, Lawrence Michael, 436 Holly, St. Paul, Minnesota 1940

Butzen, Thomas Frank, Forest Park, Madison 5, Wisconsin 1943

Cadbury, Joseph Mfoore], Johnson Court, No. 1, 16 E. Johnson

St., Germantown, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1943

Cagle, Dr. Fred R., Museum, Southern Illinois Normal University,

Carbondale, Illinois 1942

♦Cahalane, Victor Harrison, National Park Service, Merchandise

Mart, Chicago 54, Illinois 1933

Calvert, Earl Wellington, Haliburton, Ontario, Canada 1937

Calvert, William Jfonathan] Jr., 615 N. Pelham Rd.,

Jacksonville, Alabama 1942

♦Campbell, Louis Walker, 4531 Walker Ave., Toledo, Ohio 1926

♦Campbell, Miss Mildred Florence, 29 N. Hawthorne Lane,

Indianapolis, Indiana 1938

Capps, Cpl. Beryl Ffranklin], 37th General Hospital, Camp

Blanding, Florida 1939

♦Carpenter, Floyd S., 2402 Longest Ave., Louisville, Kentucky 1934

♦♦Carrothers, Miss Vera, 14704 Alder Ave., East Cleveland, Ohio 1938

♦Carter, John Darlington, Lansdowne, Pennsylvania 1930

♦Cartwright, Bertram William, 59 Elm Park Rd., Winnipeg,

Manitoba, Canada 1930

Case, Leslie Delos Sr., 714 West Madison St., Ann Arbor, Michigan 1938

Cassel, Jfoseph] Frankflin], 1529 Dauphin Ave., Wyomissing,

Pennsylvania 1940

262

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 4

♦♦Chambers, Willie Lee, Robinson Road, Topanga, California 1909

Chance, Edgar Percival, Gurdons, Witley, Godaiming, Surrey, England ..1941

♦Chapman, Dr. Floyd Barton, 1944 Denune Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1932

♦Chapman, Dr. Frank Michler, American Museum of Natural History,

Central Park West at 79th St., New York City 1910

Chapman, Lawrence Boylston, 1 Woodridge Rd., Wellesley,

Massachusetts 1940

Charles, Mrs. Gfeorge] E[d], Route 1, Box 160, West Columbia,

South Carolina 1942

♦Chase, Henry B. Jr,, Southern Biological Supply Co., New Orleans,

Louisiana 1932

Chutter, Miss Mildred C., Box 229, Athens, Ohio 1936

Clapp, Gfeorge] Howard, Pabst Farms, Oconomowoc, Wisconsin 1941

♦Clarkson, Mrs. Edwin, 248 Ridgewood Ave., Charlotte, North Carolina .1940
Clement, Roland Cfharles], 804 Walnut St., Fall River, Massachusetts ..1941

♦Clow, Miss Marion, Box 163, Lake Forest, Illinois 1929

Coats, Miss Ruth Emily, 702 E. 1st St., Tillamook, Oregon 1942

♦Coffey, Lt. Ben Barry, O.C.S. Dept, of Tactics, Ft. Sill, Oklahoma 1927

Cole, Dr. Leon Jacob, Department of Genetics, University of

Wisconsin College of Agriculture, Madison, Wisconsin 1921

♦Coles, Victor, 2910 Grasselli Ave., Westwood, Cincinnati, Ohio 1929

♦Compton, Lawrence Verlyn, 409 West Webster St., Pittsburg, Kansas . . 1923

♦Comstock, Kenneth E., 82 Centennial Ave., Cranford, New Jersey 1943

Comstock, W. Ogilvie, New Ipwich, New Hampshire 1942

Conrad, Charles Louis, 423 Warwood Ave., Wheeling, West Virginia ^937

Conway, Albert Efward], Box 135, West Chester, Pennsylvania T939

♦Cook, Miss Fannye Addine, State Fish and Game Commission,

Box 451, Jackson, Mississippi 1923

Cooley, Miss Eleanor Graham, Bot.-Chem.-Pharm. Library,

University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 1936

Coombes, Robert Armitage Hamilton, Sea Bank, Bolton-le-Sands,

Caraforth, Lancashire, England 1939

Cordes, William Joseph Jr., 1115 LuUwater Rd., Atlanta, Georgia 1941

♦Cottam, Dr. Clarence, Fish and Wildlife Ser\dce, Merchandise Mart,

Chicago 54, Illinois 1929

Cottrell, George William Jr., 4724 Alton Place, Washington, D.C 1941

Craighead, Frank C., 5301 41st St., N.W., Washington, D.C 1941

Crosby, John Alexander, 56 Broadway Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada ..1943

Cross, Edmund R[ust], 1751 University Ave., San Diego, California 1941

♦Cruickshank, Allen Dudley, National Audubon Society, 1006 Fifth

Ave., New York City 1939

Cunningham, Miss Elizabeth Rose, Box 85, Canton, Maine 1943

Cunningham, James W., 4312 Walnut, Kansas City, Missouri 1935

♦Currier, Edmonde Samuel, 8541 N. Chicago Ave., St John’s Sta.,

Portland, Oregon 1930

Curtis, Miss Elizabeth Long, 5648 Beach Dr., Seattle, Washington 1935

Dahlberg, Wendell [Oscar], 11312 S. Michigan Ave., Chicago, Illinois ..1939

Dale, David, Route 2, Humbert Rd., Alton, Illinois 1943

Dalke, Dr. Paul David, U.S. Wildlife Unit, University of Missouri,

Columbia, Missouri 1936

Dambach, Charles A., Ohio Wildlife Research Station, O.S.U.,

Columbus, Ohio 1934

Damon, David, 724 Sixth St., Ames, Iowa 1933

♦Dandridge, Miss Serena K., Shepherdstown, West Virginia 1943

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

263

Danner, May S. [Mrs. John M.], 1646 Cleveland Ave., N.W.,

Canton, Ohio 1921

**Darden, Mrs. Colgate W., Executive Mansion, Richmond, Virginia 1943

Davey, Winthrop N[ewbury], 2485 Hendee Rd., Jackson, Michigan 1941

*Davidson, William Mark, National Research Center, Beltsville, Maryland. 1933

Davis, Dr. David Edward, 721 Elmwood Ave., Wilmette, Illinois 1940

Davis, George, State Teachers College, Murfreesboro, Tennessee 1936

Davis, George W., 3 Fremont St., Montpelier, Vermont 1941

Davis, Mrs. Louie Irby, Box 988, Harlingen, Texas 1933

Davis, Dr. William B., Department of Wild Game, College Station, Texas. .1938

Day, Miss Pearl Elizabeth, 8 Alton, Milo, Maine 1943

Dean, A. Lawrence, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg, Virginia. . 1943
Dear, Lt. Col. Lfionel] Sfextus], Box 127, Port Arthur, Ontario, Canada 1939
Dechen, Mrs. Lillian Orvetta, 14 Summer St., Port Dickinson,

Binghamton, New York 1939

*Decker, Charles O., 6450 Kenwood Ave., Chicago, Illinois 1938

Delavan, Wayne C., R.R. 2, Box 61, Bronson, Kansas 1943

♦DeLury, Dr. Ralph Emerson, Dominion Observatory, Ottawa,

Ontario, Canada 1920

Dempsey, Geoffrey Hamilton, Elmhurst Hall, The University, Reading,

Berkshire, England 1940

Denney, Arthur Hugh, 112 Wildlife Bldg., Columbia, Missouri 1943

Derleth, August, Sauk City, Wisconsin 1943

DeSelm, Hal R., 97 Clinton Heights Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1943

**Desmond, Hon. Thomas C Charles], Box 670, Newburgh, New York 1942

Deusing, Murl, Milwaukee Public Museum, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1937

Devitt, Otto Edmund, 218 Eglinton Ave., E., Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 1935
Dice, Dr. Lee Raymond, Laboratory of Vertebrate Biology,

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 1943

Dickinson, Mrs. William Winston, 2006 Reid Ave., Bluefield,

West Virginia 1942

Dille, Frederick Monroe, 822 Grand Ave., Nogales, Arizona 1912

Dingle, Edward von Siebold, Huger, South Carolina 1921

*Dixon, James Benjamin, R.D. 1, Box 688, Escondido, California 1936

Dobbins, H[ugh] Cflinton], 1456 W. Clifton Blvd., Lakewood, Ohio ..1941

Dock, George Jr., 119 Brite Ave., Scarsdale, New York 1941

*Dodge, Victor Kenney, 137 Bell Court West, Lexington, Kentucky 1935

Dole, J. Wilbur, 51 E. Stone St., Fairfield, Iowa 1930

Domm, Dr. Lincoln Valentine, Whitman Laboratory for

Experimental Zoology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 1936

Donaldson, Harry Byron, Rose Lake Wildlife Experiment Station,

R. 1, East Lansing, Michigan 1943

Doughty, Jacob P[hinizy], R. 2, Prospect, Kentucky 1940

♦Douglass, Dr. Donald W., Game Division, Department of Conservation,

Lansing, Michigan 1929

Downing, Paul E., 835 Waukegan Ave., Highland Park, Illinois 1943

Dreyfoos, Wallace David, 1212 Virginia Ave., N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 1941

Drum, Miss Margaret, Owatonna, Minnesota 1937

Duer, Harry E., 9304 Edmunds Ave., Cleveland, Ohio 1941

♦Duffield, Marjorie [Mrs. J. W.], Frost Lane and Oakwood Drive,

Peekskill, New York 1940 .

♦DuMont, Philip Atkinson, Fish and Wildlife Service, Merchandise

Mart, Chicago 54, Illinois 1928

♦Duncan, Donald Pendleton, 5841 Nickerson Ave., Chicago, Illinois 1936

264

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Dundas, Lester Harvey, Germfask, Michigan 1943

Dusi, Julian Luigi, 886 Wilson Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1941

♦Eagleson, Joseph P., 85 East Gay St., Columbus, Ohio 1945

Eagleson, Mrs. Mary Stoddard, 169 Miller Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1945

♦Eastman, Whitney H[askins], % General Mills, Inc., Chamber of Com-
merce Bldg., Minneapolis, Minnesota 1941

♦Eastwood, Sidney Kingman, 301 S. Winebiddle Ave., Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania 1925

Eaton, Stephen Woodman, 808 S. Main St., Geneva, New York 1942

♦Edge, Mrs. Charles Noel, 1215 Fifth Ave., New York City, 29 1931

♦Eifert, Virginia S. [Mrs. H. D.], Illinois State Museum, Springfield,

Illinois 1941

♦Eifrig, Charles William Gustave, Windermere, Orange Co., Florida 1907

Eisenmann, Eugene, 110 West 86th St., New York City 1942

♦Ekblaw, Dr. George Elbert, 511 W. Main St., Urbana, Illinois 1914

♦Ekblaw, Walter Elmer, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts 1910

Elder, William Hanna, Natural Resources Bldg., Urbana, Illinois 1938

♦Elliott, Dr. Richard M., 1564 Vincent St., St. Paul, Minnesota 1940

Ellis, Prof. Hazel Rosetta, Kenka College, Kenka Park, New York 1942

♦♦♦Ellis, Ralph, 2420 Ridge Rd., Berkeley, California 1926

Emerson, David Lfowell], 25 Everett Ave., Providence, Rhode Island ..1939

♦Emerson, Guy, 16 Wall St., New York City 1938

♦Emilio, Shepard Gilbert, R. 4, Laconia, New Hampshire 1929

Emlen, Miss Eleanor Cope, Awbury, Germantown, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 1942

Emlen, Dr. John Thompson, Jr., Psych obiological Laboratory, Johns

Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland 1936

Empey, Miller, Freeland, Michigan 1939

♦English, Dr. Pennoyer Francis, Department of Zoology, Pennsylvania

State College, State College Pennsylvania 1934

Ennis, James Harold, Cornell College, Mount Vernon, Iowa 1942

Erickson, Arnold Burton, Division of Economic Zoology, University

Farm, St. Paul, Minnesota 1938

♦Erickson, Miss Mary Marilla, Santa Barbara State College, Santa

Barbara, California 1930

Erickson, Ray Cfharles], 1104 Washington Ave., St. Peter, Minnesota ..1939

♦Errington, Dr. Paul Lfester], Iowa State College, Ames, Iowa 1932

Etz, Mrs. Elizabeth [Cecilia], Thornhedge, Wheeling, West Virginia ....1940

♦♦Eustice, Alfred LeRoy, Bright Land Farm, Barrington, Illinois 1941

♦Evans, Dr. Evan Morton, 550 Park Ave., New York City 1929

Evans, John Harwood, 517 Jackson Drive, Oshkosh, Wisconsin 1943

Faegre, David [Colin], Belfield, Stark County, North Dakota 1940

Fahrenholz, Fred Henry, 2912 Elmo Place, Middletown, Ohio 1942

Fales, John House, 1917 Elkhart St., Silver Spring, Maryland 1939

♦♦Fargo, William Gilbert, 506 Union St., Jackson, Michigan 1923

Farner, Donald S[tanley], 4926 Cass, Omaha, Nebraska 1941

♦Feeney, W. S., Ladysmith, Wisconsin ! 1937

Feighner, Miss Lena Veta, 298-1 South Tremont St., Kansas City, Kansas 1935
Findlay, Miss Violet L., Board of Education, 11th and Washington

Sts., Wilmington, Delaware 1943

Fischer, Richard Bernard, 140-19 Beech Ave., Flushing, New York 1942

Fleetwood, Raymond Judy, Piedmont Wildlife Refuge, Round Oak,

Georgia 1931

Fleugel, James Bush, 1104 American National Bank Bldg.,

Kalamazoo, Michigan 1942

December, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

265

Floyd, E[arl] Pershing, 202 North Hogan, Pryor, Oklahoma 1939

*Floyd, Judge Joseph Larke, 1009-11 George D. Harter Bank Bldg.,

Canton, Ohio 1903

Flynn, Michael Burke, 415 S. Crouse Ave., Syracuse, New York 1942

*Foote, Maurice Edwin, R. 1, Mantua, Ohio 1932

Ford, Edward Russell, Newaygo, Michigan 1914

Forsyth, Mrs. Louise [Ann], Lebanon Road, Hanover, New Hampshire. 1940

Fox, Adrian Caspar, % Mrs. Nels Fasen, Leeds, North Dakota 1937

France, Horace Owen, Biology Department, University of Colorado,

Boulder, Colorado 1941

*Fredine, Cflarence] Gordon, Long Prairie, Minnesota 1938

Freer, Marion F., [Mrs. R. Lloyd], 4 Lenox Place, St. Louis, Missouri . .1942
**French, Mrs. Elizabeth Thomas, 1315 Las Lomas, Albuquerque,

