SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIONUNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMBulletin 176
LIFE HISTORIES OFNORTH AMERICAN CUCKOOSGOATSUCKERS, HUMMINGBIRDSAND THEIR ALLIESORDERS PSITTACIFORMES, CUCULIFORMESTROGONIFORMES, CORACIIFORMES, CAPRIMULGIFORMESAND MICROPODIIFORMES
BYARTHUR CLEVELAND BENTTaunton, Massachusetts
UNITED STATESGOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICEWASHINGTON : 1940
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. Price 75 cents (Paper)
ADVERTISEMENTThe scientific publications of the National Museum include twoseries, known, respectively, as Proceedings and Bulletin.The Proceedings series, begun in 1878, is intended primarily as amedium for the publication of original papers, based on the collec-tions of the National Museum, that set forth newly acquired factsin biology, anthropology, and geology, with descriptions of newforms and revisions of limited groups. Copies of each paper, inpamphlet form, are distributed as published to libraries and scientificorganizations and to specialists and others interested in the differentsubjects. The dates at which these separate papers are published arerecorded in the table of contents of each of the volumes.The series of Bulletins^ the first of which was issued in 1875, con-tains separate publications comprising monographs of large zoologi-cal groups and other general systematic treatises (occasionally inseveral volumes), faunal works, reports of expeditions, catalogs oftype specimens, special collections, and other material of similariiature. The majority of the volumes are octavo in size, but a quartosize has been adopted in a few instances in which large plates wereregarded as indispensable. In the Bulletin series appear volumesunder the heading Contributions from, the United States NationalHerharium^ in octavo form, published by the National Museum since1902, which contain papers relating to the botanical collections ofthe Museum.The present work forms No. 176 of the Bulletin series.Alexander Wetmore,Assistant Secretary^ Smithsonian Institution.Washington, D. C, May 3, 191^0.
CONTENTS PageIntroduction viiOrder Psittaciformes 1Family Psittacidae: Parrots and parakeets 1Conuropsis carolinensis carolinensis: Carolina parakeet 1Habits 1Distribution 10Conuropsis carolinensis ludovicianus: Louisiana parakeet 11Habits 11Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha: Thick-billed parrot 18Habits 18Distribution 18Order Cuculiformes 19Family CucuUdae: Cuckoos, roadrunners, and anis 19Crotophaga ani: Smooth-billed ani 19Habits 19Distribution 25Crotophaga sulcirostris sulcirostris: Groove-billed ani 26Habits 26Distribution 34Crotophaga sulcirostris pallidula: San Lucas ani 35Habits 35Geococcyx californianus: Roadrunner 36Habits 36Distribution 50Coccyzus minor maynardi: Maynard's cuckoo 51Habits 51Distribution 53Coccyzus americanus americanus: YeUow-billed cuckoo 54Habits 54Distribution 64Coccyzus americanus occidentalis: California cuckoo 67Habits 67Coccyzus erythropthalmus: Black-billed cuckoo 70Habits 70Distribution 81Cuculus optatus optatus: Himalayan cuckoo 84Habits 84Distribution 90Cuculus canorus bakeri: Khasia Hills cuckoo 91Habits 91Distribution 105Order Troggniformes 106Family Trogonidae: Trogons 106Trogon ambiguus ambiguus: Coppery-tailed trogon_ 106Habits 106Distribution 110ni
IV BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM PageOrder Coraciiformes. 111Family Alcedinidae: Kingfishers.. 111Megaceryle alcyou alcyon: Eastern belted kingfisher 111Habits 111Distribution 126Megaceryle alcyon caurina: Western belted kingfisher 129Habits 129Megaceryle torquata torquata: Ringed kingfisher 130Habits 130Distribition 139Chloroceryle americana septentrionalis: Texas kingfisher 140Habits 140Distribution 146Order Caprimulgiformes 147Family Caprimulgidae: Goatsuckers 147AntrGstomus carolinensis: Chuck-will's-widow 147Habits 147Distribution 161Antrostomus vociferus vociferus: Eastern whippoorwill 163Habits 163Distribution 181Antrostomus vociferus arizonae: Stephens's whippoorwill 183Habits 183Phalaenoptilus nuttalli nuttalli: Nuttall's poorwill, 187Habits 187Distribution 193Phalaenoptilus nuttalli californicus: Dusky poorwill 194Habits 194Phalaenoptilus nuttalli hueyi: Desert poorwill - 197Habits 197Phalaenoptilus nuttalli dickeyi: San Ignatio poorwill 198Habits 198Nyctidromus albicoUis merrilli: Merrill's pauraque 199Habits 199Distribution 205Chordeiles minor minor: Eastern nighthawk 205Habits 205Distribution 231Chordeiles minor henryi: Western nighthawk 235Habits 235Chordeiles minor chapmani: Florida nighthawk 237Habits 237Chordeiles minor sennetti: Sennett's nighthawk 239Habits 239Chordeiles minor hesperis: Pacific nighthawk 240Habits 240Chordeiles minor howelli: Howell's nighthawk 242Habits 242Chordeiles minor aserriensis: Cherrie's nighthawk 243Habits 243Chordeiles acutipennis texensis: Texas nighthawk 244Habits 244Distribution 252
CONTENTS VOrder Caprimtjlgiformes?Continued. ^"^^Family Caprimulgidae: Goatsuckers?Continued.Chordeiles acutipennis inferior: San Lucas nighthawk 253Habits 253Order Micropgdiifokmes 254Famil}' Micropodidae: Swifts 254Nephoecetes niger borealis: Northern black swift 254Habits 254Distribution 270Chaetura pelagica: Chimney swift 271Habits 271Distribution 290Chaetura vauxi: Vaux's swift 294Habits 294Distribution 303Micropus pacificus pacificus: Vvhite-rumped swift 304Habits 304Distribution 310Aeronautes saxatalis saxatalis: White-throated swift 310Habits 310Distribution 318Family Trochilidae: Hummingbirds 319Eugenes fulgens: Rivoli's hummingbird 319Habits 319Distribution 325Lampornis clemenciae bessophilus: Arizona blue-throated hum-mingbird 325Habits 325Distribution 330Lampornis clemenciae clemenciae: Texas blue-throated hum-mingbird 330Habits 330Archilochus colubris: Ruby-throated hummingbird 332Habits 332Distribution 350Archilochus alexandri: Black-chinned hummingbird 352Habits 352Distribution 360Calypte costae: Costa's hummingbird 361Habits 361Distribution 370Calypte anna: Anna's hummingbird 371Habits 371Distribution 387Selasphorus platycercus platycercus: Broad-tailed hummingbird. 387Habits 387Distribution 395Selasphorus rufus: Rufous hummingbird 396Habits 396Distribution 409Selasphorus alleni: Allen's hummingbird 411Habits 411Distribution 417
VI BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
Order Micuopodiiformes?Continued.Family Trochilidae: Hummingbirds? Continued.Atthis heloisa heloisa: Eeloise's hummingbird 417Habits 417Distribution 420Stellula calliope: Calliope hummingbird 420Habits 420Distribution 428Calothorax lucifer: Lucifer hummingbird 430Habits 430Distribution 432Amazilia tzacatl tzacatl: Rieffer's hummingbird 432Habits 432Distribution 443Amazilia yucatanensis chalconota: Buflf-bellied hummingbird 444Habits 444Distribution 445Amazilia salvini: Salvin's hummingbird 446Habits 446Hylocharis xantusi: Xantus's hummingbird 447Habits 447Distribution 451Hylocharis leucotis leucotis: White-eared hummingbird 452Habits 452Distribution 464Cynanthus latirostris: Broad-billed hummingbird 465Habits 465Distribution ^ 472Literature cited 475Index 493
INTRODUCTIONThis is the thirteenth in a series of bulletins of the United StatesNational Museum on the life histories of North American birds.Previous numbers have been issued as follows
:
107. Life Histories of North American Diving Birds, August 1, 1919.113. Life Histories of North American Gulls and Terns, August 27, 1921.121. Life Histories of North American Petrels and Pelicans and their Allies,October 19, 1922.126. Life Histories of North American Wild Fowl (part), May 25, 1923.130. Life Histories of North American Wild Fowl (part), June 27, 1925.135. Life Histories of North American Marsh Birds, March 11, 1927.142. Life Histories of North American Shore Birds (pt. 1), December 31,1927.146. Life Histories of North American Shore Birds (pt. 2), March 24,1929.162. Life Histories of North American Gallinaceous Birds, May 25, 1932.167. Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey (pt. 1), May 3, 1937.170. Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey (pt. 2), August 8, 1938.174. Life Histories of North American Woodpeckers, May 23, 1939.The same general plan has been followed, as explained in previousbulletins, and the same sources of information have been utilized.The nomenclature of the 1931 check-list of the American Orni-thologists' Union has been followed.An attempt has been made to give as full a life history as pos-sible of the best-known subspecies of each species and to avoidduplication by writing briefly of the others, giving only the char-acters of the subspecies, its range, and any habits peculiar to it.In many cases certain habits, probably common to the species as awhole have been recorded for only one subspecies; such habits arementioned under the subspecies on which the observations were made.The distribution gives the range of the species as a whole, with onlyrough outlines of the ranges of the subspecies, which in many casescannot be accurately defined.The egg dates are the condensed results from a mass of recordstaken from the data in a large number of the best collections in thecountry, as well as from contributed field notes and from a fewpublished sources. They indicate the dates on which eggs have beenfound in various parts of the country, showing the earliest and latestdates and the limits between which half the dates fall, indicatingthe height of the season.The plumages are described in only enough detail to enable thereader to trace the sequence of molts and plumages from birth tomaturity and to recognize the birds in the different stages and atthe different seasons. VII
VIII BLTLI.ETTN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMNo attempt has been made to describe fully the adult plumages;this has been well done already in the many manuals. The namesof colors, when in quotation marks, are taken from Ridgway's ColorStandards and Nomenclature (1912). In the measurements of eggsthe four extremes are printed in boldface type.Many who have contributed material for previous volumes havecontinued to cooperate. Receipt of material from over 450 contribu-tors has been acknowledged previously. In addition to these, ourthanks are due to the following new contributors: E. C. Aldrich,Mrs. H. P. Bracelin, Maurice Brooks, Mildred Campbell, R. T.Congdon, Murl Deusing, S. S. Dickey, H. E. Edgerton, W. G. F.Harris, L. B, Howsley, Charles Macnamara, R. F. Mason, Jr., R. T.Moore, A. R. Phillips, A. J. Pinckney, O. P. Silliman, A. F. Skutch,Emily Smith, W. P. Steinbeck, R. R. Talmadge, H. O. Todd, Jr.,B. R Tyler, L. O. Williams, G. R. Wilson, and H. B. Wood. Asthe demand for these bulletins is greater than the supply, the namesof those who have not contributed to the work during the previousten years may be dropped from the author's mailing list.Dr. Winsor M. Tyler rendered valuable assistance in reading andindexing, for these groups, a large part of the literature on NorthAmerican birds, and contributed three complete life histories. E. C.Stuart Baker and Alexander F. Skutch each contributed two com-plete life histories; and Dr. Alfred O. Gross, the Rev. F. C. R.Jourdain, Alexander Sprunt, Jr., Dr. George M. Sutton, and RobertS. Woods contributed one each. Our thanks are also due F. SeymourHersey for figuring egg measurements. Egg measurements werefurnished, especially for this volume, by Dean Arnadon, A. M. Bailey,American Museum of Natural History, GrifRng Bancroft, R. M.Barnes, I. McT. Cowan, H. G. Deignan, C. E. Doe, J. H. Gillin, W. C.Hanna, R. C. Harlow, R. T. Moore, R. T. Orr, P. B. Philipp, M. S.Ray, J. H. Riley, G. H. Stuart, 3d, and Miss M. W. Wythe.Through the courtesy of the Bureau of Biological Survey, theservices of Frederick C. Lincoln were again obtained to compile thedistribution paragraphs. With the matchless files of the Survey athis disposal, his many hours of careful work have produced resultsfar more satisfactory than could have been attained by the author,who claims no credit and assumes no responsibility for this partof the work.The manuscript for this bulletin was completed in March 1939.Contributions received since then will be acknowledged later. Onlyinformation of great importance could be added. The reader isreminded again that this is a cooperative work; if he fails to find inthese volumes anything that he knows about the birds, he can blamehimself for not having sent the information to
?
The Author.
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN CUCKOOS,GOATSUCKERS, HUMMINGBIRDS, AND THEIRALLIES.ORDERS PSiTTACIFORMES, CT:'CULTFORiIES, TROGONIFORMES, COR-ACIIFORMES, CAPRIMULGIFORMES, AND MICROPODIIFORMESBy Arthur Clea^eland BentTaunton, Mass.
Order PSITTACIFORMESFamily PSITTACIDAE: Parrots and ParakeetsCONUROPSIS CAROLINENSIS CAROLINENSIS (Linnaeus)CAROLINA PARAKEETHABITSMany of the glories of North American bird life have gone, neverto return. The spread of civilization, the selfish greed of humaninterests, and the lust to kill have wiped out some of the most spec-tacular and beautiful features in our formerly abundant bird life.The countless millions of passenger pigeons that formerly darkenedthe sky in their seasonal migrations are gone forever. And the greatflocks of gorgeous parakeets that formerly roamed over nearly all theeastern part of our country will be seen no more. This was theonly representative of the parrot family that lived and bred withinthe United States; it gave a touch of tropical character to ouravifauna and a vivid tinge of color to the landscape ; its loss is muchto be regretted. Never again may be seen the glorious sights wit-nessed by Wilson, Audubon, and other early writers, as great flocksof these gorgeous birds wheeled through the air, in close formation,their long tails streaming out in straight flight or spreading as theyturned, and their brilliant colors, red, yellow, bright green, and softblue, gleaming in the sunlight. As Wilson (1832) says: "They camescreaming through the woods in the morning, about an hour aftersunrise, to drink the salt water, of which tliey, as well as the pigeons,are remarkably fond. Wlien they alighted on the ground, it ap-peared at a distance as if covered with a carpet of richest green,1
2 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
orange, and yellow: they afterwards settled, in one body, on aneighbouring tree, which stood detached from any other, coveringalmost every twig of it, and the sun, shining strongly on their gayand glossy plumage, produced a very beautiful and splendidappearance."Conuropsis caroUnensi^, as a species, covered a wide range in east-em North America, from the vicinity of the Great Lakes southwardto Florida and the Gulf States, and from Colorado (rarely) to theAtlantic coast. For a full account, given in detail, of the formerrange of the species and its gradual disappearance, the reader isreferred to a comprehensive article on the subject by Edwin M.Hasbrouck (1891). As the species has been divided into two sub-species since this was written, we shall consider here only the formerdistribution of the eastern race, Conuropsis c. caroUnensis. The old-est and northernmost records, of what was probably this race,appeared in Bartram's Fragments (1799) in the following words:The two first of these birds were seen in the neighbourhood of Philadelphia,between thirty and forty years ago. The Psittacus, most probably the Psittacuspertiuax, Illinois Parrot, or the Psittacus carolinensis, Carolina Parrot, hasbeen occasionally observed in Shareman's Valley, on Shareman's Creek, a branchof the river Susquehanna, within twenty miles of the town of Carlisle. Thislast fact seems to contradict the observation of Mr. William Bartram, who says,
"The parakeets (Psittacus carolinensis) never reach so far north as Pennsyl-vania, which to me is unaccountable, considering they are a bird of such singu-lar rapid flight, they could easily perform the journey in ten or twelve hoursfrom North-Carolina, where they are very numerous, and we abound with allthe fruits which they delight in." * * * i may add, that a very large flightof parakeets, which came from the westward, was seen a few years ago, abouttwenty-five miles to the north-west of Albany, in the State of New-York.The arrival of these birds in the depth of winter (January, 17S0) was, indeed,a very remarkable circumstance. The more ignorant Dutch settlers were ex-ceedingly alarmed. They imagined, in dreadful consternation, that it portendednothing less calamitous than the destruction of the world.DeKay (1844) places this New York record as occurring in 1795.The only record we have for New Jersey is one recently publishedby Warren F. Eaton (1936) ; Albert E. Hedden (1841-1915) told hisson and nephew "of the occurrence of this species in East Orange,Essex County, New Jersey, when he was a boy. They placed thetime between 1850 and 1860, and both recall exactly the same story.The Paroquets occurred probably twice at least in hot weather (Isuspect September) and were considered very destructive to the smallhousehold apple orchards, maintained by the family at that time.The birds occurred in flocks and tore the apple fruit apart, extractingthe seeds." There seems to be no record for Delaware, but in Audu-bon's time they were found as far north as the boundary line betweenVirginia and Maryland, where a flock was seen and specimens were
CAROLINA PARAKEET 6
shot as recently as September 1865 (Smith and Palmer, 1888). Theyapparently were common in the Carolinas up to 1850, or perhaps1860, but must have disappeared from there soon after that. ForGeorgia, there seem to be no records since 1849. In Florida, thespecies made its last stand; parakeets were evidently commonthroughout the State up to the 1860's, but during the next 20 yearsall observers reported them as becoming rarer and more restrictedin range. In the early ISGO's it was still connnon in certain remotelocalities in Florida. Arthur H. Howell (1932) has this to sayabout the last records of this vanishing bird:E. J. Brown reported the birds plentiful in March, 1896, near Campbell,Osceola County. Dr. E. A. Mearns took 6 specimens on Padget Creek, BrevardCounty, April 18, 1901. Apparently the last stronghold was in the vicinity ofTaylor Creek, on the northeastern side of Okeechobee Lake. Here on February29, 1896, Robert Ridgway collected 13 specimens, and in April, 1904, Frank M.Chapman saw two flocks aggregating 13 birds (1912, p. 318). W. W. Worth-ington hunted along both sides of Taylor Creek on March 26, 1907, without see-ing any Paroquets. * * * Capt. F. W. Sams, an old resident of Florida,told Dr. Amos W. Butler that he saw a flock of 8 or 10 Paroquets in 1909 atCabbage Slough, on the west side of TurnbuU Hammock, about 12 or 15 milessouthwest of New Smyrna. E. Stewart Hyer, of Orlando, reports seeing onebird at Istokpoga Lake on February 16, 1910. A late and apparently authenticrecord is published by Chapman (Bird Lore, 1915, p. 453) on the authority ofW. J. F. McCormick, who claims to have seen about a dozen birds in March andApril, 1915. Henry Redding, who knows the birds well, reported a flock ofabout 30 seen on Fort Drum Creek in February, 1920.The causes that led to the extermination of the parakeet are nothard to find. It was a bad actor, regarded by fruit growers andagriculturists as a destructive pest, doing extensive damage to theircrops. Consequently it was slaughtered in enormous numbers onevery opportunity. It was more or less hunted as a game bird, for itwas abundant and its flesh was said to be very palatable. It was shotin enormous numbers for mere sport, or for practice. Hundreds werecaptured by professional bird catchers and sent north, as cage birdsor pets, and many were killed for their plumage. Furthermore, ithas always retreated before the spread of civilization and seemed in-capable of surviving in settled regions, probably for the reasonsmentioned above.W, E. D. Scott (1889) says that "they were wantonly mischievousand cut hundreds of young green oranges, peaches, and the like, fromthe trees almost as soon as the fruit was formed." Many were shotby farmers in their cornfields, where the birds had formed the badhabit of feeding on the tender corn on the ears, thus destroying, orinjuring, a large part of the crop.According to Audubon (1842) they ate or destroyed almost everykind of fruit indiscriminately and on this account were always un-
4 BULLETm 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMwelcome visitors "to the planter, the farmer, or the gardener." Hesays:The stacks of grain put up in the field are resorted to by flocks of thesebirds, which frequently cover them so entirely, that they present to the eyethe same effect as if a brilliantly coloured carpet had been thrown over them.They cling around the whole stack, pull out the straws, and destroy twice asmuch of the grain as would suffice to satisfy their hunger. They assail thepear and apple-trcos, when the fruit is yet very small and far from being ripe,and this merely for the sake of the seeds. As on the stalks of corn, they alighton the apple-trees of our orchards, or the pear-trees in the gardens, in greatnumbers; and, as if through mere mischief, pluck off the fruits, open them tipto the core, and, disappointed at the sight of the seeds, which are yet soft andof a milky consistence, drop the apple or pear, and pluck another, passing frombranch to branch, until the trees which were before so promising, are leftcompletely stripped. * * * They visit the mulberries, pecan-nuts, grapes,and even the seeds of the dog-wood, before they are ripe, and on all commitsimilar depredations. * * *Do not imagine, reader, that all these outrages are borne without severeretaliation on the part of the planters. So far from this, the Parakeets aredestroyed in great numbers, for whilst busily engaged in plucking off the fruitsor tearing the grain from the stacks, the husbandman approaches them withperfect ease, and commits great slaughter among them. All the survivors rise,shriek, fly around about for a few minutes, and again alight on the very placeof most imminent danger. The gun is kept at work; eight or ten, or eventwenty, are killed at every discharge. The living birds, as if conscious of thedeath of their companions, sweep over their bodies, screaming as loud as ever,but still return to the stack to be shot at, until so few remain alive, that thefarmer does not consider it worth his while to spend more of his ammunition.I have seen several hundreds destroyed in this manner in the course of a fewhours.This fatal habit of hovering over their fallen companions hashelped, more than any one thing, to bring about their extermination.Their social disposition has been their undoing. C. J. Maynard(1896) says of this trait: "This is not a mere liking for company,as they are actually fond of one another, for, if one out of a flockbe wounded, the survivors attracted by its screams, will return tohover over it and, even if constantly shot at, will not leave as longas their distressed friend calls for assistance; in fact, I have seenevery individual in a flock killed one after the other, and the lastbird betrayed as much anxiety for the fate of its prostrate friendswhich were strewed upon the ground, as it did when the first fell."Nesting.?Nothing very definite seems to be known about the nest-ing habits of the Carolina parakeet. No competent ornithologisthas ever seen a nest. Even Wilson and Audubon, who lived in thedays when these birds were so abundant, never saw a nest; and allthey wrote about it was based on hearsay. Most observers seemed toagree that the parakeets nested in hollow trees, but some of the
CAKOLINA PARAKEET 5accounts were rather fantastic. For example, Wilson (1832) wrote:"One man assured me that he cut down a large beech tree, which washollow, and in which he found the broken fragments of upwards oftwenty parakeets' eggs, which were of a greenish yellow colour.The nests, though destroyed in their texture by the falling of thetree, appeared, he said, to be formed of small twigs glued to eachother, and to the side of the tree, in the manner of the ChimneySwallow." Audubon (1842) says: "Their nest, or the place in whichthey deposit their eggs, is simply the bottom of such cavities in treesas those to which they usually retire at night. Many females deposittheir eggs together."Maynard (1896) was told by some cedar hunters that a large num-ber of parakeets nested in a hollow in a huge cypress tree in thedepths of a great cypress swamp. He offered them a good sum toprocure the eggs, which they attempted to do; but, on opening thetree, about which they saw a large number of the parakeets, they weredisappointed to find only young birds. H. B. Bailey (1883) had inhis collection a set of two eggs, which he felt sure were eggs of theCarolina parakeet. "The eggs, which were taken April 26, 1855,were deposited in a hollow tree, on the chips at bottom. One of themwas sent to Mr. Ridgway who has kindly compared it with identifiedeggs, and who confirms the identification." There was an appar-ently authentic set in the John Lewis Childs (1906b) collection,taken in the wild, of which he writes
:
The set consists of three eggs which were taken on April 2, 1896, by Dr. H. E.Peudry. They were found in a cavity of a sycamore tree forty feet up on theoutskirts of the Great Swamp near the head of the Caloosahatchee River andwest of Lake Okechobee, De Soto County, Florida. Dr. Pendry was not sureof the identity of these eggs, as he saw no Paroquets at the nest, but they werein the swamp and he had frequently seen and taken young birds in the samelocality. * * * The eggs were sent to us for identification, and there seemsto l)e not the slightest doubt but that they are genuine. They measure asfollows : 1.35 X 1.06-1.26 x 1.06, 1.25' x 1.05 [34.3 by 27.1, 32.1 by 27.1, and 31.8by 26.8 millimeters].William Brewster (1889) published the following account, whichseemed to him "to rest on evidence sufficiently good to warrant itspublication." He questioned everybody he met about the nesting ofthe parakeet and was told by two professional hunters of alligatorsand plume birds that they had "seen Parrakeets' nests, which theydescribed as flimsy structures built of twigs and placed on thebranches of cypress trees." He goes on to say
:
This account was so widely at variance with what has been previously recordedregarding the manner of nesting of this species that I considered it, at the time,as a mere fabrication, but afterwards it was unexpectedly and most stronglycorroborated by Judge R. L. Long of Tallahassee. The latter gentleman, who,by the way, has a very good general knowledge of the birds of our Northern
6 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMStates, assured me that he had examined many nests of the Parrakeet builtprecisely as above described. Formerly, when the birds were abundant in thesurrounding region, he used to find them breeding in large colonies in thecypress swamps. Several of these colonies contained at least a thousand birdseach. They nested invariably in small cypress trees, the favorite position beingon a fork near the end of a slender horizontal branch. Every fork would beoccupied, and he has seen as many as forty or fifty nests in one small tree.Their nests closely resembled those of the Carolina Dove, being similarly com-posed of cypress twigs put together so loosely that the eggs were often visiblefrom the ground beneath. The twigs of the cypress seemed to be preferred tothose of any other kind of tree. The height at which the nests were placedvaried from five or six feet to twenty or thirty feet. Mr. Long described theeggs as being of a greenish white color, unspotted. He did not remember themaximum number which he had found in one set, but thought it was at leastfour or five. He had often taken young birds from the nests to rear or to giveto his friends.Several times parakeets have been known to breed in captivityor attempt to do so. Kobert Kidgway brought several birds fromFlorida that laid at least 13 eggs in captivity ; most of the eggs nowin American collections are the product of these birds. Dr. Wil-liam C. Herman writes to me that parakeets bred successfully in theCincinnati Zoological Garden, where some were kept for 20 or moreyears; the last one died in September 1914. "Some of these birdsbred in captivity. Dozens of young birds were raised, especiall;ywhen others recently captured were added." Dr. Nowotny (1898)purchased a pair of Carolina parakeets in Vienna and tried to breedthem in captivity. The female laid in all ten eggs; the first fivewere put in a breeding box, but never hatched, as they were "pickedand sucked," presumably by the birds. Two more eggs were placedunder a hen but were destroyed through carelessness. The otherthree were placed in the breeding box and incubated by the para-keets; three young were hatched, but they did not live to maturity.Eggs.?It is not definitely known how many eggs were laid by theCarolina parakeet in a normal set, but indications point to two andthree as being the commonest numbers. Bendire (1895) says, of theeggs laid by Mr. Ridgway's birds in captivity
:
None of these eggs can be called round ; they vary from ovate to short ovate,and are rather pointed. They are white, with the faintest yeUowish tint,ivory-like and quite glossy; the shell is rather thick, close grained, anddeeply pitted, not unlike the eggs of the African Ostrich {Striithio camelus),but of course not as noticeable. Holding the eggs in a strong light, theinside appears to be pale yellow. * * *The deep pitting is noticeable in every specimen, and there can be no possibledoubt about the identity of these eggs. * * * There is no diflSculty whateverin distinguishing these eggs from those of the Burrowing Owl or the Kingfisher,both of which are occasionally substituted for them.Mr. Childs (1905) figures the three eggs sent to him by Mr. Ridg-way and describes them as "color pure white with ivory gloss sur-
CAEOLIISrA PARAKEET 7passing that of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker." One of Mr. Ridg-way's eggs, in the John E. Thayer collection, I should describe asovate in shape and dull white in color, with a very slight gloss. Themeasurements of 24 eggs average 34.23 by 27.80 millimeters ; the eggsshowing the four extremes measure 37 by 38, 33 by 30.2, 32.1 by27.1, and 34.4 by 25.8 millimeters.Young.?We do not know much about the development and care ofthe young in the wild state, but in captivity the birds seem to bevery careless or indifferent in the care and feeding of the young.Dr. Nowotny's eggs were hatched, after continuous incubation, inabout 19 or 20 days, but the young all eventually died from neglect.Mr. Ridgway wrote to Mr. Childs (1905), under date of November13, 1902 : "My female Parakeet laid only six eggs the past summer andI shall never get any more, as the bird is now dead. The first shelaid is the one I sent you. The remaining five hatched, but I haveonly two young ones left, a rat having carried off one, another wasstarved by the parents when half grown, and the third I gave to afriend who had time and disposition to take care of it in order tosave it from starving."Plumages.?I have never seen the downy young or nestling plum-ages and doubt if there are any such in collections. Audubon (1840)says that "the young are at first covered with soft down, such as isseen on young Owls. During the first season, the whole plumage isgreen; but towards autumn a frontlet of carmine appears. Twoyears, however, are passed before the male or female are in fullplumage." His plate shows a bird with a wholly green head.Dr. Nowotny's (1898) young birds, when between five and sixweeks old, "had already attained green wings and tail ; the older onealso had red feathers above the bill and on the under parts. * * *The oldest young one had already attained many dense strong redfeathers above the bill at the age of eight weeks". This does notagree with Audubon's account, or with C. J. Maynard's (1896) whosays, of the young of the year : "Head and neck, wholly green, andthe tail is short." He says, of the nestling: "One of my collectors,who found the young in the nest, informs me that they are coveredwith a grayish down." I have never seen a young bird with a whollygreen head ; those that I have seen, some nine in number, were in firstwinter plumage, and were collected between October 7 and April 3,indicating that this plumage is worn all through the first winter.These are much like adults, but with no yellow on the head, thighs,or anal region, and only greenish yellow on the edge of the wing;the forehead and front of the crown up to the front edges of theeyes are "flame scarlet" or "cadmium orange," shading off to dullbrownish orange on the lores and to dull brown on the cheeks. Speci-mens taken in February show yellow feathers coming in on the head,
8 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL, MUSEUMand progressive changes toward maturity continue all through thespring months until, by summer, the yellow head is fully acquired.Audubon (1840) says that the young bird requires two years to at-tain its full plumage, and Maynard (1896) says that it is acquiredduring the third year, but the material examined does not indicatethis.Adults have a complete molt in fall, from September to November.Dr. Frank M. Chapman's (1890) captive bird began to molt in Sep-tember, "and by November had acquired an entirely new plumage."Arthur T. Wayne (1910) says that they "commence to molt aboutOctober 5, and require at least six weeks to acquire their perfectplumage."Food.?Much has been said about the food of the Carolina parakeetin the earlier part of this account, as its feeding habits were sodestructive in fruit orchards and grain fields that the birds wereunmercifully slaughtered by the planters, thus hastening the ex-termination of the species. But before the lands were so extensivelycultivated, the parakeets lived on their natural, wild food. C. J.Maynard (1896) writes:I observed a large flock of Parokeets moving along the ground. * * * Atfirst, I could not make out what they were doing but soon found that theywere busily engaged in eating cockspurs, the seeds of a species of grass vrhichgrows very abundantly in old fields. They walked quite well for birds havingsuch short legs and, in pressing forward, moved side by side in a long rank,looking exactly like miniature soldiers. After a few moments, somethingstartled them and they arose, wheeled about, darting rapidly up and down,precisely like pigeons, at the same time, uttering loud cries ; then settled quietlydown again and resumed their meal, as composedly as if nothing had occurredto interrupt.This is the only time that I ever chanced to see the Parokeets feed on theground but I have been informed by the inhabitants of Florida, that they arevery fond of cockspurs and will frequently alight in the fields in order to eatthem. Early in winter, they visit the swamps, where they feed upon thecypress balls. Then it is very difficult to find them as they often remain forweeks in the impenetrable fastnesses of the vast wooded tracts which, at thisseason, are submerged in water. Later, about the first of Februai-y, the Paro-keets emerge from the swamps in small flocks and enter the open woods tosearch for the seeds of the pine cones which are then ripe. At this time, theymay be met with quite frequently but the best opportunity to procure speci-mens occurs about the middle of February, when they may be found in largecompanies, feeding upon the green seeds of the maples and elms which growalong the rivers.Dr. Chapman (1890) found these parakeets feeding on the prairiesnear the Sebastian River in Florida, of which he says:About these "prairies" and at the borders of small streams or low groundgrew in abundance a species of thistle (Cirsnim Lecontei, T. & G.) the seedsof which, so far as I could learn, constituted at this season [February] theentire food of Comtrus. Not a patch of thistles did we find which had notbeen visited by them, the headless stalks showing clearly where the thistles
CAROLINA PARAKEET 9had been neatly severed by the sharp chisel-like bill, while the ground beneathfavorite trees would be strewn with the scattered down. * * *Two days passed before I again met Conurus, and this time to better advan-tage. It was a wet and drizzling morning when we found a flock of six birdsfeeding on thistles at the edge of a "prairie." Perched on the leaflessbranches of the tree before us, their brilliant green plumage showed to the bestadvantage, as we approached through the pines without difiiculty. Severalwere skillfully dissecting the thistles they held in their feet, biting out themilky seed while the released fluffy down floated away beneath them. Therewas a sound of suppressed conversation ; half articulate calls. * * *There was an evident regularity in the habits of the birds we afterwardsobserved?in all about fifty, in flocks of fi'om six to twenty. At an early hourthey left their roost in the hummock bordering the river and passed out intothe pines to feed, always, so far as I observed, selecting thistle patches, andeating the seeds only when in the milky stage. At about ten o'clock theyreturned to the hummock and apparently to some favorite tree, here to pass therest of the morning and early afternoon, when they again started out to feed,returning to the roost just before sunset. A flock of these birds feeding amongthe thistles is a most beautiful and animated sight ; one is almost persuadednot to disturb them. There is constant movement as they fly from plant toplant, or when securing thistles they fly with them in their bills to a neighbor-ing tree, there to dissect them at their leisure. The loud rolling call wasapparently uttered only when on the wing, but when at rest, or feeding, therewas a loud conversational murmur of half articulate, querulous notes and calls.Cottam and Kiiappen (1939) examined the stomach and crop ofone bird, of which they say : "Except for two rabbit hairs, two bits ofthe bird's own feathers, and two fragments of an indeterminable ant,which formed only traces, the entire content consisted of the remainsof no fewer than thirty-two seeds of loblolly pine {Pinus taeda).''''Behavior.?Audubon (1842) writes:The flight of the Parakeet is rapid, straight, and continued through theforests, or over fields and rivers, and is accompanied by inclinations of the bodywhich enable the observer to see alternately their upper and under parts.They deviate from a direct course only when impediments occur, such as thetrunks of trees or houses, in which case they glance aside in a very gracefulmanner, merely as much as may be necessary. A general cry is kept up by theparty, and it is seldom that one of these birds is on wing for ever so short aspace without uttering its cry. On reaching a spot which affords a supply offood, instead of alighting at once, as many other birds do, the Parakeets takea good survey of the neighborhood, passing over it in circles of great extent,first above the trees, and then gradually lowering until they almost touch theground, when suddenly re-ascending they all settle on the tree that bears thefruit of which they are in quest, or on one close to the field in which theyexpect to regale themselves.They are quite at ease on trees or any kind of plant, moving sidewise, climb-ing or hanging in every imaginable posture, assisting themselves very dexter-ously in all their motions with their bills. They usually alight extremely closetogether. I have seen branches of trees as completely covered by them as theycould possibly be. If approached before they begin their plundering, theyappear shy and distrustful, and often at a single cry from one of them, thewhole take wing, and probably may not return to the same place that day.178223?40 2
10 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMMaynard (1896) says:I have remarked that the Parokeets scream very loudly when flying; soloudly, in fact, that their shrill cries can be heard for miles. They come dash-ing along, moving in a most eccentric manner ; novp near the ground, then highover the tree tops, seeming about to alight a dozen times but still withoutsettling, each in the company endeavoring to excel the other in producing themost discordant yells, when they will all pitch, at once, into some tree and asudden silence ensues. So great had been the din but a second before that thecomparative stillness is quite bewildering, then too, the large flock of highlycolored birds, lately so conspicuous, have disappeared completely. I wellremember my first experience of this nature ; I stood, gun in hand, watching theevolutions of a large company as it wheeled about, awaiting an opportunity toshoot, when, of a sudden, they all alighted in a large live-oak which stood a fewrods away. I cautiously approached the tree, ready to slaughter half the flockat a single discharge, if possible, when, what was my surprise upon goingwithin a suitable distance, not to perceive a bird. Neither could I see so muchas a feather of the desired game although I walked around the tree severaltimes and even went beneath its branches to peer up between them. Afterspending some time in these fruitless efforts, my patience became quite ex-hausted and I threw a large oyster shell up into the tree. This certainly pro-duced an effect, not just what I intended, however, for, in an instant, outdarted the entire body of screaming birds but on the opposite side of thethick tree ; thus I could only stand and watch them as they disappeared inthe neighboring swamp.Audubon (1842) says:Their roosting-place is in hollow trees, and the holes excavated by the largerspecies of Woodpeckers, as far as these can be filled by them. At dusk, a flockof Parakeets may be seen alighting against the trunk of a large sycamoreor any other tree, when a considerable excavation exists within it. Immediatelybelow the entrance the birds all cling to the bark, and crawl into the hole topass the night. When such a hole does not prove sufficient to hold the wholeflock, those around the entrance hook themselves on by their claws, and thetip of the upper mandible, and look as if hanging by the bill. I have frequentlyseen them in such positions by means of a glass, and am satisfled that thebill is not the only support used in such cases.Dr. William C. Herman writes to me, of the parakeets in the Cin-cinnati Zoological Garden : "The parakeets were well adapted to beingcaged, some were in the zoo for 20 or more years. A hollow tree wasprovided for the birds for roosting. Here they hung for the night
;
that is, they used their beaks for holding to the interior of the treetrunk and so rested for the night."DISTRIBUTION
^anp-e.?Southeastern United States ; probably extinct.The range of the Carolina parakeet extended north to casuallynortheastern Colorado (Little Thompson River) ; eastern Nebraska(Omaha and Brownville) ; casually Iowa (Spirit Lake and DecaturCounty) ; casually southern Wisconsin (Lake Koskonong and Wau-kesha County) ; Ohio (Columbus and Summit County) ; and Penii-
LOUISIANA PARAKEET 11
sylvania (Juniata River and Shermans Valley). East to Pennsyl-vania (Shermans Valley) ; casually the District of Columbia (Wash-ington) ; casually West Virginia (White Sulphur Springs) ; SouthCarolina (Pine Barrens and Edding Island) ; Georgia; and Florida(Oklawaha River, Wekiva River, and Micco) ; south to Florida(Micco, Lake Okeechobee, Tampa, Tarpon Springs, Old Town, andTallahassee) ; southern Louisiana (Bayou Sara and St. Mary) ; andcentral Texas (Brownwood). West to central Texas (Brownwood)
;
eastern Oklahoma (Caddo and Fort Gibson) ; and casually easternColorado (Fort Lyon, Denver, and the Little Thompson River).Casual records.?Several of the records that figure in the range asabove outlined can be considered as little more than casual occur-rences, but this status must be accorded a flock reported 25 milesnorthwest of Albany, N. Y., in January 1780, and to flocks observed"many years ago" at Buffalo and West Seneca, N. Y. There also isan indefinite record of this species in East Orange, Essex County,N. J., sometime between 1850 and 1860.Systematists now consider the species as separable into two geo-graphic races, the true Carolina parakeet, C. c. carolinensis, being theeastern form that ranged west to Alabama, while the Louisiana para-keet, C. c. ludovicianus, ranged westward from Mississippi, Tennessee,Kentucky, and Ohio.Egg dates.?Florida : 2 records, April 2 and 26.CONUROPSIS CAROLINENSIS LUDOVICIANUS GmelinLOUISIANA PARAKEETHABITSIn describing this pale race of Conuropsis, Outram Bangs (1913)says: "For many years it has been common knowledge among theolder set of American ornithologists that the Carolina paroquetdivided into two very distinct geographical races." He says of itscharacters: "A much paler bird than Conuropsis c. caroUnsnsis(Linn.) ; yellow portions of head and neck pale lemon yellow orpicric yellow, instead of lemon yellow or lemon chrome; green ofupper parts much paler and more bluish, verdigris green to variscitegreen on wing coverts and sides of neck; under parts dull green-yellow glossed with variscite green; bend of wing and feathers oftibia paler, purer yellow, less orange." Mr. Ridgway (1916) adds:
"Greater wing-coverts, proximal secondaries, and basal portion ofouter webs of primaries more pronouncedly and more extensivelyyellowish, contrasting more strongly with the general green color;size averaging decidedly greater." The latter author says of its for-mer range: "Formerly inhabiting the entire Mississippi Valley (ex-cept open prairies and plains) , from West Virginia to eastern Colo-
12 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
rado, north to the southern shores of Lake Erie and Lake Michigan,south to the Gulf coast."This parakeet is now, doubtless, quite extinct throughout all thiswide range. Though formerly abundant over most of this region,it had begun to disappear even in Audubon's time, for he (1842)says: "Our Parakeets are very rapidly diminishing in number; andin some districts, where twenty-five years ago they were plentiful,scarcely any are now to be seen. At that period, they could be pro-cured as far up the tributary waters of the Ohio as the Great Ken-hawa, the Scioto, the heads of the Miami, the mouth of the Manimeeat its junction with Lake Erie, on the Illinois River, and sometimesas far north-east as Lake Ontario. * * * At the present day, veryfew are to be found higher than Cincinnati, nor is it until you reachthe mouth of the Ohio that Parakeets are met with in considerablenumbers. I should think that along the Mississippi there is not nowhalf the number that existed fifteen years ago."Myron H. Swenk (1934), in a comprehensive paper on this para-keet of the interior, sums up its disappearance in the followingwords: "By 1840 they were practically gone in West Virginia andOhio. They disappeared from Indiana about 1858 and from Illinoisabout 1861. The Colorado birds were gone by about 1862. InKansas they were gone by about 1867, and during the years 1875-1880 they disappeared from Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, Mis-sissippi and Alabama. Their last stand was made in Missouri andalong the Arkansas Eiver and its tributaries in Arkansas and centralOklahoma, but by 1890 they were practically gone in these localitiesalso. * * * The very last records of living Interior CarolinaParoquets are of lone individuals shot at Atchison, Kansas, in 1904,and seen at Notch, Stone County, Missouri, in 1905 {vide Widmann,* * * 1907)."Since that time there have been at least two sight records reported.Harry Harris (1919) says that "in some unaccountable manner a lonebird strayed into the Courtney bottoms in 1912 and was observedby Bush for several weeks before it finally disappeared." Dr. DanielS. Gage has sent me a letter from Prof. Elliot R. Downing, of theUniversity of Chicago, reporting that he saw a Carolina parakeetin the sand-dune region on the shore of Lake Michigan, not far fromChicago, on June 11, 1912, His letter states that he saw the parakeet"on a Juneberry tree, a small one, on the margin of an interdunalpond. I remember the observation very clearly. I was within 20feet of the bird and had a chance to observe it with my bird glassesfor 10 or 15 minutes. I am therefore quite confident that there wasno error in the observation."
LOUISIANA PARAKEET 13Both of these records might well be based on escaped cage birds, asthere were a number in captivity at that time, and the wild birdshad long since disappeared.Wilson (1832) suggests certain reasons why the inland parakeetenjoyed a wider and more northern distribution than its relative onthe Atlantic coast. He writes
:
The preference, however, which this hird gives to the western countries,lying in the same parallel of latitude with those eastward of the Alleghanymountains, which it rarely or never visits, is worthy of remark ; and has beenadduced, by different writers, as a proof of the superior mildness of climatein the former to that of the latter. But there are other reasons for this par-tiality equally powerful, though hitherto overlooked ; namely, certain peculiarfeatures of country to which these birds are particularly and strongly attached
;
these are, low, rich, alluvial bottoms, along the borders of creeks, covered witha gigantic growth of sycamore trees, or button-wood : deep, and almost inpene-trable swamps, where the vast and tower-cypress lifts its still more majestichead ; and those singular salines, or, as they are usually called, licks, so gen-erally interspersed over that country, and which are regularly and eagerlyvisited by the Paroquets. A still greater inducement is the superior abundanceof their favorite fruits. That food which the paroquet prefers to all others isthe seeds of the cockle bur, a plant rarely found in the lower parts of Penn-sylvania or New York; but which unfortunately grows in too great abundancealong the shores of the Ohio and Mississippi.Nesting.?We have no more positive information on the nestinghabits of this parakeet than we have of the eastern race, beyond thefollowing statement by Col. N. S. Goss (1891) : "Their nests areusually placed in holes or hollow cavities of trees. In the spring of1858, a small flock reared their young in a large hollow limb of agiant sycamore tree, on the banks of the Neosho River, near NeoshoFalls, Kansas. I have never been able to procure their eggs."Eggs.?^Vliat few eggs of this race are in existence are indistin-guishable from those of the Carolina parakeet. The measurementsof the only four eggs that I have been able to locate are 36 by 27, 35by 27.5, 35 by 26.5, and 36 by 26.5 millimeters.Food.?Prof. Myron H. Swenk (1934) says of the food of thisparakeet
:
The food of the Interior Carolina Paroquet, though all vegetable was highlyvaried, and they seemed to delight in the fruits of spiny or thorny plants.One of the most relished foods was the seeds of the cocklebur {Xanthiumcanadense), and they fed also on the seeds of the sand-bur grass {Cenchrustriiuloides) and of the various species of thistles {Cirsinm). In the fall theyate the seeds of the honey locust {Gleditsia triacanthos) and the tender budsand fruit of the osage orange (Madura poniifera). In the spring they ate thebuds of the red maple (Acer rul)rum) and birch (Betula spp.). During the sum-mer they ate much fruit, especially mulberries, wild grapes, hackberries andpawpaws, and, after the planting of cultivated apple orchards, were likely tovisit them and peck out the apple seeds in the fall, sometimes doing injury in
14 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthis way. Corn in the milk was also sometimes injured, but not extensively.Other favorite items of food were the seed balls of the sycamore and beechand pecan nuts. In the South cypre.?s seeds were much eaten.Dr. Amos W. Butler (1892), quoting from W. B. Seward, thusdescribes the parakeet's method of eating the cocklebur seeds: "Ineating, the bird picked up a burr with its beak, this was then deliv-ered to one foot raised to receive it. Then one end of the burr wascut off with the sharp-ended under beak, the burr being held with thefoot and the under side of the upper beak while two small kernelswere extracted with the assistance of the tongue and the husk wasthrown away."Dr. Butler, elsewhere (1898), adds to the items of food mentionedabove cherries, persimmons, black-gum berries, haws, and acorns.Voice.?Mr. Swenk (1934) says: "The common call notes consistedof a loud, shrill series of rapidly uttered, discordant cries, given inces-sently when the birds were in flight, resembling qui-qui, qui, qui, qui,qui-i-i-i, with a rising inflection on each i and the last cry drawn out.Another call resembled the shrill cry of a goose and was frequentlyuttered for minutes at a time. When at rest they had a low, con-versational chatter."Winter.?The Carolina parakeet was evidently a very hardy bird, aremarkable quality, quite unique among parrots. Wilson (1832)saw them "in the month of February, along the banks of the Ohio, ina snow storm, flying about like pigeons, and in full cry." Dr. But-ler (1898) was furnished the following note by Prof. John Collett:In 1842, Return Richmond, of Lodi (Parke County), Ind., cut down, in the coldweather of winter, a sycamore tree some four feet in diameter. In its hollowtrunk he found hundreds of Parakeets in a quiescent or semi-torpid condition.The weather was too cold for the birds to fly or even to make any exertion toescape. Mr. Richmond cut off with his saw a section of the hollow trunk somefive feet long, cut out a doorway one foot by two in size, nailed it over a wirescreen of his fanning mill, rolled this cumbersome cage into the house and placedin it a dozen of the birds. They soon began to enjoy the feed of fruit, huckle-berries and nuts he gave them, and he had the pleasure of settling absolutelythe disputed question of how they slept. At night they never rested on aperch, but suspended themselves by their beaks, and with their feet on the sideof their cage. This was repeated night after night during their captivity.RHYNCHOPSITTA PACHYRHYNCHA (Swainson)THICK-BILLED PARROTHABITSThis fine, large parrot is a Mexican species that claims a place onour list as an irregular visitor across our southwestern border insouthern Arizona and New Mexico. Charles T. Vorhies (1934) haspublished an account of all the Arizona records that he was able to
THICK-BILLED PARROT 15find, which probably tells the whole story. K. D. Lusk (1900) re-ported that a flock of nine or ten of these parrots came into theChiricahua Mountains, just north of the Mexican border, about themiddle of June 1900. He collected two specimens, and some pole-cutters killed several others. "They appeared to come up the largecanon, at the head of which I was encamped, to about midway of themountain's height, where the oaks begin to give way to pine, andthere they tarried."Austin Paul Smith (1907) reported "an immense flock of this spe-cies, * * * observed by miners at Bonita Park, near Cochise headin the Chiricahua Mountains, during the month of August, 1904.* * * This flock was estimated at from 700 to 1,000, by those whoobserved the birds. Among these were a number of young birds,easily distinguished by plumage and small size."The next occurrence of these parrots, and probably the last definiterecord, was in the winter of 1917-18, of which Percy Hands wrote toProfessor Vorhies as follows: "The Mexican Thick-billed Parrotswere first noticed on my ranch in lower Pinery Canyon in mid-Sep-tember. About 250?counted over 200?in one flock. They havebeen on my ranch at irregular intervals since then up to March 27.They roosted here seven times during late October and early Novem-ber. The longest period they were away was about three weeksbefore they appeared March 27. There were about 70, rough count,at that appearance."The thick-billed parrot may have occurred elsewhere in Arizona,but Professor Vorhies was unable to find any definite records forany locality outside of the Chiricahuas. The New Mexico recordsare both hearsay, sight records. Mrs. Bailey (1928) reports: "In1919, Dr. Alexander Wetmore was told by R. Winkler that in recentyears his son had at times seen parrots on Animas Mountain, aboveDeer Creek. * * * j^ confirmatory record was given Aldo Leo-pold by Forest Ranger Don S. Sullivan, who said that in 1917 somelarge Parrots were seen near the Elvey Ranch. * * * on theAnimas Division of the Coronado Forest near the Mexican boundary."The main range of the thick-billed parrot is in the mountainsbordering the Mexican tableland. Dr. W. H. Bergtold (1906) writes:This bird is increasingly common from Chuictiupa southward, and was espe-cially an everyday sight during the trip, in 1904, to the mountains west ofParral. * * * in the higher mountains west of Parral, a region varyingin altitude from 4,000 to 10,000 feet, the Thick-billed Parrot is far morecommon than northward in the country west of Cases Graudes; in fact it isthe characteristic bird of these high places, as much so as is the Magpie partof the local color of our Western Plains. * * * j^ whatever section we sawthem, these parrots were most abundant in the pines. They frequented thetops of dead pines, and were, a good part of the time, going in and out ofabandoned woodpecker nests, nests which we took to be those of the Imperial
16 BUU^ETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMWoodpecker (CampopMlus imperialis), for this splendid woodpecker is rel-atively common in the same neighborhood, and is the only woodpecker whichexcavates such a large hole.Nesting.?Practically all we know about the nesting habits of thethick-billed parrot is contained in the report of Col. John E. Thayer(1906) on some ten nests of this species examined by Wilmot W.Brown, Jr., in 1905, in the mountains near Colonia Pachaco andColonia Garcia, Chihuahua, Mexico. The breeding grounds wereat altitudes varying from 6,500 to 7,500 feet, and all the nests werein the tall pines, characteristic of the region. The parrots occupiedthe old nests of the imperial woodpecker, which had been excavatedat heights ranging from 50 to 80 feet above ground ; one nest was ina living longleaf pine, but all the others were in dead, dry, or rottenpines. The entrance to the hole was usually circular and 6 or 7inches in diameter; the holes varied in depth from 18 to 24 inches,and the inner cavity measured from 8 to 10 inches in diameter.No nesting material had been brought in, the eggs having been laidon the bare wood dust left by woodpeckers. One nest, found onAugust 20, contained two big young ones and one fresh egg ; anotherfound on August 28, held two young ones. All the other nests, foundbetween August 11 and 25, contained one or two eggs. Mr. Brownwrote to Colonel Thayer (1906) that the first tree he climbed was
"located on a flat-topped mountain at an altitude of 7,500 feet abovethe sea. * * * The tree was about one hundred feet high and wasthirty-six inches in diameter at the base and was so dry that thebark had all peeled off. It was very difficult to climb, not to mentionthe danger." The nest was 80 feet from the ground.Eggs.?I have examined the eggs referred to above, which, with theentire Thayer collection, are now in the Museum of ComparativeZoology, in Cambridge. They vary in shape from ovate to rounded-ovate, are pure white in color, and are decidedly glossy; the shell ishard and tliick. The measurments of 20 eggs average 39.49 by 30.63millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 42 by 31.39.2 by 32, 37.6 by 30.6, and 38.2 by 29 millimeters.Plwmages.?Aside from the alcoholic specimens in the Thayer col-lection, which are unsuitable for description, I have seen no nestlingsof this species. The immature bird is similar to the adult, but thered of the forehead is more restricted, and the red is lacking on thebend of the wing and on the lower thighs. Nothing seems to beknown about the length of time that the immature plumage is worn,or about subsequent molts and plumages.Food.?The birds observed by R. D, Lusk (1900) "were very busilyengaged with the pine cones, and investigation of their stomachsshowed nothing but a plentiful quantity of very immature pinones
THICK-BILLED PARROT 17
wrested from their cavities in the hearts of the hard, green cones bytheir powerful beaks. The beaks, at their bases, as well as nearlythe entire under parts of the birds, were more or less begummed withthe resin of the cones." The birds reported by Austin Paul Smith(1907) were first noticed when "feeding on pinyon nuts. Some of thebirds were on the ground, searching for the fallen nuts." Duringtheir sojourn in Arizona, these parrots have been reported as feedingon pinyon nuts and acorns, after they had exhausted the supply ofpine cones.The stomachs of two birds examined by Cottam and Knappen(1939) contained 136 and 284 or more seeds of the Chihuahua pine(Pmus chihuahuana) . "The pine seeds were in all stages from en-tire seeds to a pulverized mast-like debris."Behavior.?All observers seem to agree that the thick-billed parrotis very tame and unsuspicious, probably owing to its unfamiliaritywith man.William Beebe (1905) says : "It is either a very stupid bird or con-trolled by its curiosity, for the flocks followed us everywhere."Dr. Bergtold (1906) writes:It was a great surprise to see how different is a wild parrot from a tameone ; one must need get an idea from the latter that a parrot is a slov>^, lumber-ing climber, able to use its wings perhaps, yet little given to prolonged andvigorous flight. On the contrary, this Thick-billed Parrot flew across deep bar-rancas, from mountain to mountain, as swift and strong on wing as a duck,going often in large flocks, which were noticeably divided in pairs, each coupleflying one above another as closely as beating wings allowed. Its loud squawkresoimded overhead, across the barrancas, and in the pines all day long, fromdawn till dusk ; and many and many a time a flock could be heard long beforeit was in sight. The birds were not at all shy, as one could walk up under atree and watch a pair climbing in it without distiirbing them in the least.Here they seemed natural, at least to one whose previous knowledge of parrotscame via the cage bird, for they climbed about precisely as does the domesticatedspecies, using bill and feet in the familiar way ; on the wing the birds seemedanything but parrots.Dr. Alexander Wetmore (1935) obtained considerable informa-tion from reliable observers about the occurrence of this parrot inArizona and its habits; regarding its movements and behavior, hewrites
:
According to all accounts Thick-billed Parrots gathered at night to roost inflocks and then spread out in small bands to feed during the day. In PineryCanyon they roosted somewhere on the upper mountain slopes during summerand fall. Morning and evening they were seen in two large flocks. As theweather became colder the roosting place was changed to one at a lower alti-tude. In Rucker Canyon the birds came at night to the mountain side abovethe site of old Camp Rucker.As there were a thousand or more here, their morning and evening flightswere quite impressive. In the Dragoon Range the parrots roosted somewhere
18 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
near the head of Cochise Stronghold and made a morning flight that oftencarried them directly out over the plains to the east.In feeding, the large bands usually broke up into smaller parties. In wintersuch flocks at times came down to perch on broken sandstone ledges wherethey clambered about or basked in the sun. In Rucker Canyon toward eve-ning flocks often flew down to the river to drink before passing on to theirroost. In the Chiricahua Mountains during late fall and winter the birds camedown into the foothills to an altitude of between 5000 and 5500 feet thoughearlier they were confined to the higher basins.The birds were noisy and their coming was heralded by their loud calls thatwere said to be readily audible at a distance of more than a mile. Like parrotselsewhere they were said to show much fear of hawks (though it seems strangethat a bird with so powerful a bill and so muscular a body should show suchfear) ; when a red-tail or a hawk of some other species appeared they rose inflocks and circled in the air, doubling the volume of their ordinary screechingcalls.He was told by F. Hands that "as cold weather came during thefall some of the birds disappeared. ? Others remained during the en-tire winter, although at one time the ground was covered by sixinches of snow for over two weeks and the birds were forced to seektheir food on the ground where this covering had blown partlyaway." DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southeastern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico(casually) and the mountainous area adjacent to the tableland ofMexico.The range of the thick-billed parrot extends north to (casually)southeastern Arizona (probably near Mowry, Pinery Canyon, Co-chise Head, and Paradise) ; (casually) southwestern New Mexico(Animas Mountain) ; eastern Chihuahua (Ciudad Chihuahua) ; andVeracruz (Perote). East to Veracruz (Perote and Jalapa). Southto central Veracruz (Jalapa) ; Mexico (Popocatapetl) ; and southernDurango (Canyon Rio San Juan). West to Durango (Canyon RioSan Juan, Cuidad Durango, and Arroyo del Buey) ; western Chi-huahua (Guadalupe y Calvo, Jesus Maria, and Colonia Garcia) ; andsoutheastern Arizona (Nogales and probably Mowry).Wliile the range as outlined includes the entire region over whichthe species is known to occur, it has actually been found breedingonly in the Mexican States of Chihuahua and Durango. At irregu-lar intervals flocks that sometimes are of large size travel northwardand invade the mountain ranges of southeastern Arizona. Suchinvasions took place in 1900, 1904, and 1917.Egg fZa^^es.?Mexico : 10 records, May 10 to August 25 ; 7 records,Auorust 11 to 25.
SMOOTH-BILLED ANI 19Order CUCULIFORMESFamily CUCULIDAE : Cuckoos, Roadrunners, and AnisCROTOPHAGA ANI LinnaeusSMOOTH-BILLED ANIHABITSThis curious member of the cuckoo family is a tropical species ofrare, or perhaps only casual, occurrence within the limits of theUnited States; a few may occur more or less regularly in southernFlorida or Louisiana, but to find it in abundance one must visit theWest Indies or South America. It has a variety of local names, suchas black ani, black witch, blackbird, savanna blackbird, and tickbird,the last from its habit of eating the ticks that infest cattle. CharlesB. Taylor sent some interesting notes on this bird to W. E. D. Scott(1892) ; regarding its haunts in Jamaica, he says:The Ani appears to be abundant in all parts of the island. It is one of thecommonest birds near Kingston ; and in most open and sparsely wooded lands,or in the vicinity of cultivated clearings, little groups or companies may nearlyalv?ays be seen. Blackbirds are invariably present wherever cattle are pas-tured. I cannot recollect an instance in which I have noted a herd of cowsat pasture without a flock of these birds appearing in company with them orin their immediate vicinity. This association is doubtless chiefly for the purposeof feeding on the ticks and other parasites on the animals, a good work largelyshared by the Grackles (Qulscalus crassirostris) . It is most interesting to watcha company of Blackbirds when thus engaged. Many are perched on the backsof the cattle (two or three sometimes on one cow), others are on the groundhopping about fearlessly among the grazing herd, searching for insects at theroots of the herbage or capturing those disturbed by the feet of the cattle.Nesting.?He says on this subject:Their nesting habits are exceedingly curious and interesting. Many individ-uals (possibly members of one flock) work together in the construction of alarge nest in which all the females of the company lay their eggs. The numberof eggs deposited in different nests varies greatly but is of course dependenton the number of birds in a company. Six and eight eggs are commonly found.I once took eleven, and in August last year I saw a clutch of twenty-one thathad been taken from a single nest! It is probable that normally not morethan two eggs are deposited by each bird, but nothing definite can be said onthis point. The nest, which is usually placed high up in a tall tree, very fre-quently in a clump of mistletoe on a "bastard cedar", is a large, loosely con-structed mass of twigs, entirely lined with dried leaves. But the most remark-able circumstance in connection with the nesting of these birds is the depositionof the eggs in regular layers with leaves between. This custom I had longheard of before an opportunity offered for personal observation. In the firstnest I examined, the eggs were in two distinct layers, separated by a deep bed
20 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
of dry loaves ; the bottom layer consisted of four eggs and these, strange to say,were all infertile. I believe this singular habit is practised in all cases wherea large number of birds resort to the same nest.Dr. Alexander Wetmore (1927) writes:Although this species often builds a communal nest, this is not always thecase. Near Cayey [Porto Rico], January 22, two anis were seen constructinga nest in a tree about thirty feet above a small stream, the male sitting on alimb above while the female was in the nest, as yet only a loose mass of sticksand weads. She moved and turned to shape it to her body, with her long tailsticking nearly straight up in the air. Near Bayamon, July 25, a single birdslipped quietly from a bulky nest in a clump of bamboos and only its mateappeared to join it. The nests were all large and bulky and were located fromsix to thirty feet above the ground. Bowdish reports a communal nest foundnear Aguadilla, August 13, built eight feet from the ground, in a thicket ofbushes and trees. This nest contained twenty eggs, placed in layers of fouror five, each layer being covered with dead leaves to separate it from the nextlot of eggs above. Eight of the eggs were partly incubated and twelve werefresh.John G. Wells (1902) says: "A flat nest is first built and about6 or 7 eo-^s laid in it; then these are covered over and more eggslaid, and so on until four or five layers of nests have been constructedone over the other.
"I have seen four of these birds sitting on the nest together. Whenthe top layer of eggs is hatched, and the young fledged, it is scrapedoff and incubation goes on with each succeeding layer, until all theeggs are hatched."Eggs.?On account of its communal nesting habits, the numberof eggs laid by each individual ani does not seem to be known;nor is anything known about the period of incubation. The num-ber of eggs found in a nest varies greatly, from 4 or 5 up to 20 ormore, depending on the number of females laying in the nest. Ihave in my collection a set of 18, there is a set of 19 in the Thayercollection, and sets of 20 and 21 are mentioned above.The eggs vary in shape from oval to elliptical-oval. Bendire(1895) says that the eggs "are glaucous-blue in color, and this isoverlaid and hidden by a thin, chalky, white deposit; as incuba-tion advances the eggs become more or less scratched and the blueunderneath is then plainly visible in places, giving them a verypeculiar appearance." The underlying color of some of the eggs thatI have seen is "pale Nile blue"; others have described them as green.The eggs are often very much nest stained. Mr. Taylor (Scott,1892) makes the following interesting observation regarding thescratches: "What seems very singular is that comparatively littleof this chalky covering gets rubbed off the sides, where from theturning over of the eggs in the nest we should expect to see thegreatest extent of denudation, whereas one or loth ends are nearly
SMOOTH-BILLED ANT 21
always loholly denuded. * * * So cleanly and evenly is it done,and to such an extent, that I feel confident it is the ^York of thebirds themselves, their beaks alone being able to accomplish it. Atthe same time it is easy to see that the marks and scratches at thesides are the result of friction with the twigs and leaves of the nest."The measurements of 63 eggs average 35.03 by 26.27 millimeters;the eggs showing the four extremes measure 40.4 by 28, 36.5 hy 30,and 29^21 by 23.37 millimeters.Young.?Alexander F. Skutch has sent me the following noteson the development of young smooth-billed anis, as observed by himon Barro Colorado Island, Panama: "The newly hatched ani iscovered with black skin quite devoid of any trace of feathers. Itseyes are tightly closed. The development of this naked, helpless,little creature is amazingly rapid. By the second day the sheathsof the flight plumes have already begun to sprout. By the thirdday the eyes are open, and the sheaths of the contour feathers havebegun to push out from the skin. The pinfeathers grow rapidlyand become verj^ long before they begin to release the true featherswhich they enclose. When the young ani is 5 days old, the bodyfeathers peep from the ends of their sheaths. At this age, thenestling could hang by one foot from my finger, and pull itself upby the use of its feet and bill, which was hooked over the sup-port. When placed on the ground, it attempted to crawl awaythrough the grass, and might have succeeded in escaping if I had notwatched it carefully. Returned to the nest, it would not remain inthe bowl, but climbed out to perch on the rim, where it uttered alittle whine."When I approached the nest on the following day, the 6-day-oldyoungster hopped out and began to climb through the thornybranches of the orange tree, but soon it lost its hold and fell to theground. Wlien I picked it up, it uttered a weak imitation of theparents' usual call. The flight feathers, as well as the body feath-ers, were now pushing forth from their sheaths, and the latter werelonger than on the preceding day. Much bare skin was, however,still visible between them. On the following morning the nest wasempty ; and I could not discover what had befallen the occupant."Plumages.?The youngest bird I have seen is about half grown andfully feathered. The contour plumage is soft and short, "bonebrown" on the under parts and somewhat darker above ; the wings andtail are glossy, purplish black, much like those of the adult; the bill issmaller and less specialized than that of the adult. On account of theextended breeding season, it is difficult to give any definite dates forthe molts. I have seen a young male, taken March 7, that was justcompleting the molt of the wings and tail, but the body plumage was
22 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
still Juvenal ; from this I infer that the juvenal plumage may be wornfor the whole of the first year, Maynarcl (1896) took some birds thathad just completed molting on March 8; also some that had justbegun to molt on April 24. I have seen young birds molting intoadult plumage in December.Food.?P. H. Gosse (1847) says of the food of the ani in Jamaica:The food of our Blackbird, though consisting mainly of insects, is not confinedto them. We usually find the stomach distended with caterpillars, moths,grasshoppers, beetles, and other insects, to such a degree that we wonder howthe mass could have been forced in. But I have found these contents mixed upwith, and stained by the berries of the snake-withe; and in July I have foundthe stomach crammed with the berries of the fiddle-wood, {Cytharaxylon) whichhad stained the whole inner surface a bright crimson. Flocks of these birdswere at that time feeding on the glowing clusters profusely ripe upon the trees.Stationary insects are the staple food ; to obtain which, they hop about grassyplaces, and are often seen to jump, or to run eagerly at their prey ; on whichoccasions the long tail, continuing the given motion after the body has stopped,is thrown forward in an odd manner, sometimes nearly turning the bird headover heels. * * *One day I noticed a cow lying down, around which were four or five Black-birds, hopping on or off her neck, and eagerly picking the insects from herbody ; which service seemed in no wise unpleasing to her. I have also seenthem leaping up on cows when grazing; and, on another occasion, jumping toand from a horse's back ; and my lad Sam has repeatedly observed them clingingto a cow's tail, and picking insects from it, as far down as the terminaltuft. * * *But stationary insects are not the only prey of the Crotophaga ; in December,1 have seen little groups of them engaged in the evenings, leaping up from thepasture about a yard into the air, doubtless after flying insects, which theyseemed to catch. * * * i have seen one with a dragon-fly in its beak, whichit had just caught, but it may have been while resting. At another time I sawthat a Blackbird had actually made prey of one of our little nimble lizards(Anolis).Maynard (1896) says that "anis live largely on locusts, especiallya large species, which is quite common on the Bahamas, and which hasa peculiar, rather disagreeable odor, which is imparted to the birds."W. E. Clyde Todd (1916) says that, on the Isle of Pines, "it is fondof following in the wake of brush-fires, picking up the roasted lizards,snails, and insects." Dr. Wetmore (1916) reports that the stomachsof 41 birds from Puerto Rico contained 91.3 percent animal matter,mostly harmful insects and arachnids, including mole crickets, othercrickets, locusts, sugar-cane root-borers, leaf beetles, other beetles,squashbugs, other bugs, caterpillars, and spiders ; the other 8.7 percentwas vegetable matter, mostly seeds and fruits of 7 species of wildplants. He also says elsewhere (1927) : "On May 20 near Yauco threeanis were seen in a tree in which several mazambiques had nests. Theanis were very near these nests, and the blackbirds, together with a pairof gray kingbirds, were much excited, but appeared to be unable to
SMOOTH-BILLED ANI ' 23drive out the intruders. It was certain that the anis were bent onrobbing the nests, and one was shot in the act of gulping down some-thing which was later found to be an egg. No other instances of thisevil habit were observed."Behavior.?Gosse (1847) writes:Though its usual mode of progression on the ground is by hopping, orrather bounding, the feet being .lifted together, the Blackbird is seen oc-casionally to run in a headlong manner for a short distance, moving the feetalternately. He is fond of sitting in the morning sun on a low tree with thewings expanded; remaining there perfectly still for a considerable time. Inthe heat of the day, in July and August, many may be seen in the lowlandplains, sitting on the fences and logwood hedges with the beaks wide open, asif gasping for air ; they then forget their usual loquacity and wariness. Oftentwo or tliree will sit in the centre of a thick bush, overhung with a matteddrapery of convolvolus, whence they utter their singular cry in a calling tone,as if they were playing at hide-and-seek, and requiring their fellows to comeand find them.Several observers have noted that anis roost at night huddled closetogether on a branch, like domestic fowls, and that they often bunchtogether in this way during a rain. Dr. Wetmore (1927) writes:These strange birds are found in flocks that contain from half a dozen totwenty or more individuals, ranging mainly in pasture-lands, but going alsointo the cane-fields and orange groves to feed. In pastures they remain nearthe cattle, keeping ahead of them with long hops, in order to get the insectsthat the cattle scare up. Any intruder is greeted with a querulous call, andthe whole flock flies in a straggling line across the fields to perch in a bush orlow tree, where they crowd together and peer out curiously, their long tails andarched beaks giving them an odd appearance. In the early morning, when thegrass is wet, they frequently sit in the sun with the wings extended in orderto dry them or to absorb heat. The wings are small for the size of the bird,and the flight, accomplished by a series of steady wing beats alternating withshort sails, is not strong. In a heavy wind the birds are almost helpless, andthey seldom rise high from the ground at any time. When on the wing, theback appears concave from the fact that the head and tail are held on a higherlevel.C. J. Maynard (1896) says:In flight they most nearly resemble a Canada or Florida Jay, alternatelyflopping and sailing, moving in a straight forward flight from tree to treewith great rapidity, uttering their mournful notes as they quickly disappearin the distance. * *A careful study of the Anis convinced me of the fact that a number of fe-males are led by two or three males, and these males take great care of theircharges. They utter cries of alarm when they perceive an intruder, and drivethe females before them into a place of safety. I have even seen males flyagainst females or young birds which did not attempt to escape soon enough,and knock them off the limb on which they sat and then accompany them to adistant thicket.I am inclined to think that the Ani is polygamous and this habit of themales taking care of a number of females would appear to confirm this idea.
24 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMMr. Taylor (Scott, 1892) gives a somewhat different impression,thus
:
The Blackbirds at their best have a very lean and shabby appearance, andare slow and awlvward in their movements. I have watched an individualmake several ineffectual attempts to alight on the frond of a cocoanut palm
;
but even among the branches of other trees their actions appear awkward.Their flight is slow and gliding, somewhat labored, and of little duration, thebirds often appearing to fall short of the point originally aimed at. Yet theywill chase the large yellow butterflies, and I was shown a large green locustthat one of these birds was seen to capture in flight and afterwards drop. Inthe progress of a flock from place to place they do not usually fly all together,but move away in straggling gi'oups or couples. One or more individuals firststart off with their wailing call, followed soon after by two or three ; after alittle delay then two more go ; another pause, then one, then three, and so on.If a tree has very dense foliage they alight (with much awkward scrambling)on the tops or extremities of the highest branches, where they may gain aclear and uninterrupted view, and this is usually the case when they aretraversing very open country.Voice.?^The note of the ani has been called a wailing or a whiningwhistle ; it has been said to resemble the notes of the wood duck. Dr.Wetmore (1927) says: "The ordinary call-notes are a low hur-r-rh anda querulous quee ick, quee ick^ varied by low chuckling notes. Whenthe birds are at all wild, they serve to alarm the entire country, asthey begin to call on the slightest provocation." It has also been ex-pressed as quG-yuch^ que-yuch^ que-yuch by Gosse (1847) and simi-larly by others.Field marks.?The ani is such a peculiar and unique bird that itcould hardly be mistaken for anything else. It is the only long,slender, black bird, with a long tail, short wings, and a huge bill, thatis to be found within its range, so far as I know. Its shape and itsmanner of flight are quite different from those of the grackles; itsconcave back in flight, referred to above, is distinctive. Gosse (1847)says : "The appearance of the bird in its sliding flights is unusual
;
the body is slender, the head large, and the beak enormous ; and as inflying it assumes a perfectly straight form, with the long tail in thesame line, without flapping the wings, it takes the aspect, on a sideview, rather of a fish than of a bird."Where our two small species of anis come together in Panama, theyare likely to be confused, but the voices of the two are quite distinctthe call of. the groove-billed is softer and higher in pitch, while thatof the smooth-billed is more raucous and whining. The grooves inthe bill of the former are not easily seen, except under favorablecircumstances, but the culmen of the bill in the smooth-billed ismuch higher and sharper than in the groove-billed.
SMOOTH-BILLED ANI 25DISTRIBUTIONRange.?South America and the West Indies ; casual in winter ineastern Central America and casual or accidental in Florida,Louisiana, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania.The normal range of the smooth-billed ani extends north to west-ern Cuba (Los Indios and Nueva Gerona) ; the Bahama Islands (Lit-tle Abaco and Nassau) ; Haiti (Jacmel) ; the Dominican Republic(Sesua and Ciudad Trujillo) ; Puerto Rico (Aguiclillo and Rio Pied-ras) ; and the Virgin Islands (Cuelebra, Vieques, and St. Croix).East to the Virgin Islands (St. Croix) ; the Lesser Antilles (Grenadaand Trinidad) ; British Guiana (Georgetown) ; Surinam (Para-maribo) ; and eastern Brazil (Ilha Mexiana, Maranhao, Bahia, Sape-tiba, Canatgallo, Rio de Janeiro, and Iguape). South to southeast-ern Brazil (Iguape) ; and northern Argentina (Posadas, the ChacoDistrict, and San Jose). West to northwestern Argentina (San Jose,Concepcion, and Salta) : Peru (Huanuco and Iquitos) ; northwesternColombia (the Cauca River Valley) ; Panama (Gatun, Perme, andObaldia) ; Jamaica (Port Henderson, Spanish Town, Grand Cayman,and Little Cayman) ; and western Cuba (Los Indios).This species occurs in other parts of Central America only inwinter, when it has been recorded from Costa Rica (Rio Coto)
;
Nicaragua (Great and Little Corn Islands) ; Honduras (RuatanIsland) ; and Quintana Roo, Mexico (Cozumel Island).Casual records.?The following are among the several records thespecies has for Florida : Flamingo, a specimen taken in June 1916Pass-a-Grille, a specimen collected on February 25, 1929; Dry Tor-tugas, three seen June 18 and 19, 1935; and Miami Beach, a smallflock seen on February 24, 1937. Undated specimens also are avail-able for Brevard County, Tortugas, Pepper Hammock near the headof the Banana River, and Charlotte Harbor.A specimen was collected on July 18, 1893, at Diamond, and severalhave been reported from the vicinity of Buras, St. Bernard Parish,La. A specimen was collected previous to 1866 at Edenton, N. C,while individuals were reported from Piney Creek in the westernpart of that State on July 17, 1932, June 1, 1933, and June 25, 1934.There also is an old record of the occurrence of this species on PettysIsland in the Delaware River, opposite Kensington, Pa.Egg dates.?Bahamas: 2 records, June 14.Brazil : 3 records, October 1 to November 18.British Guiana : 3 records, January 14 to July 2.Cuba : 4 records, February 22 to August 20,Jamaica : 7 records. May 29 to July 30.Puerto Rico : 2 records, July 25 and August 13.178223?40 3
26 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCROTOPHAGA SULCIROSTRIS SULCIROSTRIS SwainsonGROOVE-BILLED ANIPlATES 1, 2HABITSThis Central and South American species was added to our faunaby George B. Sennett (1879), who secured a fine male on May 19,1878, near Lomita, Tex,, while it was "flying about the low bushes inopen chaparral. It was very shy, flying in and about the bushes, andwas shot on the wing." The only one I have ever seen did not seemat all shy. I was sitting down, quietly watching some Texas spar-rows that were hopping around on the ground near me, in somethick brush bordering a resaca near Brownsville, Tex., when one ofthese curious birds appeared. It seemed more curious than shy, asit moved about slowly in the bushes, looking me over; it remainedin my vicinity for some time and I could have shot it easily. It issaid to show a preference for thick underbrush in the vicinity ofwater, or for lightly wooded swamps.In. his proposed work on the birds of the Caribbean lowlands,Alexander F. Skutch devotes two long and very interesting chaptersto the home life of the groove-billed ani. He has kindly placed atmy disposal his unpublished manuscript and allowed me to quotefreely from it. As to its haunts, he writes : "The variety of the habitatof the anis is enormous and their only restriction seems to be thatthey do not tolerate the forest and are never seen there. They arebirds of open country but seem nearly indifferent to its type. Inthe inhabited districts of the humid coastal regions they are one ofthe most conspicuous species. Their favorite haunts are bushypastures, orchards, the lighter second growth, and even lawns andclearings about the native huts. Marshland is as acceptable to themas a well-drained hillside, and they are numerous in such extensivestands of sawgrass as that surrounding the Toloa Lagoon in Hon-duras, although it is probable that they do not venture far fromsome outstanding hummock or ridge which supports a few low bushesin which they can roost and nest. In the semidesert regions of theinterior, where their associates of the coast lands, if present at all,are as a rule rare and restricted to the moist thickets along therivers, they are among the most numerous of birds, and live amongscattered cacti and acacias as successfully as amid the rankest vege-tation of the districts watered by 12 feet of rainfall in the year.In altitude they range upward to 5,000 feet, but are not nearly sonumerous in the elevated districts as in the lowlands."
GROOVE-BILLED ANI 27Nesting.?Dr. Charles W. Richmond, drawing on his experience withit near Bluefields, Nicaragua, sent some elaborate notes on the groove-billed ani to Major Bendire (1895), from which I quote as follows:It appears to breed at various times during the year, as I have found fresheggs July 6, 1892, and young birds, recently from the nest, November 29, thebreeding season spreading over seven months of the year at least, as it beginsnesting earlier than the date of taking my first eggs. Nests are frequently builtin the heart of a thick, thorny orange or lemon tree, and this appears to be afavorite situation. In this case the nest is from 4 to 7 feet from the ground,and, besides being difficult to get at, is somewhat protected from invasionthe wasps which almost invariably take up their abode in the same tree. Ingoing through a small lemon grove I found an old nest of this species. In thecavity there were no eggs, but on poking the nest to pieces six badly decayedeggs rolled out.One nest containing three eggs in the proper place and two others at thebottom, under the lining of green leaves, was located in a bamboo about 12 feetfrom the ground. The eggs were fresh, and more would probably have beendeposited ; the leaves forming the lining were still green. The parent birdswere away at the time. Another nest was situated in some vines which hadover-run an old tree stub, and was about 15 feet from the ground.It may be that where numerous eggs are deposited in one nest only thoseeggs that are deposited in the proper place and directly influenced by the incu-bating bird are hatched, while those placed among the sticks forming the bulkyexterior are left unhatched. It would be interesting to watch the progress ofa large nestful of eggs and note results. The nests found by me were all com-posed of dead black twigs, rather loosely put together, very bulky and conspicu-ous structures, lined with green leaves, or, if old nests, with leaves that had theappearance of having been picked green.One of Dr. Richmond's nests is described by Major Bendire (1895)as "a rather loose structure, about 10 inches in diameter and 4 inchesin height. The inner cup measures 4 inches in diameter by 2^/^ inchesin depth."According to George K. Cherrie (1892) Seiior Don AnastasioAlfaro says of the nests he collected in Costa Rica
:
The structure is voluminous, composed chiefly of coarse dead twigs, but pre-sents one peculiarity not observed in any other bird, namely the nest being linedwith fresh green leaves. My three specimens were all placed in low trees, andneither was found at a greater height than three meters. One had been builtabove an old nest of one of the larger Tyrannidae.It will not be without interest, I think, to insert my observations relative toone of these nests. On the 20th of May I noticed a Zopilotillo with a drystick in its bill, which was immediately carried to a point in the hedge-rowwhere it was deposited with three others. After assuring myself that the birdwas building its nest there, I retired, with the intention of returning at a moreopportune moment. And when one week later I returned to the same spot,what was my surprise to see not only the nest completed and containing sixeggs, but more than this: in the thorns and leaves about it were scatteredseven more eggs ! As a consequence, if that collection was not the work of theZopilotillos collectively, the poor owner would have had to deposit three eggsdaily ! In the finding of some of the eggs scattered in the leaves was revealed
28 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
one of the architect's peculiarities. A hole had been left in the centre of thenest and only recently filled with leaves whose fresh green color testified thatthey had been cut and placed there later than the others forming the carpetingto the bottom of this common incubator.Alden H. Miller (1932) writes of his experience with the nestinghabits of the groove-billed ani in El Salvador
:
Several nests were watched from the time there was one egg until therewere nine, or in one case eleven, eggs. The eggs were deposited regularly atone day intervals and there was no certain indication in any of the sets, of twofemales contributing to the same nest as has been claimed by other observers.My findings, however, do not prove conclusively that community nests may notexist, at least occasionally. Incubation is uniform within a set and, correspond-ingly, birds were found to be incubating regularly only after the sets werecompleted. In the set of thirteen the eggs were resting in three layers in thenecessarily ample cup of the nest.Nest sites were from two feet to twenty-five feet above ground in almostany kind of bush or tree. Usually they were located between six and twelvefeet above ground in thorny tangles or close twiggery. One nest was found,however, in an open crotch of a fan of a royal palm. Adult birds are notmuch in evidence around nests which are being built or around sets of in-complete eggs. When flushed from sets of complete eggs, they may approachwithin five feet of the intruder and utter their feeble, squeaking notes ofprotest.A. J. van Rossem (1938) found several nests, on July 29, 1925, "inthe mimosa scrub in the marsh along the north shore of Lake Olo-mega," in El Salvador. "These nests were all in similar situations,that is, they were rather conspicuously placed in mimosa bushes andmore than six feet above the mud or water."Mr. Skutch devoted considerable time to studying the communalnesting habits of the groove-billed ani. He found them to be amongthe latest birds to breed, remaining together in small flocks fromFebruary to May while the other birds of the region were raisingtheir broods. During June he watched the construction of a com-munal nest, on which three pairs worked in perfect harmony, op-erating in pairs and not as a unit. One of the pair remained on thenest while its mate brought in the material. There was not the leastjealousy between the pairs, and "two or more pairs often perchedquietly in the same bush. Each pair preferred to work alone at thenest, and if a second pair flew into the nesting tree, the first oftenquietly withdrew. This was not always their conduct, and some-times one of the second pair (probably the female) took a place onthe nest beside one of the first pair, while their two mates perchednear by, or else brought them sticks."The normal set of eggs for each female is three, or more com-monly four. Nests belonging to a single pair generally contain thisnumber, and the nests belonging to two pairs, which I encountered,contained a maximum of eight. Once I found a nest with 12 eggs,
GROOVE-BILLED ANI 29
which covered the bottom two layers deep, and six birds were in-terested in them. * * * Of ten nests which I found in Hondurasand Guatemala and was able to watch for an adequate period, fourwere the property of single pairs, five of two pairs together, and onebelonged to three pairs in common."All the birds of both sexes took turns in incubating the eggs, buttheir shifts on the nest had no regular order and no fixed duration.
"Just as the parents cooperate in incubating the eggs, they all joinin the care of the nestlings. I have watched three nests, each belong-ing to two pairs, during the time they contained young. Two ofthem, I made quite sure, were attended by four adults, but at theother I could not convince myself that there were more than threeattendants. Possibly some calamity had befallen the fourth bird, orpossibly also I failed to recognize it, since the anis at this nest wereunmarked and indistinguishable."Eggs.?T\iQ groove-billed ani lays 4 to 13 eggs, the smaller num-bers being apparently commoner. The eggs vary in shape from ovalto elliptical-oval, or rarely to elliptical-ovate or rounded-ovate. Theground color, when visible, varies from "glaucous-blue" to "Nile blue"or "pale Nile blue" ; when first laid, the ground color is completelycovered with a thin layer of dull white, chalky deposit, which even-tually becomes somewhat discolored; as incubation progresses thischalky covering becomes more or less scratched, by contact with thetwigs in the nest or by the action of the bird's feet in turning theeggs, or m relining the nest, so that ultimately much or nearly all ofthe blue ground color is visible; even then the shell is not glossy.The measurements of 51 eggs average 30.93 by 24.06 millmieters;the eggs showing the four extremes measure 35 by 25, 32 by 26, and27.68 by 21.84 millimeters.Young.?Mr. Skutch determined, by close observation of markedbirds and by noting which individual of a marked pair laid theeggs, that both sexes share in the duties of incubation. They werevery impatient sitters, constantly changing about; 30 minutes wasthe longest time that he saw one incubate, during the early stages,and they sometimes left the nest unguarded for 10 or 20 minutes,while they enjoyed each other's company ; during the last two days ofincubation they lengthened their periods on the eggs to from 30minutes to an hour. He describes the hatching process in detail:
"Fourteen days after the last egg had been laid, I held one in myhand while the birdling worked its way out of it. When I first tookit up there was a gap in the larger end, which extended about athird of the way around the circumference. The little bird's short,thick bill was in this gap, and so pressed out of position that thelower mandible overshot the upper, only a temporary condition.
30 BULLETIlSr 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMAt intervals the struggling prisoner drew its bill farther into the egg,then suddenly pushed it outward, bringing the keeled upper edge,armed with a rather insignificant egg-tooth or 'pip,' against the edgeof the shell at one end of the hole, and breaking off a small fragmentat the outward thrust. In its squirmings the bird, impelling itselfin some manner I could not determine, rotated imperceptibly slowlyin the shell, in such a way that the head, turned under one wing,moved backward and the upper edge of the bill was constantly broughtto bear upon a fresh portion of the shell, which was chipped off atthe next outward thrust. Occasionally the struggling birdlingemitted a weak cry. Thus bit by bit the ragged-margined aperturewas lengthened until it extended about two-thirds of the way aroundthe egg, when the struggles of the bird succeeded in cracking theremainder, and the large end of the shell fell off as a cap. Thenthe naked creature wormed its way out into my palm, where it layexhausted by its continued effort."In another nest the last egg to be laid hatched in 13 days. Theyoung, when first hatched, "were blind, black-skinned, and withoutany trace of feathers." Wlien the nestlings were 6 days old theywere "both bristling with long pinfeathers. The plumes of the onethat was the older by a few hours were already beginning to peepthrough the tips of these pinfeathers." Later in the day, the feathershad burst their sheaths with amazing rapidity, and the young bird
"was already well covered. The back and belly, save for a nakedline down the middle of the latter, bore a soft, downy black plumage.Broad ends of the flight feathers of both wings and tail now showed."From this time on, the young birds became more lively and leftthe nest when approached, climbing about among the branches ordown onto the ground to hide in the grass. They were brooded byone of the parents until they were a week old, returning to the nestat night. But "the following two nights they remained in the nest-ing tree but did not return to the nest to sleep. They could not yetfly and had entered a half scansorial, half terrestrial stage of exist-ence. Wlien they were 10 days old I tried to catch them for aphotograph, but they hopped from limb to limb with such agilitythat, protected as they were by the sharp thorns, I was unable tosecure them. When they were 10 days old they could make shortflights from branch to branch of the same bush. Their bills weresmooth, without any grooves, and their cheeks were bare of feathers."All through his account Mr. Skutch emphasizes the affection thatis shown by all the members of the ani family for one another.While he was watching the second nest of the pair on which theabove observations were made, something very unusual, if not en-tirely unique, happened. One of the young from the previous brood,
GROOVE-BILLED AI^I 31now nearly fully grown, "was the constant companion of his parentsduring the period in which they were busy with their second brood."He frequently perched on the rim of the nest while one of his parentswas incubating, and twice he was seen to offer food to the parent onthe nest. After the young had hatched, "the youngster fed thenestlings regularly, but not so often as his parents." During fourhours and a quarter, he saw the male, always the more attentiveparent, bring food to the nestlings 29 tunes, the female 14, and theyoung assistant 8 times. "The young bird not only fed the nestlingsbut M'as ardent in protecting them, flying up close to me and utter-ing an angry grrr-rr-i^' whenever I came near them. In the absenceof the parents he attempted to defend them alone."Plumages.?The young nestling and the development of its firstplumage are described above. In this Juvenal plumage the contourfeathers are short and soft, "bone brown" below and darker above;the wings and tail are much like those of the adult; the bill is lessspecialized and not grooved.Van Eossem (1938) says:The postjuvenal plumage, attained by a complete body and tail and a partialwing molt, is not different from that of the adults except that the rectricesare noticeably narrower. An irregular molt of the primaries takes place at thistime, although some of the juvenal quills (though their number and locationvaries) are held over till the following spring. In March and April of thenext year there is a partial body, tail, and wing molt in which an irregularnumber of rectrices are renewed and such juvenile remiges as have been heldover from the previous fall are replaced by new ones. The adult plumagewith wide rectrices follows in the second fall, that is, at the first annual molt.The time of the annual molt extends from the middle of July to the first ofOctober, the younger (one-year-old) birds molting earlier than the older ones.The spring molt of the adults includes some of the rectrices and secondaries.Food.?Mr. Skutch writes (MS.) : "The food of the anis consistslargely of insects, which they secure both from the ground andamong the foliage of bushes, and to a smaller extent of fruit andberries. Often they hunt grasshoppers and other creatures amongthe long grass or tall weeds, where they are completely hidden fromview except when occasionally they leap a foot or so above theherbage to snatch up an insect which has tried to escape by flight.Perhaps their favorite method of foraging is beside a grazing cowor mule. Several together remain close to the head of the beast,moving along by awkward hops as it moves and just managing toescape its jaws and forefeet, ever on the alert to snatch up the insectsfrightened from their retreat in the grass by the passage of theherbivore. It is frequently stated in books, and affirmed by theresidents of the countries where the anis live, that they alight uponcattle and pluck ticks and other vermin from their skin?hence thename garrafatero (tick-eater) given them in Costa Eica.
32 BULLETIN 17 6, UlS-ITED STATES KATTONAL MUSEUM
"While this is doubtless true in certain parts of the ani's range, Ihave watched them in the neighborhood of cattle from Panama toGuatemala and only once in three years have I seen an ani alighton a cow. Since the ani associates so much with cattle without alight-ing upon them, and the giant cowbird, another black bird of approxi-mately the same size, does frequently perch upon them and relievethem of their vermin, it seems likely that the ani may be oftencredited with the acts of the cowbird, especially since the latter isshier and less known. I have occasionally questioned one who in-formed me that the ani plucks ticks from the grazing animals, onlyto find that he was unaware of the existence of the giant cowbird. Ata little distance such a person might easily suppose that the birdsupon the animal's back were the same as those about its feet, andsince his closer approach would leave only the latter, the illusionwould probably persist."He has also seen a group of anis excitedly following a battalion ofarmy ants, probably not to feed on such jSery morsels as the ants, butto pick up "the cockroaches, spiders, and other small creatures drivenfrom their retreat among the dead leaves by the relentless hordes."Again he says : "After the first heavy rain of the season has sent thewinged brood of the termites forth from their nests in countlessmillions, one can watch the anis everywhere feeding like flycatchers,making ungraceful darts, not exceeding a few feet, from low twigsand fences; but the insects are so numerous on these occasions thatthey can catch many without quitting their perches."Major Bendire (1895) quotes Dr. Richmond as saying: "The foodof those examined by me on banana plantations consisted almostentirely of small grasshoppers, the stomachs being much distendedwith these insects. From the fresh earth found on the bill and feetof these birds, I should judge they also feed on the ground."Prof. A. L. Herrara, of the City of Mexico, wrote to Bendire that
"it is a social bird, being usually found in small companies of fromsix to fifteen individuals, absolutely monogamous, sedentary, and ofsemidomesticated habits, frequenting the haciendas and the fields andpastures in their vicinity, and as it is considered very useful becauseof its habit of destroying large numbers of parasites infesting thecattle, it is not molested by the inhabitants, and becomes very tame.It extracts the Ixodes and other Acaridans with remarkable skill,without causing ulcerations which might result from the proboscis orsucker remaining in the fibres of the skin, and it must be regarded asone of the most useful birds of Mexico, especially in warm regions,so abounding in parasites of all kinds."Behavior.?Dr. Richmond (Bendire, 1895) says:
GROOVE-BILLED ANI 33At Mr. Haymond's plautatiou, on tlie Escondido Kiver, above Bluefields, thisspecies was uuusually plentiful, owing, no doubt, to a large number of cattlekept tliere. The birds follow these animals as they meander over the pastures,hopping along on each side of an animal, catching grasshoppers and otherinsects which the cov/ disturbs as it moves along. Frequently the cow movestoo rapidly and the birds lag behind, when they make short flights to the frontagain, passing over one another after the manner of the Grackles when feedingin a field. Only half a dozen birds or so follow a cow usually, and not manycongregate in a flock, except when roosting. On this plantation, where thespecies is more abundant than usual, the birds appear to roost in numbers.An orange tree near the house was a favorite place where thirty or fortybirds came to pass the night, flying in from the surrounding pasture about dusk,and after a few short flights from one tree to another, passed into the roostone or two at a time, hopping about as if seeking a favorable perch, utteringtheir peculiar note meanwhile. Out of this roost I shot seventeen birds oneevening, and the males greatly predominated ; there were only five females inthe lot. The note of this species reminds one somewhat of the Flicker, Colaptesatiratus, but may be better represented by the combination "plee-co," rapidlyrepeated, with the accent usually on the first syllable, but sometimes on thelast. I have frequently found one of the small flocks resting on a bush orbamboo along the water's edge, perfectly silent, until my near approach startedthem off, one or two at a time, scolding as they went. Their flight is ev-en,slow, as short as possible, and consists of a few flaps of the wings, followedby a short sail, then a few more flaps, etc.Mr. Skutcli writes (MS.) : "Their flight is as perfectly character-istic of the birds as any other of their peculiar habits. A longjourney, say anything much in excess of a hundred yards, is seldommade by a continuous flight, but the bird advances with frequentpauses in conveniently situated trees and bushes. As he alights onone of the lower branches, the momentum of the long tail carriesit forward above the head with an abrupt jerk. Recovering hisbalance, he remains here for some moments, looking around withcaution and calling in his high-pitched voice. Then, satisfied thatthe path ahead is clear, with a tuc tuc tuc, pihuy pihuy pihuy, helaunches himself upon the next stage of his journey. A few rapidbeats of his short wings serve to impart the requisite momentum,and he sets them for a long glide. In this manner he can cover sur-prisingly long distances, on a slightly descending course, withoutfurther muscular effort. If his ultimate destination is a certainperch in a tree or bush, he will often arrest his flight on another con-siderably below it. By a few queer, rapid, sideways hops along thebranch, and some bounds, or better bounces, from limb to limb, hegains the desired position where, as likely as not, he spreads hiswings to the morning sun."Mr. van Eossem (1938) says: "They feed side by side with nevera sign of friction or argument over the choicer insects, and at nightroost in low trees or bushes, pressed shoulder to shoulder to thelimit of available space. We not infrequently found them thus when
34 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMhunting at night. During the time just preceding nesting it wasnoticeable that they were inclined to roost two and two instead ofin a long line. In some cases the pair was sitting in close contact,even though there might be plenty of room to perch comfortably."Voice.?Dr. Richmond's impression of the note of the groove-billed ani is mentioned above. Sefior Alfaro says, in his notes givenMr. Cherrie (1892), that, in Costa Rica, it is "known as 'Tijo, tijo'(tee-ho) in imitation of its peculiar notes which seem to repeat theword tijo over and over again." Dr. Chapman (1896) says: "Itsnote is a prolonged chee-wyyah, easily distinguishable from the singlewhining whistle of C. ani^ Mr. van Rossem (1938) says: "Theordinary or 'conversational' notes are a series of very liquid and whatcan best be described as 'contented' bubblings and duckings. Thelouder, often repeated 'chee-miiy-o-chee-muy-o' is the alarm note."DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas and Baja California,south to northern South America.The range of the groove-billed ani extends north to southern BajaCalifornia (San Pedro and Santiago) ; southern Sinaloa (Mazatlan)
;
southern Texas (Lomita and Corpus Christi) ; and Yucatan (Pro-greso and Chichen-Itza). East to Yucatan (Chichen-Itza) ; BritishHonduras (Cayo) ; Honduras (La Ceiba) ; Colombia (Santa Marta)and Venezuela (Altagracia, Curacao, and Caicara). South to Vene-zuela (Caicara) ; and Peru (Chachapoyas and Lima). West to Peru(Lima and Cutervo) ; Ecuador (Tumbez) ; Costa Rica (San Joseand La Palma) ; El Salvador (Sonsonate) ; western Guatemala(Lake Amatitlan) ; southwestern Chiapas (Tapachula) ; Nayarit(San Bias) ; and southern Baja California (San Jose del Cabo andSan Pedro).The birds found in the cape district of Baja California have beenseparated subspecifically and are known as the San Lucas ani, C. s.pallidula.Casual records.?In Louisiana a specimen was collected near New^Orleans about 1890; another was taken at Ostrica during the winterof 1919 ; a third was obtained without date of collection near Houma
;
a fourth was taken at Cottonport on December 11, 1932; while afifth was collected on Grand Isle on April 23, 1935. A specimenwas taken at Huachucas, Ariz., 10 miles from the Mexican border,in May 1888, and it was noted at a point 20 miles north of Tucsonon August 21, 1932. About November 1, 1904, a specimen was takennear Emporia, Kans., and on October 12, 1913, one was killed on anisland about 9 miles north of Red Wing, Minn. A specimen wasobtained at Jupiter Inlet, Fla., during the first week in January
SAN LUCAS ANI 351891, and there is also a somewhat indefinite record of its occurrencein the early part of January in the vicinity of Kingston, Jamaica.Egg dates.?Central America: 4 records. May 27 to July 29.Baja California: 6 records, April 1 to September 3.Mexico: 40 records, March 20 to August 14; 20 records, May 16to June 30, indicating the height of the season.Texas : 7 records, March 17 to July 15.CROTOPHAGA SULCIROSTRIS PALLIDULA Bangs and PenardSAN LUCAS ANIHABITSThe groove-billed ani of the Cape region of Lower California,Mexico, was described and given the above name by Bangs andPenard (1921), based on a series of 18 specimens from San Jose delCabo. It is said to be
?
similar to Crotopliaga sulcirostris sulcirosf7-is Swainson of Mexico, and of aboutthe same size, but much paler and with less purplish iridescence ; the U-shapediridescent markings of the back and breast paler and duller greenish, not sobrilliant; the dull purplish bronze of the head and neck of true sulcirostris re-placed by paler, more grayish bronze ; the lustreless parts of the body-feathersgrayish brownish black instead of dull black. * * *Eighteen adults of this new form, laid out beside a series of nearly doublethat number from various points in Mexico and Central America, are strikinglydifferent; the pale, dull colors of the Lower California bird cannot be matchedby any specimen in our series of true sulcirostris. The difference is noticeable ata glance but rather difficult to describe. Brewster (1902), in his account ofthe birds of the Cape Region of Lower California, states that the Groove-billedAni is not known to occur in central and northern Lower California, and thatthe colonies which have become established in the Cape region were probablyoriginated by birds which came from western Mexico. However this may be,the isolated colony of Cape St. Lucas has developed into a very distinct form,worthy of recognition.Griffing Bancroft writes to me, on August 6, 1937, that he is "asnearly satisfied as it is possible to be from negative evidence" thatthis form of the groove-billed ani is extinct.Nesting.?Lyman Belding (1883) writes: "The 1st of April I dis-covered four of these birds in a marsh, in which was a rank growthof tide., flags, and reeds. Having shot one of them, and the otherswere not molested, they remained in the marsh until May 15, or later.A nest found April 29 contained eight eggs. It was fastened to up-right reeds, and was composed of coarse weed stalks and mesquitetwigs, lined with green leaves. The female, while incubating, wasvery wary, slipping quietly away from the nest and returning to itvery stealthily, below the tops of the reeds."William Brewster (1902) says that the nest "taken by Mr. Frazarwas in a willow about twenty feet above the ground. It is a flat-
36 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMloose, but withal rather neat structure, formed outwardly of deadtwigs and very substantially lined with cottonwood and willowleaves, which look as if they must have been dry Avhen gathered.* * * This nest measures about six inches across the top, and thecavity is nearly an inch in depth. * * * Mr. Frazar met withthe Groove-billed Ani only at San Jose del Cabo, where a flock ofabout thirty frequented some thick brush about pools of water nearthe mouth of the river."Eggs.?The eggs of this race are apparently just like those of thespecies elsewhere. The measurements of 9 eggs average 31.99 by24.00 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 33.5by 23, 31.8 by 24.9, and 30.5 by 23 millimeters.GEOCOCCYX CALIFORNIANUS (Lesson)ROADRUNNERPlates 3-6HABITSContributed by George Miksch SuttonMost ornithologists are to some extent acquainted with the road-runner. They have read about him. They have heard strangestories about him. Perhaps, driving along some road in the South-western United States, they have even seen him. But he who reallyknows the roadrunner has risen morning after morning with thedesert sun; thrilled at the brilliance of the desert stars; seen dayturned to sudden night by the dust-storm ; pulled cactus spines fromhis shins. He who knows the roadrunner, he who has measuredthe breadth and the depth of this unique bird personality, has livedwith him?^not for an hour or so, not for a day, but week after weekafter week.First impressions almost invariably give us an inadequate conceptof this strange bird. We hear him scuttle through dry leaves aheadof us, catch a glimpse of him as he slips back of a rock, knowfrom the flight of a grasshopper that he has gone a certain way, andthat is all. Or, coming upon him suddenly, we surprise him intoflight ; note his short, rounded wings, long tail, and coarsely streakedplumage ; watch him sail down the arroyo ; and marvel that with theshutting of his wings and reckless plunge into the thicket he is soinstantly lost to view.Sometimes, traveling in a motorcar, we come upon him perched ona fence post or telegraph pole close to the highway. Now we haveopportunity to observe how slim he is, how long his legs, how notice-able his crest. But as we pass he leaps to the gi-ound, swings off
ROADRUNNER 37through the cactus clumps, and is gone. Once more only a glimpse
!