New Mexico 1943

Frost, Herbert Hamilton, “Pen Craig”, Newport, Rhode Island 1941

Fryman, Miss Kathryn E., 409 Elm St., Wyandotte, Michigan 1943

Fuller, Raymond Tifft, Winterton, New York 1943

*Furniss, Ow6n Cecil, 2203 First Ave., W., Prince Albert,

Saskatchewan, Canada 1934

Furth, John T[homas], 436 Felton Ave., Highland Park, New Jersey 1939

*Gabrielson, Dr. Ira Noel, Fish and Wildlife Service, Merchandise

Mart, Chicago 54, Illinois 1913

Gaillard, Stephen Lee, 9 Lee Place, Bronxville, New York 1942

*Gammell, Dr. Robert T., Kenmare, North Dakota 1943

**Ganier, Albert F[ranklin], 2112 Woodlawn Drive, Nashville, Tennessee. 1915

Gardiner, Dan S. Jr., 1707 South 21 East, Salt Lake City, Utah 1941

Garges, Wilbur Lawrence, 119 12th Ave., Huntington, West Virginia 1943

Garrett, Miss Lois, 1709 Chestnut St., Kenova, West Virginia 1942

Garrison, Sgt. David L[loyd], 5th General Hospital, A.P.O. 519,

Postmaster, New York City 1940

Gatterdam, Paul Cfhristoffers], 2539 Edgewood PI., La Crosse, Wisconsin 1940

Gavin, Angus, Eskimo Point, via Churchill, Manitoba, Canada 1942

Geiser, Ernest, R.F.D. 4, Troy, New York 1943

Gensch, Robert Hfenry], Lakes States Forest Experiment Station,

University Farm, St. Paul, Minnesota 1939

George, John L[othar], U.S.S. Mervine, % Fleet Postmaster,

New York City 1939

Gerstell, Richard, Pennsylvania Game Commission, Harrisburg,

Pennsylvania 1939

Gibbs, Harold N[elson], A-71 Sowans Rd., Barrington, Rhode Island ..1941

Gibbs, Walter C., Whitehall, Michigan 1941

Gier, Dr. Herschel Thomas, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 1937

Gifford, Dr. Harold, 3636 Burt, Omaha, Nebraska 1936

Gilbert, Gareth, 2422 Indianola Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1943

Gilbert, Dr. Perry Webster, Department of Zoology, Cornell University,

Ithaca, New York 1942

Gillette, Delbert A., R. 5, Yakima, Washington 1942

Gillette, Miss Fredericka B., 1319 Forest Ave., Ann Arbor, Michigan ...1938

Giltz, Maurice Lferoy], 841 Lincoln Way, N. W., Massillon, Ohio 1939

Givens, Laurence Spessard, Box 67, St. Marks, Florida 1943

Glenn, Robert W., 509 Orchard Ave., Avalon, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. .1934

**GIover, Ray James, R.D. 1, Addison, Pennsylvania 1943

Gloyd, Dr. Howard Kay, Chicago Academy of Sciences, 2001

North Clark St., Chicago, Illinois ,1925

266

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. SS. No.4

**Goetz, Christian John, 3503 Middleton Ave., Cincinnati, Ohio 1930

♦Goldsmith, Glenn Warren, Box 1611. University Station, Austin, Texas ..1931

Good, Ernest E[ugene], R.R. 5, Van Wert, Ohio 1937

Goodspeed, Mrs. Olive M., 76 Willow St., Augusta, Maine 1943

♦Gordon, J[esse] Halford, 139 East Second Ave., Roselle, New Jersey ..1942

♦Goslin, Charles Rfussell], 407 Washington Ave., Lancaster, Ohio 1940

Goslin, Robert Mfartin], 316 Wilson Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1936

Gram, Mrs. Margaret Edwards, 409 Notre Dame Ave., Grosse

Pointe, Michigan 1941

♦Grange, Wallace, Babcock, Wisconsin 1941

♦Grant, Cleveland Putnam, 620 Greenup St., Covington, Kentucky 1928

Graves, Miss Katherine, 1209 North Illinois St., Apt. 28,

Indianapolis, Indiana 1942

♦Gray, William Arthur, Room 646, 224 S. Michigan Ave., Chicago, Illinois. 1938

Greeley, Frederick, 200 Chestnut St., Winnetka, Illinois 1942

Green, N. Bayard, Training School, Marshall College, Huntington,

West Virginia 1943

Green, Miss Rhoda Jfanet], 8 Betsy Ross Lane, Sylacauga, Alabama 1940

♦♦Greene, Albert E., 1841 Cambridge Rd., Ann Arbor, Michigan 1939

Greene, Earle Rosenbury, 22 Virginia Court, New Orleans, Louisiana .... 1930

Greenhalgh, Clifton M., Kanab, Utah 1939

♦Gregg, Miss Pearl, Middlebourne, West Virginia 1942

♦Gregory, Stephen Strong Jr., Box N., Winnetka, Illinois 1922

Griffin, Donald Rfedfield], Biology Laboratory, Harvard University,

Cambridge, Massachusetts 1941

Griggs, Julian Gfladden], Camp Wellston, Wellston, Michigan 1939

Grimes, Samuel Andrew, 825 South Shores Rd., Jacksonville, Florida ..1924

♦Grimm, William C[arey], Box 424, Linesville, Pennsylvania 1939

Grinnell, Lawrence I[rving], 710 Triphammer Rd., Ithaca, New York ..1939
♦Griscom, Ludlow, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge,

Massachusetts 1937

Griswold, John A[ugustus] Jr., 115 South St., Auburn, New York 1941

Grose, E. R., Sago, West Virginia 1939

Groskin, Horace, 210 Glenn Rd., Ardmore, Pennsylvania 1937

♦Gross, Dr. Alfred Otto, 11 Boody St., Brunswick, Maine 1927

Gunderson, Harvey Lorraine, % Mr. H. H. Gunderson, Gary, Minnesota 1941

Haecker, Frederick Woods, 506 South 52nd St., Omaha, Nebraska 1938

♦Hagar, Mrs. Jack, Box 339, Rockport, Texas 1930

♦Hague, Dr. Florence S., Sweet Briar College, Sweet Briar, Virginia 1931

Hahn, Miss Helen H[amilton], 71 Mill St., Williamsville, New York 1941

Haines, T. P., 1428 White St., Ann Arbor, Michigan 1941

♦Hainsworth, William Pickard, 216 Railroad Ave., North Andover,

Massachusetts 1930

Haller, Frank Dfenver], 125 S. Second St., Coshocton, Ohio 1940

♦Hallman, Roy Cline, Box 826, Panama City, Florida 1928

♦Hamerstrom, Lt. Frederick N. Jr., 6th Alt. Trg. Unit, AAB

Mountain Home, Idaho 1934

Hamilton, Mrs. R. E., 208 College St., Dalton, Georgia 1942

♦Hamilton, Dr. William J[ohn] Jr., Department of Zoology,

Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 1933

Hammond, Merrill C[lyde], Lower Souris Refuge, Upham,

North Dakota 1939

♦Handley, Charles Overton, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, Blacksburg,

Virginia 1925

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

267

♦Handley, Charles Overton Jr., Blacksburg, Virginia 1941

*Hann, Dr. Harry Wilbur, Department of Zoology, University of

Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 1930

Hanna, Wilson Creal, 141 E. F Street, Colton, California 1936

Hanson, Eflmer] Charles, Jr., 1305 Wisconsin Ave., Racine, Wisconsin. . 1940

Happ, George Bippus, The Principia College, Elsah, Illinois 1935

Hardy [Cecil] Ross, Dixie Junior College, Saint George, Utah 1940

♦Harkness, Reed B., 4908 Laclede Ave., St. Louis, Missouri 1942

♦Harper, Dr. Francis, 224 S. Chester Rd., Swarthmore, Pennsylvania ....1930

Harrell, Byron Eugene, 1594 Stanford Ave., St. Paul, Minnesota 1943

Harrell, Frank Ridlen, Museum Libraries, University of Michigan,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 1936

♦♦Harriot, Samuel Carman, 200 West 58th St., New York City 1934

Harris, H. D., P.O. Box 579, Chappaqua, New York 1943

Harris, Mrs. I. B., 39 Franklin Park, W., Columbus, Ohio 1943

Harrison, Hal H. [Harold Holmes], The Valley Daily News, Tarentum,

Pennsylvania 1941

♦Hart, Frank Elmer, 2499 Medary Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1943

♦Hartman, Frank A[lexander], Hamilton Hall, Ohio State University,

Columbus, Ohio 1941

♦Hartwell, Arthur Mowry, 1506 Mt. Curae, Minneapolis, Minnesota 1940

Haskins, Edith D., Hanover Rd,, Lebanon, New Hampshire 1941

Hausler, Mrs. M., 7348 Paxton Ave., Chicago, Illinois 1936

♦♦Havemeyer, Henry Osborne, Mahwah, New Jersey 1930

Hawkins, B. L., Hamline University, St. Paul, Minnesota 1936

Hawksley, Mrs. Janet P., 123 Lafayette Circle, Cincinnati, Ohio 1942

♦♦Hebard, Frederick Vfanuxem], 1500 Walnut St. Bldg,,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1940

Heckler, S. B., Folly Farm, Cherry Plain, New York 1942

Hedges, Harold Charles, R. 2, Lake Quivira, Kansas City, Kansas 1940

♦Hefley, Harold M[artin], Department of Biology, Texas

Technological College, Lubbock, Texas 1942

♦Heidenkamp, Joseph Jr,, 538 Glen Arden Drive, Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania 1942

Heiser, Pvt. Joseph M[atthew] Jr., Hg. & Hg. Co., Reception

Center, Ft. Sam Houston, Texas 1939

Henderson, Alexander, 89 Woodland Rd., Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts . .1941
Hendricks, G. Bartlett, The Berkshire Museum, Pittsfield, Massachusetts 1943
♦Hendrickson, Dr. George Oscar, Department of Zoology and

Entomology, Iowa State College, Ames, Iowa 1933

♦Henry, Cordia John, Lower Souris Refuge, Upham, North Dakota 1933

Henwood, Mrs. Ethel May, 609 West Ohio, Urbana, Illinois 1941

Herula, Joseph, 2140 Evergreen Ave., Chicago, Illinois 1942

♦♦Hewitt, Oliver Harold, Fernow Hall, Cornell University,

Ithaca, New York 1943

♦Hickey, J. J., 5214 S. Woodlawn, Chicago 15, Illinois 1940

♦♦♦Hicks, Dr. Lawrence Emerson, Ohio Wildlife Research Station,

Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1925

Hiett, Lawrence Davison, 1945 Ottawa Drive, Toledo, Ohio 1929

Higgins, Harold Guymon, 352 N. 1st E., Price, Utah 1941

Hill, Herbert Oliver, 61 Irving Place, New York City 1938

Hill, Louise B. [Mrs. Julian Werner], 1106 Greenhill Ave.,

Wilmington, Delaware 1935

Hill, Norman Pierce, IS Oxford St., Arlington, Massachusetts 1941

268

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 4

Hill, Raymond W., 3316 Kenmore Rd., Shaker Heights, Cleveland, Ohio. 1941

♦Hillmer, Davis B., 8228 Woodward Ave., Detroit, Michigan 1926

♦Hilton, Dr. David Clark, 305 Continental Bldg., Lincoln, Nebraska 1918

♦Hinds, Frank J., Biology Department, Western Michigan College,

Kalamazoo, Michigan 1935

♦Hinshaw, Thomas Doane, 1827 San Juan Ave., Berkeley, California 1926

Hobson, Dorothy Madden, [Mrs. L. G.], Bloomingdale, Indiana 1935

Hochbaum, Hans Albert, Delta, Manitoba, Canada 1942

Hoff, Clayton M., 810 Blackshire Rd., Wilmington, Delaware 1943

Hoffman, Paul. William, 8415 Kenyon Ave., Wauwatosa, Wisconsin ....1940

Hoffmeister, Linus C[hristian], 504 W. Ripa Ave., Lemay, Missouri 1939

♦Holabird Christopher, 2236 Lincoln Park West, Chicago, Illinois 1940

♦Holland, Harold May, Box 615, Galesburg, Illinois 1915

Hoodema, Richard L., 116 W. 14th St., Holland, Michigan 1941

Horner, Sgt. William A., Hdq. Co., 103 Inf. Div. (Band), A.P.O. 470,

Shreveport, Louisiana 1943

Horton, Louise D. [Mrs. M. B.], 360 Prospect St., Fall River,

Massachusetts 1941

Hostetter, D[avid] Ralph, Eastern Mennonite School,

Harrisonburg, Virginia 1937

Hotchkiss, Neil, Patuxent Research Refuge, Bowie, Maryland 1940

Hough, Mrs. Eleanor Sloan, 4820 Olentangy Blvd., Columbus, Ohio 1941

Howard, William Jfohnston], 5518 Fairglen Rd., Chevy Chase 15,

Maryland 1940

Howe, Henry Branch Jr., 414 W. Ponce de Leon Ave., Decatur. Georgia . .1943
Howell, Joseph Corwin, Department of Zoology, Oklahoma A. & M.