Once more only the retreat of a timid desert creature that appearsto be half bird, half reptile.But lie in wait for the roadrunner! Watch him race across thesand, full speed, after a lizard. Watch him put out a wing, changehis course, throw up his tail, change his course again, plunge head-long into a clump of cactus, and emerge, whacking his limp victimon the ground. Watch him jerk a slender snake from the grass,fling it into the air, grasp it by the head or neck, pummel it withhis hard mandibles, and gulp it head first. Watch him stalk agrasshopper, slipping quietly forward, making a sudden rush withwings and tail fully spread, frightening the doomed insect intoflight, then leaping 3 or 4 feet in air to snatch it flycatcherwise inhis long bill. Watch the roadrunner for an hour at his daily businessof catching food and you will deem him among the most amazingof all the desert's amazing creatures. Snake-killer indeed ! Chapar-ral cock ! Not by sitting quietly on fence posts, not by slipping shylyfrom the path, has the roadrunner earned for himself these blood-stirring names
!
So odd, so even funny a creature is the roadrunner that it is naturalto caricature him a bit in describing him. This J. L. Sloanaker(1913) has done when he writes:Of all the birds on our list the Roadrunner is doubtless the most unique;indeed, he is queer, and would certainly take first prize in the freak class at theArizona state fair. He is about two feet in length, with a tail as long as hisbody, color above brown streaked with black, bare spaces around eyes blue andorange, feathers of head and neck bristle-tipped, eyelids lashed, * * * iiigwhole plumage coarse and harsh. Could you imagine such a looking creature?Try and think of a long striped snake on two legs, a feather duster on his headand another trailing behind ; or a tall, slim tramp in a swallow-tailed coat,a black and blue eye, and a head of hair standing straight on end! Thereyou are
!
Elliott Coues (1903) describes roadrunners as "singular birds
?
cuckoos compounded of a chicken and a Magpie." Mrs. Bailey(1902) considers them among the "most original and entertaining ofwestern birds." Other writers call them "odd," "anomalous," and
"unique." They are.Throughout much of his range the roadrunner is known as thechaparral cock, or merely the chaparral. He also is called lizardbird, ground cuckoo, cock of the desert, and, as we have stated above,snake killer. The Mexicans call him the paisano or the correo delcmnino. The first of these names means compatriot or fellow country-
'man; according to some writers it expresses affectionate regard, andis to be freely translated "little friend." The latter is almost theequivalent of our name roadrunner.
38 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThat the roadrunner has at times been known as the churca welearn from an interesting note by Elliott Coues (1900) who quotesfrom an anonj^mous Franciscan priest the following description, pub-lished in 1790: "The Churca is a kind of pheasant which has a longbill, dark plumage, a handsome tail and four feet. It has these latterfacing outward in such fashion that when it runs it leaves the track oftwo feet going forward and two going backward."Coues himself calls attention to the fact that the word "toes" mustreplace the word "feet" in the above paragraph if the description is tofit the roadrunner. The error may well have been the translator's.At any rate, anyone who has observed a roadrunner's tracks in thesand knows how faithfully these record the zj^godactylism of thebird's foot.Many a fanciful tale is told of the roadrunner. According to thebest known of these, the bird builds a fence of cactus spines about asleeping rattler, letting the doomed reptile buffet itself to wearinessuntil finally, in desperation, it is impaled on the spines or bites itselfto death ! According to other stories (some of which probably have agrain of truth in them), the bird will deliberately race the swiftesthorse across the plains
!
The speed of the roadrunner is remarkable. Not when he is flying
?a flying roadrunner is as much out of his element as a swimmingchicken?^but when he is afoot. A. W. Anthony (1892) tells us of apair of birds that apparently enjoyed being chased by a hound thatcould never catch them. He says
:
At Hatchita [New Mexico] a pair came regularly to one of the mines forwater, a small pool having been formed near the shaft, from the pumps. Thevisit was made at nearly the same hour each forenoon, and was eagerly lookedforward to by a foxhound owned by one of the workmen. The dog never failedto give chase as soon as the birds were sighted, and the race was as muchenjoyed by the birds as by the dog ; they seemed to have no difficulty whateverin keeping well out of danger without taking wing, and usually found timeduring the chase to stop at the water hole and get their daily drink, afterwhich they quickly disappeared.H. C. Bryant (1916) quotes from Heermann that the roadrunner"may, however, be overtaken when followed on horseback over thevast open plains," and Heermann is known to have seen "one cap-tured by a couple of dogs."Kichard Hunt (1920), who was able to check with a speedometerthe actual speed of a roadrunner encountered "en route from Soledadto the Galiban Range" in California, writes: "At the top speed towhich we provoked our victim, the famous runner was moving atthe tremendous rate of 10 miles an hour on a practically level pieceof road."
ROADRUNNER 39H. H. Sheldon (1922a), who also checked the roadrunner's run-ning speed with a speedometer, writes of the incident: "The cargained on the bird until about five yards separated us, and I saw itwas running at its utmost speed. I instructed my friend, who wasdriving, not to press him further, and for fully three hundred yardsthe bird ran from the big monster in pursuit, the while the speed-ometer registered exactly fifteen miles per hour. Wlien finally weapproached very closely, the bird gave vip and flew into a palm,where I plainly saw it, beak agape and apparently very much fa-tigued from the unusual exertion."There is no doubt in my own mind that a fully adult roadrunner,can, for short distances, run faster than 15 miles an hour. Athletic di-rectors tell us that an average man (not an athlete) can run 9 yardsa second, or about 18 miles an hour. I know I can run as fast as theaverage man, and I know I have failed many a time to gain on aroadrunner that happened to appear on the road a short distanceahead of me. I distinctly recall catching two young roadrunners(with tails 7 or 8 inches long) in a little gully near Fort Worth, Tex.,in about the year 1913. I had quite a chase and might never havecaught them had they not been forced to run up a steep embankment.Spring.?^We have seen the roadrunner sneak off through theweeds?a frightened bird. We have seen him capture lizards, snakes,scorpions, centipedes, tarantulas?a veritable monster. But not untilwe have heard him sing do we know the finer side (as Aldrovandusof old would say) of his nature. On fine spring mornings he singsas the sun rises, and he may continue his fervent if somewhatmonotonous performance for an hour or more. His favorite song-perch is the eastern rim of a mesa where, full in the fresh sunlight,he can see far and wide. If there is no mesa, he chooses a dead treeor a high cactus. Here, directing his bill downward until it almosttouches his toes, he begins to coo. Coo^ coo, coo, ooh, ooh, ooh, ooh,ooh, he calls, pumping out the syllables in a hoarse, throaty voice,his head rising a little with each coo, until the bill points upward,the pitch of the song meanwhile dropping gradually lower. So hestarts with head low and coo high, and ends vice versa. Cattlemensay that before he begins his song he "lays his beak on the rock."The pumped-out series of coos we have just described doubtless isthe roadrunner's love song. Before giving it he may parade in aprominent place, strutting with head held stiff and high, and wingsand tail drooping. On May 2, 1914, I witnessed what I believe werecertain courtship antics of the male before the female not far fromFort Worth, Tex. According to the published account (Sutton, 1922)of this performance, the bird's "wings were spread, and he may havebeen preening and taking a sun bath, but circumstances * * *
40 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMled me to think otherwise. Now and then he bowed, and affected aclose examination of his feet, only to raise his head again, drop hiswings, lift them again and spread his tail. * * * Before I knewit [I] was discovered * * * and then, without wings spread,leaped from the dead branch to the next lower one, whence on out-stretched wings he sailed to the ground. I rushed up to where hehad been, and was surprised to see two birds scuttling * * * offthrough the vines."Nesting.?The nest, which usually is situated in a low tree, thicket,or clump of cactus 3 or 4 to 15 feet from the ground, is a rathercompact, though not deeply cupped affair, about a foot in diameterand 6 to 8 inches high, with foundation of sticks and lining of leaves,grass, feathers, mesquite pods, snakeskin, roots, and dry flakes ofcattle and horse manure. It is sometimes well hidden, sometimesnot. In the Black Mesa country of the far western Oklahoma Pan-handle John Semple and I found several nests in small cedar treesthat grew on the mesa sides. Here the nests were well hidden, andsince cedar trees were numerous our usual method of locating nestswas watching the parent birds.Earely the nest is built on the ground. Such a nest, containingsix eggs, was found by W. W. Brown in Sonora, Mexico, on May 15,1905. This nest is preserved in the John E. Thayer collection.A. C. Bent writes me of a nest found by F. C. Willard in CochiseCounty, Ariz., on April 23, 1916, "7 feet from the ground on a pack-rat's nest in a dense thicket of hawthorn." This nest was "merelya few leaves, etc., in a slight hollow in the rubbish of the rat's nest."While Mr. Bent was hunting ravens' nests among the abandoned oilderricks in the Kettleman Hills, Calif., his companion, J. R. Pember-ton, told him that roadrunners sometimes built their nests in the lowerparts of the derricks, using the sticks dropped by the ravens. Grif-fing Bancroft (1930) describes a nest with complete set of two eggsfound in Lower California in the heart of a date palm * * * sowell concealed that it could not be seen until much of the foliagehad been cut away."Eggs.?Eoadrunner nests contain, as a rule, three to five or sixeggs. Occasionally two eggs comprise a complete set; and sets withas many as 12 eggs have been recorded. Where large numbers ofeggs are found in one nest it is supposed that more than one femalehas deposited them. Coues (1903) describes the eggs as "ovate orelliptical, white in ground color with an overlying chalky film whichmay take a slight yellowish tint, ranging in length from 1.45 to 1.75,averaging 1.55 x 1.20. They are laid at considerable intervals; in-cubation begins as soon as a few are deposited, and is believed tolast 18 days for each egg. The development of the chicks is rapid
;
ROADRUNNER 41perfectly fresh eggs and newly-hatched young may be found to-gether; and by the time the last young are breaking the shell theothers may be graded up to half the size of the adult."[Author's note: The measurements of 55 eggs average 39.2 by30.1 millimeters ; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 44 by30, 41 by 32, and 34 by 27.5 millimeters.]William L. and Irene Finley (1915) describe a typical nest inwhich there were "one fresh egg, one egg just ready to hatch, twofeatherless, greasy, black 3'oung, and two young ones about grownand ready to leave home." These authors were in a position to watchthis nest almost continuously for several days. They did not observemore than one female parent. If, then, the several eggs were laidby more than one female, it may be supposed that the species is tosome extent parasitic or promiscuous in this regard, as the yellow-billed and black-billed cuckoos also are thought to be.Frank L. Burns (1915) also gives the period of incubation as "18days." It is supposed that only the female incubates. That incu-bation sometimes begins with the laying of the first egg rather than
"as soon as a few are deposited" (see above quotation from Coues)has been observed by M. French Gilman (1915), who tells us of anest with four eggs in which "one hatched July 20, the others on thethree succeeding days." In cases of this sort it is natural to supposethat all eggs are laid by the same female.Eggs are usually laid in April and May. W. E. D. Scott (1886)tells us, however, of several nests found on the San Pedro slope ofthe Catalina Mountains in Arizona, the earliest of which, discoveredMarch 17, 1885, at an elevation of 3,000 feet, contained two fresheggs. That two broods of young are sometimes, if not frequently,reared in one season has been reported by numerous authors, thoughI believe it has not been proved beyond doubt that fresh eggs foundin July are laid by females that have already succeeded in bringingout one brood.Young.?Newly hatched young are odd, "featherless, greasy,black" creatures with a reptilian appearance. I had a good dealto do with young roadrunners in the vicinity of Fort Worth, Tex.,as a boy, so I quote my own description here (1922) :The nestling bird, be it ever so young, has an unmistakable cuckoo-like expres-sion in its face, though its eyes, upon which a good portion of the facial expres-sion depends, are quite different from those of the adult, being of a deep dullbrown with a bluish pupil. * * * The eyelashes are small, in fact scarcelyapparent. Its whole external appearance is very sombre, and rather dirty-looking, as though the creature had been bathed in some unrefined oil, whichhad not been properly administered. The white hairs, each of which marks acoming feather, all lie in rows and look as if they had been rudely combed intoplace. The rather large, pale blue-gi'ay feet are strong in the toes, but very178223?10 4
42 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
weak a,t the heel, so that the birds cling to the fingers or the twigs of theirnest with sume power, but are quite unable to rise. Whenever there were verymany young birds in the nest they presented a peculiarly scrambled appear-ance, due, I believe, to the constant disturbance at feeding time more than torestlessness, for they usually lie quite still. By May 1 [the birds were takenfrom the nest on April 29] feathers were appearing rapidly on my young birds,first on the top of the head, back, and wings, and then on the belly, tail, andthroat. Once the blood-quills had started to burst, development was veryrapid. On May 4 the birds were quite well feathered, the tails being one andone-half inches long, and they were quite able to walk unsteadily. It is at thisperiod, or a little before, that the young leave the nest, though there must beinnumerable dangers for the rather weak-legged creatures. Several times Ihave come across young birds able to run well, but still in trees, which leadsme to believe that the young may, like young Green Herons, spend a portion oftheir early active life climbing about from branch to branch.During the spring and summer of 1914 I reared these two youngroadrunners, feeding them uncounted hundreds of grasshoppers,cave crickets, tarantulas, centipedes, scorpions, lizards, snakes, mice,cotton rats, and small birds. They were the most entertaining pets Iever had. Eventually they learned to capture their own food. Con-cerning this period of their life I have published the followingparagraphs (1936) :After three weeks they became sturdy enough to catch part of their ownfood. With patient coaxing they were taught to pick up grasshoppers tossed tothem, and finally to run after and capture crippled insects. Content at first,perforce, with sluggish, wingless nymphs which were abundant, they stole aboutthrough the weeds, wings pressed neatly against their slender bodies, snappingup the insects as fast as they could find them. Grasshoppers, often still aliveand kicking, they swallowed with a toss of the head and a hollow gulp. Largegreen or gray cave crickets, which live in piles of boards, or in damp, shadowyplaces, were especially prized. When a yellow- or coral-winged grasshopperrose noisily from the path, the birds crouched in momentary fear, but soonbegan to mark the return to earth of the clackety aeronaut and to steal upbehind clumps of grass, intent upon a killing.Finally they learned to capture the biggest, noisiest, and wariest grasshopperson the prairies. They would watch a coral-wing in his courtship flight and,running stealthily, wait until the performer dropped to the ground. With abound over low weeds, a dart across the open, and a final rush with outspreadwings and tail, they would frighten their prey into the air, leap nimbly afterhim, nab him unerringly with their bills, and descend gracefully on outspreadwings to beat him to insensibility with a whack or two on a stone.Once they had learned to capture grasshoppers, their food problem waslargely solved and, since they showed no inclination to run away, they were atliberty most of the time. They ran about the yard, playing with each other,or catching insects. In the heat of mid-day they sought the shelter of broad,cool leaves, and sprawled in the sand. Daily, often many times daily, I tookthem for a walk across the prairie. Following me closely or running at myside, they watched the big world with eyes far keener than my own. Grass-hoppers which I frightened from the grass they captured in side expeditions.If I paused near a flat stone, they urged me on with grunts, bit gently at myhands, and raced back and forth in an ecstasy of anticipation.
ROADRUNNER 43
I entertained misgivings concerning tliese flat stones. What savage creaturesmight not they conceal? Could young Road-Runners manage swift-tailedscorpions, sharp-toothed mice, or poisonous spiders? Under the first stone therewere scorpions. The Road-Runners hesitated an instant, as if permitting anuntried instinct to talie possession of their brains, then rushed forward, thrustout their heads, and attacked the scorpions precisely at their tails. Perhapsthese venomous tails received more than the usual number of benumbing blows,but the scorpions were swallowed with gusto.I had not supposed that a Road-Runner would capture and devour a taran-tula. One day, however, we paused at the tunnel of one of these big, furredspiders. Somewhat in the spirit of experimentation, and following the methodknown to all Texas boys, I teased the black Arachnid from her lair by twirlinga wisp of grass in her face. She popped out viciously and jumped a good teninches to one side. With a dash one bird was upon the monster before she hadopportunity to leap a second time. A toss of the bird's head and one ofthe eight legs was gone. Free again, the spider leaped upon her captor. Theother bird now entered the combat, snatched up the spider, and flicked offanother leg. One by one the legs went down, and finally the two birds pulledapart and gulped the sable torso.Plumages.?The newly hatched roadrunner's only plumage iscoarse, long, white or whitish hairs. These do not by any meanscover the dark-skinned body, but they apparently give the bird allthe protection it needs. At this stage the light-colored 2gg tooth isnoticeable, the feet are dark colored like the rest of the body, themouth lining has a peculiarly blotched appearance, and the iridesare dull brown.As blood quills replace the long white hairs, the Q:gg tooth dis-appears, the legs and feet turn blue-gray, the skin about and back ofthe eye lightens, and the blotching of the mouth lining becomes lessconspicuous. The sprouting feathers now bear at their tips the whitehairs of babyhood. Some of these hairs cling to the plimiage longafter the bird leaves the nest.When young roadrunners begin to capture their own food theywear a plumage that is much like that of the adult. J. A. Allen(Scott, 1886) describes this plumage thus: "The chief difference incolor consists in the broad shaft stripes of the feathers of the neckand breast being less sharply defined in the young than in theadult, and in the brown edgings bordering the shaft stripes beingpaler."At this stage the bare skin about the eye becomes pale blue, andthe naked patch back of the eye light orange. Too, the eye itselfchanges, a light-colored ring, which contrasts sharply with the brownor gray-brown of the rest of the iris, forming about the pupil. Asthe bird becomes older the bare skin of the face brightens. Fullyadult males, at the height of the nesting season, are fairly resplend-ent with their high, steel-blue crest, brilliant eye, and bright orangepatch back of the eye.
44 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe plumage worn by the young bird after it loses its natal hairsis apparently the first winter plumage. Judging from such speci-mens as I have seen, the postnuptial molt is the only complete moltof the adult bird. Whether there is a partial prenuptial molt inyoung or adult birds I cannot say. The roadrunner's life is so stren-uous that he doubtless loses feathers frequently. Spring birds withhalf-grown tail feathers may therefore not be performing a molt inthe usual sense of the word.Food.?Lizards (including the armored horned "toad"), smallsnakes, scorpions, tarantulas and other spiders, centipedes and milli-pedes, mice, cotton rats, ground-inhabiting small birds and their eggsand young, young quail, insects of all sorts, various fruits and seeds,including pricklypears : all these are eaten by the roadrunner; andthis considerable list but hints at the rapacity and digestive powersof the gaunt bird. One of the most thorough-going reports on theroadrunner's food habits is that by Dr. Harold C, Bryant (1916).Informing us that animal food makes up slightly over 90 percent ofthe total food of the species in California, Dr. Bryant says
:
Almost any animal, from the smaller rodents down to tiny insects, appearsto be relished by this bird. Although the stomachs examined showed no largepercentage of vertebrates, other published records show that reptiles sometimesform a large part, if not the entire diet. Even these larger elements of foodare usually swallowed whole at one gulp. That the digestive apparatus ispowerful is evidenced by the fact that bone, hair, and feathers pass throughthe digestive tract, and are not thrown back out through the mouth in the formof pellets, as is the case with some hawks and most owls.A diagram in Dr. Bryant's paper makes it plain that grasshoppersand crickets form a considerable part (36.82 percent) of the road-runner's food in California. Beetles form 18.2 percent; and seedsand fruits, cutworms and caterpillars, bugs, ants, bees, wasps, scor-pions, lizards, mammals, fly larvae, birds, and "miscellaneous" itemsgo to make up the rest.Game officials are usually opposed to the roadrunner, for the birdis reputed to be an enemy of young quail. Regarding the bird'sreputation as a quail destroyer, W. L. McAtee (1931) tells us that
"the Road-runner is persecuted almost throughout its range * * *as an alleged destroyer of Quail eggs, and state bounties are even paidfor its destruction. Yet the Road-runner never has been known tobe a special enemy of Quail," and it doubtless "eats more scorpions,centipedes, and tarantulas, those poisonous nuisances of the South-west, than it does Quail eggs."Aldo Leopold (1922) writes of shooting a roadrunner "with a light-colored object in his bill." Examining the spot where the bird hadfallen he "found a dead [quail] chick, still limber and warm but
ROADRUNNER 45immutilated * * * still in the downy stage, with %-inch pinfeathers on the wing?smaller than a domestic chick when hatched."S. S. Visher (1910) writing of birds found by him in Pima County,Ariz., tells us that roadrunners "have been seen leaving the nest ofGambel's Quails carrying an egg in their beak."That the roadrunner will occasionally capture birds as large as amockingbird is apparent from several published accounts includingthat by Robert S. Woods (1927a) who tells us of "an immature butfull-grown mockingbird" captured though not actually killed by aroadrunner near Azusa, Calif.; and that by Dr. W. K. Fisher (1904)who reports that a roadrunner was seen to "remove from a nest ayoung mockingbird and devour it" in Mission Valley, near San Diego,Calif.In a letter to A. C. Bent, Mr. Woods (who is quoted above) speaksof a short article written by the late Rev. St. John O'Sullivan, ofSan Juan Capistrano Mission, "describing a roadrunner's methodof killing a swift by lying in wait in a creek-bed near Palm Springsand suddenly springing into the air to knock down one of the birdswhich passed within its reach." This capturing swifts in air seemsperfectly plausible to me, for I recall seeing my captive roadrunnerscapturing English sparrows in much the same manner. Walkingabout with a noncommittal air that was comically suggestive of thechickens that fed nearby, they gradually grew nearer to a sparrow,then with a dash to one side and a tremendous leap snatched thefleeing victim from the air.A. W. Anthony (1896) tells us of suddenly coming upon a road-runner that had just finished despatching a wood rat (Neotoma).
"The bird reluctantly withdrew as I came upon the scene," he writes,
"leaving the rat, which I found to be quite dead."My own captive birds caught and killed a cotton rat {Sigmodon)that lived in a stone w^all near our house in Fort Worth, Tex. Twoor three times a day this rat scurried across a gap in this wall, andthe birds came to look upon him as a possible meal. At first hisspeed and considerable size kept the enemy at a safe distance, buttheir interest sharpened daily, and eventually they formed the habitof loitering near the runway. One day I heard a squeal of terrorand ran up in time to see the bewildered animal running this wayand that, trying to escape two lightning-quick demons who neverreally held him, but pinched him, tossed him, dealt him blows, buf-feted him, made him weary with fighting for life. Over his limpform the roadrunners had an argument. He was heavy. No soonerwould one bird start to swallow than the other would be tuggingat the hind foot or tail, and down he would drop. I finally cut therat in two.
46 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCarroll Dewilton Scott has contributed a note concerning roadrun-ners that catch half-grown "gophers" in his garden at Pacific Beach,Calif. Describing one of the birds he says : "Finally, after ridiculousgulpings and twistings of his neck he got the gopher down, balancedhis tail, and ambled away from another conquest."Mrs. Bailey (1928) tells us of two roadrunners observed at Carls-bad, N. Mex., that "snapped their bills and chased each other up intoa Cottonwood on the bank where there were caterpillar nests. Todetermine what they had been eating, one was shot and its gizzardwas found to contain not only caterpillar skins but a number of largegrasshoppers, a large black cricket, beetles, a centipede six incheslong, and part of a garter snake a foot long. The rest of the snakewas down in the crop and the barely swallowed end up near thebill."Regarding the economic status of the roadrunner in California,Dr. Bryant (1916) says: "A preponderance of evidence favorsthe bird. The destruction of such unquestioned pests as grass-hoppers, cutworms, caterpillars, and wireworms and of such rodentsas mice is to be desired even if the amount of destruction be rela-tively small. The taking of this sort of food on wild land is evidencethat this bird w^hen feeding in cultivated fields is likely to bedistinctly beneficial."Behavior.?Anyone who has observed the roadrunner closely knowswhat an entertaining creature it is. Its voracity keeps it on thealert for food. To capture a grasshopper one moment, a race-runnerlizard the next, and a tarantula the next requires strength, speed, andprowess. If nymph grasshoppers are numerous, the bird has notrouble in obtaining a meal. But flying grasshoppers are difficult toovertake ; lizards escape because of the brittleness of their tails ; andtarantulas have burrows into which they can pop when dangerthreatens.Not often does one see a wild roadrunner capturing its food. Irecall watching one a year or two ago, not far from Packsaddle Lake,a small, artificial body of water in western OMahoma. I had climbeda sandy mound. Peering through the sagebrush, I saw a roadrunnerunder a bush not far away, busy feeding. He ran out into the sun-light now and then, but his attention was directed principally tograsshoppers that must have been feeding on the leaves. These hesnatched, with nimble leaps upward, in the tip of his bill. To reachthe insects that were in the midst of the bush, he scrambled noisilythrough the twigs, caught a few, then sprang back to the ground tocatch those that had fallen or jumped out.W. E. Allen (1932) gives us a breezy description of the captureof a small bird by a roadrunner that had been running just ahead ofhim. He says:
EOADRUNNER 47Before we had gone as much as a hundred yards, however, his [the road-runner's] pacing routine was broken by a sudden dash from a slouchy pose andthe development of a brown streak across the road which ended in his emer-gence on a bank beyond a parked automobile. Somewhere beneath the car hehad struck a full-fledged young bird (probably a "California Linnet") at fullspeed * * *. The victim appeared to have been caught by the neck, whichprobably accounts for the fact that it made no outcry. It must have beenbadly stunned also by the stroke of the heavy beak because it struggled onlyfeebly.After becoming satisfied that I was not disposed to interfere, the captormoved on to a point about 10 feet farther away. Here he hammered the hardground two or three times with the body of his victim, evidently destroying allsigns of life. Then he dropped it, grasped a wing near its base, and with askilful jerk stripped nearly every feather from it * * *. After stripping thewing he spent three or four minutes in picking at the birdling's body with somehammering and jerking mixed in. Apparently this was for the purpose ofgetting rid of feathers. At any rate, they were thrown around profusely, andthe movements were different from those a little later which seemed to bedevoted to mauling and crushing the body into a shapeless mass.Finally this mass (which seemed to be about as large as the roadrunner'shead) was picked up with a kind of tossing motion which lauded it in the backof his mouth. The first effort at swallowing, consisting of tossings of the headand spasmodic movements of the jaws and throat, only resulted in getting themass started into the throat. After a short rest another series of these move-ments shifted it along to a visible extent but it was not till the fourth serieswas finished that the food appeared to have been swallowed completely. Afterthis was accomplished the bird turned toward me and slouched into a curiouspose of indifference mixed with satisfaction.A roadrunner's program is full enough with only himself to feed.But when he has a nestful of hungry young he must indeed wearhimself ragged catching insects and lizards and snakes. These hebrings from near and far, going and coming in such a way as tokeep himself hidden. With what satisfaction must he start a foot-long garter snake on its way down the gullet of one of his offspring,knowing that one voice at least will be stilled so long as any of thatsnake remains to be swallowed
!
Many an interesting account has been written of the roadrunner'sforaging activities. A. Brazier Howell (1916) tells us of difficultieshe had in retrieving small bird specimens before roadrunners stolethem. He writes:While I was out collecting, these abundant birds would often be seen skulk-ing about with eyes open for any opportunity, and it was always necessary, insuch cases, to make a dash for a specimen after it was shot. On two occa-sions a roadrunner darted in and grabbed a bird when I had almost reachedit, once hopping two feet in air to nip a sparrow that had lodged in the branchesof a bush. At another time I was watching a small flock of sparrows as theybusily fed in the brush, when I noted a roadrunner stealing up like a cat,taking advantage of every bit of cover. When at the proper distance, itrushed out and sprang into the air at the retreating sparrows.
48 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMJ. Eugene Law (1923) tells us of a roadrunner that tried to pulla dead golden-crowned sparrow through the s^^-inch-mesh wire ofa sparrow trap. This writer states that he did not actually see theroadrunner kill the sparrow, though an autopsy showed "the entirebrain area" to be "dark v/ith blood infusion."My pet roadrunners did not capture horned "frogs" unless otherfood was difficult to obtain. They killed and ate these well-armoredreptiles, however. A horned lizard, confronted by its ancient foe,would flatten out, rise high on its legs, and sway back and forth asif about to leap or inflict a dangerous bite. But a roadrunner is notto be bluffed. Grasping his tough victim by the head or back hebeat it against a convenient stone. Thirty or forty blows wereneeded to render it sufficiently quiescent for ingestion. If swallowedwhile yet alive it had to be coughed up for further battering.When not engaged in pursuing food a roadrunner may rest, seek-ing either a cool spot on the ground or the shadowy heart of a tree.In the morning it sometimes takes a sunbath. Henry W. Henshaw(1875) tells us that "it loves to meet the first rays of the rising sun,ascending for this purpose to the top of the mesquite trees, and,standing erect on the topmost branch, loosens its feathers, and ap-pears to catch all the grateful warmth possible, remaining in thisattitude for many minutes." My captive roadrunners took sun-baths every day, spreading their wings and exposing the featherlesstracts of their backs.The roadrunner has a streak of domesticity in his nature. Mrs.Bailey (1922) has given us a delightful account of a remarkablytame though uncaged bird that lived about camp. Concerning thisbird (which was known as "Koo"), Mrs. Bailey says:It was not his potential usefulness as a camp watchman or killer of "var-mints" but his ready friendliness and attractive ways which attached us to ourrare camp visitor. If we were busy when he came he would call koo, koo, andthen wait for us to discover him. Sometimes we would look hard before findinghim and finally make him out standing on the mesquite slope above us, hisfeathers puffed out spreading the streaks on his chest till they and his lightunderparts toned in perfectly with a background of straw-colored ground anddry weed-stalks?completely camouflaging him. It was astonishing to see howsuch a large, marked bird could disappear in its background. And what acontrast that round, bird-like form made to the grotesque running figure wewere familiar with?long neck, slender body, and long tail, one straight line.J. K. Jensen (1923) tells us of a pair of roadrunners that fed
"with the chickens on a ranch near Santa Fe," that "came regularlyfor a 'hand out' and often went to roost in the poultry house." Thisauthor does not specify what the "hand out" was. Needless to say,it hardly could have been corn or wheat.Frightened from the nest a roadrunner may scuttle off to remainhidden for some time. Again, it may stay close by, attempting to
ROADRUNNER 49lure the intruder away. M. French Gilman (1915) describes amother bird that was "very anxious about the eggs," that "ran aroundclose to me in a mammalian sort of way, flat on the ground, taildragging, and head stretched out in front only about three inchesfrom the soil. She did not look like a bird at all, and though makingno fluttering demonstration, her antics were calculated to excite curi-osity and distract attention from the nest."J. K. Pemberton (1916) describing a "variation of the broken-wingstunt" by a roadrunner, writes:As I was climbing near the nest the bird hopped to the ground. Immediatelyit began to squirm, scramble, and drag itself away across an open space and infull view. The bird was simulating a broken leg instead of the conventionalbroken wing! The bird held its wings closed throughout the demonstrationthough frequently falling over on its side in its enthiisiasm. The whole per-formance was kept entirely in my view, the bird gradually working away fromthe tree until it was some 35 feet distant when it immediately ran back to thebase of the tree and repeated the whole show. I had been so interested up tonow that I had failed to examine the nest which when looked into containedfive young probably a week old. When I got to the ground the bird continuedits stunt rather more frantically than before and in order to encourage thebird I followed, and was pleased to see it remain highly consistent until I wasdecoyed to a point well outside the grove. Here the bird suddenly ran awayat full speed and in a direction still away from the nest.Voice.?^We have already described the spring song of the road-runner. Howard Lacey (1911) tells us that the bird "makes a loudchuckling crowing noise * * * and also a cooing noise thatmight easily be mistaken for the voice of some kind of dove ; it alsomakes a sort of purring sound in its throat, ijeriy.^ pen^p., ^err/?."As for this "purring sound," I am not at all sure that it is vocal.One of the roadrunner's most characteristic alarm sounds is not acry at all; it is an incisive, clackety noise made by rolling themandibles together rapidly and sharply. Even young birds just outof the nest can produce this sound, though the softness of the billmuffles the sharpness somewhat.Young birds in the nest make a buzzing sound when begging forfood. Well do I remember a nestful of these "infant dragons" thatI found in April 1914. Concerning these I have written (1936) :
"Accidentally I touched an upturned beak and four great mouths,v/obbling uncertainly on scrawny necks, rose in unison. I jerkedback my hand?the pink-blotched lining of those mouths had analmost poisonous appearance. From the depths of the small framescame a hoarse, many-toned buzzing which gave the impression thata colony of winged insects had been stirred to anger."Enemies.?There is little doubt in my mind that the roadrunner'sworst enemy is man. Man wants quail to shoot. Man sees a road-runner chasing young quail or finds a young quail in a roadrunner's
50 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMstomach and lo, thumbs turn down, another name goes on the blacklist, and the roadrunner's doom is sealed. In many a southwesternState there have been chaparral-cock drives and contests, bounty onroadrunners, newspaper stories and editorials defaming the bird.Too, there are those who eat roadrunners, or who chase and shootthem for "sport." In populated sections the roadrunner has a hardtime. Where man appears the roadrunner all too frequently dis-appears.Certain predatory birds and mammals doubtless prey occasionallyon the roadrunner, though adult birds usually are swift or waryenough to evade such enemies as coyotes and hawks. Crows andravens doubtless eat some roadrunner eggs and young. Even thesnakes themselves may take a hand in keeping the snake killertribe from becoming too numerous. Remains of a roadrunner werefound in the stomach of a red-tailed hawk collected by Dr. JosselynVan Tyne in Brewster County, Tex., February 28, 1935 (Van Tyneand Sutton, 1937).W. L. McAtee (1931) in his timely "Little Essay on Vermin" sojustly states the case of roadrunner versus mankind that his com-ments are of special significance here
:
The Road-ruuner is persecuted almost throughout its range * * * asan alleged destroyer of Quail eggs, and state bounties are even paid for itsdestruction. Yet the Road-runner never has been shown to be a special enemyof Quail, and it cannot cat their eggs except during a brief season. TheRoad-runner is as nearly omnivorous as any of our birds, eating anything inits habitat that is readily available and swallowable. No doubt it will eatQuail eggs, but it is equally certain that not one meal in a thousand of allthe birds at all times consists of Quail eggs.The Road-runner actually lives up to its repute of killing rattlesnakes;without doubt, it eats more scorpions, centipedes, and tarantulas * * *than it does Quail eggs, and it is a voracious consumer of grasshoppers. It isa unique bird, not only in our fauna but in that of the world, has extremelyinteresting habits, and in its choice of food in the long run undoubtedly doesmore good than harm. Its persecution is all but baseless and is thoroughlyunjustified. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southwestern United States south to central Mexico.The range of the roadrunner extends north to north-central Cali-fornia (Navarro River, Owens River, and Death Valley) ; Colorado(Meeker, Canon City, and Las Animas) ; and southern Kansas (prob-ably Caldwell and Arkansas City). East to Kansas (ArkansasCity) ; central Oklahoma (Norman) ; Texas (Fort Worth, Kerrville,and San Antonio) ; Tamaulipas (Matamoras, Soto La Marina, andTampico) ; and Pueblo (San Salvador). South to Puebla (San Sal-vador) ; Mexico (Tenango) ; and Jalisco (Zapotlan). West to Jalisco(Zapotlan) ; Baja California (Cape San Lucas, San Cristobal Bay,
MAYNARD'S CUCKOO 51and Kosario) ; and California (San Diego, Mentone, Santa Barbara,Sebastopol, and Navarro Kiver).Casual records.?The roadrunner is not known outside of its nor-mal range, but a remarkable occurrence was the finding of a specimenat Marshall Pass, Colo., at an elevation of about 10,000 feet, onOctober 12, 1907.Egg dates.?Arizona : 20 records, April 5 to June 24 ; 10 records,April 20 to June 3, indicating the height of the season.California : 73 records, March 4 to July 16 ; 37 records, March 25to May 2.Mexico : 5 records, April 16 to May 16.Texas : 57 records, March 18 to July 5 ; 29 records, May 3 to June 1.COCCYZUS MINOR MAYNARDI RidgrwayMAYNARD'S CUCKOOHABITSThe mangrove cuckoo {Coccyzus minor minor) long remained onthe A. O. U. Check-list, including the third edition, based on Audu-bon's record of a specimen taken on Key West and figured in hisBirds of America. Ridgway (1916) examined this specimen andidentified it as the Jamaican mangrove cuckoo {C. minor nesiotes).Now the 1931 Check-list makes the statement that all Florida recordsprove to be referable to C. minor maynardi, and excludes both of theabove races from the list.The mangrove cuckoo, of which Maynard's is a subspecies, is wellnamed, for all races of the species seem to be confined almost exclu-sively to the mangroves. The only one I ever saw was encounteredon our way to Alligator Lake through the mangi'ove forests nearCape Sable, Fla. Arthur H. Howell (1932) collected the only twohe ever saw "in a black mangrove swamp near the mouth of AliensRiver, below Everglade."Nesting.?Audubon (1842) says: "The nest is slightly constructedof dry twigs, and is almost flat, nearly resembling that of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo." Mr. Howell (1932) says that "a set of two fresheggs (now in the Florida State Museum), which the female wasbeginning to incubate, was taken at Chokoloskee, June 4, 1903, from anest 7 feet up in a red mangrove."Oscar E. Baynard tells me that he took two sets of two eggs each,on May 25 and 26, 1912, in a dense stand of extra large mangrovesin Pinellas County, Fla.Eggs.?The eggs of Maynard's cuckoo are practically indistinguish-able from those of the yellow-billed cuckoo. The measurements of20 eggs average 30.77 by 23.18 millimeters; the eggs showing the
52 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMfour extremes measure 33.1 by 22.6, 31.4 by 24.3, 27.9 by 22, and 30by 21.6 millimeters.Young.?Audubon (1842) says that this cuckoo "raises two broodsin the season, and feeds its young on insects until they are able to goabroad."Plumages.?I have seen no nestlings of this species, but a fullygrown Juvenal, taken in the Bahamas on June 23, has the upper partseverywhere "buffy brown" to "wood brown," including the crown,which in the adult is grayer than the back; there are narrow whitetips on the secondaries, tertials, and all the wing coverts; there arestill narrower white tips on the primaries, which soon wear away;the black space below and behind the eye, so conspicuous in theadult, is lacking; the central tail feathers are paler grayish brownterminally than in the adult, and the lateral tail feathers are pale"wood brown," instead of black, with whitish, instead of pure white,tips, which are also less clearly defined than in the adult. I have seenyoung birds in this plumage in July, August, and September. Thebody plumage is probably molted during the fall, but the juvenalwings and tail are apparently retained until the following spring orsummer; I have seen young birds molting wings and tail in Febru-ary, June, and August, thus assuming a fully adult plumage.Food.?The food of Maynard's cuckoo consists mainly of cater-pillars, spiders, moths, flies, grasshoppers, and other insects ; probablya few small fruits and wild berries are eaten at times. Mr. Howell(1932) says: "The stomachs of two birds taken at Everglade, Florida,in March, were examined in the Biological Survey; the food in oneconsisted mainly of hairy caterpillars (Arctiidae), the stomach beingwell lined with caterpillar spines; the remains of 3 mantids {Stag-momantis) composed the remainder. The other stomach contained 4long-horned grasshoppers, lepidopterous larvae, locustid eggs, man-tids, and spiders."Behavior.?Maynard (1896) says of the habits of this cuckoo inthe Bahamas
:
They frequent thickets near fields, and often venture into the open grounds tofeed, but usually when taken by surprise in such places, quickly I'etreat to thethickets, into which they glide easily. Once within the cover of the shrubbery,their movements are quite deliberate, but when approached, they will jumpfrom branch to branch, and although not appearing to hasten, will manageto elude their pursuer, and become quickly lost in the foliage.The flight of this Cuckoo is rapid, the wings being moved quickly, much moreso than in the Black or Yellow Billed Cuckoos. They generally move straightforward, without doubling, and when they wish to alight, they do so suddenlywithout any preliminary lessening of their speed, and as soon as their feettouch the branch the tail is dropped perpendicularly. As a rule, this Cuckoois rather shy, especially when in open fields, but I once came across one nearMathewstown, Inagua, that was feeding in an old field, that was very tame,
MAYNARD'S CUCKOO 53
allowing me to approach within ten feet of it, as it deliberately searched forfood among the remains of partly decayed stubs of trees which stood in theclearing.Voice.?On this subject Maynard says
:
All through the winter Maynard's Cuckoo is rather silent, but as spring ap-proaches they begin to utter their singular cries, and at times, more especiallybefore rain, are quite noisy. The notes may be represented by the syllables
"ou, ou, ou, ou, qua, qua, qua, coo, coo, coo."The "ous" are given very rapidly, with a decided Cuckoo-like intonation.The "quas" are harsher, more like the notes of the Bahama tree frog, andare not hurriedly given. The last three notes are more Cuckoo-like than anyof the others. The first four notes are often omitted, then the harshly andgravely given "quas" begin the song and on occasions these quaint soundsare not followed by any other notes, then it is sometimes difficult to dis-tinguish the notes uttered from some of those uttered by the large AndrosIsland Cuckoo, Saurothera andrea. This varied song is uttered in the earlymorning with rather more energy than at any other time in the day.Field marks.?The Maynard's cuckoo might easily be mistaken fora yellow-billed cuckoo, as it doubtless often has been, the tail mark-ings being practically the same. But the underparts are decidedlywashed with "pinkish buff" and "cinnamon-buff," though these partsare not so deeply colored as in the mangrove cuckoo. If clearly seenat close range, the grayish crown and the black area behind and,narrowly, below the eye are good field marks.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Northeastern South America, Central America to centralMexico, the West Indies, and southern Florida.The range of the mangrove cuckoo extends north to Nayarit (TresMarias Islands and San Bias) ; Tamaulipas (Alta Mira) ; Yucatan(Izamal, Temax, Chichen-Itza, Cozumel Island, and MujeresIsland) ; western Cuba (Isle of Pines) ; Florida (Anclote Keys andCape Florida) ; the Bahama Islands (Berry, Eleuthera, and WatlingIslands) ; the Dominican Republic (Monte Cristi, Sosua, and Seibo)
;
Puerto Rico (Desecheo, Culebra, and Vieques Islands) ; and the Vir-gin Islands (St. Thomas, Tortola, and Virgin Gorda). East to theVirgin Islands (Virgin Gorda) ; the Leeward and Windward Islands(Antigua, Guadeloupe, Dominica, Martinique, Santa Lucia, St. Vin-cent, and Grenada) ; and Trinidad. South to Trinidad ; northernVenezuela (Aruba Island) ; Panama (Chiriqui) ; and Costa Rica(San Jose and Puntarenas). West to Costa Rico (Puntarenas, Pozodel Rio Grande, and Pigres) ; Nicaragua (Greytown and Chinan-dega) ; Honduras (Roatan Island and Puerto Caballo) ; El Salva-dor (La Libertad) ; western Guatemala (near Ocos) ; Oaxaca (Caco-prieto) ; and Nayarit (Tres Marias Islands).