College, Stillwater, Oklahoma 1938

Howes, W. H., Box 310, Kindersley, Saskatchewan, Canada 1943

Hoyt, George Bfrown], 2603 Habersham Rd., Atlanta, Georgia 1941

♦Hoyt, J[ohn] Southgate Yfeston], Stark General Hospital,

Charleston, South Carolina 1936

Huggins, Russell A., Department of Physiology, School of Medicine,

University of South Dakota, Vermillion, South Dakota 1937

♦Hughes, George Thomas, R. 2, Plainfield, New Jersey 1929

Hulbert, Lloyd Clair, 529 West Grand River Ave., East Lansing,

Michigan 1938

♦Hunt, Ormond Edson, 14-133 General Motors Bldg., Detroit, Michigan . .1937

Hunter, Lawrence E., 1103 Olympia Ave., Columbia, South Carolina 1934

Hurley, John Beatty, 401 S. 17th Ave., Yakima, Washington 1937

Hutchinson, Arthur E., 715 Mission Canyon Rd., Santa

Barbara, California 1940

Hyde, Lt. Afrthur] Sidney, SOS, SAAB, Santa Ana, California 1939

Ingersoll, Albert Mills, 908 F Street, San Diego, California 1921

♦♦Ingersoll, Marian Crory, % Terwilliger, 69-11 Forest Ave.,

Ridgewood, Long Island, New York 1942

♦Jackson, Cicero Floyd, University of New Hampshire, Durham,

New Hampshire 1936

♦Jackson, Frances Lee, 541 Hammond St., Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts ..1941
Jameson, Everett Williams Jr., 179 Highland Ave., Buffalo, New York.. 1941
♦Jamison, Cfonrad] Hfeston], 2811 Acklen Ave., Nashville, Tennessee ..1940

♦Janvrin, Dr. Edmund R. P., 38 E. 85th St., New York City 1942

Jaques, Ffrancis] L[ee], 610 West 116th St., New York City 1939

Jaquith, Barbara Elizabeth [Mrs. L. Everett], 72 Hudson Dr.,

Toronto, Ontario, Canada ‘. . . . 1943

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No, 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

269

Jenkins, James H[obart], 1204 W. Chestnut, Mt. Vernon, Ohio 1939

Johanson, Miss Flora Ingeborg, 229 Sagamore Rd., Millburn,

New Jersey 1942

^Johnson, Irene W. [Mrs, Oscar], 38 Portland PI., St. Louis, Missouri ..1931
Johnson, Perry Frank, 2918 S. Anthony Blvd., Fort Wayne, Indiana ....1935

♦Johnson, Robert Anthony, 150 East St., Oneonta, New York 1930

Johnson, William M[cNutt], 108 E. Depot St., Knoxville, Tennessee ..1939
Johnston, David Ware, 1037 St. Charles Ave., N. E.,

Atlanta, Georgia 1943

Johnston, Miss Verna R[uth], Thornton Township High, Harvey, Illinois. 1941

♦Jonah, Miss Christie May, 47 Linden St., Hackensack, New Jersey 1942

♦Jones, Harold Charles, Mount Berry, Georgia 1929

♦Jones, John Courts, 718 Garfield St., Eveleth, Minnesota. 1931

♦♦♦♦Jones, Dr. Lynds, 352 W. College St., Oberlin, Ohio Founder

Jones, S[olomon] Paul, 509 West Ave., N., Waukesha, Wisconsin 1921

Jones, Victor Emmons, University of Idaho, Southern Branch,

Pocatello, Idaho 1938

Jorae, Miss Irene Frances, Central Michigan College of Education,

Mount Pleasant, Michigan 1942

Jorns, Byron C., 3725 Gregory St., Madison, Wisconsin 1943

♦Jung, Clarence [Schram], 6383 N. Port Washington Rd.,

Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1921

Jurica, Dr. E., Lisle, Illinois 1940

Kahmann, Mrs. Karl W., R. 2, Hayward, Wisconsin 1941

Kahn, Diana Hope [Mrs. Reuben L.], 1122 Michigan Ave.,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 1938

♦Kalmbach, Edwin Richard, 546 Custom House, Denver, Colorado 1926

♦Kase, John Charles, Versailles, Indiana 1937

♦Keller, Richard T., 1601 S. Fourth St., Springfield, Illinois 1943

♦Kelso, Leon Hugh, 1370 Taylor St., N.W., Washington, D.C 1930

Kemp, David L., 42 Thayer St., New York City 1943

♦Kendeigh, Dr. S[amuel] Charles, Vivarium Bldg., University of

Illinois, Champaign, Illinois 1923

Kerns, Chester M., 97 West Green St., Westminster, Maryland 1941

Kerr, Miss Mary Helen, 1290 Delaware, Springfield, Missouri 1943

Kiefer, Mrs. Elizabeth D., 243 Gratiot Blvd., Port Huron, Michigan 1941

♦Kieran, John, 4506 Riverdale Ave., Bronx, New York City 1942

Kindler, Mrs. Grace Emma, R. 1, Sheridan Drive, Lancaster, Ohio 1937

Kirk, Allan Dfixon], 14 Forest Hill Rd., Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania 1939

Kirkpatrick, Charles Milton, Department of Forestry, Purdue

University, Lafayette, Indiana 1941

♦Klinkerfuss, Dr. G. H., 340 Bermuda Ave., Normandy, Missouri 1941

♦Klinkerfuss, Mrs. G. H., 340 Bermuda Ave., Normandy, Missouri 1941

Kluge, Miss Helen Hfenrika], R. 1, Woodtick Rd., Waterbury,

Connecticut 1942

♦Knapp, Elmer Leslie, R.F.D. 2, Troy, Pennsylvania 1930

Knox, Miss Margaret Richardson, 4030 Park Ave.,

Indianapolis, Indiana 1937

Koch, Peter, Terrace Park, Ohio 1939

Koehler, Mrs. Arthur, 109 Chestnut St., Madison, Wisconsin 1941

Koestner, E. J., Box 263, Piper City, Illinois 1938

Kolb, Charles Haven Jr., 5210 Catalpha Rd., Baltimore, Maryland 1937

♦♦Kortright, Francis H., 5 St. Edmunds Dr., Toronto, Ontario, Canada ...1943
Kosten, John Leonard, 967 Pine Ave., N.W., Grand Rapids, Michigan ..1939

270

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

♦Kozicky, Edward L., 206 Forestry Bldg., State College, Pennsylvania ..1943
Kramer, Theodore Christian, Department of Anatomy, East Medical

Bldg., University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 1939

Kraus, Dr. Douglas L., Department of Chemistry, California Institute

of Technology, Pasadena 4, California 1942

Kreag, Keith K., R.R.2, Box 196, Lansing, Michigan 1942

Kuitert, Lt. Louis Cornelius, 706 Florence St., Kalamazoo, Michigan ....1938

♦Kutz, Dr. Harry Leon, Game Research Center, Delmar, New York 1939

♦Kyllingstad, Henry Cfarrell], Mountain Village, Alaska 1940

Lacey, Miss Mifton H., % Canton Girl Scouts, 433 Tusc W.

Headquarters, Canton, Ohio 1939

Laffoon, Jean [Luther], 1401 W. Third St., Sioux City, Iowa 1940

♦Lagler, Dr. Karl F., Department of Zoology, University of Michigan,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 1941

***Lambert, Bert H., 16854 Wildemere Ave,, Detroit, Michigan 1936

♦Lamson, Arrol L., Siniscroft, Simsbury, Connecticut 1943

Banning, Robert George, 56 Chatsworth Drive, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 1942
Lanyon, Wesley Edwin, 23 E. Wheelock St., Hanover, New Hampshire . .1943
*Larrabee, Austin Park, Yankton College, Yankton, South Dakota ....1921
♦Laskey, Amelia Rudolph [Mrs. F. C.], Graybar Lane, Nashville,

Tennessee 1928

Lawrence, William Hobart, 1410 Decatur St., N.W., Washington 11, D.C. 1943

Lay, Daniel Wayne, 1445 Avenue G, Beaumont, Texas 1939

Lea, Robert Bashford, 737 Center St., Elgin, Illinois 1940

Lee, Dr. Howard James, Major M.C. Station Hospital, Ft. Leonard

Wood, Missouri 1941

Leedy, Dr. Daniel Lovey, Ohio Wildlife Research Station, Ohio

State University, Columbus, Ohio 1936

Leenhouts, Miss Pearle Esther, Pease Rd., Williamson, New York 1941

Legg, William C[larence], Mount Lookout, West Virginia 1939

♦Leopold, Prof. Aldo, 424 University Farm Place, Madison, Wisconsin. .1928

Leopold, A[ldo] Starker, Box 247, West Plains, Missouri 1940

Levy, Mrs. Alice Klund, 235 East 22nd St., Apt llT, New York City ..1941
♦Lewis, Dr. Harrison Flint, Lands, Parks and Forest Branch, Department

of Mines and Resources, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 1939

Lewis, Brother Hubert, Cretin High School, St. Paul, Minnesota 1940

♦Lewy, Dr. Alfred, 2051 East 72nd Place, Windsor Park Station,

Chicago, Illinois 1915

Lindzey, James S., 901 West 22nd St., Wilmington, Delaware 1942

♦Linsdale, Dr. Jean Myron, Jamesburg Route, Monterey, California 1928

Linton, M[orris] Albert, 315 Oak Ave., Moorestown, New Jersey 1941

Lloyd, Clark K., 2712 Hoover Ave., Dayton, Ohio 1925

♦Lloyd, Hoyes, 582 Mariposa Ave., Rockcliffe Park, Ottawa,

Ontario, Canada 1922

Lockley, R. M., Skokholm Bird Observatory, Dale, Haverfordwest,

Pembrokeshire, Wales, Great Britain 1940

Lodge, William Ralph, Silver Lake Estates, R. 2, Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio . .1935

Loefer, John B[enjamin], 28 Chestnut St., Berea, Kentucky 1941

Longley, William Howard, Box 55, Bayview, Idaho 1943

Lord, Dr. Frederick P[omeroy], 39 College St., Hanover,

New Hampshire 1939

Lovell, Dr. Harvey B., 3011 Meade Ave., Louisville, Kentucky 1936

♦Lovett, Emery Jr., 2900 Via La Selva, Palos Verdes Estates,

California 1942

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

271

Low, Dr. Jessop B., School of Forestry, Utah State Agricultural

College, Logan, Utah 1941

*Low, Seth Haskell, Salt Plains Wildlife Refuge, Jet, Oklahoma 1931

***Lowery, George Hines Jr., Museum of Zoology, Louisiana State

University, Louisiana 1937

Loyster, Earl Leroy, Wisconsin Conservation Department,

State Office Bldg., Madison, Wisconsin 1943

*Ludwig, Claud Charles, 506 Wilson Bldg., Lansing, Michigan 1938

Ludwig, Dr. Frederick Edwin, 2864 Military St., Port Huron,

Michigan 1941

Lum, Miss Elizabeth Cfaroline], 4015 29th St., Mit. Ranier, Maryland ..1940

*Lunk, William Jr., 29 Bell Run Rd., Fairmont, West Virginia 1937

*Luthy, Ferd Jr., 306 North Institute, Peoria, Illinois 1937

MacArthur, John Wfood] Jr., 200 Glencairn Ave., Toronto,

Ontario, Canada 1941

MacDonald, Donald L[aurie], 72 Alexandra Blvd., Toronto,

Ontario, Canada 1941

MacDonald, Edwin Charles, 8 Sussex Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada ..1942
♦MacDonald, Kenneth F., Fort Niobrara National Wildlife Refuge,

Valentine, Nebraska 1941

MacLean, Miss Dorothy Wfilliams], 21 Ashley St., Hartford,

Connecticut 1939

MacLulich, Dr. D. A., 144 Mavety St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada 1933

MacMullan, Lt. Ralph Austin, Address unknown 1940

♦McAtee, Waldo Lee, Fish and Wildlife Service, Merchandise Mart,

Chicago 54, Illinois 1911

McBeath, Donald Young, L’Anse, Michigan 1936

McCabe, Robert Albert, 424 University Farm Place, Madison, Wisconsin. 1942

McClure, H. Elliott, 315 S. 17th St., Ord, Nebraska 1942

♦McCreary, Otto, Agricultural Hall, University of Wyoming,

Laramie, Wyoming 1930

McCue, Dr. Earl Newlon, Box 104, Morgantown, West Virginia 1941

♦McCullagh, Dr. Efrnest] Perry, 2020 E. 93rd St., Cleveland, Ohio 1937

McGraw, Harry Arthur, 1600 5th Ave., Altoona, Pennsylvania 1936

♦♦♦Mcllhenny, Edward Avery, Avery Island, Louisiana 1910

McKeever, Otto Donald, Box 143, Rensselaer, Indiana 1943

♦McKnight, Edwin Thor, 5038 Park Place, Friendship Station,

Washington, D.C 1936

♦McMath, Robert R., Route 4, Pontiac, Michigan 1934

McMurray, Arthur A., 1101 Poplar Ave., Memphis, Tennessee 1939

♦McNeil, Dr. Charles Andrew, 111 West Fourth St., Sedalia, Missouri . . .1914
McNeill, John T. Jr., 800 W. Fisher Ave., Logan, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 1943

McNish, Edgar Mann, Madison, Tennessee 1940

Mace, Miss Verna Marie, Department of Physiology, Colorado State

College, Fort Collins, Colorado 1943

Mack, Horace Gordon, % Gilson Mfg. Co., Guelph, Ontario, Canada ..1937

Magath, Dr. Thomas Byrd, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 1935

♦Magee, Michael Jarden, 603 South St., Sault Ste Marie, Michigan 1919

Magney, Mrs. G. R., Scandia, Minnesota 1940

Magoon, Donald J., University of Colorado Museum, Boulder, Colorado 1943

Manners, Edward Robert, 233 Maple Ave., Westville, New Jersey 1942

Manville, Richard, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 1941

Markle, Jess Mathew, 917 Sierra St., Madera, California 1943

272

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Marshall, D. M[cArthur], Hornings Mills, Ontario, Canada 1941

Marshall, William H[ampton], Box 188, Idaho Falls, Idaho 1942

♦Maslowski, Karl Herbert, 1034 Maycliff Place, Cincinnati, Ohio 1934

Mason, Miss Esther, 2523 Montgomery St., Louisville, Kentucky 1941

Mathiak, Harold A[lbert], Horicon, Wisconsin 1941

♦Mayfield, Dr. George Radford, Vanderbilt University, Nashville,

Tennessee 1917

♦Mayfield, Harold F[ord], 3311 Parkwood Ave., Toledo, Ohio 1940

♦♦♦Mayr, Dr. Ernst, American Museum of Natural History, 79th St.

and Central Park West, New York City 1933

Mead, Frank W[aldreth], 227 Brighton Rd., Columbus, Ohio 1941

Meade, Dr. Gordon Montgomery, Strong Memorial Hospital,

260 Crittenden Blvd., Rochester, New York 1937

Mellinger, Enos Oren, North Lima, Ohio 1939

Meltvedt, Burton W., Paullina, Iowa 1930

Mendall, Howard L[ewis], 28 Pendleton St., South Brewer, Maine 1936

Meng, Heinz Karl, 116 Miller St., Ithaca, New York 1943

♦Metcalf, Dr. Zeno Payne, State College Station, Raleigh, North Carolina 1900
♦Meyer, Henry, Zoology Department, University of Tennessee,

Knoxville, Tennessee 1939

Michaud, Howard Hfenry], 1205 Kensington Blvd., Fort Wayne, Indiana. 1938

Michener, Harold, 418 North Hudson Ave., Pasadena 4, California 1926

Mierow, Miss Dorothy, Carnegie Museum, Oakland Sta., Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania 1940

♦Miles, Merriam Lee, Box 148, Vicksburg, Mississippi 1941

Miles, Mrs. Philip E., 1900 Arlington Place, Madison 5, Wisconsin 1943

Miller, Alden Holmes, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, Berkeley,

California 1930

♦Miller, Douglas Scott, 122 Lawrence Ave., E., Toronto,

Ontario, Canada 1939

Miller, Loye [Holmes], University of California, Los Angeles,

California 1939

Miller, Richard Fields, 2627 N. Second St., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. . .1942

Mills, Robert H[enry], 2466 Medary Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1941

Milnes, Miss Hattie Kernahan, 331 Gowen Ave., Mt. Airy,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1935

♦Minich, Edward C., 1047 Fairview Ave., Youngstown, Ohio 1923

Mitchell, Earl T[homas], Box D, Horicon, Wisconsin 1940

Mitchell, Harold Dies, 378 Crescent Ave., Buffalo, New York 1936

Mitchell, Helen [Mrs. R. V.], Four Winds Farm, R.D. 1, Canton, Ohio ..1943

♦Mitchell, Mrs. Osborne, R.R. 1, Streetsville, Ontario, Canada 1933

♦♦Mitchell, Dr. Walton lungerich, 398 Vassar Ave., Berkeley, California . . . 1893

Moeran, Edward Henry, 541 Bronx River Rd., Yonkers, New York 1940

Mohler, Levi L., 1635 Smith St., Lincoln, Nebraska 1942

♦Monk, Harry Crawford, 406 Avoca St., Nashville, Tennessee 1920

♦Monroe, Burt Leavelle, Ridge Rd., Anchorage, Kentucky 1935

♦Monson, Gale, 1312 Broadway, Needles, California 1933

♦Moore, Miss Dora, 60 E. Mulberry St., Athens, Ohio 1934

Moore, George A[zro], 289 Admiral Rd., Stillwater, Oklahoma 1928

Moore, George Mfitchell], Fisheries Laboratory, College of William

and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 1942

Moore, Miss Jeanne, 718 Onondaga St., Ann Arbor, Michigan 1943

Moore, Miss Laura Brooks, French Creek, West Virginia 1941

Moore, Paul Joseph, Wildlife Research Station, Ohio State University,
Columbus, Cfcio 1942

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

273

Moore, Robert Thomas, R.F.D. 1, Box 28A, Pasadena, California 1939

Moran, James Vincent, No. 1 Alfred St., Jamaica Plain, Boston,

Massachusetts 1943

Morgan, Allen Hungerford, Cochituate Rd., Wayland, Masachusetts 1943

Morrell, Charles K., 119 E. Maxwell St., Lexington, Kentucky 1943

Morrell, Miss Elsie, 148 Peachtree St., Knoxville, Tennessee 1942

*Morse, Miss Margarette Elthea, 11432 Mayfield Rd., Cleveland, Ohio ..1921

*Moseley, Edwin Lincoln, University Museum, Bowling Green, Ohio 1925

**Moser, Dr. R[euben]Allyn, 813 N. 50th St., Omaha, Nebraska 1940

Moul, Edwin Theodore, R.D. 5, York, Pennsylvania 1942

♦Moulton, Mrs. Paulina Etta, Lower School St., Sanford, Maine 1942

Mousley, William Henry, 4073 Tupper St., Westmont, Montreal,

Quebec, Canada 1922

**Mudge, Edmund W. Jr., 4105 Averill Way, Dallas, Texas 1939

Mueller, Walter Josef, 3043 N. Prospect Ave., Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1936

Muirhead, Miss Peggy, 3945 Lake Park Ave., Chicago, Illinois 1940

Mundy, Miss Barbara B., 1009 Park Ave., New York City 1942

Munro, James Alexander, Okanogan Landing, British Columbia, Canada 1935
♦Munter, Capt. William Henry, 13th Floor Alaska Bldg., 2nd and

Cherry Sts., Seattle, Washington 1933

Murdock, James Ingram, 311 Irving Ave., Glendale, California 1940

♦Murie, Adolph, San Carlos, Arizona 1932

♦Murie, Olaus Johan, Jackson, Wyoming 1934

Murphey, Dr. Eugene Edmund, 432 Telfair St., Augusta, Georgia 1935

Murray, Rev. Joseph James, Lexington Presbyterian Church,

Lexington, Virginia 1931

Musselman, Tfhomas] Efdgar], 124 S. 24th St., Quincy, Illinois 1940

Nash, Nathaniel Cfushing] IV, 1 Reservoir St., Cambridge, Massachusetts 1941

♦Neff, Johnson Andrew, 546 Custom House, Denver, Colorado 1920

♦Nelson, Arnold Lars, Food Habits Research, Fish and Wildlife

Service, Washington, D.C 1932

Nelson, Charles Ellsworth Jr., 124 Oxford Rd., Waukesha, Wisconsin ..1937
Nelson, Edwin Lfewis], 77 Adelaide Ave., New Brunswick, New Jersey.. 1939

♦♦Nelson, Dr. Theodora, 315 East 68th St., New York City 1928

Nelson, Urban C., Soil Conservation Service, Stillwater, Minnesota ....1939

Netting, M. Graham, Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1941

Nevius, Mrs. Richard, Route 1, Greenville, Tennessee 1940

Newcomer, Miss Ruth Chisholm, Jolly Hill, Novelty, Ohio 1942

Newman, Barnett, 343 East 19th St., New York City 1942

♦Newth, Donald Jfennings], 480 W. Kirby, Detroit, Michigan 1939

Newton, Earl Tfhomas], 5500 College St., Kansas City, Missouri 1939

♦Nice, Dr. Leonard B., 5708 Kenwood Ave., Chicago 37, Illinois 1932

♦Nice, Mrs. Margaret Morse, 5708 Kenwood Ave., Chicago 37, Illinois ...1921
♦Nichols, Charles Ketcham, 212 Hamilton Rd., Ridgewood, New Jersey ..1933
Nichols, John Treadwell, American Museum of Natural History,

79th and Central Park West, New York City 1941

Nichols, Lfeon] Nelson, 331 East 7lst St., New York City 1937

♦Nickell, Walter Prine, Cranbrook Institute of Science, Bloomfield

Hills, Michigan 1943

Nixdorf, Elbert Baker, 961 East King St., Lancaster, Pennsylvania 1943

♦Nordquist, Theodore, 549th, C.A. Bn., Camp Edwards, Massachusetts ...1941

Norris, Robert Allen, 1408 North College Ave., Tifton, Georgia 1941

Norris, Russell Tfaplin], Box 847, Preston Laboratory, Butler,

Pennsylvania 1939

♦Norse, William Jfohn], 531 West 211th St., New York City 1939

274

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No, 4

North, George Webster, 249 Charlton Ave., Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. 1941

Nyc, Frederick Francis Jr., Box 869, Brownsville, Texas 1943

♦Oberholser, Dr. Harry Church, Cleveland Museum of Natural History,

2717 Euclid Ave., Cleveland 15, Ohio 1894

O’Conner, Miss Esther Laura, 4344 Locust Ave., Kansas City, Missouri . .1940
♦Odum, Dr. Eugene Pleasants, Department of Zoology, University of

Georgia, Athens, Georgia 1930

Oliver, Miss Mary Clara, Ganado Mission, Ganado, Arizona 1934

Olsen, Humphrey A., Pikeville College Library, Pikeville, Kentucky 1941

Olson, Mrs. Gladys E., 17906 Lake Road, Lakewood, Ohio 1942

♦♦Osborn, Hon. Chase Salmon, Sault Ste Marie, Michigan 1943

♦Osgood, Dr. Wilfred Hudson, Field Museum of Natural History,

Chicago, Illinois 1910

Otis, Dr. Charles Herbert, Department of Biology, Bowling Green

State University, Bowling Green, Ohio 1937

Ott, Frederick Louis, 2527 N. Wahl Ave., Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1941

♦Overing, Robert, R.F.D. 4, Raleigh, North Carolina 1930

♦Owre, Oscar Jr., 2625 Newton Ave., S., Minneapolis, Minnesota 1935

Painton, Dr. Harry R., 488 Lilac Dr., Montecito, Santa Barbara Co.,

California 1939

♦Palmer, Ralph Simon, Department of Zoology, Vassar College,

Poughkeepsie, New York 1934

♦Palmer, Dr. Theodore Sherman, 1939 Biltmore St., N.W.,

Washington, D.C 1914

Parker, Henry Mfelville], 122 School St., Concord, New Hampshire ...1941

Partch, Max Lforenzo], 613 W. Prairie St., Columbus, Wisconsin 1940

♦Patterson, Lt. Robert, Cadiz, Ohio 1943

Paxton, Thomas R[ice], 1064 East Clifton Rd., N.E., Atlanta, Georgia ..1941

♦Pearce, John, 643 Park Sq. Bldg., Boston, Massachusetts 1939

♦Peartree, Edward William, 425 S. State St., Oconomowoc, Wisconsin 1941

♦Peasley, Mrs. Harold Raymond, 2001 Nash Drive, Des Moines, Iowa 1934

Peavey, Mrs. Leonore Gastineau, 4222 Carrollton, Indianapolis, Indiana .1937

Peelle, Miles L., 329 Rice St., Adrian, Michigan 1940

♦Peet, Dr. Max Minor, 2030 Hill St., Ann Arbor, Michigan 1935

Penner, Lawrence R., Department of Zoology, University of

Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut 1940

Perner, Miss Margaret E., 2463 Woodridge Rd., Cleveland Heights, Ohio 1943

Peters, Miss Ellen, 442 5th St., Brooklyn, New York 1942

♦Peters, Harold Seymore, 107 River Rd., Ashley Forest, Charleston,

South Carolina 1924

♦Peterson, Alfred, Box 201, Brandt, South Dakota 1931

Peterson, Mrs. Charles Emil, Madison, Minnesota 1936

Peterson, Lt. Liven A[dam], 904 South 4th Ave., Virginia, Minnesota ..1940
♦Peterson, Roger Tory, National Audubon Society, 1006 Fifth Ave.,

New York City 1942

Peterson, Mrs. Theodore, 80 Oaklawn Ave., Battle Creek, Michigan 1941

Petrides, George Athan, 259 King Ave., Athens, Georgia 1942

♦Pettingill, Dr. Olin Sewall Jr., Department of Zoology, Carleton

College, Northfield, Minnesota 1930

♦♦Phelps, William Hfenry], Apartado 2009, Caracas, Venezuela 1940

♦♦Philipp, Frederick Bernard, 99 John St., New York City 1940

♦Phillips, Cpl. Alan Robert, Det. Med. Dept., Kennedy General

Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee 1934

♦Pickwell, Dr. Gayle Benjamin, State Teachers College, San Jose,

California 1923

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

275

♦Pierce, Robert Allen, Nashua, Iowa 1941

♦Pirnie, Dr. Miles David, W.K.Kellogg Bird Sanctuary, Augusta,

Michigan 1928

Pitelka, Frank Alois, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of

California, Berkeley, California 1938

Plath, Karl, 2847 Giddings St., Chicago, Illinois 1942

♦♦Poole, Cecil A., 830 Chapman St., San Jose 11, California 1942

♦Poor, Hustace Hubbard, 112 Park Ave., Yonkers, New York 1935

♦Porter, Thomas Wayne, 307 S. Lansing St., Mount Pleasant, Michigan . . .1938

♦Potter, Julian Kent, 437 Park Ave., Collingswood, New Jersey 1915

Potter, Louis Henry, R.F.D. 2, West Rutland, Vermont 1941

♦Pough, Richard Hooper, 33 Highbrook Ave., Pelham, New York 1938

Prather, Millard F[illmore], 912 McMillan Ave., W.E., Apt. H,

Birmingham, Alabama 1940

♦Preble, Edward Alexander, 3027 Newark St., Washington, D. C 1929

♦Preble, Norman A[lexander], Biology Department, Ashland College,

Ashland, Ohio 1941

♦Presnail, Mrs. Clifford Charles, Lake Zurich, Illinois 1930

♦Prill, Dr. Albert G., Main St., Scio, Oregon 1921

♦♦Procter, William, Bar Harbor, Maine 1937

Prucha, Miss Alma H., 3052 N. Maryland Ave., Milwaukee, Wisconsin. . .1942

♦Pueschel, Paul, 520 Drexel Ave., Glencoe, Illinois 1939

Putnam, Loren Smith, Box 202, College Station, Murray, Kentucky 1942

♦Pyle, George Winner, South Valley Rd., Box 604, Paoli, Pennsylvania ..1939
Quay, Thomas L[avelle], Department of Zoology, North Carolina

State College, Raleigh, North Carolina 1939

Quimby, Don C., 4742 Garfield Ave., S., Minneapolis, Minnesota 1942

Ragusin, Anthony Vincent, Box 496, Biloxi, Mississippi 1937

Rahe, Carl W., 4666 Turney Rd., Cleveland, Ohio 1931

Ramisch, Miss Marjorie, 1835 Noble Rd., No. 28, East Cleveland, Ohio . . 1943
Ramsden, Dr. Charles Theodore, 8 and 19, Vista Alegre, Santiago, Cuba 1914
Rapp, William F[rederick], Jr., 130 Washington Ave., Chatham,

New Jersey 1941

♦Rebmann, G. Ruhland, Jr., 7007 Hampden Lane, Edgemoor,

Bethesda, Maryland 1941

♦Reeder, Miss Clara Maude, 1608 College Ave., Houghton, Michigan ....1938
♦Reese, Mrs. Hans H., Circle Close, Shorewood Hills, Madison, Wisconsin. 1941
Rett, Egmont Z[achary], Museum of Natural History, Santa Barbara,

California 1940

Reuss, Alfred Henry Jr., 12910 S. Mozart St., Blue Island, Illinois 1936

Rice, Mrs. Harry Wilson, 3940 Richfield Rd., Minneapolis, Minnesota ..1940
♦Ricker, Dr. W. E., Department of Zoology, Indiana University,

Bloomington, Indiana 1943

♦Ricks, Jesse J., 30 East 42nd St., New York City 1931

Riggs, Carl D., 548 S. State St., Ann Arbor, Michigan 1943

Riner, Miss Alice, 503 S. Millwood, Wichita, Kansas 1939

Ritchie, R. C., 250 Riverside Drive, Toronto, Ontario, Canada 1942

♦Roads, Miss Myra Katie, 463 Vine St., Hillsboro, Ohio 1914

Robbins, Chandler Sfeymour], Patuxent Research Refuge, Bowie,

Maryland 1941

Robbins, Samuel Dowse Jr., 910 W. Dayton St., Madison, Wisconsin ...1941

Roberts, Homer Donald, 1011 Hazel St., Birmingham, Michigan 1943

♦♦Roberts, Dr. Thomas Sadler, Museum of Natural History, University

of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 1914

♦♦♦Rogers, Charles Henry, East Guyot Hall, Princeton, New Jersey 1903

276

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Rogers, Irl, 402 Alturas Ave., Modesto, California 1937

♦Rogers, Mrs. Walter E., 911 E. North St., Appleton, Wisconsin 1931

♦Rollo, Mrs. W. E., Otis Rd., Barrington, Illinois 1942

Root, Oscar Mfitchell], Brooks School, North Andover, Massachusetts ..1940
Rorimer, Irene Turk [Mrs. J. M.], 39 University Circle,

Charlottesville, Virginia 1938

Rosene, Walter Melvin Jr., 1212 Jupiter, Gadsden, Alabama 1923

♦Rosewall, Dr. Oscar Waldemar, Department of Zoology, Louisiana

State University, University, Louisiana 1931

Ross, Charles Chandler, 7924 Lincoln Dr., Chestnut Hill,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1937

♦Rossbach, Dr. George Bowyer, Poynette, Wisconsin 1943

♦Roth, Conrad, Box 1108, Portsmouth, Ohio 1943

Rowland, Miss Caroline, 276 Chestnut Ave., N.E., Warren, Ohio 1942

Rudd, Robert L., 225 W. Alisal, Salinas, California 1939

Ruecker, Miss Emilie, Seapowet Ave., Tiverton, Rhode Island 1943

♦Rust, Henry Judson, Box 683, Coeur d’Alene, Idaho 1921

♦Rysgaard, George Nielson, Museum of Natural History, University

of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 1937

Sampson, Miss Mabel, 67 East 8th St., Winona, Minnesota 1943

Sandve, J. Reuben, 863 23rd Ave., Minneapolis, Minnesota 1943

♦Satterthwait, Mrs. Elizabeth Allen, 806 W. Ohio St., Urbana, Illinois 1925

Saugstad, Nfels] Stanley, R. 4, Minot, North Dakota 1939

♦Saunders, Aretas Andrews, 361 Crestwood Rd., Fairfield, Connecticut ..1934
♦Saunders, Dr. George Bradford, Fish and Wildlife Service, 1623 N.W.