54 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe range as outlined is for the entire species, which has beenseparated into several subspecies, only one of which is found in NorthAmerica. This race, known as Maynard's cuckoo, C. m. maynardi^is found in the Bahamas, Cuba, and the southern part of Florida,including the Florida Keys.Migration.?Apparently only Maynard's cuckoo is migratory, andthis only in the Florida part of its range. Early dates of arrivalin Florida are : Gator Lake in Monroe County, March 22, and PuntaRossa, March 29. A late date of departure from Key West is Sep-tember 19.Egg dates.?Florida and the Keys : 13 records. May 17 to July 10.COCCYZUS AMERICANUS AMERICANUS (Linnaeus)YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOOPlates 6, 7HABITSThe yellow-billed cuckoo, with its western subspecies, covers practi-cally all the United States and some of southern Canada. It is mainlya bird of the Austral Zone, being much commoner in the SouthernStates than in the northern portions of its range. In New Englandit is not so common as the black-billed cuckoo, though in some seasonsit seems to be a familiar bird. Originally it was probably a woodlandbird, but, like many other species, it has learned to frequent thehaunts of man, where it is not molested and where it finds an abundantfood supply in our shade trees, orchards, and gardens. Its favoritehaunts are still the woodland thickets, where the tree growth is nottoo heavy, brush-grown lanes, shady roadsides, dense thickets alongsmall streams, and apple orchards in rural districts. In dense, heavywoods it is seldom seen.Nesting.?Unlike the European cuckoo, both of our North Ameri-can species usually build their own nests and rear their own young,though they are very poor nest builders and are often careless aboutlaying in each other's nests or the nests of other species. MajorBendire (1895) gives the following very good account of the nestinghabits of the yellow-billed cuckoo
:
The Yellow-billed Cuckoo is one of the poorest nest builders known to me,and undoubtedly the slovenly manner in which it constructs its nest causes thecontents of many to be accidentally destroyed, and this probably accounts tosome extent for the many apparent irregularities in their nesting habits. Thenests are shallow, frail platforms, composed of small rootlets, sticks, or twigs,few of these being over 4 or 5 inches in length, and among them a few dryleaves and bits of mosses ; rags, etc., are occasionally mixed in, and the surfaceis lined with dry blossoms of the horse-chestnut and other flowering plants, themale aments or catkins of oaks, willows, etc., tufts of grasses, pine and spruce
YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO 55
needles, and mosses of different kinds. These materials are loosely placed onthe top of the little platform, which is frequently so small that the extremitiesof the bird project on both sides, and there is scarcely any depression to keepthe eggs from rolling out even in only a moderate windstorm, unless one of theparents sits on the nest, and it is therefore not a rare occurrence to findbroken eggs lying under the trees or bushes in which the nests are placed.Some of these are so slightly built that the eggs can be readily seen through thebottom. An average nest measures about 5 inches in outer diameter by 11/2inches in depth. They are rarely placed over 20 feet from the ground, generallyfrom 4 to 8 feet upon horizontal limbs of oak, beech, gum, dogwood, hawthorn,mulberry, pine, cedar, fir, apple, orange, fig, and other trees. Thick bushes par-ticularly such as are overrun with wild grape and other vines as well as hedge-rows, especially those of osage orange are most frequently selected for nestingsites. The nests are ordinarily well concealed by the overhanging and surround-ing foliage and while usually shy and timid at other times, the Yellow-billedCuckoo is generally courageous and bold in the defense of its chosen home ; thebird on the nest not unfrequently will raise its feathers at right angles from thebody and occasionally even fly at the intruder.Of five Massachusetts nests, on which I have notes, the lowest wasonly 2 feet above the ground in some bushes, and the highest was 12feet up in a crotch near the top of an oak sapling in a swampy-thicket near a brook. Owen Durfee mentions in his notes a nest 5feet up in a juniper on the edge of a swamp. The others were atlow elevations in thickets along brooks.A. D. DuBois has sent me his notes on five Illinois nests; one ofthese was on the end of a branch of an apple tree, 8 feet from theground, near a country schoolhouse ; this nest contained 3 eggs of thecuckoo and a robin's egg. Another was near the end of a branchin an osage-orange hedge, 10 feet up ; still another was in an isolatedclump of willows, between a field and a pasture, 6 feet from theground.But cuckoos do not always nest in such low situations; there areseveral records of their nesting well up in elm trees. Grant Foreman(1924) tells of a pair that nested on his place in Muskogee, Okla.,for one or two years, high up in an elm tree ; he says : "The next yearafter nesting in this inaccessible place, they built their nest in a littleelm tree in the parking, in a low limb overhanging the curb on anasphalt street where hundreds of automobiles were passing every day,and here in this exposed, noisy place they raised a brood of young.This year they built their nest in a little hackberry tree in the park-ing along the side of my lot; but here also the nest was on a lowlimb overhanging the curb on a paved street, and the ice wagonstopped every morning directly under this nest, which was so lowdown that the driver might have put his hand in it."George Finlay Simmons (1915) mentions a nest that he foundnear Houston, Tex., on the horizontal limb of a young pine near theedge of some woods. He says of it : "The nest was a slight platform
56 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMabout eleven feet up, through which I could see with ease; it wascomposed of small pine twigs, about an eighth of an inch in diameterand averaging six or eight inches long, and was much more concavethan I had expected. This shallow saucer was neatly, though quitethinly lined with a few pine needles, a small quantity of Spanishmoss and several tiny buds."George B. Sennett (1879) says that in the Lower Rio Granderegion of Texas "ebony trees near the ranch, mesquites among cac-tuses, thorny bushes in open chaparral, and open woodland, werefavored breeding places."Wright and Harper (1913) found a well-made nest in OkefinokeeSwamp, in a tupelo tree at the margin of the Suwannee. "It wasplaced in a cluster of mistletoe on a horizontal branch four feet abovethe water, and consisted of sticks interwoven with Spanish 'moss'{Tillandsia usneoides).''''Dr. Harry C. Oberholser (1896) gives the measurements of fournests; the average height of the nests was 4 inches, and the greatestoutside diameters averaged 7.63 by 6.2.5 inches.Both species of North American cuckoos often lay their eggs ineach other's nests. The eggs of the yellow-billed cuckoo have beenfound several times in nests of the robin and catbird. H. P. Attwater(1892) writes: "In 1884 I found a Dickcissel's nest which containedfive eggs and one Yellow-billed Cuckoo's egg. The next year someboys brought me three Black-throated Sparrow's eggs and one Yel-low-billed Cuckoo's, from the same field, which they said they foundall together in one nest." J. L. Davison (1887) says: "I also founda nest of Menila migratoria^ taken possession of by Coccyzus ameri-canus before it was finished, which was filled nearly full of rootlets
;
and in this condition the Robin laid one eQ:g and the Cuckoo laid twoand commenced incubation, when a Mourning Dove {Zenauluramacroura) also occupied it and laid two eggs and commenced incuba-tion with the Cuckoo. I foimd both birds on the nest at the sametime, when I secured nest and eggs. The eggs of the Robin andCuckoo were slightly incubated; those of the Mourning Dove werefresh."Bendire (1895) adds the wood thrush, cedar waxwing, and cardinalto the list of birds that have been imposed upon, and says: "Suchinstances appear to be much rarer, however, than those in whichthey interlay with each other, and the majority of these may wellbe due to accident, their own nest having possibly been capsized, andnecessity compelled the bird to deposit its egg elsewhere. Suchinstances do occur at times with species that can not possibly becharged with parasitic tendencies."Marcia B. Clay (1929) thus describes the cuckoo's method ofgathering twigs for her nest
:
YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO 57Flying Into an adjacent apple tree containing a considerable quantity of deadmaterial, the Cuckoo landed on a limb, selected a dead twig, and grasping itin her bill bent it back and forth until it snapped from the limb, whereuponshe flew with it to her nesting-site in the next tree, arranged this twig andquickly returned for another. As she tugged at a stubborn twig, her back wasarched and her long tail curved under or waved about. If a twig resisted toowell her attack, the bird desisted at once and tried another. Always sheworked rapidly with great energy, attacking a twig as soon as .she landed inthe tree, never carrying more than one twig at a time, holding it squarely atright angles to her bill and flying rapidly with long tail streaming.The Cuckoo's concentration in the work, coupled with her indifference to ob-servers, was remarkable. Not once did she descend to the ground for material.Not once did she gather material in the tree in which her nest was located.With two exceptions the twigs were all gathered from the same tree. Workingthus off and on for an hour or two at a time, the bird completed the nest.The third night the Cuckoo was sitting on the nest at dusk, but after two daysshe deserted.Eggs.?The yellow-billed ciickoo lays ordinarily three or four eggs,sometimes only one and rarely five; as many as six, seven, or eveneight eggs have been found in a nest, but these larger numbers maybe the product of more than one female. The eggs vary in shapefrom elliptical-oval to oval, oftener nearer the former, and aboutequally rounded at both ends. The shell is smooth, but withoutgloss. Bendire (185)5) says that the "color varies from a uniformNile blue to pale greenish blue when fresh, fading out in time to apale greenish yellow." Eggs that I have examined in collections varyin color from "pale glaucous green" to "pale fluorite green." Themeasurements of 53 eggs average 30.4 by 23 millimeters; the eggsshowing the four extremes measure 34.64 by 23.11, 33.53 by 25.40,27.43 by 22.86, and 29.21 by 20.83 millimeters.Young.?The period of incubation is said to be about 14 days; it isshared to some extent by both sexes, but is probably performedmainly by the female. The eggs are sometimes laid on succeedingdays, but oftener at more or less infrequent intervals; the young,therefore, frequently hatch at irregular intervals, and young of differ-ent ages are often found in the nest.Snyder and Logier (1931) say of a brood of young that they ex-amined: "The young were quite active when disturbed. Theyscrambled about the bush, using the wings and bill for climbing.One young which was brought to our camp demonstrated a remark-able reptile-like behaviour. When it was placed on the table and onereached to pick it up, it erected its somewhat horny plumage andemitted a buzzing hiss like the sound of bees escaping from a tunnelin dry grass. This performance was certainly unbirdlike in all re-spects."Francis H. Allen writes to me: "I found a young one in an openfield on the ground. I was attracted to the spot by its loud rasping178223?40 5
58 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
cry. It fluttered along when I approached, but it could not fly fromthat position, in rather long grass, though wings and tail werepretty well fledged. When I picked it up, it pecked at my fingerangrily. It seemed as fierce as a young hawk, and its rasping cry wasprobably calculated to inspire terror in its enemies. I placed thebird on a bough of a Norway spruce, where it took a characteristiccuckoo attitude and seemed much more at home than on the ground."Dr. Lawrence H. Walkinshaw has sent me some notes on theweights and development of young yellow-billed cuckoos. One
"well-grown" young was weighed for three days in succession beforeit left the nest, at 6 a. m. each morning. It weighed 28.8 grams thefirst morning, 31 grams the second, and only 26 grams on the third,August 6. The interesting point is that the loss of weight came withthe sudden development of the plumage, of which he says : "Wlien Ivisited the nest on August 5, at 6 a. m., his feathers resembled thequills of a porcupine, long and bluish, stretched out over his wingsand back. At 7 p. m., these quills had all opened and the bird hadtaken on the resemblance of an adult cuckoo. Correspondingly, thefollowing morning, he had lost 5 grams in weight. He left thenest on August 6."At another nest a young bird weighed 25 grams on August 25,27.6 on the 26th, 32.9 on the 27th, and only 28.9 grams on the 28th
;
this bird left the nest on August 29, with feathers unsheathed. Hesays that during the unsheathing process the young bird dressed itsfeathers continually; "the wings, the tail, the scapulars, the rump,and breast all shared alike, then with the feet he would work aboutthe head and throat. Wlien hungry he would pause and call a lowcuk-cuk-cuk-cur-r-r-r-rrr. If the parent did not come soon, thesecalls increased in number. "While feeding, his wings would vibraterapidly, and after the parent left his call was more of contentment,a short curr, or a cuk-ctinTrr. When excreting, he simply backedup to the edge of the nest."Plumages.?Bendire (1895) says: "The young when first hatchedare repulsive, black, and greasy-looking creatures, nearly naked, andthe sprouting quills only add to their general ugliness." This is avery good description, and the young birds do not improve muchin appearance during the period of early growth. The body is wellcovered with the long, pointed feather sheaths until the young birdis more than half grown. But the sheaths burst, the juvenal plum-age appears, and the young bird is well feathered before the timecomes to leave the nest.Dr. A. H, Cordier (1923) describes this process very well asfollows
:
YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO 59At the end of seven clays the young Cuckoo resembled a porcupine more thana bird. I now cut the limb holding the nest and brought it to the ground.Within three feet of it I then put up the umbrella tent that I might at closerange observe minutely the rapid transition of the porcupine-looking objectinto a fully feathered, beautiful Rain Crow. * * *The first picture was made at nine o'clock. * * * ^jiig shows the youngby the unhatched egg; the homy, sheathed feathers were fully two incheslong, making the bird look like a porcupine. About ten-thirty the sheathsbegan to burst, and with each split a fully formed feather was liberated.This process took place with such rapidity that it reminded me of the com-motion in a corn popper or a rapidly blooming flower. All the while I waswithin three feet of the bird, and could see every new feather, as it blossomed,so to speak.At three p. m., six hours after the first picture was taken, 1 made anotherphotograph, showing this same bird in the full plumage of a Cuckoo, exceptthe long tail.Ill this first plumage the young cuckoo looks very much like theadult, perhaps slightly paler above and with a slight wash of tawnyor pale buff on the throat and breast; but the tail is quite different,lacking the conspicuous black and white markings so prominent onthe sides of the adult tail; in the young bird the dark spaces in thetail are not black, but dark gray or lighter gray, variable in differentindividuals or in different feathers in the same individual; the lightspaces are not so sharply defined as in the adult and are grayishwhite instead of pure white.The Juvenal body plumage appears to be molted in fall, fromAugust to October; but the juvenal wings and tail are worn throughthe first winter at least ; I have not been able to detect this plumagein spring birds, so I suppose that a more or less complete molt occurswhile the birds are in their winter homes, producing a practicallyadult plumage before they return in the spring. Adults have acomplete molt between July and October, and possibly a more orless complete molt in spring before they arrive here, but winterspecimens to show it are lacking.Food.?Cuckoos are among the most useful of our birds, mainlybecause of their fondness for caterpillars, which are some of ourmost injurious insect pests and which constitute the principal foodof these birds during their seasons of abundance. Edward H.Forbush (1907) writes:Tlie Cuckoos are of the greatest service to the farmer, by reason of theirwell-known fondness for caterpillars, particularly the hairy species. No cater-pillars are safe from the Cuckoo. It does not matter how hairy or spiny theyare, or how well they may be protected by webs. Often the stomach of theCuckoo will be foimd lined with a felted mass of caterpillar hairs, and some-times its intestines are pierced by the spines of the noxious caterpillars that ithas swallowed. "Wherever caterpillar outbreaks occur we hear the calls ofthe Cuckoos. There they stay; there they bring their newly fledged young;
60 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
and the number of caterpillars they eat is incredible. Professor Beal statesthat two thousand, seven hundred and seventy-one caterpillars were found inthe stomachs of one hundred and twenty-one Cuckoos?an average of morethan twenty-one each. Dr. Otto Lugger found several hundred small hairycaterpillars in the stomach of a single bird. The poisonous, spined caterpillarsof the lo moth, the almost equally disagreeable caterpillars of the brown-tailmoth, and the spiny elm caterpillar, are eaten with avidity.He says elsewhere (1927) :When, in time, the inside of the bird's stomach becomes so felted with amass of hairs and spines that it obstructs digestion, the bird can shed theentire stomach-lining, meanwhile growing a new one. * * * Mr. Mosher,a competent observer, watched a Yellow-billed Cuckoo eat 41 gypsy caterpillarsin fifteen minutes, and later he saw another consume 47 forest tent cater-pillars in six minutes. * * * Dr. Amos W. Butler [1897] says that he hasknown these Cuckoos to destroy every tent caterpillar in a badly infestedorchard and tear up all the nests in half a day. This species frequently feedson or near the ground, and there gets an enormous number of locusts andother pests. In summer and autumn it feeds to some extent on small wildfruits, such as the raspberry, blackberry and wild grape.The fall webworm is a destructive pest on certain trees, but fewbirds will eat it. Dr. Sylvester D. Judd (1902) noted that, on aMaryland farm, "a pair of yellow-billed cuckoos continually ex-tracted them from the webs. The destruction of this insect is anhabitual practice with the cuckoo. In a single stomach of the speciesexamined by Professor Beal there were 325 of the larvae."Henry C. Denslow writes to me that he fed many hairy cater-pillars to a cuckoo that he had in captivity, and says: "Many ofthese this bird sheared the hairs from by slowly moving them fromend to end through its beak by a side-shifting motion of the man-dibles. The removed hairs collected in a little bunch and, at the endof the caterpillar, fell to the floor. Most of the hairs were thusshorn from these caterpillars. Other caterpillars were swallowedentire, as I gave them to him, hairs and all."Walter B. Barrows (1912) says that this cuckoo feeds freely onelderberries and mulberries and that "large quantities of beetles andbugs also are consumed, and both species of cuckoo seem to be veryfond of grasshoppers, eating especially such forms as frequent shrub-bery and trees, among these the destructive tree crickets (Oecanthus).Ten specimens examined by Professor Aughey, in Nebraska, con-tained 416 locusts and grasshoppers, and 152 other insects."Audubon (1842) writes: "In autumn they eat many grapes, andI have seen them supporting themselves by a momentary motion oftheir wings opposite a bunch, as if selecting the ripest, when theywould seize it and return to a branch, repeating their visits in thismaimer until satiated."
YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO 61In addition to those mentioned above, yellow-billed cuckoos havebeen known to eat many other insects, such as armyworms, ants,wasps, Hies, and dragonflies. Several of the earlier ornithologistsaccused this cuckoo of eating the eggs of other small birds and pro-duced some evidence of the bad habit, but some modern observersseem to think that they do very little, if any, nest robbing. C. J.Maynard (1896) writes:This species in company with the former [black-billed cuckoo] are the terrorof other small birds during the nesting season for they will constantly robtheir nests. I have frequently seen a Cuckoo enter a thicket in which a Robinor a Cat Bird had built a home and in a moment the air would resound withthe shrill cries of distress given by the parents, causing all the small birds inthe immediate vicinity to rush to the spot and as each joins in the outcry, tbenoise produced is apparently enough to frighten away a bolder bird than aCuckoo.But in spite of all this din, the glossy thief nearly always succeeds in accom-plishing his purpose and emerges I'roui the thicket, carrying an egg impaledon his beak. He does not always escape unscathed, however, fur he is pursuedby a motley crowd consisting of Robins, Cat Birds, Thrushes, Warblers, etc.that follow him closely, harassing him on all sides, and some of the morecourageous will even assault him with blows from their beaks so that he fre-quently leaves some of his feathers floating in the wind behind him. As thelong and broad tail of the Cuckoo is a prominent object and as it is also aportion of the bird which its enemies can seize with comparative safety tothemselves, this member often suffers in these forays, in so much, that by themiddle of summer, it is quite difficult to find a Cuckoo of either species whichI'.as a full complement of tail feathers.On the other hand. Major Bendire (1895) says: "I am aware thatthis species has been accused of destroying the eggs and even of eatingthe young of smaller birds, but I am strongly inclined to believethat this accusation is unjust, and in my opinion requires more sub-stantial confirmation. I have never yet had any reason to suspecttheir robbing smaller birds' nests, and the very fact that they live mapparent harmony with such neighbors, who do not protest againsttheir presence, as they are in the habit of doing should a Blue Jay,Grackle, or Crow come too close to their nests, seems to confirm thisview."But then he goes on to quote from a letter from William Brewster,who says : "While I have never seen either of our Cuckoos destroy theeggs of other birds, nevertheless I think they do it occasionally. Oneof my reasons for this belief is that many of our small birds,Warblers, Sparrows, etc., show great anxiety whenever the Cuckoosapproach their nests, and they pursue and peck at them when theytake wing, beliaving toward them, in fact, exactly as they do towardthe Crows, Jays, and Crackles, which we know eat eggs whenever theycan get a chance. My other reason is that one of my friends once
62 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
shot a Cuckoo {G. americamMS^ I think it was) whose bill wassmeared all over with the fresh yolk of an egg."Yellow-billed cuckoos sometimes eat tree frogs and other smallfrogs, and, in the Southern States, an occasional small lizard.Marcia B. Clay (1929) relates the following incident: "For an houra Cuckoo searched about the dead under limbs of a huge untrimmedapple tree, peering and gliding noiselessly around and around. Atlast, after long and patient search, it dashed to the ground and beganto walk directly toward me through the scant grass and weeds, andonly then did I see a frog trying to slip away unseen. The birdfollowed the frog a rod, pecking its victim and gloating softly Cuk^Cuk. Having vanquished its prey, the Cuckoo deftly gathered itinto its bill and flew away, the frog's legs sticking out stiff andstraight together, exactly like the dead twigs which the Cuckoo car-ries to its nest."Behavior.?Mr. Forbush (1927) has described the quiet, retiringbehavior of the yellow-billed cuckoo very well as follows
:
The cuckoo is a graceful, elegant bird, calm and unperturbed ; it slips quietlyand rather furtively through its favorite tangles and flies easily from treeto tree in the orchard, keeping for the most part under protection of the leaves,which furnish excellent cover for its bronzy, upper plumage, while the shadowsof the foliage tend to conceal the whiteness of its under parts. It has a way alsoof keeping its back with its greenish satiny reflections toward the intruder inits solitudes, and while holding an attitude of readiness for flight it sits motion-less, and its plumage so blends with its leafy environment that it does notordinarily catch the eye. In the meantime it turns its head and regards thedisturber with a cool, reserved, direct gaze, looking back over its shoulder,apparently unafraid and giving no indication of nervousness or even unduecuriosity; but if the observer approaches too closely, the elegant bird slipsquietly away, vanishing into some leafy, cool retreat where it may enjoy thesilence and solitude, dear to the woodland recluse.The flight of the cuckoo is rather swift, easy and graceful, exceed-ingly direct and horizontal, but turning frequently from side to sideas it threads its way through the branches of the trees, giving occa-sional glimpses of its white under parts and the telltale black-and-white markings in its tail ; it is stream-lined to perfection and glidesnoiselessly through the air with its long tail streaming out behind.It is very quiet in its movements in its shady retreats; it seldomperches in a conspicuous place but sits motionless for long periodsin the dense foliage, watching, or moves about stealthily in search ofits prey. It might easily be overlooked, were it not for its charac-teristic notes, which lead the observer to look for it.About its nest it is rather shy, while incubating on its eggs, slip-ping away cautiously when approached, but when there are youngin the nest its behavior is quite different. It then becomes quitesolicitous and will often remain on the nest until almost touched, and
YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOO 63then perhaps throw itself down to the ground, fluttering and tum-bling along, feigning lameness, after the manner of many ground-nesting birds, uttering loud, guttural cries of distress.Voice.?We hear the voice of the cuckoo much oftener than we seethe bird ; the well-known sound comes to us, like a wandering voice,from the depths of some shady retreat, but we cannot see the hiddenauthor. We can recognize it easily as the voice of a cuckoo, but itis not always so easy to identify the species by its notes, thoughsome keen observers claim that they can do so. Certain songs arecharacteristic of each of the two species, but both have a great va-riety of notes and many notes that are much alike in both. Thejiotes of the yellow-billed cuckoo may be a trifle harsher and a littlelouder, but they are not always recognizable. The characteristic noteof the yellow-billed cuckoo is well described by Charles J. Spiker(1935) as follows: "What may be considered the song of this speciesis a series of rapid, wooden-sounding syllables resembling the follow-ing: ^'^^7*:;-^Wi^-A;'M^'-^w^-AJw^-C(3a6)^y-cea<?10-cea6>'lo-cea(9^o/ the kuJcs beinggiven rapidly, the ceaows more deliberately and with longer intervals."Bendire (1895) writes:One of their commonest notes is a low "noo-coo-coo-coo ;" another soundsmore lilje "cow-cow-cow" or "kow-kow-kow," several times repeated; othersresemble the syllables of "ough, ough, ough," slowly and softly uttered; someremind me of the "kloop-kloop" of the Bittern; occasionally a note somethinglike the "kiuh-kiuh-kiuh" of the Flicker is also uttered; a low sharp "tou-wity-whit" and "hweet hwee" is also heard during the nesting season. Thoughordinarily not what might be called a social bird, I have sometimes duringthe mating season seen as many as eight in the same tree, and on such occa-sions they indulge in quite a number of calls, and if the listener can onlykeep still long enough he has an excellent opportunity to hear a regular Cuckooconcert.Various other interpretations of the different notes have been givenby other writers, but the above quotations cover fairly well the ordi-nary variations. The song, as given by Mr. Spiker above, is some-times more prolonged by lengthening the series of kuks, with increas-ing speed of utterance and adding to the series of ceaows, with slowlydecreasing speed. I believe that the black-billed cuckoo never givesthis prolonged song, accelerated during the first half and retardedduring the last half; its song is given in more even time, and is gen-erally shorter. The song of the yellow-billed cuckoo is often heardduring the night, and its notes are often uttered while flying.Field marks.?A cuckoo may be easily recognized as a cuckoo byits size, shape, and color?a long, slender bird, longer than a robin,with a long tail, olive-brown above and white below; but the twospecies look very much alike unless the distinctive markings can beclearly seen. The yellow lower mandible of this species can be seenonly at short range. But the rufous in the wing feathers is evident
64 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMin fliglit, and the lateral tail feathers are conspicuously black, withlarge terminal white areas clearly defined. At very close range theyellow eyelids of this species may be seen.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Temperate North America, the Caribbean region. Southand Central America; casual on Bermuda and accidental in westernEurope.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the yellow-billed cuckooextends north to southern British Columbia (Kamloops) ; north-eastern Oregon (Keenys Ferry) ; northern Utah (Salt Lake City)
;
northern Colorado (Loveland, Greeley, and Fort Morgan) ; SouthDakota (White RiA'er, Yankton, and Sioux Falls) ; Minnesota (Foss-ton and St. Paul) ; Wisconsin (Ladysmith, Waupaca, and New Lon-don) ; northern Michigan (Blaney and Sault Ste. Marie) ; southernOntario (Listowel, llosseau, and Ottawa) ; northern New York(Watertown and Plattsburg) ; and southern Maine (Auburn). Fromthis point the breeding range extends southward along the Atlanticcoast to Florida (New Smyrna and Kissimmee) ; the Bahama IslandsInagua Island) ; probably the Dominican Republic (Dajabon) ; andthe Virgin Islands (St. Croix). South to the Virgin Islands (St.Croix) ; Jamaica (Port Henderson) ; Coahuila (Sabinas River) ;southern Souora (Guaymas) ; and southern Baja California (SanJose del Rancho). West to Baja California (San Jose del Ranchoand Cerro Prieto) ; California (Wilmington, Watsonvillc, SantaClara, and Redding) ; Oregon (Salem) ; Washington (Grays Harbor,Tacoma, and Seattle) ; and British Columbia (Victoria, Chilliwack,and Kamloops).The range as outlined is for the entire species, which has beenseparated into two geographic races. The yellow-billed cuckoo {G. a.americanus) occupies the eastern part of the range west to SouthDakota, Nebraska, eastern Colorado, and Oklahoma, while the Cali-fornia cuckoo {C. a. occidentalis) is found over the rest of the countryto the Pacific coast.Winter range.?The winter home of this species has not been accu-rately determined, but it extends north to northern Colombia (SantaMarta, Bonda, Medellin, and Antioquia) ; and Venezuela (San Cris-tobal, Altagracia, the Orinoco River region, and Nericagua). It hasbeen found at this season east to southeastern Brazil (Sao Paulo)Uruguay (Rio Negro) ; and eastern Argentina (Buenos Aires andLomas de Zamora). South, probably only casually to central Argen-tina (Lomas de Zamora and Saladillo). West to Argentina (Sala-dillo and La Riojo) ; Ecuador (Nono, Chimbo, Cumbaya, andGuapulo) ; and Colombia (Cienaga and Santa Marta).
YELLOW-BTLLED CUCKOO 65Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Florida
?
Melrose, March 12; Daytona Beach, April 9; Pensacola, April13. Alabama?Autaugaville, April 16. Georgia?Savannah, March24; Kirkwood, April 7. South Carolina?Charleston, April 14.North Carolina?Raleigh, April 25 ; Weaverville, May 1. VirginiaLawrenceville, April 23; New Market, April 26. District of Co-lumbia?Washington, April 27. Pennsylvania?Philadelphia, April20; Beaver, May 6; Renovo, May 11. New Jersey?Morristown,April 7; Elizabeth, May 9. New York?Shelter Island, May 2;Rhinebeck, May 3; Watertown, May 12. Comiecticut?Hartford,May 9; Jewett City, May 10. Rhode Island?Providence, May 11.Massachusetts?Boston, May 4; Beverly, May 15. New HampshireMilford, May 11. Vermont?St. Johnsbur}^, May 27. Maine?Lewis-ton, May 6; Fryeburg, May 19. Mississippi?Biloxi, April 6; Rod-ney, April 8; Oakvale, April 10. Arkansas?Helena, April 19; De-light, April 24. Tennessee?Chattanooga, April 10 ; Knoxville, April27. Kentucky?Eubank, April 22; Bowling Green, April 24. Mis-souri?St. Louis, April 28; Kansas City, April 30; Concordia, May1. Illinois?Rantoul, May 2; Chicago, May 4; Olney, May 5.Indiana?Terre Haute, April 17; Fort Wayne, April 29; Waterloo,May 4. Ohio?Oberlin, April 26 ; Columbus, April 29 ; Youngstown,May 7. Michigan?Detroit, May 4; Battle Creek, May 11. On-tario?London, May 8; Guelph, May 12. Iowa?Sioux City, April30; Grinnell, May 9. Wisconsin?Madison, May 10; Racine, May10; La Crosse, May 12. Minnesota?Minneapolis, May 6; Winona,May 8. Texas?Fredericksburg, April 1; Kerrville, April 7; SanAntonio, April 14. Oklahoma?Skiatook, April 20 ; Oklahoma City,May 3. Kansas?Ottawa, April 25; Onaga, April 28. NebraskaRed Cloud, April 29; Lincoln, May 7. South Dakota?Vermillion,May 17. New Mexico?State College, May 25. Arizona?Phoenix,May 1 ; Tombstone, May 20. Colorado?Longmont, May 20 ; Denver,May 28. California?Petaluma, April 18; Pico, May 5; Berryessa,May 13. Oregon?Sauvies Island, April 24. Washington?Tacoma,May 3.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are : CaliforniaMurphys, September 1 ; Vineland, September 22. Colorado?Yuma,September 3; Clear Creek, September 8. Arizona?Tucson, Sep-tember 8. New Mexico?Mesilla Park, September 7; State CollegeSeptember 18. North Dakota?Grafton, September 4. South Da-kota?Lennox, September 15; Yankton, September 24. NebraskaDunbar, September 27; Lincoln, October 5. Kansas?Onaga, Oc-tober 1. Oklahoma?Copan, September 23; Kenton, September 30.Texas?Bonham, September 25; Swan, September 28; Kerrville, Oc-tober 19. Minnesota?Minneapolis, October 1 ; Hastings, October 20.
66 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMWisconsin?Madison, September 27; Racine, October 6. Iowa
?
Grinnell, October 22. Ontario?Gait, October 2; London, October11 ; Point Pelee, October 16. Michigan?Detroit, October 8. OhioYoungstown, October 12; Columbus, October 19; Oberlin, October21. Indiana?Sedan, October 13. Illinois?Chicago, October 18;Rantoul, October 24. Missouri?Concordia, October 10, Ken-tucky?Lexington, October 10. Tennessee?Nashville, October 11.Arkansas?Delight, October 20. Mississippi?Biloxi, October 11.MJaine?Fryeburg, September 1. Vermont?St. Johnsbury, Sep-tember 12. Massachusetts?Marthas Vineyard, September 24 ; Lanes-borough, September 29 ; Hadley, October 18. Connecticut?Meriden,October 12; New Haven, October 16; Portland, October 17. NewYork?Rhinebeck, October 1; New York City, October 12. NewJersey?Morristown, October 9; Elizabeth, October 12. Pennsyl-vania?Beaver, September 27; Philadelphia, October 17; Renovo,November 12. District of Columbia?Washington, October 13. Vir-ginia^?Lawrenceville, October 12. North Carolina?Raleigh, Oc-tober 17. South Carolina?Mount Pleasant, November 7. GeorgiaSavannah, October 19. Florida?Pensacola, November 2.Casual records.?While the yellow-billed cuckoo may be consideredonly as a casual visitor to Bermuda, an extraordinary invasion wasrecorded on October 9, 1849, when thousands of individuals suddenlyappeared in all parts of the island; a few more have been subse-quently reported. During the period from 1825 to 1921 it was re-corded fully a dozen times from England, Scotland, Ireland, andWales, all these occurrences being in fall and mostly during October.One was taken at Bois de Lessines, Belgium, in October 1874, andone was collected at Turin, Italy, on October 28, 1883. Two occur-rences have been recorded from the southern part of France, butthere is some question that they were correctly identified.Egg dates.?Arizona : 13 records, June 28 to August 24 ; 7 records,July 19 to August 22.California : 55 records. May 15 to August 20 ; 28 records, June 17to July 10, indicating the height of the season.Florida: 19 records, April 12 to August 25; 10 records, April 16to May 16.Illinois : 39 records. May 20 to July 19 ; 20 records, June 4 to 26.New York: 23 records. May 24 to August 19; 12 records, June 4to 11.Pennsylvania : 13 records, June G to July 29.Texas: 34 records, March 22 to June 30; 17 records, May 6 toJune 5.
CALIFOENIA CUCKOO 67COCCYZUS AMERICANUS OCCIDENTALIS RidjwayCALIFORNIA CUCKOOPlate 6HABITSThis western race of our common yellow-billed cuckoo has beenseparated on very slight average characters, hardly worthy of recog-nition in nomenclature. I am inclined to agree with Harry S.Swarth (1929), who says:Between the eastern and western races of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo there isa slight average difference m size, the western bird being the larger and witha somewhat heavier bill. There is a rather wide range of variation in specimensfrom any one locality, * * * and the largest eastern birds do not fall farshort of the maximum measurements of western specimens. Birds from thePacific coast are the largest, those from central Arizona near the type localityof occidentalis (the Santa Rita Mountains) are intermediate in size. The sub-species would have a better claim to recognition if restricted to the Pacificcoast. * * * The subspecies is certainly as slightly differentiated as anyin our Check-list, and I feel that no violence to the facts would result fromsuppression of the name.The California cuckoo is nowhere abundant but seems to be gen-erally distributed, in suitable localities, throughout its range fromBritish Columbia to Lower California and other parts of Mexico. Insouthern California, its favorite haunts seem to be the willow thicketsand groves along the beds of streams, or in willow-bottom sloughs,such as the famous Nigger Slough, which formerly existed near LosAngeles. Alfred C. Shelton (1911) describes a favorite haunt inSonoma County, Calif., as follows : "In the locality of which I write,about five miles southeast of Sabastopol, this stream, known locallyas the 'Lagoon', becomes, after some winter storm, a turbulent river,flooding acres upon acres of bottom land. In summer its course ismarked by a chain of long, rather narrow ponds, many of whichare deep. The banks, and much of the intervening space betweenthese ponds, are covered with a thick growth of willow, small ashand scrub oak, while the whole is tangled together with an under-growth of poison oak, wild blackberry and various creepers, forming,as it were, an impenetrable jungle, hanging far out over the water."/Spring.?Mr. Shelton (1911) has this to say about the springmovements of the California cuckoo:Of all migratory birds breeding in this vicinity, the Cuckoo is the last toarrive in the spring, usually appearing during the latter part of May or thefirst week of June. Upon its arrival, this bird keeps to the higher land, amongthe oaks and other timber, for a period of two or three weeks before retiringto the willow bottoms to breed. During this period it is wild and shy and
68 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMdifficult to approach. Most active iu the early morning, its characteristic note,a loud, clear "kow-kow-kow," may be heard coming from some tree or groupof trees, and perchance an answering "kow-kow-liow," may come from anothertree, some distance away. * * *After the birds retire to the willow bottoms to breed, their entire attitudechanges. When watched and studied in the seclusion of their brush grownhaunts, while engrossed with the cares of their domestic duties, the Cuckooscease to be the wild, shy birds of the upland timber. The familiar "kow-kow-kow" is now forsaken for anotlier note, a low guttural note, "kulc-lcuk-knli,"always uttered by a brooding bird and is the most common call of the cuckooduring the breeding season.Courfshi'p.?J, H. Bowles (Dawson and Bowles, 1909) writes:
"While standing in an open ATOodland listening to a pair of Cuckooscalling to each other, I saw the male suddenly fly past with a largegreen worm in his bill. He flew directly to the female, who wasperched in a tree a few yards distant, and for a moment or two theysat motionless a few inches apart looking at each other. The malethen hovered lightly over his mate and, settling gently upon hershoulders, gracefully bent over and placed the worm, in her bill. Itwas a pretty and daintily performed piece of love-making,"Nesting.?The nesting habits of the California cuckoo are muchlike those of its eastern relative. In California its favorite nestingsites are in willow thickets in the river bottoms, or in, such swampylowlands as those referred to above. D. E. Brown writes to me thatit is a rare bird in western Washington, and says : "It is found mostlyin willow swamps, on the shores of fresh-water lakes, and alongstreams where the underbrush is thick. I have seldom seen it veryfar away from fresh water and never in real thick woods. It is alate arrival and does not begin nest building until about the fourthof July. I have found about a dozen occupied nests and only one ofthese was earlier than the above date ; this one w^as on June 19. Allthese nests were in willow or wild-rose bushes, except one which wasin a spirea bush. All nests were 2 to 8 feet from the ground, or waterwhen built in swamps. The nest is a very frail, small affair composedof twigs loosely put together and lined with finer twigs and some-times a few leaves. Most of the nests that I have seen have been sovery flat and small that they would be exceedingly hard to find ifthe birds were not on them."A nest in the Thayer collection, taken near Kirkland, Wash., onJuly 7, 1909, was found in an open space in a fir forest in low ground,which was dotted with a second growth of fir and some Osmaroniaand Spiraea; it was placed on a branch of a fir on the exposed sideof the tree, 9 feet from the ground ; it was made of old fir twigs andlined with fresh fir twigs. I have heard of other Washington nestsin fir trees.
CALIFORNIA CUCKOO 69Major Bendire (1895) says:The nests here [Arizona] were placed in willow or mesquite thickets, from10 to 15 feet from the ground, and they were usually fairly well concealed bythe surrounding foliage. * * * if the California Cuckoo showed the sameparasitic habit of occasionally depositing one or more of its eggs in the nestsof other birds, as its eastern relatives are now and then known to do, I believethat I should have observed the fact in southern Arizona. Here I found eightof their nests with eggs, and fully five hundred nests of smaller birds, whichnested in similar localities among the willow thickets and mesquite bushes,overrun with vines, in the creek bottoms, but not a single instance of parasitismcame under my observation.Wilson C. Hanna (1937) has published an interesting paper on thenesting habits of the California cuckoo in the San Bernardino Valley,Calif., with a photograph of a nest containing the unusual numberof seven eggs ; he writes
:
I have rather complete notes on twenty-four nests that I have examinedin the field, six along Warm Creek and eighteen along the Santa Ana River,and with two exceptions all were in willow trees. In one case the nest was11 feet up in an alder tree next to the trunk, and in the other case SO feetup in a Cottonwood tree on top of a bare limb partly supported by a few twigsand therefore conspicuous. The last mentioned nest was ten feet higher thanany other nest I have seen. Six of the nests in willows were either partlysupported by or covered with wild grape vines, another nest was well con-cealed in the center of live mistletoe, while still another was well hidden inpoison oak that was growning over the dead willow tree. A few nests wereplaced next to the trunks of trees, but by far the most common location waswell out on a horizontal or leaning limb. The average height above groundor water was less than thirteen feet and two were only four feet up.A good supply of rope and a ladder were necessary for examining some of thenests without disturbing them or the surroundings.Nests were always loose structures, of coarse twigs for a foundation, some-times with a little superimposed grape-vine bark, cottonwood bark, or rootlets.In some cases there v/as no other lining and eggs could be seen through thebottom of the nest; but usually there were fresh or old leaves, bark strips,or willow cotton. In only one nest was there a feather in the lining. Oftenthe nests were much longer in one dimension than the other, in one case fourinches wide and twelve inches long.Eggs.?The California cuckoo lays usually three or four eggs, occa-sionally only two. These are indistinguishable from those of theeastern yellow-billed cuckoo and average only slightly larger. Themeasurements of 43 eggs average 31.1 by 23,1 millimeters; the eggsshowing the four extremes measure 35.5 by 23.5, 33,5 by 25, and 27.5by 21 millimeters.Food.?Bendire (1895) says that in a brood that he watched, theyoung were fed "always with a large black cricket (Anabus simplex orfuriniratus) * * *. They picked most of these repulsive-lookingcreatures from grass stalks and low shrubs on which they were feed-
70 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMing, and although there were numbers of them to be found all around,as well as in camp, they generally went off some little distance to getthem."Mr. Swarth (1929) says that a female, collected in Arizona, "con-tained in its stomach two green caterpillars and a lizard 100 milli-meters long, the latter swallowed entire and rolled into a coil. Thisseems a startling diet for a tree-dwelling cuckoo, but there is at leastone other instance reported, also from the vicinity of Tucson, of alizard being taken by one of these birds."COCCYZUS ERYTHROPTHALMUS (Wilson)BLACK-BILLED CUCKOOPlJ^TES 8-11HABITSThe black-billed cuckoo is not so widely distributed as the yellow-billed, being confined in the breeding season to practically thenorthern half of the United States and southern Canada east of theRocky Mountains. Within this range it seems to be commoner north-ward and rarer southward than the other species, ranging farthernorth and not so far south.In appearance and habits our two cuckoos are very much alike, andtheir haunts are similar ; both are often found together, or in similarplaces, though the black-billed is rather more of a woodland birdand rather more retiring than the yellow-billed. William Brewster(1906) says that in the Cambridge region it is "more given to haunt-ing extensive tracts of dry upland woods and to nesting in wildapple trees, Virginia junipers and barberry bushes in remote rockypastures such as those which lie scattered along the crest andsides of the high ridge between Arlington and Waverley."Courtship.?Willmm Brewster (1937a) writes: "On July 15, 1908,1 witnessed the coition of two Black-billed Cuckoos in woods nearBethel, Maine. It took place on a branch only three or four feetabove the ground. Although performed listlessly and intermittently,it was singularly protracted, for the two birds remained together atleast four or five minutes, and did not finally separate until dis-turbed by my approach, when the male flew away and presently sangonce. The female stayed quietly on her perch until I got nearenough to see that she was a fully adult bird."Nesting.?Most of the New England nests on which I have datawere placed at low elevations, 2 to 4 feet above ground, in varioussmall trees, bushes, or thickets. My first nest was the highest, 10feet up, in the top of a leaning black birch in a strip of swampywoods and brushy thickets along a small brook. Another was 8
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO 71feet from the ground in a dense thicket of shrubbery and black-berry vines. Three nests were in small white pines, 3 to 4 feet up,in rather open spaces overgrown with various shrubs and small treesnear the edges of the woods; the nests were placed on horizontalbranches, against the trunk, and well concealed among the densebranches. Near Asquam Lake in New Hampshire I saw two nestsin thick clumps of mountain-laurel in some dense and heavy de-ciduous woods, where the land sloped down to the lake; the moun-tain-laurel gi-ew here in extensive patches, but not very high, seldomover 3 or 4 feet; the large and well-made nests were only 2 and 3feet from the ground, but fairly well concealed.Some nests of the black-billed cuckoo are very flimsy affairs, butoften they are much more substantially built than the nests of theyellow-billed cuckoo. Owen Durfee describes in his notes a well-made nest that he found in a clump of chinquapin oaks near a roadin Rehoboth, Mass. It was made of oak twigs and dry fern stalks,many of the twigs being fresh, with leaves attached ; it was lined withdry oak leaves and a few fresh ones. It measured 8 inches in outsidediameter and 3 by 3% inches in inside diameter, being hollowed to adepth of 1 inch. There is a beautiful nest in the Thayer collection,taken from a thicket in Lancaster, Mass., 7 feet from the ground;it has a well-made foundation of coarse twigs, tufts of grass, andburs ; and it is profusely lined with the green leaves and the cottonycatkins of the poplar. S. F. Rathbun writes to me of an interestingnest that he found: "The nest was a saucer-shaped affair made en-tirely of the burs from the burdock plant, simply stuck together so asto form a shallow receptacle for the eggs. As a lining for the nesta few dry grasses were used, and the burs with the grasses repre-sented the entire structure. The cuckoo certainly showed ingenuitywhen it made this nest, for it could not have been more simply oreasily constructed."Dr. T. C. Stephens has sent me some fine photographs (pi. 8) ofa black-billed cuckoo's nest taken at the base of a willow sapling, nearthe shore of Lake Goodenough, in Union County, S. Dak., and says:
"I have observed a rather marked tendency for the black-billed cuckooin this region to build its nest within a very few inches of the groundor on the ground. This nest in the photograph was several inchesabove the ground outside the clump, but it might be regarded as aground nest, because there was quite an accumulation of dirt andweed growth immediately below it. Of course, I have found nestsof this species at heights about level with a man's eyes, also."A. Dawes DuBois has sent me the data for eight nests of this cuckoo,as found by him in Tompkins County, N. Y., and Hennepin County,Minn. Two of them were 5 feet above ground, one in the top of abush covered with grape vines on the steep slope of a ravine and the
72 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
other ill a small larch, in the midst of an extensive willow thicket,half a foot from the trunk of the tree on a branch where two branch-lets were attached. One of the lowest two was not over a foot aboveground, among weeds 2 feet high ; the nest was supported by a smalldead branch that had fallen from a tree and lay hidden in the weeds.Others were at intermediate heights in more normal situations. Thenest in the small larch tree he describes as made first of some cottonyseed pods (ripened willow catkins), then a main structure of woodytwigs, and lined with finer twigs, a few grasses and bits of thecottony seed pods; two tufts of dry grass, with roots attached, wereat opposite sides of the rim.Major Bendire (1895) says:The nests of the Black-billed Cuckoo appear to be slightly better built thanthose of the Yellow-billed species ; the platform is usually constructed of finertwigs, the soft inner bark of cedar, fine rootlets, weed stems, etc., and there isgenerally more lining. This consists of the aments of oak, white and blackash, and maple, willow catkins, and the flowers of the cudweed or everlastingiChiaphaliuni), dried leaves, and similar materials. The majority of the nestsare placed in rather low situations, mostly not over 6 feet from the ground, onhorizontal limbs of bushy evergreens, pines, cedars, and hemlocks, or in decidu-ous trees and shrubs, such as the box elder, chestnut, thorn apple, and beechtrees; also in hedges, briar and kalmia patches, occasionally on old logs, andnow and then even on the gi'ouud.A rather high nest was found by P. G. Howes (1908) near Stam-ford, Conn. It was about 15 feet from the ground, at the extremityof a limb of "a scrubby apple tree at the foot of a hay-covered field."He says that, in his experience, the nest "has always been lined withmaiden-hair ferns."H. W. Flint, of Stamford, Conn., in a letter to Major Bendire(1895), mentions a still higher nest, and says: "I know of one spotin this vicinity where the Black-billed Cuckoo might almost be saidto breed in colonies?a sloping hillside near a traveled road. Here Ihave found seven nests of this species within an hour, none of themplaced over 3 feet from the ground. I have also frequently foundtheir nest on a fallen limb, the top of which was resting upon under-brusli. As an exception to their low nesting, I once found a nest con-taining two well-feathered young and two fresh eggs over 18 feetfrom the ground, placed in the top of a cedar tree, in a dense thicketof other cedars."As already mentioned under the preceding species, both cuckoosoften lay their eggs in each other's nests. Thomas Mcllwraith (1894)mentions three cases of parasitism on the part of the bhick-billedcuckoo, as observed by Dr. C. K. Clarke, of Kingston, Ontario; hesays:
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO 73The first birds Dr. Clarke observed being imposed upon were a pair of chippingsparrows, who raised the young cuckoo at the expense of the family.Next came a pair of yellow warblers, whose prot(!:g6 soon crowded out thelegitimate occupants of the nest. They were raised from the ground and placedwithin reach, but the big boy required all the attention of the foster-parents,and the others died. During the whole period, the old cuckoo was always to befound flitting about in a restless manner, as if she had some doubt in regard tothe ability of the warblers to take care of her child.The third case was another pair of chipping sparrows, in whose nest the cuckoowas observed sitting, and from wliich she did not move till the observers almosttouched her. The result was the same as in the other cases. The youngcuckoo threw the sparrows out as soon as he had sti-ength to do so.Eggs of the black-billed cuckoo have also been found in nests ofthe wood pewee, cardinal, cedar waxwing, catbird, and wood thrush.Under the preceding species will be found a note, published by J. L.Davison (1887), describing the finding of a nest occupied by a robin,a yellow-billed cuckoo, and a mourning dove. Bendire (1895) pub-lished an almost identical account of such a remarkable occurrence,on the authority of the same observer, but with the black-billed sub-stituted for the yellow-billed cuckoo. It seems hardly likelythat such an unusual happening could occur with both species in ex-actly the same way, and leaves us in doubt as to which species ofcuckoo was involved.Eggs.?The black-billed cuckoo commonly lays 2 or 3 eggs; sets of4 or 5 may sometimes be the product of a single pair; but the largernumbers that have been found in their nests, 6, 7, or even 8 eggs, wereprobably laid by two or perhaps three females, as these birds arenotoriously careless about laying in each other's nests. Bendire(1895) says: "The eggs of the Black-billed Cuckoo are more nearlyoval than elliptical oval, and shorter and rounder than those of theYellow -billed Cuckoo, and much more deeply colored. Like these,they are unspotted; the shell is thin and fine grained, with little orno gloss. Their color is diflficult to describe exactly, varying fromnile blue to pale beryl green, and occasionally the shell shows a de-cidedly marbled appearance, caused by different shades running intoeach other. * * * Aside from their deeper color, they are alsoreadily distinguished from eggs of the Yellow-billed Cuckoo by theirsmaller size."Eggs that I have seen in collections I should describe as "paleglaucous green," "dull opaline green," or "microline green" and vary-ing from oval to elliptical-oval. Some of these, as well as some ofthose included in the following measurements, may be yellow-billedcuckoos' eggs, as the two are probably not always recognizable withcertainty. The measurements of 54 eggs, presumably of this species,178223?40 a
74 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMaverage 27.18 by 20.57 millimeters; the eggs showing the four ex-tremes measure 30.48 by 22.86, 22.61 by 18.80, and 25.40 by 18.29millimeters.Young.?Incubation is shared by both sexes and lasts for about 14days. As the eggs are often laid at infrequent intervals, it is not unus-ual to find j'^oung birds of different ages, or even eggs and young, inthe same nest. Both sexes assist in the care of the young and aredevoted parents ; even when an egg is hatched by a foster parent, themother cuckoo does not seem entirely to lose interest in her young-ster, as related above. On the other hand, William H. Moore (1902a)
,
of Scotch Lake, New Brunswick, says: "I have known this bird todesert its young when the nest was molested, and after the youngdied they were covered with leaves by the adults." Cuckoos are care-less about removing the cast-off shells, which are often found in thenest after the young have hatched. The young remain in the nest7 to 9 days after hatching and then become quite precocial. While inthe nest the young are fed by their parents in a rather peculiar man-ner, of which Dr. Thomas. S. Roberts (1932) writes:When the old bird returns, the food, which is very likely to be live cater-pillars, is concealed in the throat. As a nestling raises its head with openmouth and rapidly vibrating wings, the parent thrusts its bill deeply into theopen maw and the young bird grasps securely the smooth bill of the old bird, inwhich action it is greatly aided by several soft papillae or disks in the roof ofthe mouth. Then, with a slow, pumping motion, the squirming caterpillars aretransferred with some difficulty from one mouth to another. The process is aslow one, the birds being attached a minute or more and the transfer aided,apparently, by a sucking effort on the part of the nestling.When a young Cuckoo opens its mouth widely there are visible, in the rocfof the mouth, a number of large, flat-topped, white papillae or tubercles, ar-ranged symmetrically, the function of which is plainly to make it possible forthe nestling to maintain its hold on the parent's bill, which is smooth andtapering. A small finger-tip inserted well down into the open, upturned mouthof a nestling is seized tightly and a sucking motion is distinctly perceptible.[PI. 10.]Prof. Francis H. Herrick (1935) has made a thorough study of thehome life of the black-billed cuckoo, and I cannot do better than toquote a few of his remarks on the behavior of the young. Afterdescribing the peculiar appearance of the newly hatched young, hesays:More remarkable than anything about its appearance, however, is the muscu-lar vigor and endurance the cuckoo displays at this tender age, for it seems to beable to withstand heat, hunger, and general neglect that would be fatal to theyoung of most wild birds. I soon found by experiment that when barely threehours out of its shell this little cuckoo could hang suspended by a leg or evenby a single toe for upwards of a quarter of a minute, and that it could raise it-self up until its bill was well over the twig that it grasped with both feet ; andin a short time it was able to raise itself on to the twig, or even to draw itself
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO 75
up with the power of one leg, which implies an extraordinary muscular develop-ment. * * * Though born blind and essentially naked, the young black-billis neither deaf nor dumb, and in proportion to its size it is probably the strongestand most enterprising altricial nestling on the North American continent. * * *Like other nestlings, the cuckoo lies flat, with toes clenched, and holds to itsfragile nest with a firm grip. Attempt to remove it, and it is likely to pull itsnest to pieces rather than loose its hold; or it may even drag out a fellow-nestling, reminding one of crayfishes or lobsters, in the handling of which onemay also get a living chain. Should you succeed in displacing a bird, its clawswill rapidly open and close in its desperate search for any object to clasp, for acontact stimulus afforded by any solid body can alone satisfy this strongreflex. * * *At the age of about six days the nestling cuckoo has reached that peculiartransitory state which we may call the "quill" or feather-tube stage. * *Towards the end of this brief and unique stage the behavior of the youngbird changes in marked and rapid fashion. It indulges in new attitudes,acquires new call- and alarm-notes, shows fear, and begins those preening orcombing movements which are to effect a relatively sudden and altogether sur-prising change in its appearance. * * *In one instance the first preening action was noticed on the sixth day ; there-after this kind of activity became frequent, and the bird would comb every
"quill" within reach, drawing the mandibles over it from base to apex. Then,with apparent suddenness, at the close of the seventh day the transparent hornysheaths began to give way at their base?instead of wearing off gradually fromapex to base in the usual fashion?and were raked off by the mouthful. * * *Fear may become manifest as early as the sixth day, when a frightened birdwill sometimes clear the nest at a bound and, seizing a branch with both feet,hold firmly to it. Should it drop to the ground, it can make off with surprisingspeed. If captured and held, it will emit loud, explosive squeals, than whichnothing seems to arouse its parents to quicker attack or bolder measures. Re-place it in the nest, and it spreads its wings, stiffens, and lies flat with everyfeather-tube on end ; and it will repeat these defensive measures as often as itis touched or disturbed. * * *When from seven to nine days old, with half of its feathers unsheathed, thecuckoo suddenly leaves its nest and enters upon a climbing period, which lastsabout a fortnight or until it is able to fly. At one of my observation stationsI saw three young birds leave their nest in succession, and the procedure inthe case of the oldest one was particularly interesting. This bird, which hadbeen sitting in the bright sunshine, for the day was not uncomfortably warm,of a sudden moved to one side of its platform. After having combed off severalmouthfuls of feather-sheaths, it sat upright for some minutes and gazed intoits outer world. Then, directing its attention to a small branch and duckingits head as if contemplating flight, with a leap it cleared the nest, and, catchinghold of a twig, with both feet, it swung free with acrobatic dexterity. In an-other moment it had pulled itself up and was comfortably perched. If such afirst perch is placed in the shade and the young bird is promptly fed, it maykeep to it for a long time; but it can move about, and should it drop to theground, it can mount to safety again.The vertical position assumed by young cuckoos, probably as ahiding pose, has been noted by several observers, but the followingincident reported to me in a letter from Frederic H. Kennard, isquite unusual; he says: "I had just been investigating a big highbush
76 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMblueberry bush, looking for a nest, when I discovered, to my surprise,a fledgling black-billed cuckoo, squatting on a twig about 6 feet fromthe ground. The little bird, which really was not able to fly, wassquatting on a limb, just as little birds ordinarily do ; his wing feath-ers were fairly well developed, but his tail was only about a quarterof an inch long. When I parted the branches a trifle, so that wecould see him better, and finding out that he was discovered, hepromptly assumed an almost perpendicular position, with his neckstretched out almost unbelievably and his bill almost straight in theair; and there he sat, immovable, with his bill in the air like a bit-tern, only oscillating a trifle when the branch on which he was sittingwas disturbed a little by the breeze."My youngest son, Jack, being interested in the peculiarities ofcuckoos' feet, attempted to pick him off the limb; the little birdfluttered to the ground, where he picked him up. Wlien we had dulyexamined and discussed the arrangement of his toes, Jack endeavoredto put the little fellow back exactly where he had been when wefirst disturbed him. Then, as he endeavored to replace him on thelimb, he suddenly went limp and, apparently, passed out in his hand,frightened to death, as I supposed. He was perfectly limp and myimpression is that his eyes were closed. Jack finally, in trying toget him to stay on the limb, hung him across the limb by the neck,with his head across one side and his body down the other side.Just then there came a little breeze, the body dropped, and thatlittle bird simply scuttled in under the ferns. It was the most aston-ishing performance that I ever witnessed, first the stake-driverattitude, as a protective position, and then playing dead."Plumages.?Professor Herrick (1935) says of the newly-hatchedyoung cuckoo: "Although most birds emerge from the shell wetwith the amniotic fluid, the cuckoo just mentioned came out quitedry. It was two and one-half inches long and weighed less than aquarter of an ounce (or 7.4 grams). Its skin was coal-black, sparselysprinkled with sharply contrasting snow-white 'hairs'?in realitythe feather-tubes of a rudimentary down which never unfolds. Theseprimitive feather-tubes are later pushed out by those of the juvenalcontour feathers and for about a week are borne upon their tips,thus giving them a peculiar flagellate appearance."When about six days old, the young cuckoo "bristles like thefretful porcupine in every feather-tract"; these bristles are thefeather-tubes of the juvenal plumage, referred to above. At aboutthis age, the young bird begins the "combing" process, by whichthe sheaths of these feather tubes are removed, as described above,and a marvelous change begins to take place in a remarkably shorttime, as the sheaths are removed and fall in a shower in and about
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO 77the nest. Professor Herrick (1935) says: "Thus at one stroke oneor more of the juvenal contour feathers are exposed and quickly fluffout in all their shapely proportions. * * * The change actuallyoccupies about twelve hours, and it is really not complete, since thesheaths of the wing- and tail-quills flake off gradually, as in otherbirds, and those feathers of head and neck out of reach of the 'comb'remain sheathed for a considerable time longer."By the time that the young bird leaves the nest, at the age of 8or 9 days, it is in nearly full juvenal plumage; the wings are fairlywell grown, but the tail is still very short. In this plumage the softplumage above is "buffy brown," each feather tipped with white;the under parts are silvery white, tinged with pale gray on the bellyand with pale buff on the breast and throat. During late sum-mer and early fall, most, if not all, of this juvenal contour plumageis molted and replaced by the first winter plumage, but the flightfeatliers of the wings and tail are retained until spring. This firstwinter plumage is much like that of the adult, but it is more brown-ish on the head and back and more greenish olive on the scapularsthan in adults; the throat is more buffy and the upper breast moregrayish buff than in the adult; the young bird's tail is quite different,the grayish white tips are smaller and are not bordered inwardlywith the dusky space, which is clearly visible in the adult tail. Themolts are apparently the same as in the yellow-billed cuckoo; theadult plumage seems to be acquired before the young birds returnfrom their first winter in the south, but we have no specimens show-ing a spring molt.Food.?The black-billed cuckoo is just as good a caterpillar de-stroyer as the yellow-billed; in fact the food habits of the twospecies are almost identical in all respects. An abundance of cater-pillars in a locality is very likely to bring with it an invasion ofcuckoos. Frank L. Farley writes to me: "As far as I am aware,the blaclc-billed cuckoo was unknown in central Alberta until thesummer of 1923. That year the central portion of the Provincewas infested with tent caterpillars, which, in 1924-25, assumed plagueproportions. Entire bluffs of poplar trees, several acres in extent,were entirely denuded of their leaves, while houses and other build-ings were overrun with the pests." In June 1924 the cuckoos beganto appear for the first time, birds entirely unknown to the residents."Although caterpillars gradually disappeared after 1925, cuckooswere reported from widely separated parts of central Alberta, themost northerly one being about 150 miles north of Camrose, which isin latitude 53? N. The presence of cuckoos and caterpillars in thesame territory during these years would tend to bear out the claimsof other observers, that the insects are particularly relished by these
78 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMbirds, which, in some uncanny manner, are able to locate infestedterritory far removed from their usual place of residence."Forbush (1927) says:In seasons when caterpillars of any species are abundant, cuckoos usuallybecome common in the infested localities. They follow the caterpillars, andwhere such food is plentiful, the size of their broods seems to increase. Duringan invasion of forest tent caterpillars in Stoneham, Massachusetts, in May,1898, Mr. Frank H. Mosher watched one of these birds that caught and ate 30of these insects inside of five minutes. He saw another in Maiden eat 29,rest a few minutes and then eat 14 more. In July, 1899, he reported a familyof these birds in a locality infested with the gipsy moth, and said that theywere eating large quantities of gipsy caterpillars. In June, 1895, Mr. HenryShaw reported great numbers of these cuckoos in Dorchester feeding on thesame pests. The late Professor Walter B. Barrows, of Michigan, an extremelyconservative ornithologist, is responsible for the statement that in several in-stances remains of over 100 tent caterpillars have been taken from a singlecuckoo's stomach. The Black-billed Cuckoo, because more common than theYellow-billed, is the species that most commonly attacks this insect in NewEngland orchards. During an invasion of army worms. Professor S. A. Forbesfound that 95 per cent of the food of this species consisted of that caterpillar.F. H. King (1883), writing of the food of the black-billed cuckooin Wisconsin, says : "Of thirteen specimens examined, nine had eatencaterpillars?among them were eight of the fall web-worms {Hy-phantria textor), thirtj^-three of the oak caterpillars {Dryocampasenatoria)^ one of the lo caterpillars {Satumia io), six of the antiopacaterpillars (Vanessa antiopa), and one of the caterpillars of thearchippus butterfly {Dartxiis archippus). One contained five larvaeof the large saw-fly {Cyrabex a^nericana) ; six, twenty-five grass-hoppers ; one, a cricket ; two, ten beetles ; and two, two harvest-men."Other authors have charged this cuckoo with eating minute rhol-lusks and other small animals, fishes and aquatic larvae, fruits andberries, and even the eggs and young of small birds. On the latterpoint, Henry D. Minot (1877) says that "they do great mischief indestroying the eggs of other useful birds. Like arrant cowards, asthey are, they take opportunities to approach stealthily the nests ofmany birds, whom they would be afraid to encounter, and then feaston the eggs of the absent parents, after which they hurry away.They are scarcely less destructive in this way than the black snakes,though I have never known them to kill young birds."Behavior.?The two cuckoos are so much alike in haunts, habits,and behavior that most of what I have said about the yellow-billedwould apply equally well to this species. The black-billed is rathermore SAvift on the wing than the other, but it flies in the same grace-ful manner. It is the same shy recluse of the shady retreats, amongthe dense foliage of the woods and shade trees, unafraid to frequent
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO 79the orchards and gardens in search for its food, but shunning anyintimacy with human beings ; we hear its wandering voice but seldomsee more than a fleeting glimpse of its graceful form as it fades awayinto the shadows.In defense of its eggs or young the black-billed cuckoo is oftenquite courageous. Olive Thorne Miller (1892) writes charmingly ofher experiences with an incubating pair of these cuckoos ; she watchedthem change places on the nest, and found the female quite confiding,but the male never became reconciled to her presence:It happened that I arrived when the mother was away, and the head of thehousehold in charge. No sooner did I appear on the path than he flew off thenest with great bustle, thus betraying himself at once; but he did not deserthis post of protector. He perched on a branch somewhat higher than myhead, and five or six feet away, and began calling, a low "coo-oo." With everycry he opened his mouth very wide, as though to shriek at the top of hisvoice, and the low cry that came out was so ludicrously inadequate to hisapparent effort that it was very droll. In this performance he made fine dis-play of the inside of his mouth and throat, which looked, from where I stood,like black satin. * * *Finding that his voice did not drive me away, the bird resorted to anothermethod; he tried intimidation. First he threw himself into a most curiousattitude, humping his shoulders and opening his tail like a fan, then spreadinghis wings and resting the upper end of them on his tail, which made at theback a sort of scoop effect. Every time he uttered the cry he lifted wings andtail together, and let them fall slowly back to their natural position. It wasthe queerest bird performance I ever saw.On another day, she says : "We had not waited long when the headof the cuckoo family appeared. He saw us instantly, and, I regret tosay, was no more reconciled to our presence than he had been on theprevious occasion ; but he showed his displeasure in a diiierent way.He rushed about in the trees, crying, 'cuck-a-ruck, cuck-a-ruck,'running out even to the tip of slender branches that seemed tooslight to bear his weight. When his feelings entirely overcame himhe flew away, and though we remained fifteen minutes, no one cameto the nest."E. A. Samuels (1883) writes:Like the other, the Black-billed Cuckoo is very cowardly, and is quicklydriven from the neighborhood of the nest of almost any of the other birds. Ifa robin, or other bird of equal size, discover one of these, to him pirates, iuthe vicinity of his nest, he immediately assaults the intruder, with loud outcries,pouncing upon him, and pecking with great ferocity. Others of his neighbors,who are near, join in the attack; the Cuckoo, in retreating, dives into therecesses of a stone wall, or the first secure retreat available; very seldomtaking to his wings, as another bird would do. I have known of a cuckoobeing driven into a barn by a Blue-bird (S. sialis), who sat perching on a fenceoutside for several minutes, keeping his enemy prisoner ; and the latter, whenpursued and captured by myself, preferred being my prisoner to facing hisenemy outside.