Washington St., Brownsville, Texas 1926

♦Savage, James, Buffalo Athletic Club, Buffalo, New York 1939

Sawyer, Miss Dorothy, R.F.D. 1, Unadilla, New York 1937

Schaller, Ralph A., State University, Bowling Green, Ohio 1943

Schaub, Mary Hall [Mrs. J. B.], 1040 Isabella St., Wilmette, Illinois ..1939

Schlenker, Miss Lydia, 410 Floyd St., Toledo, Ohio 1937

♦Schneider, Miss Evelyn J., University of Louisville, Belknap

Campus, Louisville, Kentucky 1935

♦Schorger, Dr. Arlie William, 168 North Prospect Ave., Madison,

Wisconsin 1927

Schroeder, Miss Clara, Address unknown 1937

♦Schuette, Chal, 1446 Beaver Rd., Sewickley, Pennsylvania 1942

Schutz, Miss Clara Ifrene], 277 Park Place, Meadville, Pennsylvania 1941

Schwall, Eugene Edward, New Concord, Ohio 1943

♦Schwartz, Charles Walsh, R 6, Columbia, Missouri 1943

Scotland, Dr. Minnie Brink, 42 Continental Ave., Cohoes, New York 1938

Scott, Dr. Thomas George, Department of Zoology, Science Bldg.,

Ames, Iowa 1936

Scott, Walter Edwin, Mendota Beach Heights, Madison 5, Wisconsin ...1938
Seibert, Henri C., 204 Vivarium Bldg., Wright and Healey Sts.,

Champaign, Illinois 1941

♦Sener, Miss Ruth, 233 Charlotte St., Lancaster, Pennsylvania 1943

Serbousek, Miss Lillian, 1226 Second St., S.W., Cedar Rapids, Iowa 1935

♦Shaffer, Chester Monroe, 125 Spence Place, Knoxville, Tennessee 1934

Sharp, Dr. Ward M., Valentine Lakes Waterfowl Refuge,

Valentine, Nebraska 1936

Shaver, Jesse M., George Peabody College for Teachers, Nashville,

Tennessee 1922

Shaw, Dr. Charles Hficks], Bremen, Ohio 1941

Shaw, Mrs. Elizabeth Martin, 2312 Stuart Ave., Richmond 20, Virginia . .1943

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

277

**Shearer, Dr. Amon Robert, Mont Belvieu, Chambers Co., Texas 1893

*Shelford, Dr. Victor Ernest, Vivarium Bldg., Wright and Healey Sts.,

Champaign, Illinois 1931

Shepherst, J. Max, 504 River Rd., Maumee, Ohio 1941

Sheppard, Roy Watson, 1805 Mouland Ave., Niagara Falls,

Ontario, Canada 1933

Sherwood, John Willitts, 26 Smith St., Salinas, California 1936

Shirling, Albert Elwood, 3849 E. 62nd St., Kansas City, Missouri 1941

Short, [Hubert] Wayne, 1207 N. 7th St., St. Louis, Missouri 1941

Shortt, Angus H., 101 Morier Ave., St. Vital, Winnipeg,

Manitoba, Canada 1942

Shortt, Terence Michael, Royal Ontario Museum of Zoology,

Queens Park at Bloor St., Toronto, Ontario, Canada 1941

Shubeck, Paul [Peter], 440 Bond St., Elizabeth, New Jersey 1943

Sibley, Charles G., 1438 Hawthorne Terrace, Berkeley, California 1942

Simmons, Mrs. Amelia C., 2007 N. Holton St., Milwaukee, Wisconsin 1943

***Simmons, Edward Mcllhenny, Avery Island, Louisiana 1942

Simpson, William B., 1101 Poplar Ave., Memphis, Tennessee 1943

Sims, Harold Lee, 714 St. Philip St., Thibodaux, Louisiana 1942

♦Singleton, Mrs. Albert, 68 W. Cooke Rd., Columbus, Ohio 1943

Skaggs, Merit Bryan, Julian Rd., South Euclid, Ohio 1934

Slack, Miss Mabel, 1004 Everett Ave., Louisville, Kentucky 1934

Slagle, Elmer Charles, 115 Court House, Duluth, Minnesota 1941

♦Smith, Dr. Arthur Francis, Manning, Iowa 1934

♦Smith, Frank Rush, R.F.D. 2, Box 100, Laurel, Maryland 1910

Smith, Miss Gwendolyn B., 205 Noland St., Falls Church, Virginia 1942

♦Smith, Harry Madison, Whitman Laboratory of Experimental Zoology,

University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 1936

♦Smith, Lewis MacCuen, 8040 St. Martins Lane, Chestnut Hill Sta.,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1931

Smith, Luther Ely, 1554 Telephone Bldg., 1110 Pine St.,

St. Louis, Missouri 1941

Smith, Orion O., 1539 Crosby St., Rockford, Illinois 1936

♦Smith, Roy Harmon, 183 N. Prospect St., Kent, Ohio 1936

Smith, Thomas [Price], Osage Ave., Anchorage, Kentucky 1941

Smith, Wendell Phillips, Wells River, Vermont 1921

Snapp, Mrs. Edith LaVantia, 310 W. Michigan Ave., Urbana, Illinois ..1940
Snyder, Lester Lynne, Royal Ontario Museum of Zoology, Queens

Park at Bloor, Toronto 5, Ontario, Canada 1929

Snyder, Richard Craine, 431 Clark St., South Orange, New Jersey 1940

Sooter, Clarence Andrew, Malheur National Wildlife Refuge,

Burns, Oregon 1940

Soper, J[oseph] Dewey, 827 Riverwood Ave., Fort Garry, Winnipeg,

Manitoba, Canada 1937

Spangler, Miss Iva M., 128 E. Foster Parkway, Fort Wayne, Indiana ...1939
Spawn, Gerald B., South Dakota State College, Brookings, South Dakota. 1941

Spear, Ivan MacDonald, 39 W. Elm St., Yarmouth, Maine 1942

♦Speirs, Mrs. Doris Huestis, Ancaster, Ontario, Canada 1936

Speirs, John Murray, Ancaster, Ontario, Canada 1931

Spencer, Miss Oflive] Ruth, 1030-25 Ave. Court, Moline, Illinois 1938

Sperry, Charles Carlisle, 1455 S. Franklin St., Denver, Colorado 1931

Spofford, Walter Richardson II, Vanderbilt University Medical

School, Nashville, Tennessee 1942

Stabler, Robert Mfiller], Glen Mills, Pennsylvania 1939

Stacey, J[ohn] Wfilliam], 236 Flood Bldg., San Franciso, California ....1940

278

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. SS, No. 4

Stackpole, Richard, 292 Beacon St., Boston, Massachusetts 1940

Staebler, Arthur Eugene, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 1937

♦♦Stahl, Miss Marjoretta Jean, Kimberly, West Virginia 1942

Stanford, Jack Afrchibald], 328 John St., Ann Arbor, Michigan 1941

Stark, Miss Wilma Rfuth], 1701 16th St., N.W., Washington, D.C 1939

Starrett, William Charles, % W. E. Starrett, 105 Glen Oak Court,

Peoria, Illinois 1933

♦Stebbins, Miss Fannie Adell, 31 Ely Ave., West Springfield, Massachusetts. 1935
Steggerda, Dr. Morris, Department of Genetics, Carnegie Institution

of Washington, Cold Spring Harbor, Long Island, New York 1941

Stephens, Dr. Thomas Calderwood, Morningside College, Sioux City,

Iowa 1911

Stevens, Dwight W., 1722 Brenner St., Saginaw, Michigan 1941

♦Stevens, O. A., State College Station, Fargo, North Dakota 1926

Stevenson, Henry M. Jr., Department of Biology, University of

Mississippi, University, Mississippi 1943

Stevenson, Hforace] Godwin Jr., 641 Woodward Way, Atlanta,

Georgia 1939

♦Stevenson, James Osborne, 6633 Sheridan Rd., Chicago, Illinois 1943

♦Stewart, Paul Alva, Leetonia, Ohio 1925

Stewart, Robert Earl, Patuxent Research Refuge, Bowie, Maryland 1939

♦Stickney, Mrs. Albert Jr. % H. E. Herrick, Woodmere, Long Island,

New York 1935

♦Stiles, Bruce F., 1546 — 30th St., Des Moines, Iowa 1935

♦Stillwell, Jerry E., 7460 San Benito Way, R. 4, Dallas, Texas 1935

♦Stine, Miss Perna M., State Teachers College, Minot, North Dakota 1931

♦♦Stoddard, Herbert Lee, Sherwood Plantation, R.F.D. 5,

Thomasville, Georgia 1916

Stone, Harry Hferbert], Jr., Box 101, Sturbridge, Massachusetts 1941

♦Stoner, Dr. Dayton, New York State Museum, Albany, New York 1912

Stophlet, John Jermain, 2612 Maplewood Ave., Toledo, Ohio 1934

Storer, John Humphreys, 579 Beaver St., Waltham, Massachusetts 1939

Storer, Robert Winthrop, Museum of Vertebrate Zoologj^

Berkeley, California 1938

♦Storer, Dr. Tracy Irwin, Division of Zoology, University of California,

Davis, California 1928

Stoudt, Jerome H., 209 N. Mill St., Waupun, Wisconsin 1941

♦Street, J. Fletcher, 1120 Locust St., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1943

Street, Thomas M., Bottineau, North Dakota 1940

♦♦♦Strehlow, Elmer William, 721 W. Mason St., Green Bay, Wisconsin 1941

Stringham, Dr. Emerson, General Delivery, Austin, Texas 1940

♦♦♦♦Strong, Dr. Reuben Myron, 5840 Stony Island Ave., Hyde Park Sta.,

Chicago, Illinois Founder

Struck, Dr. Kuno Herbert, 1003 First National Bank Bldg.,

Davenport, Iowa 1942

Stupka, Arthur, Great Smoky Mts. National Park, Gatlinburg,

Tennessee 1935

♦♦♦Sturgeon, Myron T., Michigan State Normal College, Ypsilanti, Michigan. 1934

Sturgis, S. Warren, 66 Marlboro St., Boston, Massachusetts 1941

♦Sturm, Louis, Sheffield Rd., Glendale, Ohio 1943

♦Sumner, Lowell, Box 188, Menlo Park, California 1943

♦Suthard, James Gregory, 1881 Raymond Ave., Long Beach, California ..1936

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

279

***Sutton, Capt. George Miksch, A.C., Arctic Section, ADTIC,

25 Broad St., New York City 1920

*Swanson, Dr. Gustav, Division of Economic Zoology, University of

Minnesota, University Farm, St. Paul, Minnesota 1927

♦Swedenborg, Ernie David, 4905 Vincent Ave., S., Minneapolis,

Minnesota 1929

Swoger, Arthur Glenn, 921 Wood St., Wilkinsburg, Pennsylvania 1943

♦Taber, Wendell, 3 Mercer Circle, Cambridge, Massachusetts 1936

Tallman, William Sfweet], 4 Linden PL, Sewickley, Pennsylvania 1940

♦Tanger, Mrs. C. Y., 318 N. President Ave., Lancaster, Pennsylvania 1943

Tanghe, Leo J., 120 Barnard St., Rochester, New York 1943

Tanner, James Taylor, 16 V2 N. Church St., Cortland, New York 1937

Tatum, Miss Bernice, 1105 Lowell, Kansas City 2, Kansas 1943

♦Taverner, Percy Algernon, 45 Leonard Ave., Ottawa, Ontario, Canada . . . 1905

♦Taylor, Dr. Aravilla Meek, Lake Erie College, Painesville, Ohio 1936

♦♦♦Taylor, Dr. Arthur Chandler, Irving Zuelke Bldg., Appleton, Wisconsin. . 1929

Taylor, Miss Joanne, 1176 Shattuck, Berkeley, California 1941

♦♦♦Taylor, Rose Schuster [Mrs. H. J.], 900 Santa Barbara Rd., Berkeley,

California 1916

♦Taylor, Walter Penn, 254 Faculty Exchange, College Station, Texas 1937

Taylor, William Ralph, Museum of Vertebrate Paleontology, University

of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 1940

♦Teachenor, Dix, 1020 West 61st St., Kansas City, Missouri 1923

♦Templeman, Dr. Wilfred, Memorial University College, St. John’s,

Newfoundland 1943

Thacher, S. Charles, 2918 Brownsboro Rd., Louisville, Kentucky 1942

♦Thomas, Edward Sinclair, 319 Acton Rd., Columbus, Ohio 1921

♦Thomas, Mrs. Rowland, R.F.D. 3, North Little Rock, Arkansas 1937

Thomson, Nelson P., 61 W. Eleventh Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1943