80 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMVoice.?One cannot ahvays distinguish with certainty all the notesof the black-billed cuckoo from all those of the yellow-billed. Manyof the notes are much alike in both species. The notes of the black-billed are, as a rule, softer and more liquid than those of the yellow-billed and not so deep-toned.The ordinary "song" of the black-billed is preceded by a gurglingnote, and the rest of the long song is uttered in regularly measuredtime, not retarded at the end, as is that of the yellow-billed, and thenotes are given in couplets or triplets, one syllable in each set beingaccented. Dr. Charles W. Townsend (1920a) describes it very wellas follows : "The full song may be described as a preliminary harshclearing of the throat followed bj'^ from six to twelve short coughswhich in turn are succeeded by the more pleasing doublets and trip-lets of cows. The Yellow-billed Cuckoo repeats his cotvs or cowks inregular order without dividing them into sets and they sound aswoodeny as if he were striking a plank with a mallet."Aretas A. Saunders (1929) says: "The bird has a variety of calls.One consists of a gurgling note followed by single notes in eventime, 'krak-ika kuh kuh kuh kuh kuh kuh kuh kuh'. Another is aseries of groups consisting of two to six notes repeated many times,with one of the notes strongly accented, such as ^kuksi kuksi kuka,'' or^kakukaku ka^^^aka kakukakii.^ I have known a bird to repeatsuch phrases over a hundred times without stopping."The notes of the black-billed cuckoo are often given on the nest orwhile the bird is in flight, and they may be heard at all hours of theday or night. Both cuckoos are said to be more noisy just before arain, hence the name "rain crow."Mr. Brewster (193Ta) says that "both species coo in the same sub-dued, mournful, dovelike tones, but when so engaged, the Yellow-bill always utters only a single note at a time, and then waits at leasta second or two before following it with another precisely similar;whereas the cooing notes of the Black-bill are invariably doubled ortrebled or quadrupled, or perhaps even quintupled, yet separatedfrom one another within such grouping by scarcely appreciablepauses."Gerald H. Thayer (1903) has given an interesting account of whathe calls "the mid-summer, mid-night, mid-sky gyrations of the Black-billed Cuckoo, as noted by my father and me for three consecutiveseasons in the southwestern corner of New Hampshire":Several years before we discovered the noeturiuil-flight pUeuomenon, webegan to be puzzled by the extreme frequency of Cuckoo calls on summeruights. * * * They uttered both the coio-cow notes and the rolling gutturalcall ; but the guttural was much the commoner of the two, except on dark.foggy nights, when the case was usually reversed. * * * rjij^g birds wereoften so far up as to be only faintly audible when directly overhead, with no
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO 81
obstructions interposed ; and this on a still night would seem to mean auelevation of at least a hundred and fifty yards. They sometimes flew lower,however, and on cloudy nights often moved about barely above the tree-tops.* * * On the evening of July 11?a pitch-dark evening with a thunder-shower lowering,?they were remarkably noisy, both sitting in trees andflying high in air. The seated ones, of which I heard only two, made the ooiv-cow notes, while all the flying ones made the liquid gurgle. I heard this noteoverhead between thirty and forty times in the course of about three hours,during half of which time I was afoot on the road.Field marks.?This bird may be recognized as a cuckoo by its size,shape, and general coloration. It can be distinguished from the yel-low-billed cnckoo by the absence of the distinguishing marks of thelatter, the cinnamon-riifons in the wings, and the conspicuously black-and-white lateral tail feathers.The wings of tlie black-billed cuckoo are practically uniform incolor with its back ; and the lateral tail feathers are dark gray, withinconspicuous, grayish-white, smaller tips, bordered inwardly with adusky spot. The wholly black bill and the red eyelids can be seenonly at short range. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southern Canada and the United States east of the RockyMountains, south in winter to northwestern South America. Acci-dental in Italy, the Azores, and Ireland.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the black-billed cuckooextends north to southern Saskatchcvran (Jolinstone Lake, Muscow,and Indian Head) ; southern Manitoba (Carberry, Portage la Prairie,and Shoal Lake) ; northern INIinnesota (Crooked Lake) ; southernOntario (probably Goulais Bay, Toronto, and Stirling) ; Quebec(Hull, Montreal, probably Quebec, and probably Kamouraska) ; NewBrunswick (Scotch Lake) ; probably Prince Edward Island (NorthRiver); and Nova Scotia (Wolfville and Pictou). From this pointthe range extends south along the seaboard to North Carolina(Raleigh and Winston-Salem) ; Tennessee (Beersheba Springs andNashville) ; northwestern Arkansas (Rogers) ; eastern Kansas (Law-rence and Clearwater) ; Nebraska (Red Cloud, Kearney, and Antioch)
;
and southeastern Wyoming (Wlieatland). West to eastern Wyoming(Wheatland and Dayton) ; eastern Montana (Terry) ; and Saskatche-wan (Johnstone Lake).The species has been detected in summer on several occasions westof its breeding range. Among these are: Colorado (Fort Morgan,Clear Creek, Fort Collins, and Wray) ; Wyoming (Laramie) ; Mon-tana (Fort Keogh, Knowdton, and Billings) ; and western Saskatche-wan (Eastend, Skull Creek, Medicine Hat, and Big Stick Lake). OnJune 23, 1924, a partially completed nest was found near Camrose,Alberta, a range extension that for the time being must be consid-
82 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
ered unusual (see remarks under "Food"). The species also was re-corded at Godbout, Quebec, on August 11, 1885.Winter range.?Available information indicates that in winter thisspecies is concentrated in northwestern South America: Colombia(Antroquia, Medellin, and Bogota) ; Ecuador (Guapulo, La Caro-lina, Daule, Puna Lake, and Lechugal) ; and northern Peru(Huamachuco).Sfring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Florida
?
Hastings, April 13; Eau Gallic, April 27; Pensacola, May 2. Ala-bama?Scottsboro, April 18 : Barachias, April 22. Georgia?Atlanta,April 24; Athens, April 27. South Carolina?Frogmore, April 24;Spartanburg, April 29. North Carolina?Raleigh, April 15; PineyCreek, May 4. Virginia?Blacksburg, April 26; Lynchburg, May 8.District of Columbia?^Washington, April 30. Maryland?Baltimore,April 20. Pennsylvania?Jeffersonville, April 30; Ridgway, May 6;Doylestown, May 9. New Jersej^?^Milltown, May 2 ; Passaic, May 7.New York?INIedina, May 3 ; New York City, May 9 ; Rochester, May15. Connecticut?Fairfield, May 1; Hadlyme, May 4; New Haven,May 7. Rhode Island?Block Island, May 6. Massachusetts?Bel-mont, May 4 ; Marlboro, May 6 ; North Amherst, May 12 ; Danvers,May 12. Vermont?Clarendon, May 12; St. Johnsbury, May 13;Wells River, May 18. New Hampshire?East Westmoreland, May16 ; South Hooksett, May 16 ; Concord, May 21. Maine?South Port-land, May 11; Winthrop, May 15; Waterville, May 20. QuebecMontreal, May 10; Hatley, May 28. New Brunswick?Scotch Lake,May 27. Nova Scotia?Halifax. May 12 ; Wolfville, May 18. Louisi-ana?Avery Island, April 12. Mississippi?Bay St. Louis, April 14.Arkansas?Faj'^etteville, April 30; Broma Towns, May 2. Tennes-see?Knoxville, April 12; Tate, April 26. Kentucky?Lexington,May 1 ; Bowling Green, May 6. Missouri?Jonesburg, May 3 ; Mont-gomery City, May 4; Columbia, May 7. Illinois?Rantoul, April 17;Elgin, May 5; Glen Ellyn, May 7. Indiana?Bloomington, April26; Richmond, April 27; Vincennes, May 7. Ohio?Oberlin,May 1; Columbia, May 2; Upper Sandusky, May 3. MichiganDetroit, May 1; Brant, May 3; Sault Ste. Marie, May 11. OntarioGuelph, April 19; Ottawa, May 7; London, May 9. Iowa?Mc-Gregor, April 24 ; Mason City, April 30 ; Wall Lake, May 3. Wiscon-sin?Racine, May 8; Beloit, May 10; Whitewater, May 11. Minne-sota?Montevideo, April 13; Anoka County, May 5; Excelsior,May 13. Oklahoma?Tulsa, May 3 ; Norman, ISIay 5. Kansas?FortLeavenworth, May 6; Bendena, May 8; Clearwater, May 9. Ne-braska?Valentine, May 1; Red Cloud, May 11; Omaha, May 13.South Dakota?Yankton, May 1 ; Huron, May 13 ; Forestburg, May 15.North Dakota?Grafton, April 25 ; Antler, May 3 ; Jamestown, May
BLACK-BILLED CUCKOO 8323. Manitoba?^Aweme, May 20; Pilot Mound, May 24; Keaburn,May 26. Saskatchewan?Muscow, May 12; Indian Head, May 20,Fall migration.?^Late dates of fall departure are : Manitoba?Mar-garet, September 3; Aweme, September 14. North Dakota?Fargo,September 13; Cando, September 18; Argusville, September 22.South Dakota?Forestburg, September 6 ; Sioux Falls, September 22
;
Lennox, October 14. Kansas?Cimarron, September 2; Osa^Yatomie,September 22. Minnesota?Elk Kiver, September 27; Red Wing,October 2. "Wisconsin?New London, September 24; Racine, Sep-tember 24; Madison, September 26. Iowa?Wall Lake, September28; Osage, October 10; McGregor, October 20. Ontario?Ottawa,September 16; Point Pelee, October 18. Michigan?Charity Island,September 20; Grand Rapids, September 26, Detroit, October 9.Ohio?Saybrook, October 1; Berlin Center, October 12; Columbus,October 15. Indiana?Indianapolis, October 2; Fort Wayne, Octo-ber 12; Bicknell, October 18. Illinois?Rantoul, October 4; LaGrange, October 7; Glen EUyn, October 21. Missouri?Columbia,October 4 ; St. Louis, October 16. Kentucky?Danville, October 5
;
Bowling Green, October 18. Mississippi?Bay St. Louis, October 11.Nova Scotia?Sable Island, September 25. Quebec?Montreal, Sep-tember 5. Maine?Orono, September 21; Winthrop, October 20.New Hampshire?Jefferson, October 3; Durham, October 5. Ver-mont?Wells River, September 14; Woodstock, September 18.Massachusetts?West Groton, September 30; North Truro, October13; Harvard, October 16. Rhode Island?Providence, October 23.Connecticut?New Haven, September 28; East Portland, October 3;Meriden, October 8. New York?Hyde Park, October 6 ; New YorkCity, October 10. New Jersey?Elizabeth, October 3; Sandy Hook,October 5 ; Milltown, October 24. Pennsylvania?McKeesport, Octo-ber 11; Jeffersonville, October 13; Pittsburgh, October 16. Districtof Columbia?Washington, October 28. Virginia?Naruna, October18. North Carolina?Chapel Hill, October 3; Raleigh, October 10;Hendersonville, October 12. Georgia?Atlanta, October 14 ; Thomas-ville, October 21. Alabama?Autauga County, October 16. Florida
?
College Point, September 28 ; Pensacola, October 23.Casual records.?'W\\i\Q the black-billed cuckoo does not migrateregularly through the Caribbean region it has been recorded onDominica (September 30, 1904), Tobago, and Trinidad. Gundlachis alleged to have taken a specimen in May (year?) near Cardenas,Cuba, and there is a somewhat doubtful record from the Isle ofPines on May 11, 1909. Specimens were taken in Bermuda inOctober 1874 and also in April and May 1875. The PontaDelgada Museum has an undated specimen taken at San Miguel,Ponta Delgada, Azores; a specimen taken in 1858 near Lucca, Italy,
84 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMis preserved in the Museum of the University of Pisa ; and one wastaken on September 25, 1871, at Killead, County Antrim, Ireland.Egg dates.?Illinois: 13 records, May 7 to July 20; 7 records,June 1 to 26, indicating the height of the season.Massachusetts: 20 records, May 19 to June 20; 10 records. May 30to June 10.Michigan : 14 records, May 25 to September 14 ; 7 records, June 21to July 20.New York: 23 records. May 11 to July 18; 12 records. May 29to June 9. CUCULUS OPTATUS OPTATUS GouldHIMALAYAN CUCKOOContributed by Edward Charles Stuart BakerHABITSThe Himalayan cuckoo very closely resembles the various racesof the common cuckoo {Cu?iilus canorus) in its general habits, but itis, I think, a more secretive bird, keeping closely to tall trees withdense foliage, so that although one may hear its very distinctivecall on many occasions quite close by it is often y^vy difficult to seeuntil it takes to wing. In Kashmir and the northwest Himalayasit is found in summer at all elevations between 5,000 and 10,000 feetand occasionally to some 2,000 feet higher but, never, I believe, abovethe forest line. In Sikkim it is common in well-forested land be-tween 4,000 and 9,000 feet, while Stevens (1925) records having heardit calling at an elevation of 3,500 feet on May 25, so that it maybreed as low down as this in that part of the Himalayas. In Assamit is very common between the same elevations as in Sikkim, therealso keeping closely to forest, either deciduous, pine, or evergreenwith dense undergrowth. All ornithologists seem to agree as to thenature of the country frequented by this cuckoo. In letters to meA. E. Jones mentions "dense forest," "dense deodar forest" as thebreeding haunts of birds whose eggs he has found; B. B. Osmaston(MS.) found it in "open, well-wooded forest." Mackenzie and Hop-wood (MS.) took eggs in the nests of Acanthopneuste davisoni inthe Chin Hills, in "heavy evergreen forest." The only exception tothis of which I am aware is an egg taken by T. R. Livesey (MS.)found in Kashmir in a nest of Emhenza cia stracheyi in a "well-wooded glade in forest."At all seasons of the year it keeps almost entirely to branches ofhigh trees, some 40 or 50 feet or more from the ground, descendingto the undergrowth only when hunting for nests in which to depositits eggs or for the actual deposition of the &gg. When so em-
HIMALAYAN CUCKOO 85ployed it is, I believe, always silent and, even in its movements,very quiet and secretive unless it is being harassed by small birdswho hunt it just as they do the common cuckoo. I have not seenthis bird feeding in bushes or on the ground even when there arenumerous caterpillars or a flight of termites to tempt it.When on migration also this cuckoo seems to keep to forest or toexceptionally well-wooded country, and I have no record of its hav-ing been found in the open in India, though obviously it mustsometimes pass over such country in its movements from one districtto another, more especially in the northwest.Spring.?In Kashmir and the northwest Himalayas the birdsarrive from the lower hills and the plains adjoining them in April,a few apparently in the first fortnight, but the majority not untilthe last week or so. In Sikkim they arrive a good deal earlier, andStevens (1925) records them as seen at Go])aldhara in the RambongValley about tlie middle of March "when it ascends to an elevationof 7,000 feet," while he heard them calling at the same place asearly as March 12. Farther east in Assam it does not arrive at itsbreeding quarters in the higher hills until about the first week inApril and then only in small numbers. In Burma at elevations ofabout 4,000 feet and over it breeds about a fortnight earlier and isin full call by the last week in March.This cuckoo is possibly only a partial migrant in India, leavingthe higher hills for the broken foothills, where it may be found moreor less throughout the winter, as well as in the plains immediatelyadjoining them. To the east, however, as I show under the fallmigration notes, it is a true migrant. According to La Touche(1931-1936), during the spring migration north the Himalayancuckoo "appears in China from about the 10th April to the endof May," and he records three cuckoos taken at Shaweishan onMay 1, 16, and 17. These birds were presumably on their way northto eastern Siberia or Manchuria.La Touche does not think that this bird breeds anywhere in theCliinese Hills, its place being taken by the local breeding ra^ekelungen&is.The 38 eggs in my collection were taken as follows: Three inApril, 14 in May, 20 in June, none in July, and 1 in August. Theearliest date was April 25, 1915, and the latest August 20, 1914. Atthe same time an egg taken in the Chin Hills on April 30 was on thepoint of hatching, so, in the Burmese Hills, some eggs must be laidin the middle of that month, birds arriving in their breeding hauntsat least a fortnight earlier. Other eggs that have passed throughmy hands were all taken within these dates so far as I have re-corded them, so they may be accepted as confirming my dates formigration.
86 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCourtship.?There is nothing recorded upon this subject but, sofar as I know, it differs in no way from that of the Khasia Hillscuckoo, and both sexes seem to be equally promiscuous in their sexualrelations.Nesting.?This cuckoo is parasitic principally on the small warblersof the PhyllosGopus and Acanthopneuste group, which lay white eggs,either immaculate or speckled slightly with various tints of reddishbrown or red, or the Seicercus group, which lay glossy pure whiteeggs.In my own collection I have eggs taken from the nests of 16 speciesand subspecies of fosterers (see the following list) ; of these the first10 may be considered to be normal fosterers and the latter abnormal.The Himalayan cuckoo does adopt a certain territory but hardlyin the restricted sense that Cuculus canoi^s and its various races do.The principal reason for this is the comparative rarity of the birdsthat she selects as foster parents to her eggs. For instance, althoughthe little Acanthopneuste breeding in the Khasia Hills is a commonbird, it nowhere breeds in the numbers in which birds of the Suya andCisticola genera are found. Perhaps half a dozen pairs may be foundin one big forest of many square miles, and to find even these six isvery hard work. In the same forest another half dozen birds of thegenus Seicermis of various species may be found. These little war-blers of the two genera Acanthopneuste and Seicercus make verysimilar nests, balls of moss, quite green and fresh, which are placedin hollows in banks and generally among the same kind of moss asthat of which the nests are built. They are exceedingly hard to findby human beings and, unless the birds are watched on to the nest,are generally located only when the female is disturbed from it byaccident and doubtless the cuckoo also finds they are difficult to markdown. List of Foster PaeentsPhyUoscopus inornatus humei 2 eggsPhylloscopus prorcgulus simlaae 1 "Acanthopneuste reguloides harterti 13 "Acanthopneuste reguloides davisoni 3 "Acanthopneuste reguloides reguloides 1 "Acanthopneuste occipitatis occipitatis 4 "Seicercus cantator 3 "Seicercus burkii 2 "Seicercus xanthoschista xanthoschista 1 "Seicercus castaneiceps castaneiceps 2 "lanthia rufilata 1 "Niltava sundara sundara 1 "Suya crinigera assamica 1 "Orthotomus atrogularis nitidus 1 "Napothera brevicaudata striata 1 "Emberiza cia stracheyi 1 "
HIMALAYAN CUCKOO 87I have only two small series of three eggs, each of which I believeto have been laid by one cuckoo, one of these being taken in 1909by myself. Of this latter the first two eggs were found on June16 and 18 in a patch of forest in which we marked down three nestsof the Khasia crowned willow warbler, one of which contained nocuckoo's egg. On June 13 we found that the pair of warblers firstseen on May 16 had again built close by their original nest and thenew one contained a third egg, apparently of the same cuckoo, andthree of their own. The nests found on May 16 and 18 were betweena quarter and a half of a mile apart.On another occasion, June 27, 1935. three eggs were taken, one inthe nest of the willow warbler and two others in nests of Seicercus.These were all in the same forest, but only two close together andthe third nearly half a mile away. The eggs, however, appearedobviously to have been laid by the same bird.Eggs.?The eggs of this species of cuckoo are all of the same type,white eggs sparsely marked with tiny black specks, sometimes con-fined to the larger end only. Several oviduct eggs have been taken,the first by Brooks from the oviduct of a female he shot in Kashmiron June 17, and three others by Kattray in 1903 on June 10, 15, and17, respectively. All these were exactly alike and similar to the de-scription given above.The only two exceptions in coloration I have seen are eggs one ofwhich has a faintly green tinge while the other has an equally faintpink tinge. The first of these was taken from a forktaiPs {Enicnrusmaculatus guttatus) nest and the second from that of a tailorbird{Orthotomus atrogularis nitidus).In shape the eggs are rather long ellipses, and the shell is thin andrather fragile for a cuckoo's.Forty-one eggs average in size 20.11 by 14.28 millimeters; maxima25.3 by 16.2 ; minima 19.0 by 13.0 millmieters ; the same number aver-age in weight 141.4 milligrams; maximum 178; minimum 117milligrams.A large double-yolked egg weighs 222 milligrams, while two verysmall, almost pygmy eggs, weigh only 105 and 112 milligrams.The method of the deposition of the eggs is not known, but in manycases they could not possibly be laid direct into the nest. The crownedwillow warbler makes a nest in a hole in among the roots of treeswith so small an entrance and so far in that the cuckoo could not pos-sibly get in to lay her egg nor could she eject it from the cloaca suffi-ciently far to reach the egg chamber and, if she did, it would cer-tainly break. Nests of the genus Seicercus and of Acanthopnetistereguloides are so shaped and situated that though the cuckoo couldnot enter them she could very often eject the eggs into them withoutmuch difficulty by clinging to their tops or sides during the operation.
88 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMYoung.?Nothing is recorded, as to incubation, but I believe itto take only 10 or 11 days, i. e., much the same period as for theeggs of the small warblers the cuckoo selects to cuckold.Ejection of young undoubtedly takes place in the same manner asthat by which it is effected by the common cuckoo, the young cuckoohoistiiig the other occupants of the nest, either eggs or young birds,onto its shoulder and then pushing them over the edge of the nest.I have seen several young birds from two days to a week old in thenests of various warblers, and they have always been alone. Theyoung cuckoo has the same dorsal interscapular arrangement as thatfound in the nestling canonis to assist it in carrying out thefratricide.Plwniages.?Male: Similar to the male of Cucidus c. canonis andC. c. bakeri but less dark on the upper parts than the latter andalways to be distinguished from all races of the canorus group byhaving the edge of the wing pure white and not barred. On thelower surface the white bars are broader and the black bars in conse-quence wider apart, while they are blacker and bolder in appearance.Female: Similar to the male but generally with a more rufoustinge on the breast and abdomen; the luider tail coverts are oftenpale fulvous with black crossbars.The female has a hepatic phase like that of C. c. canorus.Juvenile: In first plumage blackish brown above, the feathers allbroadly edged with white; the wing quills are barred with rufouson the outer webs; the chin, throat, and breast are blackish, thefeathers narrowly fringed with white and the rest of the lower partswhite, or faintly fulvous-white, heavily barred with strong bands ofblack.In intermediate stage between juvenile and adult the plumage isslaty, the feathers very narrowly edged with white ; below, the chin,throat, and upper breast are blackish, the feathers broadly fringedwith white and the remainder of the lower parts like the adult.Hepatic young are like the hepatic female adult but less richlycolored and more heavily banded below with blackish, especially onthe chin, throat, and breast. Some specimens of young birds in theBritish Museum collection seem to be changing from a juvenilehepatic plumage into a normal adult plumage.The white nuchal spot is very seldom seen in the young of thiscuckoo but is occasionally present.Measurements.?Wing 208 to 226; tail 151 to 176; tarsus about 20or 21; culmen 20 to 22 millimeters. The female is little, if any,smaller than the male in Indian birds, but of Chinese birds LaTouche gives the following measurements: Male, 23 (2 examples),wing 200 to 226; female, 22 (1 example), 190-200; culmen, male,20-22 ; female, 19 millimeters.
HIMALAYAl^ CUCKOO 89Colors of soft parts.?Iris yellow or "grey with brown inner circle"(La Tonclie) ; bill dark horny green, the base of the upper, and mostof the lower, mandible yellowish horny, the gape still more yellow;legs and feet wax-yellow to rather bright yellow.Food.?This also is the same in character as that of Cuculuscanorus, but C. optatu.s also devours more hard-bodied insects suchas Cicadae and many small and some quite large beetles, while itfeeds rather more exclusively on food obtained near the tops of hightrees. I have never seen it feeding on the ground, nor have I noticedit in scrub or bushes except when it was probably hunting for a nestin which to deposit its egg.Behavior.?I do not think that this bird could be distinguishedfrom Cuculus canornis.^ except by its voice, by any field naturalistuntil the bird was actually in his hand. In flight, perching position,and general action I have been able to discern no difference of anykind between the two birds unless it is that when the two were seentogether optatus looks a smaller, slighter bird than canorus and mayfly a trifle faster with quicker wing beats.Both sexes have the habit, as canorus has, of sitting, almost motion-less, for a very long time in one position, possibly in the case of thefemale while she is watching certain birds and waiting for themto give away the site of their nest, or when she is waiting for theprecise moment at which to fly down and place her Qgg in the nestof the foster parent selected to receive it.Voice.?The call of the male consists of four notes, two rapid, thena pause, and then two more, all of the same cadence, sounding likehoo-hoo hoo-hoo. When one is close to the bird a fifth note can beheard preceding these, much higher pitched and far less resoundingso that at a little distance only the four notes are heard. The callis a typical cuckoo note, and hearing it one would expect to find thata cuckoo had uttered it. There is also a sweet trilling note that israrely heard, and I cannot say whether it is uttered by one sex orboth, but I suspect it to correspond to the bubbling note uttered bythe female canorus. Although occasionally this cuckoo calls onmoonlight nights it does not do so with anything like the persever-ance of the common cuckoo, nor is it so incessantly vocal during theday.En^emies.?The same as those of the common cuckoo, but the youngdo not suffer so much from exposure by falling out of nests too smallor too weak to hold them. In the case, how-ever, of eggs laid in holesoccupied by the nests of the crowned willow warbler the young birdshave to vacate them at a very early stage or they would be unable todo so when full grown and would be incarcerated in them for life.As these cuckoos select ground nests so largely in which to deposit178223?40 7
90 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMtheir eggs, these and the young birds when hatched do not suffer sogreatly from the crows and magpies who hunt the hedges and bushes,but, on the other hand, they are easier for snakes and lizards to get at.Fall.?Migration from the breeding grounds in northwest Indiaapparently commences in the end of August and continues to theend of September or early October, From northeast India theywould seem to migrate later by about a month, birds continuing tocall up to the beginning of August, while in 1914 an egg was takenas late as August 20. It is a curious fact that in the continent ofIndia birds do not seem to move far south and have only been re-corded in winter from many places in the plains of the northwestand Punjab and from Lucknow, Jodhpore, Fategarh, Bihar, Dibru-garh and Cachar, in the United Provinces, Bengal, and Assam.Farther east it migrates much farther south and has been recordedfrom all over Burma to the extreme south, and from the Andamansand Nicobars, while it also ranges throughout the Malay Peninsulaand the Austro-Malaysian islands to New Guinea and Australia.Birds found in winter east of Burma are certainly those that breednorth of China and probably migrate, more or less, due north andsouth, and I am inclined to think it is possible that birds from theHimalayas migrate almost entirely to the east in India and thensoutheast through Burma and the Malay States. Otherwise it seemsincredible that no specimens should ever be obtained, in south Indiaor even central India, of a migrant which in and from China wandersso very far south in the winter months.DISTRIBUTIONThe Himalyan cuckoo is found throughout the Himalayas and cen-tral Asia from the extreme west of India and Baluchistan, while incentral Siberia it extends from Dauria and Lake Baikal to the extremeeast of the northern Chinese mountains and, possibly, to Japan. InChina La Touche (1931) summarizes its distribution as follows:"China generalh^ Szechuen, Kwangsi, Fohkien, Lower Yangtse,Shaweishan, Shantung, Chihli (migrant)." To this he adds, "Onthe whole this Cuckoo is not common in North China, and very fewhave been noted by Dr. Wilder," and, again, noting on my distribu-tion of the summer range he adds, "Corea and Manchuria shouldprobably be added."It certainly occurs and breeds in all the higher hills in Burma;quite commonly in the Chin Hills and rarely to the east in the KubyMines district and the Shan States.Its appearance on the American list is due to a specimen obtainedon St. Paul Island, Pribilof Islands, Alaska, on July 4, 1890(W. Palmer, 1894).
KHASIA HILLS CUCKOO 91CUCULUS CANORUS BAKERI HartertKHASIA HILLS CUCKOOCONTEIBUTED BY EdWARD CHAKLES StUAKT BaKEBHABITSThis most interesting race of the common European cuckoo wasgiven a name in 1912 by Dr. Hartert (1912), no museum possessingsufficient material until 1911 to substantiate the differences that bothDr. Hartert and I believed to distinguish this subspecies from thoseothers already accepted.The lOiasia Hills cuckoo is a race that breeds at considerably lowerelevations than do either G. c. canoTms or C. c. telephonus and, speak-ing generally, haunts during the breeding season more densely forestedareas in much hotter and far more humid climates. Thus in theKliasia Hills of Assam, where it is extraordinarily common, it maybe found in all the higher ranges at and about Sherraponji between3,500 and 6,500 feet frequenting forest that is always lush and green,with luxuriant undergrowth and with an almost impenetrable tangleof creepers, beautiful orchids, ferns, and parasites growing on everytree. Here the rainfall averages about 550 inches in the year, whileas much as 72 inches have fallen in 24 hours and over 700 inches inthe 12 months. They are, however, equally numerous, between 4,000and 6,000 feet around Shillong, where the rainfall is less than 150inches in the year and where, in many parts, pine woods take the placeof the wet evergreen forests.Although on the whole this race of the cuckoo certainly frequentsdenser and thicker forest than do the other forms, individuals varygreatly in their tastes and those parasitic on pipits and other speciesof birds, which breed in the open grass plains, also haunt the samekind of country as that in which these birds breed. At the same timeeven in these places they always select those that contain a certainnumber of trees on which they can perch and from which they cansurvey the surrounding area and watch the fosterers to their nests.In the Khasia Hills many cuckoos are parasitic on the conmion Indianand Blyth's pipits, which are to be found nesting on the wide stretchesof open grassland above Shillong, the former on ridges and plateausup to some 5,500 feet and the latter on those above that altitude. In-termediate in habits between the evergreen forest cuckoos and theopen country cuckoos there are others that haunt the more open pineforests, especially those that have brooks and small rivers runningthrough them, or are broken up by ravines in which small deciduoustrees, bushes, and brambles grow freely to the exclusion of the somberpinQ trees.
92 BULLETIN 17 6, ITlsriTED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMIn Burma this cuckoo is commoner in the Euby Mines district andm the Southern Shan States than anywhere else. T. R. Livesey, whohas had a wonderful experience with them in the latter country, in-forms me that in these districts they frequent both the open decidu-ous forests as well as the open country of scrub and grass landaround towns and villages, even depositing their eggs in the nests ofbirds breeding in and close to the gardens of houses occupied byEuropeans or by Shans.After the breeding season this cuckoo may be found in almost anykind of country that is fairly well wooded, while in the plains ofBengal and Lower Assam it seems to have a special liking for mangoorchards and patches of jungles in tea plantations.Spring.?In Assam those individuals that have migrated into theplains and lower hills the preceding autumn return to their breedingquarters in the end of March or early April, their numbers increasingrapidly up to the end of that month, when their mellow call may beheard almost continually in every direction at all elevations between3,500 and 6,500 feet. Exact dates of arrival are recorded nowherethat I can trace, but I have eggs taken on April 14, odd eggs takenin the third week in April, and many after the 25th of that month.In the Chin Hills, between Assam and the Ruby Mines district andShan States, most cuckoos commence breeding about the middle ofApril, arriving in their breeding haunts nearly a month earlier. Herethey are common at about 4,000 feet upward and haunt much thesame kinds of country as they do in Assam, certainly breeding up to7,000 feet, or a little over, as eggs have been taken on Mount Victoriaand the hills above Fort White.In the Shan States Mr. Livesey informs me that few if any birdsremain above 4,000 feet in winter, in the end of August and earlySeptember the great majority moving into the lower hills and adjoin-ing plains. The first birds returning to the higher hills put in anappearance early in March and commence to lay the last of thatmonth, March 27 being the earliest date on which he has taken eggsand July 1 the latest.The length of the breeding season is much more extended than isthat of the European cuckoo {C. c. canonis) or the central Asianbird {C. c. telephonus) ^ doubtless owing to the same factors of cold,food supply, etc., that compel the more northern birds of all familiesto compress their breeding arrangements into a far shorter time thanthat occupied by the southern birds, for whom temperature, foodsupply, and other factors are more or less favorable almost through-out the year.The individual cuckoo, however, is governed in her time of egg-laying by the habits of the foster jDarent that she selects to bring up
KHASIA HILLS CUCKOO 93her young, while all cuckoos, as well as the foster parents, are affectedmore or less in tlieir spring migration and breeding time by the lateor early arrival of the rains and the consequent shortage or abund-ance of insect life. In Assam, where the rainy season is long andthe rainfall heavy, eggs may be found in some numbers from April20 to the middle of June and, then, in decreasing numbers, to the endof June, after which they further decrease in number until, after themiddle of July, few will be taken, though my latest recorded date fora cuckoo's egg is August 24. In Burma, as already noted, birdscommence laying about a month earlier, and few eggs are found afterearly June.The 1,366 eggs in my collection were taken as follows : One in ISIarch(taken in Burma), 104 in April, 608 in May, 527 in June, 114 in July,and 12 in August. It may, I think, be accepted that migratingbirds arrive on their breeding ground some two to three weeks beforecommencing to lay and leave again about one to two months after thedeposition of their last eggs.In Burma the peak of laying is reached in early May; in Assamnot until the end of that month.Courtship.?I can find nothing recorded as to the conduct of court-ship between males and females during the breeding season and have,therefore, only my own observations to guide me. There appears tobe no true courtship, and I have no doubt that, except in very rareinstances, cuckoos do not pair, though in certain areas, where thebird is uncommon, a male and female may possibly mate and remaintogether throughout the breeding season. This is probably the casein North Cachar, where the bird is rare, breeding in deeper forestthan I have seen anywhere else, and where I have seldom heardmore than one male calling in any one particular area or found morethan one type of egg deposited therein. In the Kliasia Hills, inwhich district the birds swarm in incredible numbers, both sexeswere undoubtedly promiscuous in their sexual relations. I havepersonally seen a female accept the attentions of one male and thenfly off to a tree close by and accept another pursuing male within afew minutes. On this occasion several, I think four, males werepursuing the one female, who flew slowly from one tree to anotheron a roadside. Settling on one of these she crouched on a largebough, half lying there with both wings hanging slightly loweredand quivering, while her head was held quite low, her whole attitudeexpressing invitation. The first male, of those following her, at onceaccepted this after which he settled on a branch close by while thefemale flew away to a tree about 50 paces distant followed by theother three males, one of whom was again accepted by the femalewho, after the completion of the act flew off accompanied by theremaining two males to a tree beyond my view.
94 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMAmong the Khasias, certain classes of whom are very intelligentobservers, it appears to be well known that both sexes of cuckooexercise no discretion in their love affairs.Nesting.?The female cuckoo is, of course, parasitic in her habits,and I have personally taken eggs in the nests of no less than 103species and subspecies of fosterer (see following list) , the very greatmajority of which are, however, undoubtedly abnormal or casualonly, for I feel satisfied that when the usual foster parent has nonest available the cuckoo will eventually deposit her egg in thatof any other bird that may be convenient. Repeated instances havecome within my own experience in which a cuckoo normally para-sitic on one bird deposits one or more of a series of eggs in a nestutterly unlike those of the usual fosterer, merely because she hasalready exhausted all the nests known to her of the latter.List of Foster ParentsSuya crinigera (subspecies 6) 215 eggsCisticola jundicis cursitans 276Cisticola exilis tytleri (generally with C. j. c. series) 7Trihura luteiventris 32Orthotoinus (species and siTbspecies 2) 27Acanthopneuste reguloides harterti 9Megalurus palustris 7Miscellaneous warblers (abnormal fosterers, 9) 25Anthus (various species and subspecies, 8) 199Rhodophila ferrea haringtoni 18Saxicola caprata iurmanica 55Rhyacornis fuUginosus 25Enicurus (species 2) 25Petrophila (Monticola) (species 2) 21Turdidae (abnormal fosterers, species 8) 15Cyanosylvia leucura 13Eumyias thalassina thalassina 63Niltava (species 3) 43Muscicapidae (abnormal fosterers, species 12) 22Lanius nigriceps nigriceps 35Lauiidae (abnormal fosterers, species 2) 2Troglodytidae (species 3) 21Mesia agentauris 46Leiothrix calypyga 33Timaliidae (abnormal fosterers, species 32) 92Other abnormal fosterers, Passer, Sitta, Parus, etc. (7species) 8 "Total Fosterers: Normal 23, abnormal 80 (=103).Like the English cuckoo, as Chance (1922) has proved, the KhasiaHills female cuckoo sometimes adopts a certain area of country asits own breeding territory into which it will allow no other female,parasitic on the same foster parent, to enter, though it seems to have
KHASIA HILLS CUCKOO 95
no objection to the entry of any number of males or of another femaleparasitic on a different species. Thus in a certain area close to thehouse in which I lived in Shillong I found three cuckoos breeding;one depositing its eggs in the nests of the little fantail warbler {Cis-ticola jundicis cursitans)^ the second in the nests of the verditerflycatcher {Eumyias thalassina thalassina), and the third in the nestsof the black-headed shrike {Lanius iiigriceps nigriceps). On an-other occasion I took eggs of three different cuckoos from nests ofCisticola^ Niltava^ and Leiothr'ix in the same strip of jungle and not50 yards from one another. Yet another instance of shared territorywas a grass-covered hillside occupied by two female cuckoos, the oneparasitic on the same little fantail warbler and the other on pipits(species various). Other similar instances were quite common inthis district.My personal experience confirms what those interested in cuckoo-work have for some time maintained in regard to cuckoos being con-sistently parasitic on one selected foster parent. A good example ofthis constancy is a series, collected for me by a family of four mentrained by myself in cuckoo-work in the Kliasia Hills. From 1925to 1935 these men obtained for me no less than 132 eggs of one cuckooparasitic on the fantail warbler, all collected in the same area ofgrass and scrub surrounded by pine forest. Of these 132 eggs only4 were taken from nests other than those of the little fantail and ofthese 4, 3 were placed in the nests of another little warbler {Orthoto-mus sutorius patio) and the other in the nest of the Assam brown hillwarbler {Suya crinigera assamica), both, of course, in the sameterritory.In addition to the above I have many series of eggs, numbering 3to 15, from individual cuckoos, occasionally taken in two or moreconsecutive years, all placed in nests of the same warbler. Again Ihave other series of cuckoos' eggs, some taken from nests of Suya(various species) ; others from those of Eumyias, pipits (variousspecies), the silver-eared mesia {Mesia a. argentauris) , the Pekinrobin {Leiothrix httea calypyga), and other fosterers. As a rule thecuckoo also shows equal constancy to its chosen breeding area, re-turning year after year to it and leaving it only when the supply offosterers is exhausted or the nature of the country has been alteredby man or some other agency. Wliere the normal foster parent isexceptionally common, such as are the warblers of the genera Cisti-cola and Suya, the cuckoo often has ample nests in a compact area toact as hosts to her whole series of eggs, and we have found as manyas 18 eggs laid by the same individual within such an area. Wliere,however, the fosterers such as pipits or mesia are less numerous or arebreeding in comparatively small areas, some 4 to 10 eggs are laid in
96 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthe one area and then, when the available nests have all been madeuse of, the cuckoo removes to another area, generally close by, even-tually often returning to the original one later in the season andagain cuckolding other nests of the same fosterer.There can, I think, be no doubt that a cuckoo brought up in a nestof a certain fosterer will deposit its own eggs in nests of the samebird. This theory seems now to be one generally accepted, and cer-tainly my experience goes to confirm this, and in my own collectionI have eggs of a very definite type taken for over 30 years in thenests of the same species of fosterer in the same district.Eggs.?The eggs of the Khasia Hills cuckoo are of very many andbeautiful types of color and character of markings, while the eggsof each individual cuckoo, though varying slightly inter se, do notshow so great a variation as is found in the eggs of single clutcheslaid by many species of Passeres or other orders.Among the most common types of eggs are, naturally, those thathave been evolved to assimilate with the eggs of the birds mostfrequently employed as foster parents. Among these may be men-tioned the following:An egg with a white ground lightly marked, chiefly at the largerend, with specks, spots, or small blotches of red, reddish brown, orbrown. These eggs are excellent counterparts in all but size of theeggs of the fantail warbler, in whose tiny nest they are usuallydeposited.The next commonest type has the ground color more or less dis-tinctly tinged with reddish and is rather more profusely markedwith larger blotches of various shades of red-brown. These arenormally deposited in the nests of various species of Suya, or brownhill warbler, the most common types of whose eggs agree well withthose of the cuckoo.A third and common type of cuckoo's egg has the ground colora beautiful salmon-pink or buff-pink and has the surface freckledwith deeper reddish ; in some cases so finely and thickly that the eggsappear at first glance to be unicolored; in other cases more or lessboldly, though sparsely, covered with reddish brown and underlyingfaint marks of gray or pale purple. These eggs agree well withvarious types of eggs laid by the verditer flycatcher and, even stillmore so, with those of the beautiful niltava {Niltava sundara)^while it is in the nests of these birds we find them deposited.Cuckoos, however, that normally deposit their eggs in the nest ofthese birds seem regularly also to cuckold the large niltava {N.grandis) and the white-tailed chat {Muscisylvia notodela), whichlay the same colored eggs and make similar cup-shaped nests ofliving moss, built in exactly similar positions in holes in banks andamons: boulders.
KHASIA HILLS CUCKOO 97Another beautiful type is bright pale blue, often immaculate butsometimes faintly flecked with primary reddish and secondary grayblotches. In the Khasia Hills these are almost invariably depositedin the nests of the silver-eared Mesia or the red-billed Leiothrix (L.lutea calypga) , two species that lay exactly the same type of Qgg tothat of the cuckoo, though more boldly blotched, while the twospecies also make similar nests, which they place in somewhat simi-lar positions in bushes, etc.In Burma, more especially in the Ruby Mines district and in theShan States, we have two dominant types of eggs: One blue, muchdarker in tint than those referred to as being deposited in Leiothrixnests, laid with the similar eggs of the Burmese dark gray bushchat{Rhodo'phila ferrea haringtoni), and the other having a pale pinkground, freely blotched all over with reddish, deposited in the nestsof the Burmese stonechat {Saxicola caprata hurmanica), which alsolays eggs of this color and character. In connection with these twotypes of egg an interesting state of affairs has now been arrived atin parts of the Shan States. Thirty years ago the bushchat wasextremely common in certain districts in hills between 4,000 and5,000 feet, and the great majority of cuckoos found there were thoselaying blue eggs. Cultivation has now wiped out the scrub andbush jungle, beloved by the bushchat, and fields of rice, gardens, andthe vegetation surrounding villages have taken its place. With thischange in the character of the jungle growth has also come a changein the birds frequenting it, the bushchat has almost disappeared, andthe little stonechat has taken its place, breeding everywhere in gar-dens, village grounds, and cultivated fields. The elimination of thebushchat, although so recent, has already gone far to eliminate alsothe cuckoo that lays blue eggs, while the one that laj^s eggs like thoseof the stonechat has become much more numerous and has becomethe common form. Even now, however, an occasional blue egg ofa cuckoo will be found in the stonechats' nests, the latter similarin every respect to the nests of the bushchat and therefore cuckolded,faute de 7nieux, by the cuckoo.It is impossible here to deal with the problem of the evolution ofthe various types of cuckoos' eggs, but the facts recorded above seemto go far toward proving that cuckoo eggs, to assimilate with thoseof their fosterers, have been evolved by discrimination among thefoster parents leading to the slow but sure destruction of the unfit,i. e., Darwin's doctrine of the survival of the fittest in its crudestform.In shape the eggs are rather broader ovals than those of the Euro-pean cuckoo, and they also average larger and heavier. It is indeedmuch easier to separate the various subspecies of cuckoo by the eggsthey lay than by the plumage of the birds that lay them.
98 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe number of eggs laid by the Khasia Hills cuckoo probablyvaries somewhat individually, though I believe it generally to be12 to 20. It is, however, very difficult to decide this definitely, asit is impossible to be satisfied that every nest of the selected fostererin any given area has without doubt been marked down. It wasnot until 1907 that I concentrated on the attempt to solve any oneof the numerous cuckoo problems, and it was some years after thisbefore satisfactory evidence had accumulated on this particular point.My different series of eggs of individual cuckoos vary greatly in num-ber, being, I believe, governed entirely by the number of nests ofthe foster parent available in the area searched over. In 1908, onMay 25, in one small grass glade surrounded by pine forest I foundfive nests of Clsticola, three containing young cuckoos or eggs of thecuckoo, and I am practically sure that I missed no Cisticola or Suyanests. One of these nests had in it a young cuckoo about 2 days old,another nest had a young cuckoo just hatching, while a third had aslightly incubated cuckoo's egg. The two other nests of the Cisti-cola were unfinished and empty, but on June 1 one of these con-tained a slightly incubated cuckoo's egg and three of the fosterparent, while, finally, on June 4 the last nest contained a fresh eggof the cuckoo and four of the warbler. As the egg from whichthe older of the nestling cuckoos had been hatched must have beenlaid about May 13, while the last egg was laid on June 3 or 4, wehave only five eggs laid in 21 days, whereas we know now that thelarger cuckoos lay every second day, so the five eggs and the twoyoung found cannot possibly include all then laid. A series of 14eggs, all found between May 19 and June 10, 1910, in a similar butmuch larger area, were probably laid between May 16 and June 10and represent a complete series laid every alternate day. In anothersmall series of five eggs of one and the same cuckoo found in a nar-row strip of grassland three eggs were deposited in Cisticola's nestson May 16, 18, and 20, this exhausting all the nests then available.After this she apparently departed, but on July 5 and 7 the samecuckoo returned and placed two more eggs, one each in two newnests of Cisticolas. Another series of 14 eggs, of which 12 wereplaced in nests of Cisticola jundicis cursitans^ one in a nest of C.exilis tytleH^ and one in a nest of Suya atrogulans khaslana^ werelaid in two periods : The first from May 15 to 23 occupying each ofthe five nests of the fantail warbler available between these dates,and, then, from June 1 to 18 in all the nests then available in thatparticular area. Finally a series of eggs of one cuckoo that weretaken from 1925 to 1935 consisted of the following numbers: 6, 8,14, 9, 10, 12, 15, 18, 14, 11, 15. In 1925 and 1926 woodcutters were
KHASIA HILLS CUCKOO 99working in the pinewoods surrounding the open patch in which thefantail warblers were breeding and doubtless drove these little birdsaway and so deprived the cuckoo of foster parents during the latterperiod of her laying, or probably larger series would have been ob-tained in that particular patch of grassland. The various seriesprove satisfactorily that eggs are normally deposited every alternateday and, also, that there is no interval in the laying period dividingit into two.The weights of 1,368 eggs of the Kliasia Hills cuckoo are as fol-lows: Average weight 231; maximum 307; minimum 153 milli-grams; this latter is, however, an abnormally small light egg andvery few will be found less than 180 milligrams.The same number of eggs measure: Average 23.76 by 17.43;maxima, 28.5 by 18.0 and 27.1 by 20.0; minima 20.9 by 16.3 and 23.4by 15.0 millimeters.I should, perhaps, not omit to say that though the generally ac-cepted idea that cuckoos' eggs can be distinguished by their weight isin most cases correct, it is not always so. For instance, I have 37eggs of this cuckoo taken in shrikes' nests, and a comparison ofweights and measures of the eggs of the two species is as follows
:
C. c. bakeri, 37 eggs Lanius n. nigriceps, 100 eggsAverage size: 23.56 by 17.50 mm. 23.60 by 17.9 ram.Average weight : 232 rag. 215 mg.Maximum weight: 266 mg. 249 mg.Minimum weight: 190 mg. 185 mg.The comparative weight of the eggs of different species of birdsvaries greatly. Thus Anthus eggs are normally very light while theeggs of Passer are very heavy, two of the former about equalingthree of the latter of the same size and, in a few cases, otherwiseindistinguishable in coloring, shape, etc. Hoopoes' and spine-tailedswifts' eggs are very heavy, far more so in comparison with theirsize than those of cuckoos.This shows that weight alone in some cases does not suflBce to dis-tinguish cuckoos' eggs from their fosterers' eggs, and other compari-sons of cuckoos' eggs with those of other species could be quoted toconfirm this. The hard gritty shell wdth fine pits at wide intervalsis a further good distinguishing feature of cuckoos' eggs, while whenblowing it is noticeable that most cuckoos' eggs have the yolks tingedwith flesh color and very pale, while the white is rather more opaque,like the white of a duck's egg when compared with that of a fowl.In Europe it is very rare to find two eggs of cuckoos in a nestlaid by the same female; in India this is not so rare, and I haveon three occasions found three eggs of the same cuckoo in one nest.
100 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMIt is not possible here to go fully into the fascinating subject ofthe method of deposition of eggs, but briefly it may be said thatit has been fully proved that in manj^ cases cuckoos lay their eggsdirectly into open nests, an act that has been witnessed by myself,Whitehead, and others in India and proved by Chance (1922) to bethe case in England.There are, however, any number of eggs deposited by cuckoos innests into which it is utterly impossible for the cuckoo to gain anentrance. Into many of these the cuckoo projects her egg from thecloaca by pressing herself up against the entrance to the nest andejecting her egg with sufficient force to propel it the 2 or 3 inchesthat may be necessary for it to reach the nest (Livesey, 1936; A. E.Jones, 1937).On the other hand, there are many nests to which this methodalso would not apply, such as nests of small birds, more than 2 or 3inches inside holes of various character, in some cases a corner havingto be turned before the nest is reached. Into these I believe thecuckoo places her egg with her bill, and there is some evidence tosupport this which I hope to give in my proposed book on "CuckooProblems."Young.?Incubation, I think, takes usually 12 or 13 days, rarelyonly 11 days but occasionally extending to 14. The period the nest-ling remains in the nest is 4 to 6 weeks, but in many cases the nestis far too small to retain the young cuckoo until it is full grown.Thus when the eggs are deposited in the nests of birds such asCisticola and, to a lesser degree, Suya, the young bird when a quartergrown fills the small egg-shaped nest, sitting in it with its headprojecting from the entrance at the top side. Gradually, as theyoung cuckoo grows, the nest is expanded until it looks like basket-work around it, which finally bursts, depositing him or her on theground. This generally occurs when the cuckoo has fair featheringand is about half grown or a little later.The young Khasia Hills cuckoo ejects the fosterer's eggs or youngfrom the nest in the same way as its English cousin does, possessingthe same curious interscapulary pit to assist it in doing so. Thisstructural aid to ejection is found in all such genera as Cuculics,Cacomantis, Penthoceryx, and others that eject their foster brothersand sisters, but not in the young of Clamator, Eitdi/namis, and thosecuckoos that do not commit such murders. In the cuckoos that pos-sess it, the pit soon fills in and young cuckoos lose the impulse toeject after a very short time, sometimes within 4 days and almostinvariably within a week of being hatched.Plumages.?Male: Wliole upper plumage and wing coverts a darkslaty-gray or blackish slate, decidedly darker than the same parts in
KHASIA HILLS CUCKOO 101the European cuckoo; the lower back, rump, and upper tail covertsare a purer and somewhat lighter gray; the wing quills and con-cealed portions of greater coverts more brown, the quills slightlyglossed and barred with white on the inner webs of the outer pri-maries, turning to rufous on the inner primaries; tail ashy blacktipped with white and with white notches along the sides of theshafts, the white increasing in extent on the lateral tail feathers;chin, throat, sides of head and neck, and the upper breast ashy gray,not so dark as the back; remainder of lower parts, axillaries, andunder wing coverts Avhite with rather irregular bands of black,broader and farther apart than in G. c. canorus. Under tail covertsthe same but with the dark bars still farther apart.Female : Differs in having a rufous tinge on the upper breast andsometimes on the throat and sides of the neck.Nestling: Naked when hatched.Juvenile: First plumage; whole plumage brownish gray or slate,obsoletely barred with huffish white; a patch of white on the napeor hind neck; whole lower plumage barred white or rufescent whiteand dark brown, very heavily on the chin, throat, and breast, andless so on the under tail coverts.The young male after the first molt is like the adult but nearlyalways retains traces of the juvenile barring, more especially so onthe wings.Hepatic females have the whole upper parts barred chestnut andblackish slate or blackish brown; the lower plmnage has the chin,throat, and breast barred pale chestnut and blackish and generallywith a strong rufous tinge on the breast and abdomen.Young hepatic females are duller in color than the adults andhave the feathers of the upper part fringed with white.Colors of soft parts.?Iris pale to deep yellow, sometimes brown-ish in young birds of the year ; bill dark horny brown, or very darkhorny green, paler and yellowish at the base and on the commissureand orange-yellow on the gape; legs and feet wax-yellow.Measurements.?^Wing 220 to 227; tail 155 to 178; tarsus 18 (LaTouche) to 19; culmen from feathers of forehead 20 to 22 milli-meters (24 La Touche).Food.?The principal food of this, as of other cuckoos, consistsof caterpillars, pupae, chrysalides, and soft insects of any kind. Dur-ing flights of termites cuckoos may be seen both catching them onthe wing and eating them on the ground as they emerge from it. Ihave also taken Cicadae from their stomachs, and occasionally quitehard beetles of considerable size.The actions of this bird when attempting, and indeed succeed-ing in, the catching of termites in flight are very clumsy and labored
102 BULLETIN 17 6, UII^TITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMand their progress on the ground very slow, similar to the progressof certain woodpeckers when hunting a lawn for ants and otherprey.As a rule they feed in trees at some height from the ground, butany plague of caterpillars will tempt them down to quite low under-growth or even onto low grass in the open, and I once saw fourcuckoos all feeding on small green caterpillars on the ground in anopen glade in pine forest.Behavior.?Normally cuckoos are seldom found on any but hightrees, often resting in one position for a long time on some loftybranch and then flying to another tree with strong, easy beats of thewing, at a considerable speed. In the breeding season the femalesundoubtedly mark down the nests in which they intend to deposittheir eggs, and they may be seen perched in a tree, watching theirvictims until these latter give away the position of the nest. Whilethus engaged the patience of the cuckoo seems inexhaustible, andit will sit for hours in one position, hardly moving, yet_ obviouslywatching the intended fosterers, which may be loath to return totheir nests though they may come and perch on the same tree asthat occupied by the cuckoo, sometimes within a few feet of her.Apparently they not only mark down nests for immediate victimiza-tion, but others to be made use of when later eggs are to be laid.At other times they seem to be able to ascertain the approximate,yet not the exact, position of a nest. (Livesey (MS.) gives me a mostinteresting example of this. He writes
:
"Yesterday, May 19, 1937, I was out for a walk with my wifeabout 5 p. m. at Taungyi, which has an elevation of some 5,000 feet.Close to my cottage the dogs chased a bird off a ploughed field,which I recognized as a cuckoo. The cuckoo returned withtwo chats after her and perched on some bamboo rails, so, suspect-ing that the chats had a nest somewhere near in which the cuckoowas going to lay, I sat down to wait and watch with my glasses.Back came the cuckoo and flew low over the field almost settling on aplace some 50 yards in front of us. Twice she flew backward andforward, chased by the chats, finally settling where I expected thenest to be. I could see her very plainly through the glasses as withthroat feathers puffed out and crest feathers sometimes raised shejumped clumsily from clod to clod searching for the nest, strainingher neck up and looking everywhere. The chats were now mobbingher furiously and in retaliation she only opened her beak and madefaces at them. She did not appear to know where the nest was andbegan a systematic search for it in an area about 5 by 3 yards. Theclods in the field were very large and lumpy with all sorts of holes
KHASIA HILLS CUCKOO 103
wliicli might have held a nest, and from tune to time she disap-peared from sight as she hopped into the various depressions, goingbackward and forward in the most persistent manner, mobbed allthe time by the chats.
"She was, I think, a full 10 minutes searching for the nest, but, atlast she dipped out of sight and a flutter of her wings suggested shehad found the nest and was in the act of laying. She was out of mysight for about 4 seconds and then sped away in a great hurry."We climbed the fence and walking up to the place whence shehad flown found a very well-concealed chats' nest in which by stoop-ing down to the ground I could see that the nest contained two eggs,the cuckoo's and one of the chat's; by using the tips of my twofingers I was just able to draw the eggs out, one at a time with con-siderable difficulty."Voice.?The call of the male during the breeding season is exactlythe same as that of the European cuckoo, but in winter it also has asingle note sounding like chuck softly repeated two or three times.At the beginning of the season the bisyllabic note, from which thebird derives its name, is not perfect and the imperfections cover quitea wide range of variations. Sometimes the note is single instead ofdouble; often it is preceded by a rather hoarse note of the samecharacter as the call, while sometimes the cuck-oo is followed by an-other hoarser note. The female has the sunnner bubbling note of itscousin and also certain chuclding notes, very seldom uttered, whilein winter it gives vent to the same soft chucks as the male. "Whetherthe female ever calls cuckoo is disputed, but, personally, I am fairlycertain that she does, although it may be but seldom. The bubblingnote is the call to the male and is also repeated after she has met hermate, but it is then, I thinly, lower and softer, perhaps an expressionof satisfaction.During the daytime the calling of the male is almost continuous,but that of the female far less so as the former calls in the presenceof a female, while the latter does not "bubble" before the male exceptat the moment she takes to flight and invites him to follow her.On moonlight nights the male often calls with as much persistencyas during the day, but I have never heard it calling on dark nightsuntil dawn is advanced.Enemies.?Cuckoos have the usual enemies of all bird life, verminof every kind, which during the breeding season hunt for and devourall the eggs and young they can find. All the civet-cat tribe, snakes,lizards, and iguanas are inveterate thieves of eggs and young, whileeven more destructive than these are the birds of the ciow andmagpie tribe, which systematically hunt out the nests and devour
104 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMtheir contents. I have often watched the birds of the genus Den-drocitta and Cissa beating over an area in search of nests, quarter-ing it with the care and energy of a spaniel after game. The youngbirds suffer also very greatly from being too large for the nestsin which they are hatched. Half grown they fall out on to theground, and many, which escape death from vermin, are killed byexposure to heavy rain.The older birds seem to have no special enemies, their swiftflight and comparatively large size saving them from the suddendeath so often the fate of smaller, slower birds. At the same timebirds of prey undoubtedly attack and kill them just as they wouldany other bird of similar size and their superficial resemblance
?
in human eyes?to a sparrow hawk, would certainly not deceive theirwould-be destroyers even if these were sparrow hawks. Nor do thesmall birds attack cuckoos because they helieve them to be hawks,but because they know them to be cuckoos and, in their own way asobjectionable as hawks.Fall.?The Khasia Hills cuckoo is far more sedentary in charac-ter than its nearest relations and, possibly, is originally a sedentaryrace from which the migratory forms have sprung. I have seenthe bird in the Kliasia Hills in every month of the year exceptFebruary and, as it is silent in the winter months and does not callattention to its presence, it is probably even more numerous in itsbreeding range at this time than has hitherto been supposed, whilesome individuals may be resident in the same locality all the yearround. At the same time migration does take place in some degreeand this dark race has been found in winter, certainly, in Bengal,more especially in tlie eastern districts on the Bay, in Orissa, onceby Annandale (MS.), while it extends through Burma, south toProme (Mackenzie and Hopwood, MS.) ; south Siam (E. G. Her-bert, MS.) and finally, almost certainly, to southwestern China.I have no proof that in the Indian Empire adult cuckoos migrate anyearlier than the birds of the year. About September the pleasantcall, which has been heard continually up to the end of July andcasually up to the end of August, ceases entirely, and the birdsare also far less frequently seen on the higher ranges of hills and,by October, nearly all the birds, old and young, have left these andhave taken to the lower hills and the broken country at their bases,thence slowly and gradually extending into the plains in the districtsalready mentioned. It is also possible, of course, that this cuckoomay range farther south in winter than stated above, as recordsof GuGulus canoTus (subspecies?) have been recorded from Madrasand from the islands of the Austro-Malayan region, between October
KHASIA HILLS CUCKOO 105and March, some of which ahnost certainly refer to this form. Atpresent, from the evidence at my disposal, I can neither substan-tiate nor refute this suggestion, as it is quite impossible to recognizeone subspecies from another in the field unless a particularly brightlight shows up the comparative slaty darkness of this bird, to anobserver with some experience of cuckoos.DISTRIBUTIONExact details as to the distribution of the Khasia Hills cuckoo arestill wantiug as so many records of cuckoos refer merely to thespecies, Cuculus canoms, while the subspecies is not given or, indeed,in many cases distinguished. The breeding area has been proved toextend throughout the hills of Assam and Burma as far south asKaren-nee and as far east as Yunnan, while Bangs and Peters (1928)consider it is this form that is found and breeds m eastern Tibet andSzechwan. To the west the breeding cuckoo in the Bhutan Hills isundoubtedly of this race, but hotv much farther west it may extendis not known though, almost certainly, it may be found breeding inthe lower Himalayas below Sikkim. Stevens informs me that hebelieves it does.A fine series of breeding specimens in the Stevens collection, col-lected by him in the Sikkim Hills, indicates that the range of bakeriis below 7,000 or 8,000 feet, and that above that, up to 12,000 feet,telepJiOims is the breeding form.In the cold weather it extends to the countries mentioned abovein this article as being visited on migration. To these may beadded that it occurs in Siam, as far south as Bangkok and the Siamesepeninsula west of Tenasserim. Finally, extraordinary as it may seem,it has been recorded by Friedmann (Friedmann and Riley, 1931) ashaving once been obtained in St. Lawrence Island, Bering Sea, an oc-currence that entitles it to a place in the American avifauna. Thisspecimen was originally described as belonging to the central andnortheastern Asiatic race tel-ephonus, which one might expect wouldoccur at long intervals in Alaska.
178223?40-
106 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMOrder TROGONIPORMESFamily TROGONIDAE : TrogonsTROGON AMBIGUUS AMBIGUUS GouldCOPPERY-TAILED TROGONHABITSThis gorgeous Mexican species brings color from the Tropics, alltoo rarely, across our borders in extreme southern Texas and southernArizona. Ever since Lieutenant Benson shot an immature male inthe Huachuca Mountains on August 24, 1885, it has been known tooccur there and in other neighboring localities in Arizona as one ofour rarest birds. Specimens have been taken there under circum-stances that would indicate that sometime its nest will be found withinour borders. An adult female was shot by F. H. Fowler (1903) in theHuachucas during August 1892. Major Bendire (1895) writes: "An-other adult female, which evidently had a nest close by, was obtainedby Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, on June 23, 1892, onthe east side of the San Luis Mountains, close to the Mexican bound-ary line. The long tail feathers in this specimen are much worn andabraded, and look as if the bird had passed considerable time in verylimited quarters. Its mate was also seen, but not secured. Judgingfrom the character of the country this species inhabits in southernArizona, that is pine forest regions, it is probably only a stragglerin the lower Rio Grande Valley in Texas, and does not breed there."Mrs. Florence M. Bailey (1923) reports that A. B. Howell dis-covered a pair of these trogons in the Santa Rita Mountains in south-ern Arizona in 1918, of which he writes : "While wrapping two birdswhich I had shot at 6,000 feet in a canyon, on August 4, I looked upand saw a pair of these birds watching me from live oak branches atperhaps a hundred yards. I had an unobstructed view of their brightunderparts and characteristic form and flight, and identification wassure. They were very 'wise,' and as I carefully approached, they asslowly receded, flying from oak to oak until they separated and I lostthem in the denser growth. The trees were almost entirely live oakshere with a very occasional pine."Herbert W. Brandt has sent me the following notes on the status ofthis beautiful bird on the western slopes of the Huachuca Mountains,Ariz.: "The turkeylike call of this rare, semitropical visitor is acommon bird note in Sunnyside Canyon and in the lower reaches ofBear Canyon. There are at least three pairs of birds in each ofthese valleys; and in the morning they noisily call back and forthto one another. These valley floors are usually densely wooded andwould make this bird difficult to study were it not for its inquisitivenature, for it is usually easily lured by the 'squeech.' One lavishly
COPPERY-TAILED TROGOK 107garbed male and his more modest mate repeatedly allowed me towalk up to within about 20 feet of them before they would fly ashort distance and then allow me to approach them again. Each timethey both called their hen-turkey-like notes, kum-kum-kum^ everanswering my squeeches of a like count and inflection. That thisbird breeds in the vicinity there is little doubt, but we did not spendtime seeking its home, as Arizona has wisely put it on the per-manently protected list, and in consequence this mountain-lovingspecies is becoming common again in its densely tangled retreats."A. J. van Kossem (1936) adds the following news:Regardless of its status in former years, this trogon may now be counteda fairly common summer visitant in the Santa Ritas. Possibly it has alwaysbeen more numerous than was supposed, for one of the rangers, who has beenstationed for many years in the Santa Ritas, knew the bird well and told meof having seen as many as five or six feeding together at a single patch ofmauzanita. At any rate there were several pairs in Madera Canon in thesummers of 1931 and 1932. *On June 27 [1931], Mr. Gorsuch and I saw or heard eight birds between theforks of the caiion at 6000 feet, and Littleshot Cabin at 7000. On that date afully adult male was collected by Mr. Gorsuch for the museum at the Universityof Arizona. On June 28, a very young trogon, about two-thirds grown andevidently just out of the nest, was shot, quite unintentionally, in a patch ofoaks at 6000 feet.At least two pairs were noted on May 30, 1931; "the associationin which they were noted was the oak-sycamore growth near thejuncture of Upper Sonoran and Transition. Two males (both ofwhich presumably had mates) were heard in the left (north) fork
?
one at 7000, the other at 8000 feet altitude. These altitudes are inthe pine-oak association in the Transition Zone."Col. A. J. Grayson (Lawrence, 1874) says that, in western Mexico,
"it is to be met with only in the dark forests of the tierra caliente"Nesting.?Colonel Grayson says that "it breeds in the hollows oftrees like the parrots." According to Mrs. Bailey (1928), the nestis "reported in cavities in large trees, generally in large desertedwoodpecker holes, but also in holes in banks." There are ten sets ofeggs of the coppery-tailed trogon in the Thayer collection in Cam-bridge, all collected by, or for, Frank B. Armstrong near CiudadVictoria, Tamaulipas, Mexico, between March 29 and April 27, 1908.If these dates are all correctly recorded, these trogons must breedvery plentifully in that region, or Mr. Armstrong's collectors musthave been very industrious. There are a number of sets in othercollections from the same locality, all taken by the same collectors.These eggs were all taken from nests in holes in trees, apparentlynatural cavities; the holes were at various heights, ranging from12 to 40 feet above the ground; some of the trees were in a riverbottom and others in "big woods near town." The nests were made
108 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
of various materials, such as hay, straw, trash, moss, wool, down,feathers, vines, and thistledown.Eggs.?The coppery-tailed trogon laj^s ordinarily three or foureggs but probably sometimes only two. These are rounded-ovate tonearly oval in shape; and the shell is smooth but not glossy. Thecolor is dull white or faintly bluish white and entirely unmarked.The measurements of 55 eggs average 28.50 by 23.18 millimeters;the eggs showing the four extremes measure 30.7 by 24.6, 29 by 25,26 by 22.8, and 29.5 by 22.1 millimeters.Plunvages.?I have not seen anj'' nestlings or very young birds.Ridgway (1911) gives very full and accurate descriptions of all theknown plumages of both sexes of this trogon ; but his accounts aretoo long to be quoted in full here, so I shall mention only the mostconspicuous features,of the different plumages, by which the readermay recognize them.In the Juvenal plumage, in July, the sexes are alike, or nearly so,and closely resemble, on the upper parts, the adult female, exceptthat the central pair of tail feathers have very narrow black tips,instead of broad ones; the next three pairs of rectrices are black, andthe two lateral pairs are mostly white, barred with black, except fora large terminal white area; the lesser, median, and to a lesser degreethe greater wing coverts are tipped with a large spot of pale buffor buffy white, bordered with black; chin and throat grayish brownabove a quite distinct white pectoral band ; below this band the underparts are indistinctly barred, or mottled, with grayish brown andgrayish white.This unadulterated juvenal plumage is apparently worn throughthe first summer and early fall; I have seen it in its purity in birdscollected at various dates between July 23 and September 20; but,on the other hand, some specimens show the beginning of a molt be-fore the end of August. During all the remainder of their first year,young birds show more or less continuous progress toward maturityby a gradual and irregular molt. At an early age, between Augustand November, young males begin to show metallic green feathersin the back and throat, and metallic blue feathers in the rump andupper tail coverts; during winter and spring these metallic colorsgradually increase; and on the under parts, below the white band,there is a gradual decrease in the brown and white and a correspond-ing increase in the "geranium red" of the adult plumage. At thesame time, young females are acquiring more and more of the "peachred" of the adult female on the posterior under parts.These transition plumages may be seen, in the series I have studied,in birds collected in November, December, Febiniary, March, April,May, June, and July, during all of which time the juvenal wingsand tail are retained. From this I infer that the annual molt occurs in
COPPERY-TAILED TROGON 109summer and fall and that young birds do not acquire the fully adultjDlumage until they are at least 15 months old, or perhaps much older.Food.?Some coppery-tailed trogons that E. C. Jacot collected forme were feeding on wild grapes. Dr. A. K. Fisher wrote to MajorBendire (1895) that "a rancher who raises fruit in Ramsay Canyonstated that the species visited the gardens in considerable numbers,especially during the period when cherries were ripe." Major Ben-dire (1895) says of other members of the trogon; family: "Their foodconsists of fruit, grasshoppers, and other insects, and in their actionswhile catching the latter they are said to resemble a Flycatcher,starting and returning from a perch like these birds, and oftensitting for hours in the same place."Cottam and Knappen (1939) state that a bird, collected by Dr.Fisher in the Huachuca Mountains in June, "had fed exclusively onthe adults and larvae of lepidopterous insects." They examined thestomach of another bird, collected in October in Mexico, that con-tained 68 percent insects and 32 percent fruits. The insect food in-cluded one grasshopper nymph, long-horned grasshopper eggs, threeMantidae, three stink bugs, other Heteroptera, one leaf beetle, onevery large larva of a hawk moth, larvae of undetermined Lepidoptera,and two sawfly larvae. The vegetable food consisted of fruits of cut-leaved cissus, fruit of red pepper, and undetermined plant fiber.Behavior.?F. H. Fowler (1903) writes:On June 9, 1802, my father and I accompauiod Dr. A. K. Fisher to GardenCanyon seven miles south of the post. We reached the canyon and were ridingup the narrow trail bordered with pines and live oaks, when suddenly a beauti-ful male trogon flew across the path just ahead of us, and perched on a live oakbush on the other side of the small stream which flows through the canyon.The Doctor tried to approach it, but the noise caused by his passage throughthe thick brush and over the sliding rocks on the hill side alarmed the bird,which from the first had seemed a trifle uneasy, and it was soon lost to viewamong the trees down the canyon. Higher up among the pines, on the sameday, we heard the calls of another which sounded much like those of a henturkey. While we were eating lunch on the way down, we heard still anothercalling from the hillside above us, and the Doctor, who found it perched on thelower limb of a pine after a short search, watched its actions for a few momentsand then shot at it. It sat erect, the tail hanging straight down, and when utter-ing the call threw its head back imtil its beak pointed nearly straight up.On August 14 of the same year I again found the trogon in Garden Canyon,this time higher up however at the Picture Rocks. A beautiful pair flew upfrom a fallen pine to the lower limb of a tree, and sat there quietly watchingme. I dismounted and fired a reduced charge at the male, but the only effectwas that he flew off through the trees unhurt, while the female flew up to asmall tree on the hill, where she sat, looking at me until I loaded my gun,when I shot her. At the second shot the male flew up the canyon his beautifulcarmine breast gleaming in the sunlight like a streak of flame. Both birds satnearly erect when at rest, with their long tails hanging nearly straight down.Their flight was nearly like the slow flight of a magpie, until startled, whenthey flew like a dove and nearly as fast.
110 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMVoice.?Mr. Jacot says, in his letter, that the young birds weresilent but that the adults had many notes, one of which was "almostlike the chattering of our gray squirrel." A note referred to abovewas like that of a hen turkey. Dr. William Beebe (1905) says:
"The call of the trogon, uttered especially toward evening when itcame to drink, was a soft series of melodious notes, reminding onesomewhat of the content-call of a hen with chickens. Regularly atdusk two of these birds went to roost in a dense tangle of wildclematis." Mr. van Rossem (1936) refers to the note of the maletrogon as a "loud, hoarse, 'koa-koa-koa'." Evidently the bird has avariety of notes.Field marks.?The shape and posture, referred to above, as well asits brilliant colors, would mark this beautiful bird definitely as atrogon. The only other trogon likely to be met with anywherewithin the range of this species is the Mexican trogon, found on thehighlands of Mexico. The two species can be recognized in life bythe color patterns of the outer tail feathers; in amhiguus thesefeathers are largely white, barred or vermiculated with black; inmexicarms they are largely black, broadly tipped with white.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southern Arizona, south to central Mexico; accidental inthe lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas.The range of the coppery-tailed trogon extends north casually toArizona (possibly Santa Catalina Mountains, Huachuca Mountains,and possibly Tombstone) ; northern Chihuahua (San Luis Mountainsand the Sierra de la Campana) ; Nuevo Leon (Monterey and Monte-morelos) ; and central Tamaulipas (Ciudad Victoria and Soto laMarina). East to Tamaulipas (Soto la Marina, Xicotencatl, Alta-mira, and Tampico) ; central Veracruz (Orizaba) ; and central Oaxaca(Talca and Juchatengo). South to Oaxaca (Juchatengo) ; Oaxaca(Omilteme and Amula) ; Michoacan (Tancitaro) ; and Jalisco (Zapot-ian). West to Jalisco (Zapotlan, Ameca, and San Marcos) ; Nayarit(Mazatlan, Tres Marias Islands, and Mexcatitlan) ; Sinaloa (Escui-napa. El Limon, Angostura, and San Javier) ; eastern Sonora(Alamos, Chinobampo, and Guiracoba) ; and southeastern Arizona(Huachuca Mountains and possibly the Santa Catalina Mountains).Casual records.?Although this bird can only be considered as rareanywhere in the United States, it appears to be fairly regular in theHuachuca Mountains, Ariz. During the summer of 1877 a trogonwas killed near Ringgold Barracks and another at Las Cuevas, Tex.Although not preserved they were fully described, by the persons whoshot them, to Dr. James C. Merrill, and were undoubtedly this species.Egg dates.?Mexico: 23 records, March 29 to June 30; 12 records,April 15 to May 13, indicating the height of the season.
EASTEKN BELTED KINGFISHER 111Order CORACIIFORMESFamily ALCEDINIDAE : KingfishersMEGACERYLE ALCYON ALCYON (Linnaeus)EASTERN BELTED KINGFISHERPlATES 12-14HABITSOur North American representative of the large and interestingkingfisher family is not so gaudily colored as some of the foreignspecies and is intermediate in size between the largest and thesmallest members of the family, but it is an interesting bird, strikingin appearance and voice, and unique in form. Its long, heavy billand its large head with its prominent crest, contrasting with itsdiminutive feet and its short tail, seem entirely out of balance andgive it a top-heavy appearance. But its peculiar proportions andstructure are beautifully adapted for the life it leads ; its large beakand head form an effective spearhead for use in its deep plunges, andthey are well built to stand the shocks of frequent diving. Unlikethe osprey, it does not need to use its feet in fishing; but the shortlegs and shovellike feet are most useful in shoveling the loose soilfrom its nesting burrows, after it has been loosened by the powerfulbeak.The belted kingfisher, as a species, covers nearly all the NorthAmerican Continent, breeding from northern Alaska and centralLabrador southward to the southern border of the United States.Being essentially a fish-eating bird, its haunts are naturally nearlarge or small bodies of water. It is common on the seacoast andestuaries, where it may be seen perched on some stake or pier, watch-ing for its prey; or along the shore of a lake or pond, its favoriteoutlook may be the branch of a tree overhanging the water ; I believethat it prefers to perch on a dead or leafless branch, where its viewis unobstructed. Trout brooks, especially swift and rocky mountainstreams, are favorite resorts, where its loud, rattling cry is oftenlieard, as it flies up and down, patrolling its chosen fishing groundand driving away any intruders of its own species; it prefers toplay the role of the lone fisherman.Courtshi'p.?Very little seems to be known about the kingfisher'scourtship. Laurence B. Potter says in his notes: "Sometimes I havewatched as many as five or six high up in the air, tumbling andwheeling about, uttering their harsh rattle ; they appear to be doingit merely for the joy of flying, or it may be their courtship antics."Francis H. Allen writes to me: "From courting birds?a group of
112 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthem?I have heard a mewing note uttered in rapid succession,almost if not quite as loud as the familiar rattle of the species.These same birds?or two of them at least?also kept up a con-tinual, prolonged rattle."Nesting.?The nest of the belted kingfisher is almost invariablyin a burrow in a sandy, clay, or gravelly bank, excavated by thebirds themselves. The site chosen is preferably near water and asnear the favorite fishing grounds of the birds as a suitable bank canbe found. But such banks are not always to be found in the mostconvenient places, so the birds are forced to nest in any bank theycan find, often at a long distance from any water, such as theembankment of a railroad cut, the cliff of a sand dune, or a bank bya roadside where sand or gravel has been taken out for grading. OnCape Cod, the sandpits made while sanding cranberry bogs are favor-ite sites. The burrow may be at any height from the base of thecliff, depending on the height of the cliff, but it is usually not morethan 2 or 3 feet from the top, though Major Bendire (1895) saysthat it is sometimes as much as 20 feet below the top of the cliff.The burrow extends iuAvard, sloping slightly upward, for varyingdistances, usually from 3 to 6 feet, but sometimes as much as 10 oreven 15 feet; as kingfishers sometimes use the same burrow forseveral years in succession, it may be that the deepest burrows arethe oldest and have been extended from year to year to provide afresh, clean nest. The burrow is usually straight, or nearly so, butoften it curves somewhat, or makes a more or less abrupt turn tothe right or left. One that I dug out ran straight in for 3 feet, madean abrupt turn to the left, and then made a reverse curve, so that thenest was only about 2 feet from the face of the cliff. The entranceand the tumiel itself are not quite circular, being usually about 3i/^to 4 inches wide and 3 to 3^/2 inches high; an occupied burrow cangenerally be recognized by the footmarks of the bird, a centralridge with a furrow on each side of it, made by the bird as itenters or leaves the nest. The nest is placed in an enlarged chamber,which may be directly at the end of the tunnel, or a little to one sideof it, and usually a little above the level of the tunnel. The chambervaries considerably in size and shape but is approximately circularand dome-shaped ; it is usually 10 to 12 inches in diameter and 6 to 7inches in height. Often the eggs are laid on the bare sand or gravelwhich probably indicates that the nest is a new one, or that theeggs are fresh; oftoner, perhaps, the nesting chamber is lined withbits of clean, v.'hite fish bones, fish scales, or fragments of the shellsof crustaceans; these, I believe, are the remains of ejected pelletsand indicate that the nest has been previously occupied by youngbirds or that the female has been fed on the nest for some time;
EASTERN BELTED KINGFISHER 113there is no evidence to indicate that the birds ever bring in suchmaterial intentionally.Bendire (1895) writes:The time required to dig out a burrow depends largely on the nature of thesoil to be removed, taking sometimes two or three weeks, but generally muchless. I have personally seen an instance where a pair of these birds excavateda new burrow in a rather friable clay bank near Fort Lapwni, Idaho, to adepth of 5 feet (estimated measurement) in a little over three days. How theymanaged to dig so rapidly, considering their short and weak-looking feet, withwhich they must remove the greater part of the material, has always been amystery to me, and I would not believe them capable of accomplishing such anamount of work had I not seen it done. When not disturbed the same nestingsite is resorted to from year to year. Sometimes the male burrows an addi-tional hole near the occupied nesting site, usually not over 3 feet deep, to whichit retires to feed and to pass the night.Dr. Thomas S. Eoberts (1932) published the following account onthe authority of Miss Frances Densmore, of Red Wing, Minn.
:
On April 25, 1928, I found a pair of Kingfishers digging their tunnel at thetop of a high cut about a foot below the surface, just where the black loammet the under sand, some one hundred feet, or thereabouts, above the water.They both dug, taking turn and turn about, except when she thought he hadn'tstayed in long enough and sent him back. After watching them for an houror more I formed a theory as to how they managed it. One would go in andwork for tv.'o or three minutes and then push the dirt ahead of it to the en-trance and fly out over it. No dirt ever came out with the bird that had beendigging, but when the other went in there was a veritable fountain spurtingout for nearly a minute after it entered. Then this subsided and more diggingwas done by the bird that had cleared the hole. They kept very close to theirschedule of two or three minutes each. On this day the dirt they brought outwas sand, but on the 27th it was black loam from above, and I decided thatthey had got back to their "sitting room." On May 1 they weren't workingand, as both were in and out at the same time, I judged that there was roomto turn and that they would call it done.Dr. A. K. Fisher wrote to Major Bendire (1895) as follows:On June 6, 1882, the writer found two nests of the Kingfisher in the side of arailroad cut near Croton Lake, Westchester County, New York. The burrowswere placed in a bank not over 7 feet above the roadbed and within 18 inchesof the top. That of the first one ran in about 7 feet and turned to the rightas it entered the nesting chamber. The seven fresh eggs were placed in anest of coarse grass, which, although rather scanty, covered the floor of the cav-ity on all sides. The burrow of tlie second one extended in about 4y2 feet,and, like the other previously mentioned, turned toward the right as theexpanded nesting cavity was reached. The nest, which was quite elaborate,was composed wholly of fish scales and bones, arranged in a compact, saucer-shaped mass. The writer made a tunnel from the top of the bank so as tointercept the burrow as it entered the nesting cavity. Viewed through thishole, the nest was a beautiful affair. The scales, which looked as if madeof frosted silver, formed a delicate setting for the six pure-white eggs lyingin the center, and by the projected light made a most effective picture. On twooccasions, near Sing Sing, New York, the writer found the Kingfisher and
114 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMRough-winged Swallow using burrows having a common entrance. It isprobable in each case that the swallow had commenced its diverging burrowafter the larger bird completed its work.A few cases have been recorded of the kingfisher nesting in othercavities, where suitable sandbanks were not available. Mr. Forbush(1927) says: "Mr. Herbert F. Moulton of Ware, Massachusetts, tellsme that he found a kingfisher's nest in a plowed field on a hillside.The entrance was made in a 'dead furrow,' " Arthur H. Howell(1932) says: "Baynard (1913) writes that in Alachua County[Florida] the Kingfisher nests early in April in holes in dead treesor stubs over water. He states, also (verbally), that he once founda nest at Clearwater, 4 feet above water in a leaning stub, the en-trance hole being on the under side ; this nest contained 4 eggs onMay 6."Beyer, Allison, and Kopman (1908) , referring to Louisiana, say
:
The character of the nest varies greatly with different conditions of soil
:
On the coast it is content with such elevations as can be found on the shores,and the burrow is sometimes scarcely more than a pocket in the clayey banks;in the upper districts, the site is often far from water, and the soft, coarse-grained soil renders easy the excavation of a burrow five or sis feet deep,enlarged at the end, and often partly lined with leaves and pine straw; andfinally, a unique condition exists in the extensive gum-swamps in the lakeregion of the southeast, where the land?always submerged?is perfectly flat,and nothing stands above water except innumerable trees and stumps of Nyssa
;
the nest is placed in the top of a decaying stump, with no attempt at excavation.But tree-nesting is not wholly confined to the southern swamps,for Dr. George M. Sutton (1928) writes:On May 27th, 1927, while observing Chimney Swifts at Bethany, BrookeCounty, West Virginia, I saw a Kingfisher fly rapidly across an open field froma near-by deep pool in Buffalo Creek, Wondering that it should thus cross over-land, I watched it as it flew to a large, dead sycamore, not far from me, anddisappeared in a hole at the end of a short, thick, horizontal stub. Upon goingto the tree I heard the buzzing cries of the young birds. Shortly thereafter themale parent flew away as the female came in. The nest was located about tenfeet from the ground in a large cavity near the juncture of the bough and themain trunk. The young birds were lying about seven feet from the entrance.The cavity was almost as dark as a bank burrow would have been. It is oddthat the Kingfishers chose such a site for their nest, since earthen banksadmirably suited to their needs were available along the creek.Eggs.?The number of eggs laid by the eastern belted kingfishervaries ordinarily from five to eight, the commonest numbers being6 and 7; on rare occasions as many as 11 or 14 eggs or young havebeen found in a nest. If the first set of eggs is taken, the birds willdig another burrow, often within a few feet of the first, and lay asecond set ; sometimes a third, or even a fourth, attempt will be made.But only one brood is raised in a season. The eggs are short-ovateor rounded-ovate in shape ; the shell is smooth and rather glossy ; they
EASTERN BELTED KINGFISHER 115
are pure white in color. The measurements of 54 eggs average 33.9by 26.7 millimeters, the eggs showing the four extremes measure36.8 by 27.9, 30.8 by 26.4, and 33 by 25.4 millimeters.Young.?The incubation period is said to be about 23 or 24 days.Bendire (1895) says:The male does not assist in incubation, but supplies bis mate with foodwhile so engaged, and she rarely leaves the nest after the first egg has beenlaid ; at any rate I have invariably found the bird at home if there wereany eggs in the nest. Incubation lasts about sixteen days. The young whenfirst hatched are blind, perfectly naked, helpless, and, in a word, very unpre-possessing. They scarcely look like birds while crawling about in the nest,where they remain several weeks, their growth being very slow. The excre-ment of the young is promptly removed and the burrow is kept rather clean.They utter a low, puffing sound when disturbed, and frequently vary consider-ably in size, as if incubation, in some instances at least, began with the firstegg laid. The young, even after they have left the nest for some time, re-quire the attendance of their parents before they are able to secure sub-sistence for themselves.I believe that Bendire's statement above, that the male does notincubate, is incorrect; perhaps he may not do so regularly, or to thesame extent that the female does, but several observers have reportedfinding the male on the eggs, or at least in the nest. The youngremain in the nest for about 4 weeks or more, and do not leaveit until they are able to fly.William L. Bailey (1900) made an interesting study of a familyof young kingfishers, by digging a hole in the rear of the nestingcavity on four different occasions, taking photographs of. the youngat four different ages, and filling up the hole each time, so as notto disturb the birds too much. He says that when the young wereabout two days old they "were not only found wrapped togetherin the nest, but the moment they were put on the ground, one ata time, though their eyes were still sealed, they immediately cover-ered one another with their wings and wide bills, making such atight ball that when one shifted a leg, the whole mass would movelike a single bird. This is a most sensible method of keeping warm,since the mother bird's legs are so short that she could not standover them, but as they are protected from the wind and weatherthey have no need of her. Their appearance is comical in the ex-treme, and all out of proportion. This clinging to one another isapparently kept up for at least ten days, for a week later, whennine days old, they were found in exactly a similar position."On his last visit, when the young birds were 23 days old, he madean interesting discovery, of which he says: "Taking the precautionto stop the hole with a good-sized stone, I proceeded to my diggingfor the last time on the top of the bank. This time I found thechamber had been moved, and I had some difficulty in locating it
116 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMabout a foot higher up and about the same distance to one side. Theold birds had evidently discovered my imperfectly closed back door,and either mistrusted its security, or else a heavy rain had soakeddown into the loosened earth and caused them to make alterations.They had completelj'' closed up the old chamber and packed it tightlywith earth and disgorged fish bones."Mrs. Florence M. Bailey (1928) makes the following apt quota-tion from the writings of Professor Herrick:From the time of birth the young lie huddled in a cluster in their darkunderground chamber ... As they grow in size and strength the monotonyof sitting still, often with legs and wings interlocked, must become verygreat, and . . . they soon begin to bite and tease one another like youngpuppies. Should one be hard pressed, the only way of escape lies along the nar-row passage, which they naturally traverse head first; but the instinct to re-turn to the warm family cluster is strong, and to do this they are obliged towalk backwards. Again when the rattle of the alma mater announcing thecapture of another fish is heard, each struggles to get down the narrowpassage-way first, but when the parent enters the hole she hustles them allback.The young are fed by their two parents while they remain in thenest, and for some time afterward while they are learning to fishfor themselves. Mrs. Irene G. Wheelock (1905) made the followingobservations
:
By care in concealment we were able to discover that the adult came to thenest on the first day with no visible supply of food in the bill but with a gulletconspicuously swollen. We had previously excavated the nest from the rearmaking a false back to it so that it would be protected from the weather andat the same time open easily. As soon as feeding was completed and the adultout of sight, we opened the nest at the false back, took out the young, then oneday old, and examined the crops. They contained a dark gray, oily mass, nearlyfluid and very ill smelling, but with no bones or scales in it. If fish they werevery small and digested. Returning the young fishers to the tunnel, we closedit. Two days later the experiment was repeated with the same results. Fourdays later, or the seventh day after hatching, we examined again. This timeone of the nestlings had swallowed several small fish about one and one halfinches long and the others v/ere still hungry. As yet we had not seen either ofthe adults bring visible food and the most frequent feedings had been forty min-utes apart, I believe all by regurgitation. No record was kept from the seventhto the fourteenth day when an examination was made for the third time.We now found the young showing well developed pin feathers, and there weretraces of disgorged fish bones and scales in the nest which had not been therebefore. The crops examined showed fish only slightly digested and regurgita-tive feeding had evidently given place wholly or in part to fresh food. On thisday one of the adults brought several fish, possibly four inches long to the nestin different journeys. Examinations made on the twenty-first day revealed thesame food conditions as the fourteenth. The pile of fish bones and scales wasa trifle larger but was partially buried in the earth. There was surprisinglylittle of this debris in the nest or tunnel but the ground seemed to be saturatedwith fishy oil. On the tv?'enty-eighth day the young kingfishers resented beingexamined or photographed, and made good their escape when taken from thenest.