♦Thornton, William James, Box 1011, Birmingham, Alabama 1940

♦♦♦Thorp, George Boulton, % Arens Controls, Inc., 2253 Halsted St.,

Chicago, Illinois 1935

♦Tift, Richard, Madison Terrace Apts., Albany, Georgia 1937

♦Tinker, Almerin David, R.F.D. 1, Chelsea, Michigan 1909

♦Tipton, Dr. Samuel Rfidley], University of Alabama Medical

School, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 1941

Todd, Mrs. Elizabeth D., 918 West Main St., Kalamazoo, Michigan ...1939

Todd, George Kendall, 770 Browning Ave., Salt Lake City, Utah 1943

Todd, Henry Oliver, Jr., Woodbury Road, Murfreesboro, Tennessee 1938

Todd, Mrs. Mabel [Augusta], 1622 Kensington St., Houston, Texas 1940

♦♦Todd, W [alter] E[dmond] Clyde, Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania 1911

♦Tomkins, Ivan Rexford, 513 E. Duffy St., Savannah, Georgia 1931

Toner, George Clive, 63 Lowther Ave., Toronto, Ontario, Canada 1939

♦Townsend, Miss Elsie White, Wayne University, Detroit, Michigan 1938

♦Trautman, Milton Bernhard, Stone Laboratory, Put-in-Bay, Ohio 1932

Trimm, Wayne, 165 Strong Ave., Syracuse, New York 1943

Tryon, Clarence Archer Jr., Zoology Department, Montana State

College, Bozeman, Montana 1942

♦Tubbs, Farley F., Game Division, Department of Conservation,

Lansing, Michigan 1935

♦♦♦Tucker, Mrs. Carll, Penwood, Mount Kisco, New York 1928

Tucker, Edward Robert, 245 N. Auburndale, Memphis, Tennessee 1942

280

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 4

♦Turner, Miss Ruth D[ixon], Department of Zoology, Vassar College,

Poughkeepsie, New York I939

Tvedt, Harold Bfloom], MDR. P-MFSS, Carlisle Barracks,

Pennsylvania 1941

♦Twomey, Dr. Arthur Cornelius, Carnegie Museum, Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania 1936

♦Tyler, Dr. Winsor Marrett, 1482 Commonwealth Ave., Brighton,

Massachusetts 1914

♦Uhler, Francis Morey, Patuxent Research Refuge, Bowie, Maryland 1931

♦♦Uhrig, Mrs. A. B., Box 28, Oconomowoc, Wisconsin 1926

Umbach, Miss Margaret, 2526 East Drive, Fort Wayne, Indiana 1941

♦Vaiden, Meredith Gordon, Rosedale, Mississippi 1937

Van Camp, Laurel, Genoa, Ohio 1943

Vandervort, Charles Champion, Lacey ville, Pennsylvania 1937

Van Epps, Claude A., 824 Eighth St., Brookings, South Dakota 1943

♦van Rossem, Adriaan Joseph, 2205 West Adams St., Los. Angeles,

California 1939

♦♦Van Tyne, Mrs. C. H., 349 East Ridgewood Ave., Ridgewood,

New Jersey 1939

♦♦♦Van Tyne, Josselyn, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan,

Ann Arbor, Michigan 1922

Varney, Eugene H., South Egremont Rd., Great Barrington,

Massachusetts 1943

♦Vaughan, William Coleman, 591 Ashland Ave., Buffalo, New York 1933

Velich, Ralph W., 5212 S. 23rd St., Omaha, Nebraska 1941

Vesall, David Bernard, Stillwater, Minnesota 1940

Vesey, W. Glenn, 102 East High St., Painesville, Ohio 1943

♦Visscher, Dr. Paul, Biology Laboratory, Western Reserve University,

Cleveland, Ohio 1924

♦Vogt, William, % Mrs. F. V. Brown, 32 Cunningham Ave., Floral

Park, New York 1935

Yoke, Miss Mabel, 243 Eighteenth Ave., Columbus, Ohio 1943

♦Vollmar, Mrs. Joseph E., 6138 Simpson Ave., St. Louis, Missouri 1941

♦Wade, Douglas E., Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 1936

Walker, Dr. Charles Frederic, Stone Laboratory, Put-in-Bay, Ohio 1939

Walker, M. V., Glacier National Park, Box 406, Belton, Montana 1943

♦♦♦Walkinshaw, Dr. Lawrence Harvey, 1416V^ W. Michigan Ave.,

Battle Creek, Michigan 1928

Wallace, George John, Zoology Department, Michigan State College,

East Lansing, Michigan 1937

Wallner, Alfred, 111 Roby Rd., Madison, Wisconsin 1941

Wangnild, Miss Lillian M., 2818 Gaylord St., Denver 5, Colorado 1943

Wanless, Dr. Harold Rfollin], 704 S. McCullough St., Urbana, Illinois ..1940
Warner, Mrs. Carmen Hambleton, 177 W. Hubbard Ave.,

Columbus, Ohio 1939

♦Watson, Dr. Clarence W., Box 833, Atlanta, Georgia 1943

Watson, Frank Graham, 2418 Chestnut Ave., Long Beach, California 1937

Watson, Robert J., Box 75, Blacksburg, Virginia 1943

♦Weaver, Richard Lee, Audubon Nature Center, Port Chester, R.D. 1,

New York 1936

Weber, Edmund P., 95 Ingram Ave., Pgh, No. 5, Ingram,

Pennsylvania 1942 .

♦Weber, Louis Mfarkus], 2713 Dodier St., St. Louis, Missouri 1941

♦Weber, Orlando Franklin Jr., Mount Kisco, New York 1936

December, 1943
Vol. SS. No. 4

MEMBERSHIP ROLL

281

Webster, Cpl. JLackson] Dan, Co. E., M.D.E.T.S., O’Reilly General

Hospital, Springfield, Missouri 1939

Webster, [Noah] Randall, 341 Western Ave., Brookville, Pennsylvania ..1940

Weingart, Vernon Rolland, R.D. 1, Kent, Ohio 1940

**Welch, Mrs. Lola Harriet, 610 Bowen St., Savanna, Illinois 1943

Welles, Mrs. Mary Pyke, R.F.D. 2, Ossining, New York 1938

Wessel, John P., Wright City Junior College, 3400 Austin Blvd.,

Chicago, Illinois 1941

Wester, Russell William, 112 Prospect St., Nutley, New Jersey 1942

♦Wetmore, Dr. Alexander, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C 190.^

*Weydemeyer, Winton, Fortine, Montana 1930

*Weyl, Edward Stern, 6506 Lincoln Drive, Mt. Airy, Philadelphia,

Pennsylvania 1927

Wharram, S. V., Austinburg, Ohio 1943

**Wheatland, Miss Sarah Bigelow, 532 State St., Bangor, Maine 1942

Wheeler, Miss Ruth, 3340 W. 37th Ave., Denver 11, Colorado 1943

White, Courtland Y., 1118 Spruce St., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1942

♦White, Francis Beach, Silk Farm Rd., R. 2, Concord, New Hampshire . .1926

♦White, Miss Katherine A[ugusta], R. 2, Collinsville, Illinois 1940

Whitney, Nathaniel Ruggles, Jr., Lowell M-33, Cambridge,

Massachusetts 1942

♦Whittier, Mrs. Lida, 2830 E. 13th St., Cleveland, Ohio 1943

Widdicombe, Harry T., 15 College Ave., N.E., Grand Rapids 3,

Michigan 1943

Widmann, Berthold, 4621 Wesley Ave., Los Angeles, California 1936

♦Wiggin, Henry Taylor, 151 Tappan St., Bropkline, Massachusetts 1941

Wilcox, Harry Hammond, Jr., Madison Court, Ann Arbor, Michigan ...1938

Wiles, Harold Ofliver], 26 Boxwood .\ve., Wilmington, Delaware 1936

Wilkowski, William, 119 Bronson Ct., Kalamazoo 12, Michigan 1943

♦Williams, Laidlaw Onderdonk, Box 453,' Carmel, California 1930

♦Wilson, Archie Ffrancis], 1322 Braeburn Rd., Flossmoor, Illinois 1937

Wilson, Bruce V., Okemos, Michigan 1943

Wilson, Mrs. Carl, 11285 Lakepoint, Detroit 24, Michigan 1941

♦Wilson, Dr. Gordon, 1434 Chestnut St., Bowling Green, Kentucky 1920

Wilson, Harold Charles, Ephraim, Wisconsin 1938

Wilson, Myrtha M. [Mrs. Henry E.], R. 3, Raleigh, North Carolina . . . .1942

Wilson, Rowland Steele, Address unknown 1941

♦♦Wineman, Andrew, 150 Michigan Ave., Detroit, Michigan 1934

Wing, Harold Francis. R. 3, Jackson, Michigan 1941

♦Wing, Leonard William. State College, Pullman, Washington 1924

Winterbottom, JCohnl Mfialll. .\frican Education Office, P.O. Box 150,

Livingstone, Northern Rhodesia 1939

♦Wood, Dr. Harold Bacon, 3016 N. Second St., Harrisburg,

Pennsylvania 1932

VV’^oodward, Arthur Ja.‘^on, 504 Kahkwa Blvd., Erie, Pennsylvania 1937

♦♦Woodward. Miss Barbara, East Main St., Le Roy, New York 1943

Worley, John Gfravesi, 237 Charle.ston St.. Cadiz, Ohio 1936

Wright, Miss .\udrey .Adele, 1312 Hepburn. Louisville. Kentucky 1941

Wright, Lt. Col. Dana. State Game Farm, St. John, North Dakota 1943

Wright, Ernest Bicknell, 140 W. Chestnut .\ve.. Chestnut Hill,

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1941

Wright, J[ohn] T[homas], R. 5, Box 665, Tucson, Arizona 1941

Wright, Philip L[incoln], Montana State University, Missoula,

Montana 1940

282 THE WILSON BULLETIN

Wright, Thomas Jr., Box 65, Wakefield, Rhode Island 1939

Wyman, Miss Mary May, 1040 Mary St., Louisville, Kentucky 1940

Yeager, Lee E[mmett], Illinois Natural History Survey, Urbana,

Illinois 1939

♦Yeatter, Dr. Ralph Emerson, Illinois Natural History Survey, Urbana,

Illinois 1932

Young, J. Addison II, 93 Argyle Ave, New Rochelle, New York 1942

**Young, James B[oswelll, 2516 Talbott Ave., Louisville, Kentucky 1937

Zempel, Arnold, 626 Crandall, Madison, Wisconsin 1941

♦Zimmerman, Dale, 480 North Almont St., Imlay City, Michigan 1943

♦Zimmerman, Fred Robert, 702 S. Thornton .Ave., Madison 4, Wisconsin. .1935
Zirrer, Francis, R. 3, Hayward, Wisconsin 1943

REPORT OF THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE

Once more war conditions have made it inadvisable to attempt any kind of
annual meeting of the Wilson Ornithological Club. The annual election of officers
must therefore be conducted by mail. Your Committee offers the following nomina-
tions for officers of the Wilson Ornithological Club for 1944;

President: S. Charles Kendeigh

First Vice-President: Olin Sewall Pettingill, Jr.

Second Vice President: Harrison F. Lewis

Secretary: Maurice G. Brooks

Treasurer: Milton B. Trautman

Councillors: Burt L. Monroe, Eugene P. Odum, Lawrence H. Walkinshaw

Principles of good government make it urgent that as many as possible of our
members participate in this election. In addition to the slate offered above, all
Active and Sustaining members of the Club are eligible for office. You are urgently
requested to mail in your votes to the Secretary, whether you choose to support
the slate given above, or whether you choose to write in the names of others for
one or all of the.se offices.

A. E. Ganier
Lynds Jones

Margaret M. Nice, Chairman

To the Members of the Wilson Ornithological Club:

Last year, with his statement for dues, each Wilson Club member received
a nominations blank, with the urgent request that names of prospective members
be submitted to the Secretary. The response was good, some ten per cent of
those receiving the blanks sending in the names of one or more persons. Persons
nominated have been solicited, and a good number of new Club members has
resulted.

This procedure will again be followed in 1944, and your officers request your
fullest cooperation in putting us in touch with persons of ornithological interests.
Despite the disruptions of the war, we will close our Club year with something
over a thousand members, only a very slight reduction from last year’s figure.

We hope that many persons may find the coming year an opportune time to
participate more actively in Wilson Club affairs by raising the class of their
membership. We need more Active and Sustaining members. The present size
and excellence of The Wilson Bulletin can only be maintained if an adequate
number of members carry more than the minimum subscription. May we ask
that you seriously consider raising the class of your membership?

Maurice Brooks, Secretary

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

THE WILSON BULLETIN

283

AFFILIATED SOCIETIES

The Georgia Ornithological Society was established in 1937 at the instigation
of the Atlanta Bird Club. The Oriole, which had been founded in 1936 by Don
Eyles and Norman H. Giles and sponsored by the Atlanta group, became the
official organ. Semi-annual meetings have been held in various parts of the state
but were cancelled this year because of transportation problems. A meeting next
spring is planned, however. Meetings and field trips of local groups have been
encouraged, and the data they gather are collected and summarized. This spring
the members concentrated on the collection of data on number of eggs and per-
centage of hatch of common southern bird species.

The officers of the Society are: President, Eugene P. Odum; First Vice-Pre.si-
dent, Mrs. Lucille Rotchford; Second Vice-President, Miss Annie Reddy; Execu-
tive Secretary, Miss Blanche Tait; Treasurer, Mr. Ray C. Werner; Historian-
Librarian, Dr. Beatrice Nevins; Editor, J. Fred Denton.

Committees have been active from time to time on education, sanctuaries, and
history, and an exchange library is being built up. Occasional Paper No. 1, “The
Birds of Athens, Clarke County, Georgia,” by Thomas Burleigh, was published
in 1938. A fully annotated check-list of Georgia birds is now being prepared by
a group of members which includes Earle Greene, Herbert L, Stoddard, William
Griffin, and Ivan Tomkins. It is hoped that this will be published during the coming
year as Occasional Paper No. 2. — Eugene P. Odum, President

The Wisconsin Society for Ornithology began in January, 1939, with the
issue of Vol. 1, No. 1 of a monthly mimeographed bulletin. The Passenger Pigeon,
under the auspices of The Madison Bird Club. An organization meeting was called
at Madi.son on May 6 and 7, 1939, and officers elected as follows: N. R. Barger,
President; Alvin Throne, Vice-president; Murl Deusing, Secretary; Karl W. Kah-
mann. Treasurer; W. E. Scott, Editor; A. W. Schorger and Clarence Jung, Mem-
bers-at-Large of the Executive Committee. \ total of 123 charter members were
accepted into the Society at that time. The present active membership is approxi-
mately 400. Annual meetings, which are a highlight of the year for members,
have attracted an attendance as large as 300. On April 12, 1942, the organization
became incorporated under the Wisconsin laws, at the annual meeting at Green
Bay. The name of the group was then changed to “The Wisconsin Society for
Ornithology.” On May 1, 1943, the Society voted unanimously for affiliation with
The Wilson Ornithological Club at the Fifth Annual Convention at Milwaukee.