EASTERN BELTED KINGFISHER 117Henry R. Carey (1909) writes:The food brought to tlse uest-hole consists of various Iduds of small tish. Itnot infreq\ient!y happens that one of tliese fish is too large to be carried by theparent bird into the narrow passage; it is then dropped upon the sand and isallowed to rot. * * * i once found a common salt-water flounder, four andone-half inches long and proportionately wide, which, being rather unwieldyfor the parent bird to handle, had been left in this way. Another time I founda young Sculpin (Callionymus aeneus) in the same condition, and, yet again, alive minnow, which, in spite of a great patch on its side devoid of scales, wasfinally freed in perfect health. * * *The young birds leave the earth about July 25 [in New Hampshire]. Theyare a sombre-looking lot, as for several days they sit tamely about the wharfsor venture on short, erratic flights, which makes one feel that they have notyet got used to the light after their long imprisonment underground. It is atthis time that both parents and young, somewhat crowded in the vicinity ofthe home nest by their sudden increase in population, begin to seek out newfishing-stubs, or to use old ones for the first time in the year. When the youngare able to care for themselves, the old birds leave them and lead once morethe single life which they seem to enjoy most.At this time of year, frequent quarrels occur among them, mostly about thebest fishing spots, and now that strange, whining note, which Herrick de-scribes as resembling the grating of two tree boughs in the wind, is oftenheard. It appears to be a note of anger ; I have heard it when one bird,wanting the perch of another, hovered menacingly over him. Once I saw twobirds dive simultaneously for the same spot in the water, the same note es-caping them as each reliTctantly swerved aside.Floyd Bralliar (1922) writes interestingly of how the young learnto catch their own fish
:
The young birds did not remain in the neighborhood of the nest more thana few days, but those few days were busy ones, for in that brief time themother was teaching her children bow to earn a living. She would perch bytheir side on an overhanging limb and patiently wait for the glimmer of a fishbelow. The first day or two she usually caught the fish, beat it into partialinsensibility and then dropped it again into the water. The young were per-sistent in their plea for food, but the mother was as insistent that they catchtheir living if they got any. There was very little current where they hunted,and a fish did not float out of sight quickly. The young birds would cranetheir necks and look hungrily at the fish below until finally one more hungryor more bold than the rest would make a dive for it. At first the aim wasnot good, and the bird would miss even a dead fish more often than he succeededin catching it. Usually, however, he fluttered about the surface of the wateruntil he got his fish, even tho he had missed it when he made his plunge.* * * During the first few days when the young birds became too hungry,the mother would occasionally relent and feed them, but before the week wasover, no matter how hungry they became, no food was coming imtil they caughtit. Within ten days the young birds were catching live fish instead of halfdead ones.Then a young bird would catch his fish, carry it to his perch, whack it overthe limb a few times, toss it in the air, catch it by the head as it came downand swallow it with as much skill as his mother. As soon as she was convincedof the skill of each of her brood, she forsook them entirely. I do not knowwhether she ultimately drove them from the neighborhood or whether they
118 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMleft voluntarily, but when July was past only the old birds were to be seenin the neighborhood.Henry Mousley (1938), who made a prolonged study of a familyof belted kingfishers, estimated tlie period of incubation to be about24 days. His report says, in conclusion
:
On summing up I find forty-two hours were spent with the birds (May 11-July 24), during which time the young were fed one hundred times, or at anaverage rate of once in every 25.2 minutes. Of course there were periods whenthe feeding was much faster, as for instance, once in every 8, 9, 13, 20, and 21minutes respectively. Sometimes the parents were absent from the nest forlong periods of time, such as, 150, 120, 105, 97, 93, 90, 85, 75, 70, and 60 minutesat a time, when of course the young were without food. It was after theselong spells that the more rapid feedings generally took place. As alreadyremarked, the male seemed to pay the most attention to this part of the busi-ness, for I find of those times when I was perfectly sure of the sex of theparent, the male fed twenty-eight times to his partner's fourteen, or just double.It was the male parent which was the last seen at the nest previous to thedeparture of the one surviving young?a male. The food for the most partconsisted of small fish, crawfish, minnows, tadpoles, and probably beetles.Plumages.?The young kingfisher is hatched naked, blind, andhelpless, a shapeless mass of reddish flesh, looking much like a veryyoung puppy with a huge conical bill. Its eyes do not open for abouttwo weeks. Within a week, or less, the pinfeathers or feather-sheaths appear, and soon the young bird bristles in all the feathertracts with quills like a young porcupine, which grow to varyinglengths and show, before they burst, the pectoral band and the gen-eral color pattern of the adult. When the young bird is 17 or 18days old, a remarkable change takes places within the short space of24 hours, for the sheaths rapidly burst and the juvenal plumageblossoms out all over the body.In this plumage the young bird looks strikingly like the adult withonly minor differences, and the sexes are alike. Young birds ofboth sexes, when fully fledged, have the pectoral band more or lessheavily tipped or mixed with cinnamon, rufous or dull brown; thisusually consists of narrow edgings in young males, but in youngfemales many feathers are half or more brown; the rufous band ofthe female adult is only partially shown in the young female, mainlyon the flanks, and it shows to some extent in nearly all young males,some having nearly as much as young females; the crest is darkerthan in adults, there is more white in the wing coverts, the whitetips of the secondaries are more extensive, and the central tailfeathers are spotted, as in the adult female. This juvenal plumageis also a first winter plumage, for it is worn without much changeuntil spring. Young birds have a first, prenuptial molt early inspring, which involves most of the body plumage, perhaps all of it,the tail, and apparently the wings also; this takes place between
EASTERN BELTED KHSTGFISHER 119February and April. Adults have a complete postnuptial molt inAugust, September, and October.Mr. Brewster (1937a) made some observations on the roosting habitsof kingfishers at Umbagog Lake, Maine, of which he says: "Everyevening, a little after sunset, two or three Kingfishers resort to PinePoint to spend the night. They fly directly into the forest and goto roost among the densest foliage, often that of spruces and arborvitaes, growing anywhere from four to ten rods back from the nearestshore." One that he watched "flew up into a tall, slender PaperBirch, and alighted near the end of a long branch, about thirty feetabove the ground. * * * ^g darkness gathered, the bird settledlower and lower on the branch, and drew in its neck without, how-ever, burying its head in its plumage, for I could still see its billpointing outward over the breast. At 9 p. m. I went under the tree,and by the light of a lantern dimly made out the Kingfisher, crouch-ing in the same attitude, in exactly the same place."Food.?The kingfisher is a fish eater and an expert fisherman, welldeserving its name. It evidently prefers fish to any other food andwoujd probably live on fish exclusively, if it were always able tosecure all it needed. It catches mainly small fish, preferably notover 6 inches long, and mostly those species that are of little use,or even harmful, economically as far as human interests are con-cerned. The kingfisher has been condemned by trout fisherman asa great destroyer of trout, but in a large measure unjustly. King-fishers undoubtedly visit trout hatcheries frequently and can easilycatch plenty of trout in the open pools, where the trout have no placeto hide and where they are congregated in large numbers; they cando considerable damage in such places, but the trout can be easilyprotected by placing wire screens over the pools. In the troutstreams wild trout are not so easily caught, for, as every trout fisher-man knows, the trout are seldom seen in the open places except whendarting swiftly across them, but spend their time hiding under over-hanging banks, or under logs or stones, and only dashing out occa-sionally to capture their prey. On the other hand, chubs, dace, suck-ers, and sometimes sculpins are very common in most trout streams,generally in larger numbers than the trout; they frequent the openspaces, are much slower in their movements than the swiftly movingtrout, and consequently are more easily caught. The records showthat these neutral or harmful fishes make up the greater part, ornearly all, of the kingfisher's catch in trout streams. Chub and scul-pins are very destructive to small trout fry ; and suckers eat quanti-ties of trout spawn; consequently the kingfishers are really doing thetrout fisherman a favor by reducing the numbers of these fishes in thestreams and should be protected rather than persecuted.
120 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe kingfisher must of necessity do its fishing in clear water, so isseldom seen on muddy streams or ponds, or on those that are chokedor overgrown with thick vegetation, such as is often found alongtrout streams. It usually perches on some stake, snag, or pier stand-ing in the water, or on some bare overhanging branch, where it canwatch patiently for some passing fish. Favorite perches of this sortin good fishing spots are resorted to regularly and rival kingfishersare driven away, for the kingfisher is a solitary bird except duringthe nesting season or while training its young. From such a perchthe bird may dive obliquely into the water to seize the fish in itspoAverful bill ; or, rising 30 or 40 feet into the air and scanning thewater below it in more active pursuit of its prey, it may stop andhover for a few seconds, with rapidly vibrating wings, and then makea straight or spiral dive directly downward, disappearing beneaththe water sometimes for several seconds. It is not always successfulin its plunges, as the fish may move and cause a sudden change ofdirection in the bird's rapid dive either above or below the surface;but it is not easily discouraged and is always ready to trj^ again.Having secured the fish, it flies with it to some favorite perch, whereit beats the fish into insensibility, tosses it into the air, or otherwiseadjusts it, so that it can swallow it head first and thus avoid anyinjury to its throat from the sharp spiny fins. Sometimes the fish istoo large to be swallowed completely, in which case the tail must beleft protruding from the mouth until the rapid process of digestionenables the bird to gradually work it down. Manly Hardy wroteto Major Bendire (1895) of such a case, and says: "I shot a King-fisher last spring that had swallowed a pickerel considerably longerthan the bird from the end of the bill to the tip of the tail, and thetail of the fish protruding from the throat, while the head was partlydoubled back, causing a large protuberance near the vent."Where fish are not readily obtainable, especially in the arid regionsof the Southwest where the streams largely disappear during thedry season, the kingfisher seems able to make a good living on variousother kinds of food. The list includes crabs, crayfishes, mussels, liz-ards, frogs, toads, small snakes, turtles, grasshoppers, locusts,crickets, salamanders, newts, butterflies, moths, beetles and other in-sects, young birds, mice, and even berries. On the seacoast, it hasbeen known to feed on clams and oysters, which sometimes resultsdisastrously for the bird. H. C. Hopkins (1892) reports finding akingfisher with "its bill held fast between the shells of an oyster."The bird had evidently inserted its bill into the open shell of theoyster, which had closed upon it; "the tongue [was] quite black fromnon-circulation of the blood, which showed that it must have beenheld prisoner for some time." The bird would probably have
EASTERN BELTED KINGFISHER 121drowned at the next high tide. Dr. B. H. Warren (1890) reportsthat a friend of his once caught one of these birds on a hook andline while fishing with a live minnow for bait. He also says: "Oneday B. M. Everhart found a kingfisher lying on the bank of asmall stream. On making an investigation, Mr. Everhart ascer-tained that the bird was unable to fly, as its bill was tightly claspedin the grasp of a large fresh-water mussel. I have heard of severalinstances where kingfishers have been captured under similar circum-stances, which could naturally lead one to suppose that they feed toa limited degree on the flesh of these bivalves."In the Bermudas, kingfishers are said to feed on squids. Walter B.Barrows (1912) quotes Professor Aughey, of Nebraska, as follows:"One that was sent to me to identify in September, 1874, had 18locusts, in addition to portions of some fish, in its stomach. Onethat I opened in September, 1876, had mingled at least 14 locustswith its fish diet." Bendire (1895) caught a kingfisher in a trapbaited with a mouse, and believed "that not a few mice, and possiblysmall birds also, are caught by them during their nocturnal rambles,and they are certainly fully as active throughout the night as in thedaytime."Kingfishers disgorge as pellets the indigestible portions of theirfood, such as fish bones and scales, the shells of crutaceans and theseeds of berries; the bones and scales found in the nests are theremains of such pellets. Henry R. Carey (1909) writes:Only once have I seen a pellet of fishbones and scales being disgorged fromthe bird's beak, as he sat on his hunting perch. These pellets are foundwherever the birds are accustomed to sit for any length of time. I oncefound one completely composed of various parts of the shell of a small crab.Only a few days later I had the pleasure of seeing a crab actually caught.The bird captured him by diving in the usual way and took him to a low rockwhere he proceeded to bang him just as he would have done to a minnow.During this process the crab, which measured an inch and a half sidewaysacross the shell, lost several legs and was dropped upon the rock, from whichby a considerable effort he managed to fall by scrambling to the edge with hisremaining legs. The bird, perhaps seeing that he was rather a large morselto swallow whole, then forgot him completely and went on with his fishing.Ora W. Knight (1908) has seen kingfishers chase and capturemoths and butterflies, taking them on the wing. Dr. Thomas S.Roberts (1932) says that they have been known to eat young spar-rows; also that "crawfish are pounded and crushed before swallow-ing, and fish that are too large may be divided into pieces by thepowerful bill. Miss Densmore, of Red Wing, once saw a Kingfisherthat was making unsuccessful attempts to handle a small turtle.This was thoroughly pounded and variously manipulated but had tobe discarded in the end."17S223?40 9
122 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMDr. Charles W. Townsend (1918) writes: "Early in August, 1917,Mr. John Hair, gamekeeper of Mr. E. T. Crane at Ipswich, missedsix of a four days old brood of Bob-whites. He had seen a King-fisher nearby and later the same day saw it perched on the gable endof the little house where the Bob-whites had been hatched, and fromthere pounce on the young birds as they ran in and out. He shot theKingfisher, and, on opening the bird, a female, found the legs andfeathers of the young Bob-whites in its crop."When hard pressed for animal food the kingfisher has been knownto eat wild cherries and probably other wild fruits. Dr. ElliottCoues (1878) published the following note from Mrs. Mary Treatabout a kingfisher that fished regularly from a private wharf infront of her house in Florida: "When the water is so rough thatit is difficult for him to procure fish, instead of seeking some seques-tered pool he remains at his usual post, occasionally making anineffectual effort to secure his customary prey, until, nearly starved,he resorts to a sour-gum tree {Nyssa aquatica^ L.) in the vicinity,and greedily devours the berries. Returning to his post, he soonejects a pellet of the large seeds and skins of the fruit."Behavior.?The belted kingfisher is a striking and picturesquefeature in the landscape whether in action or at rest. The mountaintrout stream would lose much of its charm without the rattling callof the lone fisherman and the flash of his broad, blue wings, as hefollows the course of the stream, flying well below the treetops untilhe glides upward to alight on his accustomed perch, there to tilt hisshort tail nervously up and down and raise and lower his long cresta few times, as he sounds his battle cry again. At the seashore, too,his trim, unique figure and his conspicuous color pattern, as heperches day after day on his favorite stake or goes rattling alongthe shore, add color and a tinge of wildness to the scene.The flight of the kingfisher is strong, swift, and graceful, usuallylow, but high above the treetops when traveling ; often there are fiveor six rapid strokes followed by a long glide on half-closed wings.Mr. Carey (1909) writes of it:The Kingfisher's flight is remarkable for its beauty. How easily those longwings carry him about, as he skims so close over the water that their tips aresometimes wetted, or, as he hovers, his body appearing absolutely motionless,in that wonderful way which few birds can equal, for indefinite periods oftime. Sometimes, especilally in water half a foot or less in depth, he diveswhile fiying nearly parallel to its surface. Sometimes, in his journeys fromperch to perch when fish are plentiful, he dips again and again into the waterin this way, reminding one of the Swallow as he gracefully touches the waterhere and there in his flight over the mill-pond. Again, he drops like a fallingstone in a nearly perpendicular line upon his fishy prey.Again he writes, referring to times of keen competition over goodfishing grounds
:
EASTERN BELTED KINGFISHER 123On such occasions one bird is often angrily pursued by another. Thesepursuits are most reckless and enduring in character. One sees the twobirds swirl by like two blue flashes of light, to disappear in an instant oftime on perfectly controlled wings perhaps far away in the pine woods,almost grazing the tough trunk of some mighty tree, or heading straight for asheer cliff and rising fifteen feet or more to clear it when it seems that theymust be dashed to pieces on the rock. I once saw a Kingfisher, hard-pressed insuch a pursuit, adopt a clever means of escape. His pursuer was close uponhim?about five feet behind. On they came down the creek, neither birdseeming to gain upon the other. Both were flying lat top speed low over thewater. Suddenly there was a splash, and the foremost Kingfisher disap-peared under the water. The bird behind swept on and lit ou a nearby stub, notattempting to renew the chase when his enemy reappeared.The above was probably a case of one bird defending its territoryagainst the invasion of it by another kingfisher. Frederick C.Lincoln (1924) saw a striking example of this during his field workin the marshes of the Illinois River ; he says : "During the period ofgreatest abundance, practically every channel had its quota of birds,each of which appeared to patrol or to hold dominion over a certainwell-defined section." As many as 8 or 10 birds were encountered,each always confined to its own limited section. One of the boatmentold him that "he took much pleasure in informing club members andothers who might be with him in the club launch, just how far thekingfisher then in sight would go and where the next one would bemet."William Brewster (1937a) watched a kingfisher at Lake Umbagogthat "plunged into the water, striking a fish so large, that he hadto let it go after a brief struggle, during which he failed to bringit to the surface, although evidently trying his best to do so."Voice.?There is not much beauty in the voice of the kingfisher, butthe loud rattling call always produces a thrill in the listener; it isa wild, weird, wilderness call that enlivens the solitudes and punc-tuates the stillness of lonely shores or forest streams; it seems to fitin well with the active vigor of this aggressive guardian of hisdomain, as a warning to his rivals. It consists of a series of harsh,wooden, rattling notes of great carrying power. It has been likenedto the sound made by an old-fashioned policeman's or watchman'srattle, a very good description for those of us who are old enoughto remember such out-of-date sounds ; but it may remind the youngergeneration of the sound made by certain noise-making instrumentsused at get-together dinners, political rallies, or other joyous gath-erings.It is not easily expressed in syllables, but Mr. Bralliar (1922) haswritten it fairly well as rickety, crick, crick, crick. The call variessome under different circumstances, sometimes being quite soft andlow, as if in a conversational tone with its mate. The courtship
124 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
note, referred to above by Mr. Allen, was "a mewing note utteredin rapid succession, almost if not quite as loud as the familiar rattle."Tlien there is the whining note, referred to by Mr. Carey above,
"resembling the grating of two tree boughs in the wind," whichseems to be a note of anger while quarreling over fishing rights.Brewster (1937a) says that "on such occasions they often utter aharsh cah-car-car-car^ quite unlike the usual volley of watclnnan'srattle-like notes."Field marks.?The kingfisher could hardly be mistaken for any-thing else. Its shape is distinctive, its large head and crest and itslong, heavy bill are all out of proportion to its small body, short tail,and tiny feet. As it flies its great blue wings, its white collar, andits banded breast are unique. Its loud, rattling note proclaims itbeyond doubt.Enemies.?The most serious enemies of the kingfisher are the self-ish fisherman, who wants all the fish for himself and begrudgesthe poor bird an honest living, and the proprietor of a trout hatchery,who is unwilling to go to the trouble and expense of screening hispools to protect his fish. The former shoots every kingfisher he canwith misguided satisfaction; the latter either shoots or traps anythat visit his pools. A small, unbaited, steel trap is set and fastenedto the top of a stake or post near the bird's favorite fishing pool ; ifthe trap is so set that the pan is at the highest point, the bird is almostsure to alight on it and is caught. Hundreds of kingfishers are caughtand killed in this way along private trout streams, or about trouthatcheries, every year.The natural enemies of the kingfisher are of no great menace toits welfare. The Cooper's and the sharp-shinned hawks often pursueit, perhaps largely for sport ; under the accounts of these two hawks,in a previous volume, will be found references to these attacks and thesuccessful attempts of the kingfisher to escape by diving; it evenseems as if the kingfisher enjoyed the sport, judged by its derisive
"laughter" at the defeat of the hawk.The remains of a kingfisher have been found in the stomach of ared-tailed hawk ; the former must have been caught unaware, for thehawk is no match for it in flight. The kingbird sometimes makes lifemiserable for the kingfisher; Fred T. Jencks (1881) writes:The Kingfisher had poised himself several times to look for fish, and wasjust moving to do so again as the Kingbird approached and attacked him. TheKingfisher is not a troublesome bird, and always minds his own business.He was entirely unprepared, and acted as though he could not believe thatthe other had any evil intentions, for he tried to poise again. The secondattack seemed to undeceive him, and show him his enemy was in earnest. Hevaulted and turned, vainly endeavoring to rid himself of his persecutor. Hesoon saw he could not save himself by flight and tried diving. As soon, how-
EASTERN BELTED KINGFISHER 125
ever, as he appeared at tlie surface he attempted to fly, but the Kingbird,keeping up an incessant twittering, forced him to dive again. Two or threetimes this was repeated, both birds making considerable noise, until the King-fisher seemed convinced that escape in that direction was impossible, so he satlike a duck upon the surface, and as his persecutor would swoop at him hewould go under. This lasted for some little time, until even the Kingbirdseemed wearied and flew away.Snakes and perhaps skunks or minks may crawl into the nestingholes, while the parent birds are away, and destroy the eggs oryoung ; but it would seem that the formidable beak of the kingfisher,if at home, would prove to be an effective weapon of defense. H. H.Bailey (1907) says: "While digging out some Kingfishers' nests thisseason I was surprised to find a dead bird in about every fourthor fifth hole. This I was at loss to account for, as the birds showedno signs of combat or disease, while the plumage was not even dis-arranged. The bodies, though, seemed to be dried up, with no signsof blood in them, so I presumed that something had crawled into theholes and sucked the blood from them, leaving the carcass intact.This surmise proved correct, as the last hole I dug out contained alarge black snake, and a dead kingfisher still warm."I quote the above for Avhat it is worth, but cannot agree with Mr.Bailey's conclusion. I have never heard that the black snake is ablood-sucker and doubt if it would attack a bird as big as a king-fisher. If such well-known blood-suckers as minks or weasels hadattacked the bird, there would have been evidences of a struggle.I believe that the snake was looking for eggs. The kingfishers mayhave died from an epidemic of roundworms or ringworms, whichhave often proved fatal to these birds.Frederic H. Kennard told me that while he was fishing on GrandLake, Maine, he and his daughter heard a splash behind them andtheir guide saw a kingfisher dive, disappear beneath the surface andnot come up. Although they all watched for some time, the birdnever appeared. They paddled over to the place where the king-fisher dived but could see no trace of the bird in the water or inthe air. They suspected that some of the large fish, pickerel, salmon,or togue, that abound in that lake, may have caught the kingfisher.Arthur W. Brockway tells me of a nest that was dug into by askunk and the young devoured, the excavation being made fromabove the nest.Winter.?The belted kingfisher is a hardy bird, and remains asfar north in fall and winter as it can find open water in which tocatch a fair supply of fish, A few kingfishers remain all winter,especially during mild winters, in southern New England, frequent-ing to some extent the open inland streams, but more regularly alongthe southern coast from Cape Cod to Long Island Sound.
126 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThere, Mr. Forbusli (1927) says, "they go into winter quarters inDecember, especially about river mouths where at that time the littlefrost-fish come in, and there they remain, unless extreme cold locksrivers and shores in ice."They are occasionally seen in winter in the northern tier of States.Dr. L. H. Walkinshaw writes to me from Battle Creek, Mich. : "Alongopen stretches of water, a few kingfishers can be found during theentire winter. I have several dates for southern Michigan for De-cember, January and February. I have watched them on zero, ornear zero, days dive from some dead branch after minnows in theopen stream."Mr. Skinner says in his notes from Yellowstone Park : "Ordinarilythis is a migratory bird, but here a few remain all winter along thestreams kept open by hot water. During cold winds and storms,they are often seen in the most protected places, but with feathersall fluffed out. The winter birds noticed have been males, the fe-males not appearing until March IT. In winter, I believe they roostin the tops of the thick cedars in the Gardiner Canyon, but I haveno data about the other localities."Most of the kingfishers migrate to the more southern States duringthe late fall, where they find open water and plenty of fish. Therethey establish regular fishing stations and live their solitary lives,each in its own territory. We often saw one in Florida perchedday after day in practically the same spot, presumably the samebird in each case. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?North America south to northern South America; acci-dental in the Azores, Ireland, and the Netherlands.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the belted kingfisher ex-tends north to central Alaska (Kowak River, Fairbanks, and prob-ably Fort Yukon) ; Mackenzie (Fort McPherson, Fort Wrigley, FortProvidence, and Fort Smith) ; central Saskatchewan (Knee Lake andPelican Lake) ; central Manitoba (Oxford Lake) ; Ontario (Rossportand North Abitibi River) ; Quebec (Lake Mistassini, Godbout, andRomaine River); and east-central Labrador (Grand Falls). Fromthis northeastern station the range extends southward through New-foundland and along the coasts of Nova Scotia and the EasternUnited States to central Florida (Micanopy and Clearwater) . Southto Florida (Clearwater, probably St. Marks, and Chipley) ; southernLouisiana (Bird Island and Bayou Sara) ; Texas (Giddings, CorpusChristi, Kerrville, and Pecos) ; southern New Mexico (Carlsbad andChloride) ; and southern California (Escondido). The western limitsextend northward through California, Oregon, Washington, and
EASTERN BELTED KINGFISHER 127British Columbia (sometimes along the coast) to Alaska (Sitka,Hope, Mount McKinley, and Kowak River).There are a few records north and west of the range as outlinedthat may possibly represent occasional nesting. One was seen August5 and 6, 1915, at a point 100 miles above Bethel, Alaska, and anotherwas seen on July 6, 1917, at Iditerod. MacFarlane (1891) reportedseeing several birds in the Fort Anderson region of Mackenzie, buthe states that no nests were found. An adult female was taken atChurchill, Manitoba, previous to 1845; one was seen at Fort DuBrochet on September 22, 1920, while the species also has been re-ported from York Factory.Winter range.?In winter the species is found north with fairregularity to southeastern Alaska (Sitka and Wrangell) ; southeasternBritish Columbia (Okanagan Landing) ; Wyoming (YellowstonePark and rarely Wheatland) ; rarely central Missouri (jMarionville)
;
rarely central Indiana (Crawfordsville and Richmond) ; Ohio (Can-ton) ; and southern New Jersey (Cape May). From this point theeastern boundary of the winter range extends south along the coastto southern Florida (Royal Palm Hammock and Key West) ; theBahama Islands (Nassau) ; the Dominican Republic (Sanchez)Puerto Rico (Fortuna) ; the Lesser Antilles (Anguilla, Antigua, St.Lucia, Carriacou Island, and Los Testigos) ; and northeastern Vene-zuela (Cariaco). South to Venezuela (Cariaco, Guarico, andApure) ; rarely northern Colombia (Santa Marta) ; Panama (BarroColorado Island) ; and Costa Rica (San Jose). West to Costa Rico(San Jose and Rio Frio) and northward along the west coast ofNicaragua, Guatemala, Mexico, the United States, and British Co-lumbia, to southeastern Alaska (Craig, Ketchikan, and Sitka). Occa-sionally kingfishers will be recorded in winter from points in thenorthern United States (Montana, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, NewYork, Vermont, and Massachusetts), as well as from northern On-tario (London, Guelph, and Toronto). It also is a winter residenton Bermuda.The range as outlined is for the entire species, of which two sub-species are currently recognized. The eastern belted kingfisher{Megaceryle aloyon alcyon) occupies all the range east of the RockyMountains and north to Quebec and Mackenzie; the western beltedkingfisher {M. a. caurina) is found west of the Rocky ^lountainsand north to Alaska and Yukon.Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Pennsyl-vania?Renovo, February 22 ; Oil City, March 3 ; Beaver, March 22.New York?Ballston Spa, March 19; Rochester, March 21; Water-town, March 27. Connecticut?Hartford, INIarch 16. Rhode Island
?
Providence, February 23. Massachusetts?Boston, March 19; Har-
128 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
vard, March 25. Vermont?St. Johnsbivry, March 26 ; Eutland, April4; Wells River, April 12. New Hampshire?^Tilton, March 28.Maine?Orono, April 6 ; Portland, April 7 ; Machias, April 18. NewBrunswick?Scotch Lake, April 22. Nova Scotia?Picton, April 6.Prince Edward Island?Alberton, April 17. Quebec?Montreal,April 21; Quebec City, April 24; Godbout, May 5. Missouri
?
St. Louis, February 25; Kansas City, March 10; Concordia, March17. Illinois?Chicago, March 11; Odin, March 13. NorthernOhio?Oberlin, February 13. Michigan?Vicksburg, March 8; De-troit, March 20; Sault Ste. Marie, April 11. Ontario?Toronto,March 6 ; Ottawa, April 5. Iowa?Iowa City, March 7 ; . SiouxCity, March 18. Wisconsin?La Crosse, March 11 ; Madison, March16 ; Stevens Point, April 1. Minnesota?St. Cloud, March 23 ; Min-neapolis, March 24. Kansas?Hays, February 7. Nebraska?Val-entine, March 3. South Dakota?Vermillion, March 22 ; Dell Rapids,March 23. North Dakota?Charlson, April 5. Manitoba?Mar-garet, April 1; Aweme, April 11; Reaburn, April 22. Sas-katchewan?Indian Head, April 22; Eastend, April 23. IdahoRathdrum, April 9. Montana?Bozeman, March 26; Great Falls,April 13, Alberta?BanfF, April 25; Stony Plain, May 12. North-western Alaska?Kowak River, May 21.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are: Alberta?^Lacla Biche, September 27; Banff, September 30; Camrose, October 24.Montana?Great Falls, October 1; Big Sandy, October 9; Fortine,October 31 (winters rarely). Saskatchewan?Indian Head, Septem-ber 20; Eastend, October 5. Manitoba?Killarney, October 15;Aweme, October 25. North Dakota?Rice Lake, October 2 ; Kindred,October 22. South Dakota?Yankton, October 16; Sioux Falls, No-vember 11. Nebraska?Valentine, October 24; Lincoln, October 30;Red Cloud, November 10. Kansas (sometimes winters)?Hays, No-vember 21; Wallace, November 24; Harper, November 30. Minne-sota?Lanesboro, November 16 (sometimes winters) ; Minneapolis,November 25. Wisconsin?Madison, November 12. Illinois?Ran-toul, October 27 ; Chicago, November 20. Ontario?Toronto, Novem-ber 3; Ottawa, November 26. Michigan, Sault Ste. Marie, October16; Detroit, December 4. Quebec?Montreal, October 23. PrinceEdward Island?Alberton, October 10. New Brunswick?ScotchLake, November 5. Maine?Portland, October 13; Phillips, October17. Vermont?St. Johnsbury, November 9; Wells River, November23. Massachusetts?Boston, December 13. Rhode Island?Provi-dence, December 2. Connecticut?Hartford, December 26, NewYork?^Watertown, October 31; Rochester, November 13. NorthernNew Jersey?Elizabeth, December 15. Pennsylvania?Beaver, No-vember 28; Renovo, November 30.
WESTERN BELTED KINGFISHER 129Further insight into the migratory flights of individual kingfishersis provided by banding records. One banded as a nestling at Nobles-ville, Ind., on June 21, 1924, was killed in the Naches Kiver Valley,Tex., on November 19, 1924, while another, banded on June 30, 1937,at Waukesha, Wis., was retaken at Society Hill, S. C, on November22, 1937.Casual records.?At least a part of the reported occurrences of thebelted kingfisher in the Old World are unsatisfactory. Two cases,wherein specimens were alleged to have been taken in Meath andWicklow, Ireland, in the autumn of 1845 are now believed to be basedupon fraud. A specimen is supposed to have been taken on the islandof Flores in the Azores, but neither its disposition nor the details ofcollection are known. A male bird was taken, however, in Hollandon December 17, 1899, and another was collected on Westmann Island,off the south coast of Iceland, in September 1901.Egg dates.?California : 16 records, April 7 to June 24 ; 8 records,April 21 to May 17, indicating the height of the season.Illinois : 5 records. May 10 to June 8.Massachusetts : 8 records, May 11 to June 6.New York: 27 records, April 10 to July 15; 14 records, May 10to 29.Ontario : 7 records, May 24 to June 28.MEGACERYLE ALCYON CAURINA (Grinnell)WESTERN BELTED KINGFISHERPlate 15HABITSIt has long been known that the kingfishers of the Pacific coast areappreciably larger than eastern birds, but Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1910)was the first to give the western race a name. He characterizes it as
"similar to the Ceryle alcyon of eastern and southern North America,but size throughout greater, especially measurements of flight-feathers," and goes on to say that "the secondary wing quills areproportionally longer in the northwestern birds. This means that inaddition to its greater expanse of wing and generally larger size, thewing of caurina is 'broader. In the closed wing this difference pre-sents itself conspicuously in the interval between the end of the long-est secondary and the tip of the longest primary. In the northwest-ern birds this interval averages only 27.3 mm., while in the easternbirds it averages 33.7 mm. This is in spite of the larger size of theformer. The ratio to total wing length in the two cases is 17 and 22per cent., respectively."
130 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe nesting habits of the western belted kingfisher seem to be verysimilar to those of the eastern bird ; I find no record of its nestinganywhere but in sand, clay, or gravel banks; such banks are oftenmuch higher than those in the East, so the nesting burrow is often ata considerable height from the base, but usually near the top of thecliff.In all other respects its habits are not materially different fromthose of the species elsewhere. Grinnell and Storer (1924) say:
"This bird's wing-beat is characteristic, three quick beats followed bytwo executed in a more leisurely manner, like this: one, two, three;four; five."A Western Belted Kingfisher watched by Mr. Walter P. Taylorcame to a perch on a bare limb overhanging some rapids in the river,and sat there motionless. The outline of the bird's body at once be-came indistinguishable from the light and shade of its background;in other words it was obliterated because of the disruptive patternof its coloration, white and slate areas alternating. If the fishes inthe water beneath got the same impression as did the human ob-server, the kingfisher must have become invisible to them, remainingso until the moment of its headlong plunge in their pursuit."The eggs of the western belted kingfisher are similar to those ofthe eastern bird and average only slightly larger. The measure-ments of 38 eggs average 34.78 by 26.89 millimeters; the eggs showingthe four extremes measure 36.6 by 27.4, 35.7 by 28, 31.6 by 27, and 33by 25.4 millimeters.MEGACERYLE TORQUATA TORQUATA (Linnaens)RINGED KINGFISHERPtate 17HABITSThis handsome bird is the largest of the three species of kingfisherfound on the American Continent. Its claim to a place on our listis based on the capture of a single specimen, an adult female, byGeorge B. Benners, on June 2, 1888, about a mile below Laredo, Tex.,on the United States side of the Rio Grande. The specimen was pre-sented to the Academy of Natural Sciences, in Philadelphia, of whichDr. Witmer Stone (1894) says: "It was sitting on some old rootswhich had been washed up into a heap by the current of the river,and was shot immediately, so that he did not see it fly or hear itscall. Mr. Benners further states that he never saw one of these birdsin the vicinity either before or since. Upon the strength of the evi-dence just given this species seems entitled to a place in the fauna
RINGED KINGFISHER 131
of the United States, along with several other tropical birds whichoccasionally reach the Rio Grande valley."Col. A. J. Grayson, in his notes from western Mexico, sent toGeorge N. Lawrence (1874), says:I have seen the largest kingfisher only near the sea coast, in the vicinity ofMazatlan River, but not on that stream. They seem, to prefer the stagnantpools and lagoons, whose waters are murky and densely shaded with over-hanging trees ; here upon some dried branch it sits quietly watching the opaquewater for whatever finny creature may make its appearance upon the surface,when if not too large, it instantly darts or plunges headlong upon it ; aftersecuring the prey in its powerful bill, it bears it to the perch, and beating it afew times upon the perch swallows it entire. Small fishes constitute almost itsprincipal food, but frogs and small water reptiles are often struck and devouredby it. This species does not seem to be so wary as its near congener, theBelted. I have approached it quite near, in order to observe its habits, andit appeared to be very little concerned at my presence. In examining thestomach of one shot by me, I found it crammed with the small fry peculiarto muddy pools, among which was a mud catfish of considerable size. Itdoubtless breeds in holes scratched in sand cliffs, like the other members ofthis family, but I have never encountered the nest.Dickey and van Rossem (1938) say that in El Salvador
?
the ringed kingfisher is of general distribution along the coast where it showsdecided preference for mangrove lagoons. Locally, the species is almost equallycommon on fresh water wherever there is a plentiful supply of small fish.It is notable, though, that the species attains its upward limit at Lake Guijaat 1,450 feet, and seems to be absent from the higher lakes such as Ilopango.It is customarily solitary, although local conditions such as a very favorablestream may result in a number being found at one point. A great deal of ter-ritory may be covered by individual birds, for they seem to have regular routesalong lake borders and rivers with lookout perches at intervals of every fewhundred yards. In activity this species is far ahead of any of the other residentkingfishers and evidently prefers to range widely for its prey rather than tostake out a limited, private preserve.Alexander F. Skutch tells me that in the Caribbean lowlands ofGuatemala and Honduras they are partial to the larger, more openstreams and lagoons, and avoid the narrow, tree-shaded waterwaysthat the smaller species of kingfisher sometimes frequent.Nesting.?Major Bendire (1895) quotes Dr. Herman Burmeister(1856) as saying that "it nests in perpendicular banks, occasionallyquite a distance from water, in burrows from 5 to 6 feet deep, andlays two white eggs."There are two sets of eggs, one of five and one of six eggs, in theThayer collection, taken for Frank B. Armstrong, on March 21 and30, 1910, near Ciudad Victoria, Tamaulipas, Mexico. One of thenests is described as a hole in the bank of a river, 8 feet deep and 10feet above water.Dickey and van Rossem (1938) state that "at San Sebastian in lateJuly, 1912, nest holes were occasionally noted in vertical sandy
132 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMbanks. In size these holes were on an average four inches wide andthree inches high at the entrance. Those investigated went straightback into the bank, in one case as far as six feet. This particularburrow then may have made a turn, but it was not dug out."Alexander F. Skutch has very kindly lent me his unpublishedmanuscript for a proposed work on the birds of the Caribbean low-lands of Central America, which contains much interesting infor-mation on this species, from which I shall quote freely. He saysthat, in that region, these kingfishers "begin the excavation of theirburrows in February, if not earlier. Their nesting is of necessitylimited to the drier season when the rivers are lowest, which in thisregion extends from February to the end of May. The flood watersof June often undermine and eat away the banks in which theynest, if they do not actually rise high enough to flood their tunnels.Since they begin the excavation of their burrows early and raise asingle brood each year, they proceed with their task in a leisurelyfashion, and one may watch long and in vain for them to return totheir work.
"One morning toward the end of February I concealed myself ina blind before a burrow in a bank of sandy loam beside the RioMorja, near the boundary between Guatemala and Honduras. Thetunnel was already well advanced and went far beneath the bananaplants at the top of the bank, which had been freshly cut when theriver ate into the plantation at the last high water. Although Ibegan the watch early in the morning, it was 11 o'clock before Iheard the measured hlech Meek kleck^ and turning saw one of thepair approaching from upstream. It soon entered the burrow andremained within several minutes, appearing not to notice the rough-winged swallow that fluttered before the tunnel and several timesrested in the entrance while it was busy inside. On emerging, thekingfisher perched atop a banana leaf and kept up a running con-versation in low rattles with its mate, out of sight around the bendup-river. In five minutes it flew upstream to join the other, callingwith a loud kleck kleck kleck.
"Soon the pair returned together and began to work in earnest.Each time one entered the burrow there was a jet of earth thrownout behind. As the bird moved inward the jet fell short of the en-trance until it could be seen no more. Doubtless the bird continuedto kick the earth back until it reached the head of the excavation,and so the material loosened by the bill was gradually pushed out ofthe tunnel. The kingfishers invariably emerged head first, indicat-ing that the burrow had reached its final length and had begun towiden at the far end into the nesting chamber. The bird insidecalled in low klecks^ which were answered by the mate perched on a
RINGED KINGFISHER 133
rusty tram rail, washed out by the flood, which leaned against thebank just below the burrow. They seemed to encourage each otherin their dark subterranean labors. Both sexes shared equally in thetoil, and as soon as one emerged and flew up beside the other on therail, the latter went into the burrow, throwing out a jet of earth ashe disappeared into the darkness. Four or five minutes was theusual period spent in the earthwork. On one occasion both were to-gether in the burrow for a few minutes. Just after noon, while onebird was working inside, its mate became tired of waiting on the railand flew upstream. The other, when it emerged and found itselfalone, followed in this direction. Although I remained until themiddle of the afternoon, the birds did not return, having worked lessthan an hour that day.
"I waited almost a month before daring to open the nest. Iprobed the length of the burrow with a slender vine, repeating themeasurement several times to make sure I had reached the back. Ifound the burrow to be Y feet 3 inches long, measured back thisdistance from the top of the bank, and tried to calculate the positionof the nesting chamber from the direction of the portion of the tun-nel I could see from the front. Experience with Amazon kingfishersand motmots had taught me that by far the safest way to open aburrow is to dig down behind it and make an opening in the back ofthe nesting chamber just large enough to reach the eggs, afterwardclosing it with a stone or a board and carefully covering over the ex-cavation.
"As I began to dig almost above it, the incubating bird, who hadstood its ground in face of the thrusts with the vine, flew out, uttereda few hlechs and headed upstream, where it perched on a giant caneleaning over the current and soon plunged for a fish. I now saw forthe first time that it was the male. Like other burrow-nesting birdsunder the same circumstances, it seemed rather unconcerned, and thisdespite the fact that I afterward found it the most devoted ofparents."Because he "had faith that the activities of birds, including theirperiods on the nest during incubation, are rhythmic and more or lessconstant for the species, rather than irregular and arbitrary," Mr.Skutch was determined to learn how these kingfishers arranged theirshifts on the nest. In his efforts to solve this problem, he was at
"first baflEled, next challenged, and finally surprised." For manyweary hours, during nearly two weeks, and at various hours fromdawn to sunset, he patiently watched that hole in the bank, mostlywith little or no results. The use of what he called a "silent monitor,"a small stick stuck upright and loosely in the entrance of the bur-row, enabled him to tell that a bird had either entered or left the
134 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
nest, but did not tell him the hour or the sex of the bird. His ac-count of how he accomplished this and finally learned the secret istoo long a story to be told here. But he did finally discover "thatthere is a single nest relief each day, early in the morning. This iscomparatively easy to observe, for the bird coming to take its placein the burrow usually flies downstream sounding his powerful, me-tallic Meek Meek at measured intervals, and so heralds his own ar-rival." After three or four false starts he finally gathers courage toenter the burrow ; and, after a minute and a half or two minutes, hismate launches forth and flies off upstream. The times at which therelief took place varied from 7 : 05 to 10 : 01 a. m., most of the shiftsbeing made between seven and nine o'clock. He says, further:
"After I learned what precautions were necessary in order to deter-mine the sexes of the birds, I found that on some mornings it was themale who entered and the female who departed, while on other morn-ings the reverse was true. There was a regular alternation, the maleentering one morning and the female the next.
"Each afternoon the incubating partner took a single recess, forfood or exercise, from its long 24-hour turn on the eggs. It emergedsuddenly and without warning, at some time between 1 and 4 o'clock,flew upstream to the feeding ground, leaving the nest unoccupied,and returned in half an hour to an hour. On returning, it flewdownstream low above the water and entered the nest directly, with-out perching or calling, in a manner very different from the morningentry, since there was no mate on the nest to be advised of its arrival.Then it remained until relieved by the mate the following morning."Few birds incubate so continuously as the ringed kingfishers.One day the female took her afternoon recess early, and on returningremained on the nest more than 19 hours, for her mate was verylate in relieving her the next morning, and did not appear until 10o'clock. The usual period between their return in the afternoonand their relief the following morning is 16 or 17 hours."Mr. Skutch found another nest of this kingfisher "400 feet down-stream in the same bank. I opened it only two days before the eggshatched. The bird on the nest, with a degree of attachment I haverarely seen equaled, remained bravely in the tunnel while I probedits length, dug in the rear, took out the eggs for measurement, fitteda stone in the aperture I had made, and tamped the soil above it.All this occupied well over an hour. This burrow was 7 feet 9 inchesin length and the nesting chamber, 22 inches below the surface, con-tained, like the last, four white eggs. The territories of these twopairs extended in opposite directions from their burrows, the birdsfrom the upper nest always entering it from upstream and returningthither when relieved, those in the lower nest fishing in the riverbelow it."