In 1942 a special committee consisting of N. R. Barger, Elton E. Bussewitz,
Earl L. Loyster, Sam Robbins, and W. E. Scott prepared a preliminary check-list,
with migration charts, of Wisconsin birds. Beginning with the July 1940 issue. The
Passenger Pigeon has been i.ssued quarterly and is now a larger and more complete
bulletin. — W. E. Scott, Editor of The Passenger Pigeon

284

THE WILSON BULLETIN

Decembpr, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 4

INDEX TO VOLUME 55, 1943

In addition to names of species and of authors, this index includes references to
the following topics: age determination, anatomy, bibliography, conservation, court-
ship, distribution, food, localities by states and countries, migration, molt, nesting,
new forms noticed, parasitism, physiology, population, predation, roosting, tax-
onomy, territory, weight.

Acanthis 1. linaria, lSS-163
hornemanni exilipes, 156
.\ccipiter cooperi, 33, 36-38
fasciatus vigilax, 168
velox, 33

Age determination, 3-5
.\gelaius humeralis, 123
Ajaia ajaja, 127
.\labama, 237
.Maska, 147-149
.\lberta, 218, 221
.\lbinism, 85

.Aldrich, John W. Relationships of the
Canada Jays in the Northwest,
217-222

.Allan, Philip F., and Palmer R. Sime.

A Hawk Census on Texas Panhandle
Highways, 29-39

.Allen, Robert Porter. “The Roseate
Spoonbill” (reviewed), 59
.Amadon, Dean. Bird Weights as an Aid
in Taxonomy, 164-177
.Ammodramus savannarum intricatus,
124

.Anas rubripes, 3-7, 126
r. rubripes, 5
r. tristis, 5
Anatomy, 3-5
Aquila chrysaetos, 34
Arkansas, 237, 242

Armstrong, Edward A. “Bird Display.
An Introduction to the Study of
Bird Psychology” (reviewed), 87
.Arquatella maritima, 128-129
Asio flammeus, 131
wilsonianus, 54-55
Auriparus flaviceps, 55-56

Baeolophus bicolor, 180
Baker, Bernard W., biog. sketch of, 67
Bananaquit, 120
Banding, 234-244

Bard, Fred G. Canada Jay, Plate 4,
opp. p. 217
Bent, A. C., letter, 222
Bibliography, 62-63, 132, 138-142, 202-
207, 253-256
Bittern, Least, 54
Blacicus, 117

Blackbird, Tawny-shouldered, 123
Bombycilla cedrorum, 246
Bonasa umbellus, 246
Bond, James. Nidification of the Pas-
serine Birds of Hispaniola, 115-125

Brackbill, Hervey. A Nesting Study of
the Wood Thrush. 73-87
Brciding, George H. Starling ne.sting in
Colorado, 247
British Columbia, 218-221
Brooks, Maurice. The carpels of red
spruce blossoms as food for birds.
245-246; Ilex collina fruits as bird
food, 246 ; review by, 201
Bubo virginianus, 34
Bucephala clangula americana, 192
Bullfinch, Greater Antillean, 123
Bullough, W. S. “The Reproductive
Cycles of the British and Conti-
nental Races of the Starling” (re-
viewed) , 60

Buteo borealis, 33, 36-38
lagopus, 34, 36-38
regalis, 31, 34-38
swainsoni, 29, 30, 33-34, 36-38

Cacomantis p. pyrrophanus, 168, 174-
175

variolosus addendus, 168, 174-175
Calcarius lapponicus alascensis, 132
California, 42
Callichelidon, 118
Callipepla squamata, 35
Calyptophilus frugivorus abbotti, 122
f. tertius, 122

Campephilus principalis, 55

Canvasback, 213

Cardinal, 195

Caribou, 65

Catbird, 81, 83, 246

Cathartes aura, 30, 32, 36-38

Ceophloeus pileatus, 55

Charadrius vociferus, 23-28, 223-233

Chat, Palm, 119

Chen hyperborea atlantica, 168-169, 175
h. hyperborea, 168-169, 175
Chewink, 81

Chickadee, Black-capped, 178-191
Carolina, 179
Chicken, Prairie, 55
Chlorophonia cyanea, 121
Christy, Bayard H., Obituary, 197
Circus hudsonius, 30, 34-35
Coccyzus erythropthalmus, 11-22
americanus, 11, 14
Coereba, 115

flaveola bananivora, 120
Colaptes auratus, 55
Colorado, 247

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

INDEX TO VOLUME 55, 1943

285

Connecticut, 237, 242
Conservation, 64-66, 134-135, 212-214
Contopus caribaeus hispaniolensis, 117
virens, 117
Coot, 127-128
Coragyps atratus, 32
Corvus, 115
corax, 55

1. leucognaphalus, 118
p. palmarum, 118

Cottam, Clarence. Least Bittern at
Long Lake, North Dakota, 54;
Greater Yellow-legs as a Fish-
eater, 128; see also, Givens, Law-
rence S. and

Courtship, 13, 88-113, 227-228
Cowbird, 195
Cractes, 217-218 footnote
Crane, Little Brown, 127
Sandhill, 127
Whooping, 245
Crossbill, Red, 246
White-winged, 124, 246
Crow, Palm, 118
White-necked, 118
Cuckoo, Black-billed, 11-22
Yellow-billed, 11, 14
Cyanocitta cristata, 81, 83
stelleri, 130

Cygnus columbianus, 245

Davis, Emma. A Study of Wild and
Hand Reared Killdeers, 223-233
Dendroica petechia albicollis, 120
pinus chrysoleuca, 121
pityophila, 121

Devitt, O. E., see Smith, W. W. and

Dice, Lee R. “The Biotic Provinces of
North America” (reviewed) , 200-
201

Distribution, 29-39, 54, 55, 115-125,
127, 128, 129-130, 132, 192, 196,
217-222, 234-244, 245, 247
Dove, Mourning, 151-154
Duck, 212-214
Black, 3-7, 126
Ruddy, 213
Dulus dominicus, 119
Dumetella, 118
carolinensis, 81, 83, 246

Eagle, Golden, 34, 36-38
Bald, 34, 36-38
Ecolo^, 88-113
Ectopistes migratorius, 55
Elaenia fallax, 115
f. cherriei, 117
flavogaster, 115, 117
martinica, 115, 117
Elaenia, Greater Antillean, 117
Empidonax trailli, 117
Euphonia, Antillean, 121

Falco columbarius, 32
mexicanus, 35
peregrinus, 35
sparverius, 31, 35
Falcon, Prairie, 35-38
Fisher, James. “The Birds of Britain”
(reviewed) , 202
Flicker, 55

Florida, 192, 237, 238, 240, 243
Flycatcher, Alder, 117
Loggerhead, 116
Stolid, 116-117
Vermilion, 192

Food, 16-17, 34, 35, 54, 55, 77-79, 128,
129, 130, 131, 151-153, 159, 194,
226, 232, 245-246

Friedmann, Herbert, review by, 250-
252

Fulica americana, 127-128

Gabrielson, Ira N. “Wildlife Refuges”
(reviewed), 137-138
Gavia adamsi, 149
arctica pacifica, 145-147
immer, 148
stellata, 145-147
Georgia, 132, 237
Geothlypis, 121

Givens, Lawrence S., Clarence Cottam,
and Donald V. Gray. Vermilion
Flycatcher at St. Marks, Florida,
192.

Golden-eye, American, 192
Goldfinch, Antillean, 124
Eastern, 56, 162

Goose, Greater Snow, 168-169, 175
Lesser Snow, 168-169, 175
Grackle, Bronzed, 56
Purple, 83

Gray, Donald V., see Givens, Lawrence

S. and

Grassquit, Black-faced, 123
Yellow-faced, 123
Great Lakes, 234-244
Grinnell, Joseph. “Philosophy of Na-
ture. Selected Writings of a West-
ern Naturalist” (reviewed), 125
Grinnell, Lawrence I. Nesting Habits
of the Common Redpoll, 155-163
Griscom, Ludlow, review by, 136-137
Grouse, Ruffed, 246
Grus americana, 245
c. canadensis, 127
c. tabida, 127
Gull, Glaucous, 129-130
Great Black-backed, 129-130
Herring, 129, 192
Ring-billed, 129, 234-244

Haematopus, 40-46
ater, 42
bachmani, 42

286

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

finschi, 44
fuliginosus, 44
leucopodus, 42-43
ostralegus occidentalis, 43
ostralegus reischeki, 43-44
palliatus frazari, 41
palliatus galapagensis, 41-42
palliatus palliatus, 41
palliatus pitanay, 41
unicolor, 43-44

Haliaeetus lencocephalus, 34, 36-38
Hamerstrom, Frederick N., Jr. Conserva-
tion, 64-66; Conservation Educa-
tion, 134; Winter Feeding, 134-135;
review by, 137-138.

Handley, Charles O., see Mosby, Henry

S. and

Haplochelidon, 118

Hawk, American Rough-legged, 34, 36-
38

Cooper’s, 33, 36-38
Duck, 35, 36-38

Ferruginous Rough-legged, 31, 34-38
Harris, 32
Marsh, 30, 34-38
Pigeon, 32

Red-tailed, 33, 36-38
Sharp-shinned, 33, 36-38
Sparrow, 35-38
Swainson’s, 29, 33-34, 36-38
Hickey, J. J. “A Guide to Bird Watch-
ing” (reviewed), 249-250; review
by, 50

Hill, Raymond W. Purple Sandpipers
at Richmond Beach, Ohio, 128-129
Hirundo, 117

Hochbaum, Albert. War and Water-
fowl, 212-214

Hubbs, Carl L., review by, 59
Hudson Bay, 9-10, 145-147
Hylocichla mustelina, 73-87, 246
ustulata, 246
Hylonax, 117

Ictinia misisippiensis, 31-33, 36-38
Idaho, 219

Illinois, 88-114, 237, 242
Indiana, 237, 242

Inland Bird Banding Association, 215
Iowa, 127-128
Iridoprocne, 118
Ixobrychus exilis, 54

Jameson, E. W., Jr., see Terres, Pvt.

John K. and

Jay, Blue, 81, 83

Canada, 217-222; Plate 4, opp. p. 217
Columbian (described), 217-222
Steller’s, 130

Judd, Elmer T., biog. sketch of, 51-53
Junco, 167

oreganus montanus, 170-171

Kendeigh, S. Charles, review by, 200-
201

Kentucky, 196, 237
Killdeer, 23-28, 223-233
Kingbird, Eastern, 116
Gray, 116

Kingfisher, Belted, 132
Kite, Mississippi, 32-33, 36-38
Kortright, Francis H. “The Ducks,
Geese and Swans of North Amer-
ica” (reviewed), 61

Lack, David, “The Life of the Robin”
(reviewed), 252

Lagler, Karl F. Neglected Sources of
Data, 132

Lagopus lagopus albus, 158
Lamprochelidon euchrysea, 118
e. sclateri, 118
Lark, Horned, 34, 156
Larus argentatus smithsonianus, 129,
192

delawarensis, 129, 234-244
hyperboreus, 129-130
marinus, 129-130

Leopold, A. Starker. Autumn Feeding
and Flocking Habits of the Mourn-
ing Dove in Southern Missouri,
151-154

Lewis, Harrison F. Conservation, 64;
Small Arms Ammunition for Ci-
vilian Use Rationed in Canada, 135
Lloyd, Clark K. An Unusual Nest of
the Bronzed Grackle, 56
Longspur, Alaskan, 132
Loon, Common, 148
Pacific, 145-148
Red-throated, 145-147
Yellow-billed, 149
Louisiana, 237

Lovell, Harvey B. Gambel’s Sparrow
in Kentucky, 196

Low, Jessop B. Coots Killed Under Un-
usual Circumstances, 127-128
Lower California, 41
Lowery, George H., Jr., biog. sketch of,
67

Loxia curvirostra, 246
leucoptera, 246
1. megaplaga, 124
Loxigilla noctis, 123
violacea affinis, 123
V. maurella, 123-124
V. parish!, 124
Loximitris dominicensis, 124
Ludwig, Frederick E. Ring-billed Gulls
of the Great Lakes, 234-244

Mackenzie, 221
Magpie, 180
Maine, 9

Manitoba, 155-163, 245
Margarops f. fuscatus, 119

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

INDEX TO VOLUME 55, 1943

287

Martin, Purple, 118
Maryland, 73-87, 237, 242
Massachusetts, 237, 242
Mayfield, Harold. Glaucous and Great
Black-backed Gulls at the Western
End of Lake Erie, 129-130; Least
Tern in southeastern Michigan,
245 ; see also Van Camp, Laurel
and

Mayr, Ernst. “Systematics and the
Origin of Species, From the View-
point of a Zoologist” (reviewed) ,
136-137

McClure, H. Elliott. “Ecology and
Management of the Mourning
Dove, Zenaidura macroura (Linn.) ,
in Cass County, Iowa” (reviewed),
198-200

Meadowlark, 35
Megaceryle alcyon, 132
Melanitta perspicillata, 54
Melanocharis longicauda captata, 169
versterii maculiceps, 169
Melanoptila, 118
Meleagris gallopavo, 246
g. silvestris, 54
Melopyrrha taylori, 120
Melospiza melodia, 196
Michigan, 9, 11-22, 23-28, 130, 195,
235-238, 240, 242, 245
Microligea p. palustris, 121
montana, 121

Migration, 8-10, 29-39, 73, 88-113
Mimocichla plumbea ardosiacea, 119
Mimus polyglottos orpheus, 118
Minnesota, 9-10
Mississippi, 237
Missouri, 151-154, 237, 242
Mockingbird, Northern, 118
Moffitt, James, Obituary, 197
Molothrus ater, 195
Molt, 145-150, 193, 195, 196
Montana, 130-131

Mosby, Henry S., and Charles O. Hand-
ley. “The Wild Turkey in Virginia:
Its Status, Life History and Man-
agement” (reviewed), 201
Myadestes genibarbis montanus, 119
Myiarchus, 115
barbirostris, 117
crinitus, 116
stolidus, 117
s. dominicensis, 116-117
s. stolidus, 117
tyrannulus, 117
validus, 117

Nesomimus, 118

Nesting, 11-22, 23-28, 34, 56, 73-87,
115-125, 155-163, 223-233, 234-244
New forms noticed, Aimophila botterii
goldmani, 139

Aimophila botterii texana, 139
Dendrortyx macroura diversus, 253
Elaenia fiavogaster saturata, 253
Elaenia viridicata pacifica, 253
Falco sparverius guadalupensis, 253
Melospiza melodia bendirei, 139
Ortalis vetula vallicola, 62
Otocoris alpestris alpina, 139
Pediocetes phasianellus caurus, 253
Perisoreus canadensis pacificus, 203
Spinus tristis jewetti, 203
Trogon citreolus sumichrasti, 62
New Brunswick, 9, 237, 242
New Jersey, 237, 242
New Mexico, 32

New York, 9, 131, 178-191, 223-233,
237, 242

New Zealand, 43

Nice, Margaret M. A bald Song Spar-
row, 196; “Studies in the Life His-
tory of the Song Sparrow II; The
Behavior of the Song Sparrow and
Other Passerines” (reviewed), 250-
252; reviews by, 60, 198-200, 249-
250

Nickell, Walter P, Observations on the
Nesting of the Killdeer, 23-28
Norris, Robert. Diving of a Long-billed
Marsh Wren, 132
North Carolina, 237, 242
North Dakota, 51, 53-54, 128
Nuthatch, White-breasted, 170, 180
Nyctea nyctea, 8-10
Nycticorax c. caledonicus, 168
c. mandibularis, 168
Nyroca valisneria, 213

Odum, Eugene P. Some Physiological
Variations in the Black-capped
Chickadee, 178-191

Ohio, 54, 55, 126, 127, 128-130, 132,
192, 196, 237, 238, 242, 245
Olson, Ada L. Cowbird carrying away
and eating a bird’s egg in the eve-
ning, 195

Ontario, 3-6, 9, 235-238, 242, 247
Oporornis formosus, 247
Oregon, 221
Oreoscoptes, 118
Osprey, 35, 36-38
Otocoris alpestris, 34, 156
Owl, Great Gray, 130-131
Great Horned, 34
Long-eared, 54
Short-eared, 131
Snowy, 8-10

Oxyechus vociferus, 23-28, 223-233
Oyster-catchers, 40-46

Pachycephala schlegelii obscurior, 171
soror klossi, 171-172
Palmer, Ralph S. Photos, 155, 157,
160-161

288

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55. No. 4

Pandion haliaetus, 35, 36-38
Parabuteo unicinctus harrisi, 32
Parasitism, 14, 195
Parker, Lansing A. letter, 65
Passer domesticus, 81, 83, 185, 187
Passerculus sandwichensis, 156
Passerella iliaca altivagans, 173-174
i. brevicauda, 171-173
i. canescens, 171
i. fulva, 173
i. iliaca, 173-174
i. mariposae, 167, 171
i. monoensis, 173-174
i, schistacea, 173-174
i. sinuosa, 173-174
i. stephensi, 173
Pelicans, White, 245
Pennsylvania, 237, 242
Penthestes atricapillus, 178-191
a. borealis, 180
carolinensis, 179
palustris, 180
Perisoreus, 217-222
canadensis albescens, 218-221
c. bicolor, 218-221
c. canadensis, 220, 221
c. capitalis, 219, 220
c. connexus, 217-222
c. fumifrons, 218-221
c. griseus, 218-221
c. obscurus, 219-220
c. pacificus, 218, 220, 221
c. rathbuni, 219, 220
Petrides, George A. Notes on a Captive
Redstart, 193-194
Petrochelidon andecola, 118
f. fulva, 117-118
Pewee, Greater Antillean, 117
Wood, 117
Phaenicophilus, 121
palmarum, 122
poliocephalus coryi, 122
Philohela minor, 88-114
Physiology, 126, 178-191
Pica pica, 180
Pigeon, Passenger, 55
Pinicola enucleator eschatosus, 168
e. leucura, 168
Pipilo erythrophthalmus, 81
Piranga olivacea, 122
Pitangus, 116
sulphuratus, 116

Pitelka, Frank A. Territoriality, Dis-
play, and Certain Ecological Rela-
tions of the American Woodcock,
88-114

Ploceus c. cucullatus, 123
Population, 29-39, 62-63, 212
Predation, 56, 64-65, 130, 131, 192
Progne subis dominicensis, 118
Protonotaria citrea, 56
Ptarmigan, Willow, 158

Ptiloprora g. guisei, 171
Pyrocephalus rubinus mexicanus, 192

Quail, Scaled, 35
Quebec, 9, 237, 242
Quiscalus quiscula aeneus, 56
q. quiscula, 83

Raven, 55
Redhead, 213

Redpoll, Common, 155-163
Hoary, 156
Redstart, 193-194
Rhodinodchla, 122
Richmondena cardinalis, 195
Roberts, Thomas S., Wood Thrush,
Plate 2, opp. p. 73
Robin, 80, 81, 83, 246
Roosting, 55-56, 230-231

Saltator, Antillean, 124
Saltator atriceps, 124
aurantiirostris, 124
coerulescens, 124
maximus, 124
orenocensis, 124
Sandpiper, Purple, 128-129
Saskatchewan, 237
Saunders, William E. Obituary, 197
Scaup, Lesser, 213
Schiffornis turdinus, 115
Schorger, A. W. Remains of the Wild
Turkey in Wisconsin, 54
Scolopax rusticola, 94, 104, 105, 109,
112

saturata, 104

Scotiaptex n. nebulosa, 130-131
Scoter, Surf, 54
Setophaga ruticilla, 193-194
Sherman, Althea R. Obituary, 133
Shortt, Terence M. Correlation of Bill
and Foot Coloring with Age and
Season in the Black Duck, 3-7
Sime, Palmer, see Allan, Philip F. and

Simmons, Edward Me Ilhenny, biog
sketch of, 144
Siskin, Pine, 160, 246
Sitta carolinensis, 180
c. aculeata, 170
c. alexandrae, 170

Smith, W. W., and O. E. Devitt. The
Kentucky Warbler in the Toronto
region, 247

Snyder, L. L. The Snowy Owl Migra-
tion of 1941-42

(Report of Snowy Owl Committee),
8-10

Solitaire Antillean, 119
South Carolina, 237, 242
Sparrow, Andean, 124
Chipping, 56
English, 81, 83, 185, 187

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

INDEX TO VOLUME 55, 1943

289

Fox, 170-171, 173-174
Cambers, 156, 196
Grasshopper, 124
Nuttall’s, 171
Puget Sound, 171
Savannah, 156
Song, 196
Tree, 156

White-crowned, 156, 196
Spencer, O. Ruth. Nesting Habits of
the Black-billed Cuckoo, 11-22
Spindalis dominicensis, 121-122
Spinus pinus, 160, 246
t. tristis, 56
Spizella arborea, 156
p. passerina, 56
Spoonbill, Roseate, 127
Starling, 81, 83, 247
Stejneger, Leonhard. Obituary, 133
Sterna hirundo, 132
albifrons athalassos, 245
Stevens, O. A. Elmer T. Judd, North
Dakota Ornithologist, 51-53
Storer, Tracy I. “General Zoology”
(reviewed), 22

Sturgeon, Myron T., biog. sketch of, 215
Sturnella neglecta, 35
Sturnus vulgaris, 81, 83, 247
Sutton, George Miksch. Wing Molts of
Adult Loons: A Review of the Evi-
dence, 145-150; biog. sketch of,
215; see also p. 253, footnote
Swallow, Antillean Cliff, 117-118
Golden, 118
Swan, Whistling, 245
Swenk, Myron Harmon, biog. sketch of,
47-50

Tanager, Black-crowned Palm, 122
Chat, 122

Gray-crowned Palm, 122
Hispaniolan Golden, 121-122
Scarlet, 122

Tanagra laniirostris, 121
musica flavifrons, 121
m. intermedia, 121
m. musica, 121
violacea, 121

Tanner, James T. “The Ivory-billed
Woodpecker” (reviewed), 58
Taxonomy, 3-7, 40-46, 115-125, 164-
177, 217-222

Telmatodytes palustris, 132
Tennessee, 237
Teretistris, 121
Tern, Common, 132
Least, 245

Terres, Pvt. John K. and E. W. Jame-
son, Jr. Plague of Mice as Food
for Short-eared Owls, 131
Territory, 62-63, 81-83, 88-114
Texas, 29-39, 55-56, 237

Thomas, Edward S. A wren singing the
songs of both Bewick’s and the
House Wren, 192-193
Thomson, A. Landsborough. “Bird Mi-
gration” (reviewed), 50
Thorp, George B., biog. sketch of, 66
Thrasher, Brown, 83, 118
Pearly-eyed, 119
Thrush, La Selle, 119
Olive-backed, 246
Red-legged, 119

Wood, 73-87, 246, PI. 2, opp. p. 73
Thryomanes bewicki, 192-193
Tiaris, 116
b. bicolor, 123
b. marchii, 123
0. olivacea, 123
Titmouse, Tufted, 180
Tolmarchus, 116
bahamensis, 116
caudifasciatus gabbii, 116
Totanus melanoleucus, 128
Toxostoma, 118, 167
crissale, 118
guttatum, 118
ocellatum, 118
rufum, 83, 118

Trautman, Milton B. and Mary A. An
Ohio Record of the Surf Scoter, 54
Trautman, Milton B. Normal Flight of
a Black Duck after Healing of Wing
Fractures, 126; Herring Gull at-
tack on normal Golden-eye, 192
Troglodytes aedon, 185, 187-188, 192-
193

Tryon, C. A., Jr. The Great Gray Owl
as a Predator on Pocket Gophers,
130-131
Turdus, 119
aurantius, 119
migratorius, 80, 81, 83, 246
swalesi, 119
Turkey, Wild, 54, 246
Tympanuchus americanus, 55
Tyrannus, 116
d. dominicensis, 116
melancholicus, 116
tyrannus, 116

Van Camp, Laurel, and Harold May-
field. Two Long-eared Owl Nests
near Toledo, Ohio, 54-55
Van Tyne, Josselyn, Roseate Spoonbills
Transported Northward by Ship,
127; Abnormal feather loss by
Cardinals 195; reviews by, 22, 59,
61, 87, 125, 202, 252
Verdin, 55-56

Vermivora chrysoptera, 193
pinus, 193

Vireo, Black- whiskered, 120
Flat-billed, 120

290

THE WILSON BULLETIN

December, 1943
Vol. 55, No. 4

Red-eyed, 120
Thick-billed, 119-120
White-eyed, 119
Yellow-throated, 55
Vireo a. altiloquus, 120
c. crassirostris, 120
c. tortugae, 119-120
flavifrons, 55
griseus, 119

magister caymanensis, 120
m, magister, 120
modestus, 120
nanus, 120

Vireosylva caymanensis, 120
Virginia, 237, 242, 246
Virginia Society of Ornithology, 214
Vulture, Black, 32
Turkey, 30, 32, 36-38

Walkinshaw, Lawrence H. Snakes De-
stroying Birds’ Eggs and Young, 56
Warbler, Blue-winged, 193
Golden, 120
Golden- winged, 193
Gray-breasted Ground, 121
Kentucky, 247
Pine, 121
Prothonotary, 56
White-breasted Ground, 121
Yellow, 120

Ward, F. C. Whooping Cranes at Shoal
Lake, Manitoba, 245
Washington, 217-221
Waxwings, Cedar, 246
Weaver, Village, 123
Webster, J. Dan. The Downy Young of
Oyster-catchers, 40-46

Weight, 162, 164-177, 179-180
West Indies, 115-125
West Virginia, 237, 245-246
Wetmore, Alexander. Evidence for the
Former Occurrence of Ivory-billed
Woodpeckers in Ohio, 55 ; The
Little Brown Crane in Ohio, 127;
The Alaskan Longspur in Ohio, 132
Whitaker, Lovie M. Roosting Habits
of the Verdin, 55-56
Wilson Ornithological Club, Library
208-211; Reports, 68-71, 143, 214,
282

Wisconsin, 54, 237
Wood, Norman A. Obituary, 197
Woodcock, American, 88-114
European, 94, 104, 105, 109-112
Woodpecker, Ivory-lDilled, 55
Pileated, 55

Wren, Bewick’s, 192-193
House, 185, 187-188, 192-193
Long-billed Marsh, 132

Xenicus, 115

Yellow-legs, Greater, 128
Yukon Territory, 64

Zenaidura macroura, 151-154
Zimmer, John T. Myron Harmon
Swenk 1883-1941, 47-50
Zonotrichia capensis, 166
capensis antillarum, 124
leucophrys, 169-170
1. gambeli, 156, 196
1. leucophrys, 156, 196
1. nuttalli, 171
1. pugetensis, 171

NEW NAME PROPOSED IN VOLUME 55: Perisoreus canadensis connexus, 217

TO OUR CONTRIBUTORS

Our members are asked to submit articles for publication in the Bulletin.
Manuscripts will be accepted with the understanding that they have not been
published or accepted for publication elsewhere.

Manuscript. Manuscripts should be typed on paper of good quality and of
letter size (8J4 x 11). Write on one side only and use double spacing. The title
should be brief and carefully constructed so as to indicate the subject clearly.
Ordinarily the scientific names of the birds treated should be given and should
appear early in the article. Most articles should have a brief summary at the end.

Bibliography. Literature referred to in the text should be cited by author’s
name, year of publication, and exact pages of the particular reference. Such
citations should ordinarily be listed in full at the end of the paper.

Illustrations. Photographic prints, to reproduce well as half-tones, should
have good contrast and detail. Please send prints unmounted, and attach to
each print a brief but adequate legend. Do not write heavily on the backs of
photographs.

Proof. Galley proof will be submitted to authors and must be returned
promptly. Expensive alterations in copy after the type has been set must be
charged to the author.

Reprints. The Club is unable to furnish free reprints to authors. Airange-
ments will be made, however, for reprints to be made at cost. A scale of
costs, based on the number of pages, is given below.

REPRINT SCHEDULE OF THE WILSON BULLETIN

Each

Additional

1 page 2 pp. 4 pp. 8 pp._ 12 pp. 16 pp. 4 pp.

100 copies $1.95 $2.10 $2.40 $4.15 $5.90 $7.00 85c

Each additional

100 copies 70c 85c 1.40 2.20 2.90 3.50 55c

Covers: $3.85 for first 100 copies; $1.40 for additional 100 copies.

Charge will be made for a minimum of 100 reprints.

Orders for reprints should accompany the returned galley proof. Contributors
are asked not to pay for reprints in advance. Bills for reprints, transportation,
and tax are sent to authors by the press.

m

j

(

I

I > ;

i

j

\

I

Date Due

MAY 28 1968