RINGED KINGFISHER 135Eggs.?The ringed kingfisher apparently lays three to six eggsto a set; probably four and five are the commonest numbers. Whatfew eggs I have seen are pure white; they vary in shape fromovate to short-ovate; and the shells are smooth and quite glossy.The measurements of 19 eggs average 43.72 by 34.52 millimeters;the eggs showing the four extremes measure 46.8 by 35, 43.7 by 35.6,and 39.7 by 32.5 millimeters.Young.?On the morning of March 28, the female arrived, at thefirst burrow examined by Mr. Skutch, at sunrise, an unusually earlyhour for her to appear, and seemed to be excited. He opened theburrow and found that two of the eggs had hatched. The nestlingswere "pink skinned and were without the least vestige of feathers.They could already stand upright, supporting themselves on theirfeet and belly, and attempted to walk, which they did in a weak andtottering fashion." Three of the eggs in the other nest hatched thesame day; as he removed the stone from the rear, "a sizzling noisearose from the earth," and two of the nestlings retreated into thetunnel with their mother, where they could not be reached.Soon after the young in the first nest had hatched, some maliciousperson dug into the burrow at both ends but could not reach theyoung in the tunnel. Three of these nestlings eventually died, butthe parents continued to feed and brood the fourth in the exposedand gaping burrow. Then, Mr. Skutch continues: "Stuffed withwhole fish to the bursting point, the single nestling grew at a tre-mendous rate. Its eyes opened by the tenth day, when it uttered ahigh-pitched, trilling sound in response to its parents' rattle. Itwas 14 days before the upper mandible caught up to the lower inlength. The young kingfisher was beginning to defend itself withenergy and bit hard with its great mandibles whenever I picked itup. A few days later it squealed and fought like a fury. When 4weeks old it was fully feathered except for the naked belly, whichrested upon the sandy floor of the foul burrow. To its biting andsquealing it now added an alarm rattle almost as loud as that of theparents, which at length drew one of them, w^ho answered in kind.Still it did not attempt to flutter, and when I placed it on the groundit could do no more than hop along with outstretched wings. It re-mained in the burrow a full week after it was completely feathered,and finally departed at the age of 34 or 35 days."Although this nestling was one of the most vociferous I everencountered, its struggles and cries were very mild in comparisonwith those of the single youngster who survived in the burrow down-stream." "When about 4 weeks old, it was almost as big as its parents.When he attempted to reach it from the back of the nest, "it fledthrough the tunnel and jumped into the river, where it spread itswings, turned upstream, and flapped its way slowly against the
136 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
current. When it encountered obstacles of stranded brush it hookedits bill over them and scrambled across. Thus it led me a merrychase, wading in the muddy shallows, until a fallen banana plantstopped its wayward progress and I seized it. Unlike its neighborof the same age upstream, it had not become accustomed to beingtaken in hands; its deafening screams and fierce attempts to bitemade, for duration and intensity, the best efforts of the other pale toinsignificance. It was ten agonized minutes before it became recon-ciled to me, and I let it perch on my hand until its feathers driedbefore returning it to the burrow. This bird left its burrow betweenits thirty-fifth and thirty-seventh day."Plumages.?I have seen no very young birds. In immature birds,probably birds of the first year, the sexes are distinguishable. In theyoung male, the jugular area is dull gray washed with "cinnamon,"and the under tail coverts are pale cinnamon, both of which partsare pure white in the adult male, though some adults have theunder tail coverts barred with bluish gray; the brown areas on theunder parts are paler than in the adult, "ochraceous-tawny" to "cin-namon," more or less mixed with white ; these parts in the adult arerich browns, "Sanford's brown" to "cinnamon-rufous"; the upperparts and wing coverts are dotted with small white spots, and manyof the feathers have shaft streaks or median wedges of black; theseparts are clear, grayish blue, or "delft blue," in adults, withoutstreaks; young birds also have broad, median, black streaks in thecrest. Young females are similar to the young males but may bereadily recognized by the broad pectoral band, which is never presentin the male at any age ; in the adult female this is clear bluish gray,but in the young bird it is broadly edged with rufous, or dull brown,and sometimes mainly rufous; in the young female the under wingcoverts are wholly "cinnamon-rufous," whereas in the young malethese are partly white.I have not seen enough material to determine how long theseimmature plumages are worn, or to learn much about the molts.Food.?Mr. Skutch (MS.) says on this subject: "The ringed king-fisher's diet is rather monotonous. They live almost entirely, if notexclusively on fish, often of large size, which they catch m the regu-lar manner of kingfishers, but being larger birds their plunges aremore spectacular than those of the othei*s."One day "a female flew into a balsa tree, growing beside a smallstream, with a fish fully half as long as herself dangling crosswisein her bill. For more than two and a half hours by the watch sheheld it thus, changing her position only from one branch to anotherof the same tree. I was at the time watching a green kingfisher'snest, and I could keep her in sight without additional effort. When
RINGED KINGFISHER 137
at length I was ready to leave, she had begun to beat her fish againstthe limb, although it must have been dead long since. After this ex-hibition of stolidity, I no longer felt sorry for the ringed kingfishersbecause the customs of their race obliged them to sit on the nest forsuch long periods."Behavior.?Dr. Charles W. Eichmond (1893) found this speciesvery common in Nicaragua and Costa Eica, and he writes of itshabits
:
One morning a pair of tliese birds went tlirough a very curious performance.Attention was first called to them by their loud rattling cry, which was keptup almost constantly as they circled and gyrated about over the water, oc-casionally dropping?not diving?into the water, and sinking below the surfacefor a moment. This maneuvering lasted some minutes, after which both birdsflew upstream uttering their ordinary note.Two or three individuals were in the habit of passing the night at somepoint on the creek back of the "I. P." plantation, and came over just aboutdusk every evening. I noticed them for several mouths, and was struck withthe regularity of their coming, and the course taken by each on its way to theroost. The birds could be heard a considerable distance away, just beforedusk, uttering their loud single "chuck" at every few beats of the wings.They appeared to come from their feeding grounds, often passing over theplantation opposite, probably to cut off a bend in the river. One of the birdsinvariably passed close to the corner of the laborers' quarters, though at con-siderable height, and the other near a trumpet tree some distance away. Thethird bird was only a casual visitor. At times the birds came together, butusually there was an interval of several minutes. Their routes met at a turnof the creek a few rods back of the house, where they usually sounded theirrattling notes and dropped down close to the water, which they followed tothe roost. This was a huge spreading tree, covered with parasitic plants andnumerous vines, which hung in loops and festoons from the limbs. On oneoccasion I shot at one of the birds as it came clucking overhead, and causedit to drop several small fish. A female nearly ready to deposit eggs was sliotOctober 9.Referring to the behavior of ringed kingfishers, Mr. Skutch (MS.)writes: "Watercourses are their highways, and, like men, they arefrequently reluctant to leave them. One day, ascending in a motorlaunch the Toloa Creek in Honduras, we drove a ringed kingfisherbefore us for possibly a mile. Each time the boat approached hewould leave his perch, fly a few hundred feet ahead, and finallyalight in a branch overhanging the stream. Here he would waituntil the launch was almost opposite him, then fly ahead of it a fewhundred feet more. Only after this procedure had been repeatedmany times did he finally double over the bank and return down-stream."He noticed, while studying the program of nest I'elief, that thesekingfishers "showed a certain amount of formalism in their natures."One morning while he was on watch, "at 7 : 30 the male emerged178223?10 10
138 BULLETIISr 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMfrom the burrow without warning [and without waiting to berelieved by the female in the usual way] and flew upstream as usual.I was surprised at this unexpected behavior, but probably no morethan his mate. Five minutes later she appeared from the directionof his departure and perched in a trumpet tree growing on thebank a few rods from the burrow, where she often rested beforegoing to relieve the male on the nest. Soon he reappeared and thefemale, who had not moved, greeted him with a rapid, low rattle,which was evidently a scolding. A minute later he flew upstreamagain. I thought now the female would certainly enter, it washer day upon the nest, but such an unwelcomed entry would havebeen a breach in formality, beneath the dignity of a well-bred king-fisher matron. She delayed another minute, as though consideringwhat course to follow, then flew off after the delinquent. Soon theyboth returned, but separately, and there was a rather lengthy con-versation between the pair as they perched on the banana leaves nearthe entrance of the burrow. Finally, after flying back and forthseveral times before it, the male entered, rather sheepishly we maysuppose, while his mate continued to Meek from her perch in a lowvoice.
"Mrs. kingfisher had won her point. She delayed a seemlyinterval for him to compose himself for her reception, then enteredherself with the usual warning. I shall probably never know whatpasses between them in the fraction of a minute they must betogether in the nesting chamber, but whatever form of greeting theyindulge in, we may well suppose it was not as cordial as usual. Themale came out in record time, about one minute after his mate'sentry, and turned upstream, klecking loudly, a free bird at last."A change in the behavior of the two males was noted after theyoung had hatched in the two nests, of which Mr. Skutch (MS.)writes : "The males of both nests, both of whom happened to be freethat day, behaved differently than on previous mornings. Afterbeing relieved, they had gone off as usual to their respective terri-tories up and down the stream; but instead of remaining there, asthey had always done before the eggs hatched, they soon returnedto perch at no great distance from their nests, and loudly protestedmy presence. In their excitement, both perched at the same time inthe trumpet tree which grew on the bank of the river between thetwo nests, and was apparently the boundary between their terri-tories. They stood side by side on a branch, their beautiful, white-barred, slate-colored wings spread until they almost touched. Oneraised his crest, but the other laid his flat, and, with open bills andangry klecks, each defied the other to cross the accepted frontier."Voice.?The same patient observer says : "Now that there were nest-lings, I heard an utterance from the kingfishers that I had never
RINGED KINGFISHER 139heard before. It was really not so much a new note as a differentmanner of using the old familiar one, for their entire vocabulary con-sists of a sound that to our ears is suggested by the syllable kleck^but they employ their single word in a great variety of ways toexpress different meanings and emotions. A single loud kleck^ ut-tered at measured intervals, punctuates their flight ; a softer, rapidlyrepeated Meek is the signal that a bird wishes to relieve his mate onthe nest ; and now there were nestlings to guard they expressed theiranxiety by a very loud, rapid, mechanical klecking, continued withmomentary pauses so long as danger seemed to threaten. Thisharsh, deafening rattle was uttered while the bird perched with thebill open, the mandibles held motionless, and the tail vibratingrapidly up and down. I never heard another bird make more noisewhen its nestlings seemed to be in danger, nor give more evidentsigns of distress, yet, in common with other birds which nest under-ground, they never darted at me nor made any demonstration. Theymerely perched in full sight and rattled interminably."DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Mexico, the Lesser Antilles, Central and South America
;
casual in the lower Rio Grande Valley, Texas ; nonmigratory.The range of the ringed kingfisher extends north to Nayarit (TresMarias Islands and San Bias) ; Tamaulipas (Rio Cruz and Tampico)Honduras (Toloa and Lancetilla) ; northern Colombia (Cartagena,Sabanilla, and Santa Marta) ; northern Venezuela (Lake Valencia)the Lesser Antilles (Goyave) ; British Guiana (Georgetown andBlainnont) ; Surinam (Paramaribo) ; and northern Brazil (Santaremand Capim River). East to Brazil (Capim River and Cantagalla)
;
Uruguay (Rio Negro) ; and Argentina (Villegas, Puerto Santa Elena,and Tierra del Fuego). South to southern Argentina (Tierra delFuego) ; and southern Chile (Chonos Archipelago). West to Chile(Chonos Archipelago and Chiloe Island) ; western Peru (Huachosand Lima) ; western Ecuador (Tumbez, Bucay, Babahoyo, andVinces) ; western Colombia (Cali and Honda) ; Panama (San Migueland Alminante Bay) ; Costa Rica (Pozo Azul and Bolson) ; westernGuatemala (Rio Morja) ; Jalisco (Las Penas Island) ; and Nayarit(Tres Marias Islands).Casual records.?The only United States record of this species isa specimen in the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia thatwas collected on the American side of the Rio Grande, near Laredo,Texas, on June 2, 1888.Egg dates.?Guatemala: March.Mexico : March 21 and 30.Peru : May 29.
140 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCHLOROCERYLE AMERICANA SEPTENTRIONALIS (Sharpe)TEXAS KINGFISHERPlate 16HABITSI made the acquaintance of this pretty little kingfisher when Imade a short visit to Cameron County, Tex., as the guest of GeorgeFinlay Simmons, in May 1923. This is a most interesting birdcountry, rich in the number of Mexican species that reach theirnorthern limits here and the only region in which some of them canbe found within the limits of the United States. About Browns-ville the chaparral, the open prairies, the tree claims, the ponds, andthe swamps were all teeming with bird life of many species; butperhaps the most interesting of all were the dense forests along theresacas or stagnant watercourses, the old beds of rivers; these oftencontained large trees, mesquite, huisache, ebony, palms, etc., with athick undergrowth of many shrubs and small trees, such as gran-jena, persimmons, coffee bean, and bush morning-glory. Here wefound the characteristic birds of the region in abundance, such asthe chachalaca, the red-billed pigeon, the noisy derby flycatcher, thebrilliant green jay, and Audubon's oriole. Here, too, I was delightedto see my first Texas kingfisher, as it sat on a dead fallen tree overthe water and then went flying away upstream, uttering its rattlingtwitter, suggestive of but different from that of the belted kingfisher.Mr. Simmons (1925) says that it is "resident along clearer moun-tain streams of southwest-central Texas, from Comal County south-ward. * * * Occurrence depends largely on its habitat, the birdrequiring the clearest of waters, particularly the crystal-clear riversand brooks of the central Texas hill area; dislikes water the leastbit muddy; larger, clearer streams and rarely smaller ones," as wellas "shady little brooks," are mentioned as its favorite haunts.Dickey and van Rossem (1938) record this kingfisher as a "com-mon resident throughout the arid Lower Tropical Zone on all fresh-water lakes, streams, and marshes below 2,300 feet, and also coast-wise in the mangrove belt," in El Salvador. Of its haunts theysay: "A favorite environment is along small, rocky streams of theuplands, and in such places the population averages about a pair tothe mile. Wlien the young of the year are on the wing, this averageis considerably increased for a time. Probably the section of streaminhabited by any individual pair has pretty definite limits, foralthough individual birds or pairs show no hesitancy in keepingwell ahead of a person for a time, sooner or later they will make
TEXAS KINGFISHER 141
every effort to break back along the route to the places from wherethey were first started. Salt water is apparently not greatly totheir liking, and in the mangrove lagoons they were decidedly un-common. Scarcity of suitable nesting sites may, however, be in partresponsible for this condition."Alexander F. Skutch found this kingfisher on small streams ashigh as 7,000 feet above sea level in the highlands of Guatemala,and writes (MS.) of its haunts: "While toiling over the rocky bedof some narrow torrent rushing down a mountain valley, where thehuge trees arch overhead and shut out the sky, I have often heard apleasant cheep and turned to watch the solitary figure of a greenkingfisher fly swiftly past, low above the water and following allthe twistings of the channel, until lost in the depth of the forest.While his larger relatives require deeper water and a longer drop,he is often content to plunge from the top of a boulder projecting afoot or so above a shallow channel, and fishes on the smaller streamsfrom which they are absent; but he joins them on the bro.ader andmore sluggish waterways. He rarely hovers above the water in themanner of the larger kingfishers."Nesting.?The first account of the nesting of the Texas kingfisheris by William Brewster (1879), who writes: "This beautiful littleKingfisher was found by Mr. Werner in comparative abundance atseveral points in Comal County, notably about some of the springsthat empty into the Guadaloupe Kiver. A set of six eggs, takenApril 25, 1878, was authenticated by the capture of both parent birds,the female being caught on the nest. * * * The nesting cavitywas in a sandy bank near the water's edge. The eggs were laid on thebare sand, no fish bones or other extraneous material being near.The entrance was not quite 1% inches in diameter, and the holeextended inward from the face of the bank about 3i^ feet."Bendire (1895) says:The nests of many of these little Kingfishers are yearly destroyed by highwater flooding their burrows, caused by heavy rains and cloud-bursts, whichare more or less prevalent in southern and western Texas. It is not uncommonon both the Medina and San Antonio rivers, and a nesting site on the last-mentioned stream found by Mr. C. H. Kearny, in the spring of 1892, containingsix fresh eggs, is described by him as being located in a bank about 15 feet highand about 5 feet above the water level. The nesting chamber, which was slightlylarger than the tunnel leading to it, was placed about 2 feet from the mouth ofthe hole. There was no nest proper, but a few fish bones and scales werescattered about the eggs. In the same bank a number of Bank Swallows(CUvicola riparia) had taken up temporary homes, and one of their holes waslocated within a foot of that of the Kingfishers. They are devoted parents,and these birds will usually allow themselves to be caught rather than forsaketheir eggs.
142 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThere are four sets of eggs of this kingfisher in the Thayer collec-tion and one in the writer's collection, all taken by, or for, Frank B.Armstrong, near Ciudad Victoria, Tamaulipas, Mexico, betweenMarch 12 and 28, 1908. The nests were aU in holes in banks, about3 feet deep and 6 to 8 feet above the water.Mr. Skutch says (MS.) that this kingfisher, which he calls the greenkingfisher, is one of the five species of birds that nest most commonlyin the banks of the streams in the Caribbean lowlands of CentralAmerica. "The burrows of the ringed kingfisher are distinguishedat once by the large diameter of the tunnel, 6 inches in width. Nextin size are those of the Amazon kingfisher, 3% inches wide. Thencome those of the turquoise-browed motmot, about 3i^ inches in width
;
and finally those of the green kingfisher, only 2 or 214 inches inhorizontal diameter.
"While the burrows of the larger kingfishers and the motmot areplaced in plain sight in the bare and exposed banks, so that he whoruns may see them, those of the green kingfisher I have found con-cealed by the fringe of vines and dead vegetation draping the topof the bank, or else behind exposed roots, and I discovered them onlyby seeing a bird enter or leave. Theirs were the last of the threekingfishers' nests I encountered, and I found only two, late in theseason, although the species is equally abundant with the Amazonkingfisher. As befits the smaller bird, their burrows are far shorterthan those of the larger species. The two I measured were only 22and 25 inches in length."One morning at the end of April, I sat down to eat my breakfastupon a fallen log beside the Quebrada de Arena, a little brook sonarrow that one can easily jump across it, flowing through a pasturegrown up with low bushes and thorny vine tangles. Presently a malegreen kingfisher flew downstream, perched on a branch ahead of me,ticked a great deal and seemed excited about my presence. The bird'spersistence in remaining in that stretch of the river and hisevident excitement renewed my conviction [on a previous visit] thathis burrow was not far distant. I removed my shoes and waded upand down, examining every likely bit of bank, while the bird flewback and forth to keep out of my way. I discovered only old burrowswhose lack of fresh foot-furrows proclaimed clearly enough they werenot in use. Quite baffled, I paused beneath the shelter of some over-hanging bushes to watch the bird, and in a few minutes, after callingagain tich tick tick^ he flew up beneath the exposed roots of a deadstump, half washed out, and disappeared. This was almost the exactspot whence I had seen him or his mate emerge three weeks before,but the entrance to the burrow was so well concealed by the overhang
TEXAS KINGFISHER 143
of the top of the bank, the projecting roots and the vines which drapedover them, that it had completely escaped me.
"I lost no time in opening the burrow. The male flew out withthe second push I gave the machete which I used to dig, for the tunnelsloped upward so sharply that the nesting chamber was less thanthree inches below the surface of the ground, and I broke throughinto the rear of it before I supposed I had well started to dig. Therewere three white eggs, well advanced in incubation, to judge fromtheir opacity. The male fluttered several times in front of the burrow,eager to enter before it had been closed again. I fitted a stone overthe small aperture I had made, covered it with earth, and placed logsacross the roof of the nesting chamber, to prevent the mules' steppingupon it and possibly breaking through. The birds continued toincubate.
"The pair arranged their turns on the eggs in much the same man-ner as the Amazon kingfishers. The female spent each night on thenest. Soon after 6 a. m. the male flew downstream, low above thewater, uttering at intervals the high-pitched cheep^ w^hich is his flightcall. He perched on one of the roots of the old stump projecting infront of the nest and called tick tick tick in a low voice, which his mateheard in the burrow. She came forth, greeting him with a singlecheep, as she flew swiftly past and turned down the brook to her feed-ing grounds. Her behavior was rather erratic.
"One morning she could not aw^ait his arrival, although he washardly late. She popped out of the nest without warning and flewoff, but a minute later the pair returned together. The male went tothe root in front of the burrow, ticked just as much as he was accus-tomed to do to call off his mate, although he could certainly see shewas not inside, then entered the empty burrow. The following morn-ing she acted in quite another manner. Just after 6, on a cloudymorning after a night of hard rain, the male flew downstream, perchedin front of the burrow, and ticked for her to come forth, but she paidno heed to his repeated calls. He flew a few rods downstream, thenreturned to call tick tick tick again. Still no response, so he flew awayout of sight. Ten minutes later he reappeared and perched again onthe root in front of the burrow, where he called at intervals for twominutes before at length she darted forth. Then he entered for themorning. The male incubated until the female returned from herbreakfast to relieve him. One morning she left him on the nest lessthan two hours, but the next it was nearly three. She covered theeggs for the remainder of the morning. The male was chiefly respon-sible for keeping them warm during the afternoon, until his matecalled him from the nest and entered for the night at some time between5 and 6 o'clock."
144 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMEggs.?The Texas kingfisher lays three to six eggs, but five seemsto be the commonest number. These vary in shape from oval toelliptical-oval; the shell is smooth and thin; some show little or nogloss and others are quite glossy ; the color is pure white. The meas-urements of 64 eggs average 24.36 by 19.23 millimeters; the eggsshowing the four extreme measures 26.4 by 20.3, 24.1 by 20.7, 22.3by 19.3, and 23.8 by 17.5 millimeters.Young.?The second nest that Mr. Skutch found contained five
"pink-skinned, blind, and totally naked nestlings," which "like thoseof the larger species, had undershot bills and heel callosities." Hevisited this nest 18 days later and found that the young, which werenot more than 25 days old, "could flutter just a few feet. One flew intothe river, where she spread her wings on the surface and headed forthe shore. I threw her into the shallow water again, and again sheturned unerringly toward the marginal rocks, beating her wings on thesurface until she gained a footing. The following morning I placedthem on the shore for a photograph, but two found their wings andeasily traversed the 50-foot channel, flying low above the surface. Thepower of flight had come to them almost overnight."One evening early in June, after the sun had fallen behind thebordering fringe of willow trees, I was resting on a log stranded on theflood plain of the river, when a young green kingfisher flew upstream,calling cheep at intervals, and perched on a pile of brushwood almostin front of the burrow in which it was hatched. Presently its fathercame flying downstream, with a small minnow in his bill, and perchedon the same pile of brushwood, not far from the other. The youngbird came toward him, as if to receive the fish, but the other raised hiswings above his back to forfend it. The youngster took this as a hintto remain aloof and perched at a little distance. Not satisfied with theinterval that remained between them, the male darted at the youngbird, which retreated a few feet. Several times it started to approachits father, but each time was warned to remain away by the spreadwings, a very picturesque attitude. Several times, too, the bird withthe fish drove at the applicant for it and finally, still holding thefish in his bill, chased it down the stream and out of sight. The youngkingfisher had been out of the nest 29 days and must now at least learnto dive for its own fish."Plumages.?The young kingfishers are hatched naked and blind, asdescribed above, but the juvenal plumage is acquired before the youngleave the nest. A young male, taken on August 21, fully grown andfully fledged in juvenal plumage, is much like the adult female ; therich brown pectoral band of the adult male is only faintly indicatedbut is replaced by a band of greenish-black spots ; and there is more
TEXAS KINGFISHER 145black spotting on the flanks than in the adult male. Apparently thereis a gradual change toward maturity during the first year, for October,February, and April birds show a gradual increase in the rufous band.The youngest female I have seen, taken on June 8, is much like theadult female, but the pectoral band of greenish black spots is lacking,or nearly so, the under parts being nearly immaculate. These spots,which are more in the form of broad streaks than in transverse spots,increase with age to form one complete and one nearly complete bandin the oldest birds. The observations made by Mr. Skutch on thebrood of young that he studied agree substantially with the above.I have no data on the molts, but Mr. van Rossem (1938) says that
"the annual molt * * * takes place in the fall, but the definite timeis not known."Food.?The food mentioned by Mr. Skutch (MS.) consisted of smallminnows. Mr. Simmons (1925) says that this kingfisher is a "busi-ness-like little fisherman, perching atop a stick or stake in tlie wateror on a low branch overhanging low water" ; it "frequently flies backand forth over the water, hunting for small fish." It is "often drivenoff feeding-grounds by the larger Belted Kingfisher, with wliich it issometimes found."Voice.?Mr. Simmons (1925) says that the voice of the Texas king-fisher is a "rather sharp, rattling twitter, uttered on the wing ; quitedifferent from and shriller than the loud, harsh rattle of the BeltedKingfisher." Mr. Skutch refers to the flight note as cheep ^ and thecall or alarm note as tick tick tick.Field marks.?This is such a small kingfisher that it could hardlybe mistaken for anything else within its range. Its upper parts aredark, glossy green, and spotted with white, and it has no occipitalcrest. The under parts are white, with a rufous pectoral band on themale and a ring of black spots across the breast of the female.Enemies.?The first set of eggs that Mr. Skutch found failed tohatch, as they were destroyed by ants. He writes (MS.) : "Openingthe burrow, I found it swarming with myriads of small, amber 'fireants,' a scourge to man and beast alike. Invading the nest, they hadworried the birds until they fidgeted on their eggs and cracked them
;
then they had worked into the cracks and begun to eat the embryos.I had cleaned them out the previous evening, but all to no avail. Thenest was completely ruined. That same morning they had attackedand killed three young woodpeckers in their nest in a dead stubstanding a few paces from the kingfishers' burrow. In the humidcoastal regions, ants are one of the principal enemies, if not actuallythe chief enemy, of nesting birds. I have found more eggs and nest-lings destroyed by them than by all other known agents combined."
146 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMDISTRIBUTIONRrnige.?Southern Texas, Mexico, and Central and South America
;
casual in southern Arizona; apparently a nonmigratory species.The range of the green kingfisher extends north to Sinaloa (Mazat-lan) ; Durango (Rio Sestin) ; southern Texas (Turtle Creek and NewBraunfels) ; Quintana Roo (Xcopan) ; eastern Nicaragua (Pis PisRiver) ; northern Colombia (Santa Marta and Bonda) ; northernVenezuela (La Guaira) ; British Guiana (Potaro Landing and Bar-tica) ; Surinam (Paramaribo) ; and northern Brazil (Quixada).East to Brazil (Quixada, Rio Taquarussu, and Goyaz) ; and Uruguay(Santa Elena). South to southern Uruguay (Santa Elena); andcentral Argentina (Santa Elena, San Jose, and Tucuman). Westto northwestern Argentina (Tucuman) ; Bolivia (San Jose) ; Peru(La Merced and the Ucayale River) ; Ecuador (Vinces) ; westernColombia (Tumaco, Cali, and Rio Frio) ; Panama (Sapo Mountains,Gatun, and the Chagres River) ; western Guatemala (Duenas, andLake Atitlan) ; Oaxaca (Juchatengo) ; Nayarit (San Bias) ; andSinaloa (Escuinapa, and Mazatlan).The subspecies, known as Chloroceryle a/mericanus septentrionalisyis the only form to enter the United States. It ranges southwardfrom Texas to Yucatan.Casual records.?A specimen was taken at Decatur, Tex., north ofthe normal range in this State, on January 3, 1889. Dr. Elliott Couesreported seeing this species in September 1865 at points on the Colo-rado River, Ariz., between Forts Mohave and Yuma, and one wastaken on the San Pedro River near Fairbanks on February 13, 1910.One was collected on September 8, 1893, at Cajon Bonito Creek,Sonora, a few miles south of the New Mexico line. One was taken onthe Santa Cruz River, Ariz., on October 1, 1938.Egg dates.?Mexico: 24 records, March 5 to June 13; 12 records,March 12 to April 19, indicating the height of the season.Texas : 4 records, April 11 to June 15.
CHUCK-WILL's-wroow 147Order CAPRIMULGIFORMESFamily CAPRIMULGIDAE : GoatsuckersANTROSTOMUS CAROLINENSIS (Gmelin)CHUCK-WILL'S-WIDOWPlates 18-20HABITSContributed by Alexandeii Speunt, Je.Dusk falls gently over the salt marshes, which reach out from ashoreline where moss-bannered live oaks and stately pines rustlesoftly in the late March breeze. A faint fragrance of jessaminehangs in the air; the sleepy note of a cardinal echoes from a cassinathicket, while atop a tall palmetto a mockingbird salutes the comingnight with a burst of melody. Silence comes and the stars appear,glinting in golden splendor through the purple gloom.Suddenly through the air comes another sound, a sharp, clear-cut,insistent chant. Splitting the silences, it strikes clappingly uponone's ears, ringing with startling emphasis, unmistakable, thrillingand welcome. The first chuck-will's-widow has returned to theCarolina low country, and spring is definitely back again
!
There is something about nocturnal birds that fascinate onestrangely. Doubtless the cloak of darkness that shrouds their move-ments and activities has a great deal to do with it. One cannot butwonder at their comings and goings; how they pursue their huntingamid the gloom. Their voices too lend much to the fascination, forthe notes seem a part of the night itself, just as the bodies of thebirds themselves seem more like detached and living particles ofdarkness than of flesh and feathers.All my life I have lived amid the haunts of some of these furtivekindred of the dusk, but the chuck-will's-widow above all .seems totypify the mystery of the night and invests it with a sense of in-tangible yet satisfying tranquillity. It has alwaj^s seemed to me thatthose beautiful lines, written of the cuckoo, might be even moreapplicable to the chuck-will's-widow, for, in truth, much of the timeit does not seem a bird at all, but simply "a wandering voice." With-out brilliant plumage or grace of form, it nevertheless possessesundoubted character, and long acquaintance with the bird only in-creases the interest that is bound to be aroused in any study of its lifeand habits.Spring.?Generally speaking, the chuck-will's-widow arrives inthe South in March. There is some indication that a few birds
148 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMspend tlie winter in southern Florida for C. J. Pennock (MS.) hasstated that "in the Charlotte Harbor district a few at least appearto winter. February 26, 1926, one heard calling; February 24, 1927,while camping, we heard one," Arthur H. Howell (1932) statesthat it "winters in small numbers" and gives December and Febru-ary dates. K. J. Longstreet's opinion (1930) is that "the chuck-will's-widow is a summer resident in north Florida and a permanentresident in south Florida." Audubon considered the species apermanent resident in the State, and his idea was, according to Allen(1871), confirmed by "old residents," though he himself states it "isnot observed till about the first of March." I am obliged to spendportions of every winter month in Florida, being constantly in thefield throughout the southern Everglades and the Keys, but it sohappens that I have yet to find the chuck-will's-widow during thisseason. The wintering f)opulation is undoubtedly small andscattered.It reaches north-central Florida about March 18 (D. J. Nicholson,MS.) and appears in the coastal districts of southern Georgia a fewdays later (T. D. Perry, MS.). In South Carolina, about Charleston,it arrives anywhere from the third week in March to the first weekof April. The males always arrive first, followed in a few daysby the females.Courtship.?^Little time is lost by- the chuck-will's-widow, after itsarrival from its winter home, in seeking a mate. Almost at once itundertakes the search, and it is at such times that the observerhas an opportunity to see them actively in daylight. The courtshipperformance is an interesting one and, all things considered, is notdifficult to observe. The outstanding characteristic is the struttingpomposity of the male. He sidles up to the watching female, hiswings droop, the tail is widely spread, and he swells and swellsuntil it really seems that the limit of inflation is reached and anotherfraction of distention would cause him to disintegrate like a burstingbomb. Various vocal efforts are indulged in meanwhile, accom-panied by quick, jerky motions. Audubon (1840) has compared thisphase of the proceedings to that of the domestic cock pigeon, whileArthur T. Wayne (1910) likened it to a turkey gobbler's antics.This latter has always seemed to me most apt, for not only does theseemingly endless inflation remind one vividly of the turkey, but themotions also suggest this bird.After this j^eriod of intense and apparently exhausting display, aspace of calm and quiet pervades the pair should the male have beensuccessful in his suit, and he perches placidly beside her.Nesting.?No semblance of a nest is constructed. The eggs are2)laced on the ground upon a carpet of dead leaves, and the sitting
CHUCK-WILL'S-WIDOW 149bird constitutes one of the finest examples of protective colorationthat nature affords. Such dependence is placed in it that the closestapproach is possible, and the bird flushes only when nearly troddenon. The mottling of the plumage is exactly like that of the varie-gated background of leaves, sun splashes, and shadow, and one maylook directly at the bird without seeing it. Once the bird is flushed,however, it is perfectly easy to see the eggs, for they then stand outlike huge pearls against the leaves, not having the similarity to theground that characterizes the eggs of the nighthawk.Mixed oak and pine woods are usually the nesting haunt of thechuck. In the large live-oak groves, which occur over so much ofthe plantation country of the South, the species is abundant andshows a remarkable tendencj^ to place the eggs in nearly the samespot year after year. As a rule there is little if any undergrowthabout the eggs. When under the pines, this would not be expected,and in the oak groves the ground is always covered by a veritablecarpet of leaves, through which no undergrowth appears. Thus theeggs can be seen from a considerable distance should the bird beoff them.On May 8, 1926, I found two eggs on Folly Island, S. C, lyingupon pine needles. Marking the spot accurately I returned thenext year and on May 12, 1927, found two eggs within 5 feet ofthe spot used previously.M. G. Vaiden (MS.) writes from Rosedale, Miss., that he dis-covered a set of eggs on May 1, 1911. Twelve years later^ on April27, 1923, he returned to the same locality and found two eggs within10 feet of the same spot ! He states that the "trees were larger, thehillside washed into gullies, but otherwise about as formerly."Walter Colvin (MS.), of Arkansas City, Kans., reports the firstnesting of the species in that State, two eggs having been found inMay 1923, near Arkansas City, Cowley County. Another nest wasdiscovered the following year (1924) also in May. Probably thechuck had been nesting there for some time previous and was alsodiscovered in Miami County, by Mr. Colvin's son John, in 1929.Nesting observations from a variety of sources indicate that thechuck raises but one brood. However, if the eggs are taken, thebird will lay again and again until young are hatched. The lateArthur T. Wayne, of Mount Pleasant, S. C, once took in successionthree sets from a pair near his home, and a fourth was laid, incubated,and hatched.The chuck brooks no tampering with the eggs whatever. If theyare handled, or as much as touched in some cases, the bird removesthem to what is considered a safer locality. This habit was notedlong ago and gave rise to much dispute and speculation as to the
150 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMmethod employed in the transportation. It has been definitelyproved that the bird takes them in the mouth. Audubon (1840)describes it so well that his account is given herewith
:
When the Chuck-wills-widow, either male or female (for each sits alter-nately) has discovered that the eggs have been touched, it ruffles its feathersand appears extremely dejected for a minute or two, after which it emits alow murmuring cry, scarcely audible at a distance of more than eighteen ortwenty yards. At this time the other parent reaches the spot, flying so lowover the ground that I thought its little feet must have touched it, as itskimmed along, and after a few low notes and some gesticulations, all indica-tive of great distress, takes an egg in its large mouth, the other bird doingthe same, when they would fly off together, skimming closely over the ground,until they disapi)eared among the branches and trees. But to what distancethey remove the eggs, I have never been able to ascertain ; nor have I everhad an opportunity of witnessing the removal of the young. Should a person,coming upon the nest when the bird is sitting, refrain from touching the eggs,the bird returns to them and sits as before. This fact I have also ascertainedby observations.The first "apparent" recorded instance of the occurrence and nest-ing of the chuck in Ohio is recorded by E. S. Thomas (1932) and datedMay 14, 1932. On May 21, 1932, the nest and two eggs were foundand the female, with two eggs, was collected for the Ohio StateMuseum,My earliest nesting record for South Carolina was made on April13, this being nearly two weeks in advance of the next nearest date.The eggs are laid somewhat sooner than usual in forward seasons,the above record being an illustration of such an instance.Eggs.?[Author's note : The chuck-will's-widow regularly lays twoeggs, which are between oval and elliptical-oval and usually mod-erately glossy. Major Bendire (1895) considered these eggs as"among the handsomest found in the United States." I cannot dobetter than to quote his description of them, as follows
:
The ground color of these eggs is of such a subtle tint that it is almost im-possible to describe it accurately ; it varies from a rich cream, with a faintpinkish suffusion, to a pale cream, and more rarely to pure white. They are inmost cases more or less profusely blotched, marbled, and spotted with differentshades of brown, tawny, fawn, and Isabel-color, underlaid and mixed withlighter shades of ecru drab, lavender, pearl gray, and pale heliotrope purple.In an occasional specimen some of the markings take the shape of irregularlines and tracings, like those of the Grackles ; in others they are fine and minute,obscuring the ground color to some extent. In some specimens the darkershades predominate ; in others, the lighter ; in fact, there is an endless varia-tion in the style of markings, but in the entire series there is not a singlespecimen which is not perceptibly marked.The measurements of 54 eggs average 35.56 by 25.57 millimeters;the eggs showing the four extremes measure 40 by 27.5, 38.1 by 28.2,32.9 by 25.1, and 36.2 by 23.1 millimeters].
CHUCK-WILL'S-WIDOW 151Young.?Some notes of unusual interest in regard to the behaviorof the adult at the nest, as well as the actions of the young birds,have been sent me by Herbert L. Stoddard, of Thomasville, Ga.These are transcribed herewith, and in the general lack of suchknowledge they serve to illuminate something of the home life of thisinteresting species:
"April 30 (1928), 7 a. m. : One egg has hatched and the chick is aqueer little mite covered with a yellow-ochre down, and hops aboutlike a frog in a very lively manner. When he is uncomfortably hotor chilled he gives a plaintive little pipe that can be heard about20 feet"May 1 : Other chick hatched out this morning or during the nightand eggshells were gone."May 3 : Chicks growing fast but still being brooded in same spot.Mother goes to sleep on a fence post after flushing, but as soon aschicks start to squeal from the heat, she becomes frantic and willnearly fly into my face. I bother her a few minutes at 3 p. m. eachday, as I chase her well away, then duck into the blind and take afew feet of film as she comes back to the nest. Not much action,however, and she is a wise fowl. She knows perfectly when I am inthe blind
!
"May 6: Found the nest spot empty today at noon but finallylocated the old bird (she has two patches of albinistic feathers in cen-ter of upper breast, so I know it's the same individual that performedthe incubation) brooding her two chicks about 30 feet south. Theireyes have been open from the first but are now a little deeper in colorand are always half closed like those of the adult in daytime."May 13: Have kept in rather close touch with the chuck-will's-widow family recently. They are living under a growth of sparkle-berry shrubs and have lived here within a radius of 6 feet for thelast ten days."The place is pretty well marked by their mourning-dovelike excre-ment. When disturbed, the chicks hop off with elevated wings in a
'mechanical toy' sort of way. That is, their progress is marked by aseries of rapid, toadlike hops until they are 'run down' (usually in30 or 40 feet). The wings serve as balances."The chicks have a little complaining whine that brings the motherin frantic haste. She flies noiselessly about, every now and then lyingon the ground with her wings widely spread and reached forward^with the primaries pressed to the ground. In this queer position,she beats them a bit and opens and shuts her huge mouth, exhal-ing air audibly as she does so and occasionally uttering the queer,froglike croak. Altogether an odd performance. No evidence of amate has been seen about this location."
152 BULLETIlSr 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMPlumages.?[Author's note: The young chick is completely cov-ered with long, soft, silky down ; on the upper parts the color variesfrom "ochraceous-tawny" or "light ochraceous-buff" on the head to"tawny" on the back; on the lower surface the color grades from
"ochraceous-tawny" on the chest to "light ochraceous-buff" on thethroat and belly.The growth of the juvenal plumage, in which the sexes are alike,is rapid. Ridgway (1914) describes it very well as follows: "Similarto the adult female in 'pattern' and coloration of tail, primaries, andprimary coverts, but otherwise different ; scapulars and middle wing-coverts ochraceous-buff, irregularly barred witli, black; pileum moregrayish, with small spots, instead of streaks, of black; under partsbarred with black on a light brownish buffy ground, without vermic-ulations, mottling, or spots, and band across lower throat indistinctor obsolete."This plumage is worn but a short time, as a partial molt into afirst winter plumage begins in July ; I have seen a specimen that hadnearly completed this molt on August 2 ; this plumage closely resem-bles that of the adult female, as the juvenal wings and tail areretained; I can find no evidence of a spring molt. Young birdsapparently retain the first winter plumage, including the juvenal wingsand tail, until the following summer; I have seen birds in this plu-mage during winter and as late as May in spring.Both adults and young have a complete annual molt, mainly inJuly and August. At this first postnuptial molt young birds becomepractically indistinguishable from adults, and the sexes become differ-entiated. Young birds in fresh fall plumage are darker and morerichly colored than adults, with more "ochraceous-tawny" ; the colorshave faded some by spring.Adults have two recognizable color phases, a tawny phase, in whichthe ground color of the two central rectrices varies from "ochraceous-buff" to "ochraceous-tawny", with deeper ochraceous or buffy colorsin the scapulars and wing coverts; and a gray phase, in which theground color of the two central rectrices is pale buff, or pale grayishbuff, and the scapulars and wing coverts are paler and grayer.]Food.?The chuck-will's-widow, like its family relatives, is an in-sect eater par excellence. The semitropical nature of much of itsrange is highly conducive to an abundance of insects and other night-flying creatures that are the bulk and mainstay of its diet. The mouthof the chuck is enormous, a characteristic of the goatsucker tribe,and is provided with bristles that act as a sort of additional trap.The widely open mouth is as much as 2 inches at the greatest breadth.Prey is secured at low elevations, often only a few feet from theground. The bird works the edges of woodlands bordering open
CHUCK-WILL'S-WIDOW 153fields and often makes sallies over the latter. The flight is silent, andthe birds seem to be no more than gigantic moths. Beetles, "flyingants," and moths make up a large bulk of the food in many localities.Small birds have frequently been found in the stomachs of this spe-cies. While seemingly incongruous, this is, after all, not difficult tounderstand when the conditions are considered. Many observers haveconcluded that this type of stomach content is taken by mistake ; thatthe small, fluttering bird, confused by the darkness, is taken for amoth and snapped up by the cruising chuck, of course being swallowedwhole.An alternative theory exists, however, and, if true, the bird-takinghabit would be removed from the realm of the accidental and fallinto purposeful, predatory effort. The late Edward H. Forbushpointed out that the "goatsuckers show an anatomical affinity to theowls. They have similar, soft plumage, noiseless flight, large eyesand nocturnal vision." It is possible that, with this structural re-lationship, there are other phases of likeness between the chuck andthe owls. It is the largest of the goatsuckers that occur in thiscountry, and the other representatives of the family do not seem toindulge in small bird prey. Doubtless this is because of their con-siderably smaller mouths, but whatever the reason the chuck remainsas the outstanding example of this procedure.That this habit is certainly not accidental sometimes is definitelyproved by the observation recorded by Gerald Thayer (1899) inwhich he relates the instance of a chuck-will's-widow pursuing andcatching warblers near a ship off the Carolina coast. Hummingbirds,swallows, sparrows, and warblers have been among those birds foundin the stomachs of the chuck, and the frequency with which thisoccurs lends color to the supposition that it is more intentional thanaccidental. More research is necessary on this subject.Even granting the truth of it, the economic status of the chuck ison the right side of the ledger and the great percentage of its activi-ties are beneficial, for the noxious insects which it destroys arenumerous. Miss Phoebe Knappen, of the United States BiologicalSurvey, in answer to a request of the writer has very kindly furnisheda summary of specific results in the stomach analysis carried out onthis species in the laboratories of that Bureau. A full stomach fromOklahoma, without date and therefore not included in the tabulationbelow, contained the following: Dendroica (sp.), 70 percent; Coleop-tera {Galasoma, Harpalus, Carabidae, Ligyrus, Strategus, Scarabaei-dae), 22 percent; Orthoptera {Schistocerca, Nesconocephalus) ^ 8percent.The remarkable percentage of bird remains shown by this stomachwould seem a great argument for the support of predation by purpose.178223?10 11
154 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMSeventy percent of the total food among the wood warblers ! How-ever, it seems also to be a most exceptional case, for nothing that evenapproaches it is found in the list below, which embraces a range of45 stomachs from five States and one Canadian Province. The entireamount of the stomachs listed contained the remains of but two birds
!
With reference to the Oklahoma stomach, I wonder whether theremight be a seasonal variation in the bird-taking propensities of thechuck-will's-widow in relation to migration. It would appear rea-sonable to believe that when there is high activity among birds trav-eling through a given area, such as would take place in the springmigration, the chucks of that locality would have greater opportunityin securing them. One would not have to incline to the predatorytheory to accept this, for if there are a great many small birds passingthrough an area for a few weeks, the chucks in their night huntingwould blunder across more birds than would be the case later in theseason. If the take is accidental, a higher percentage of accidentswould then occur. If, on the other hand, the take is deliberate, thenthe chances of indulging that habit would be greater and would falloff later in the season. So, whatever impulse governs the matter, themigrations would result in more birds appearing in the diet. Un-fortunately, the Oklahoma stomach was undated, so it is impossibleto ascertain whether the bird secured its high percentage during amigration or not, but I incline to the belief that it was a springspecimen.To return to the analysis. Miss Knappen states : "The other 45 stom-achs taken in March (2), April (31), May (11), and November (1)were collected in Florida (37), Georgia (1), Mississippi (2), NorthCarolina (1), Ontario (1), and Texas (3). The annual percentagesof different items in the food, which was entirely animal, equal:Carabidae, 3.64; Phyllophaga^ 32.98; other Scarabaeidae, 25.28;Cerambycidae, 4.49 ; Elateridae, 1.34 ; other Coleoptera, 5.13 ; Lepidop-tera (moths), 12.36; Odonata, 4.63; Aves, 7.21; and miscellaneousanimals, 2.85."The genera most persistently eaten were Phyllophaga (Maybeetles) and Anomala. The birds consumed were 1 Dendroica pal-marum and 1 HelTninthophUa sp., while the miscellaneous bracjietincludes various bugs, flies, a bivalve, and other animal material."The insect content of these 45 stomachs totals more than 70 percentin but three classes {Phyllophaga^ Scarabaeidae, and Lepidoptera)and other kinds make up considerably more than that. Birds arerepresented by only 7.21 percent, and both victims were warblers.One cannot but wonder at the single "bivalve," an item that wouldcertainly not occur to most students as being connected with achuck's diet.
CHUCK-WILL'S-WroOW 155Behavior.?Being as close kin to the whippoorwill as the chuckis, it cannot be expected that its habits will vary extensively.Inactive by day and a persistent hunter by night, it fulfills the usualcharacteristics pertaining to the family. Sitting motionless on amossy log, a branch of some forest tree, or ensconced witliin anatural cavity, it dozes away the daylight hours. Some observershave found it sleeping in company with bats, in an obscure hollow.I have never found the chuck among such company, all my daylightobservations being connected with the bird's occupancy of some lowlimb, or on the ground itself.When flushed, it rises with easy, fitful wafts of silent wings, alter-nating the beats with periods of sailing. Frequently it describes acurve and swings back near the spot from which it was flushed.Fairly close approach js allowed, even after the bird has been dis-turbed and alighted again. Doubtless it puts a great deal of de-pendence upon the wonderfully protective coloration of the plumage.In the Carolina low country the chuck is very fond of roosting inthe sandy roads so characteristic of the rural districts. Passingalong at dusk, one may see the reflection of the eyes plainly in theglare of a car's headlights. At times a roosting bird is disturbedunder these conditions by day, and I have had them flush and comedirectly at the car, swerving only slightly aside to pass. One birdon Bulls Island, S. C, was flushed two or three times in an hour,as we had occasion to pass the same spot often, and once it flew byso closely that an extended arm might have touched it. This habitof frequenting the sand roads is shared by the whippoorwill whenit is present in coastal Carolina during the winter months.Little or no distinction is made between these two birds in much oftheir range. The uninformed observer takes it for granted that anynight bird that calls, except an owl, is a whippoorwill, and this seemsthe more strange in a section where the chuck is abundant and thewhippoorwill comparatively uncommon, as in coastal Carolina. Thelatter calls but rarely during its winter sojourn in the Charlestonarea ; indeed, I have heard it but twice in all my years of ornitholog-ical study. One of these instances was in January, the other earlyin March. When the whippoorwill is present in this area, the chuckis not, for the former leaves before the latter appears from the south.In spite of this fact and the overwhelming evidence of the chuck'spresence and comparative absence of that of the whippoorwill, thepeople of the low-country are far more familiar with the name ofthe latter and credit the call of the chuck to the other bird.The eyes of the chuck-will's-widow reflect light admirably. Someyears ago E. B. Chamberlain, of the Charleston Museum, and Icarried out a series of experiments in "jack-lighting" amid the woods
156 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
of Cumberland Island, Ga. It was a revelation in many ways. Thenight woods were literally twinkling and sparkling with eyes ! Theground and low bushes gleamed with hundreds of points of lightfrom the eyes of spiders; the lagoons reflected the ruby-red of manyalligators, while here and there along the bank a wandering raccoonstared into the light beam or a trotting gray fox paused to sniff, oneforeleg upraised like a pointer. Florida screech owls were seenperched atop low stumps, hunched and motionless, and although wecould work up to within 3 feet of them, the take-off when it occurredwas so utterly noiseless that not a whisper of sound ensued at eventhat close range. Dozens of deer were seen, their eyes, of course,reflecting the light perfectly, and even grazing horses and cows alongthe edges of the lagoons were as plainly noted.Now and then a very large pair of eyes close to the ground shoneout. Coming closer, we could see a chuck, sitting like a stone, staringrigidly into the light. Wliile one of us held the light, the otherworked' around to the side and came up on the bird from behind,and reaching out could pick up the staring bird with ease. Weexamined several in this way, while they uttered a hissing note offear or anger. The birds struggled strongly while held and w^erevery difficult to quiet.Though sharing with the other goatsuckers the characteristic habitof perching lengthwise, the chuck occasionally departs from customand proves the ancient adage that exceptions make the rule. N. B.Moore (MS.) writes that he has seen it perch directly across a branchwhen the latter is an inch or more in diameter. He once "saw oneperch on a greenbrier one-quarter inch in diameter as cleverly as anybird, though it sank suddenly under its weight for 7 or 8 inches.The bird remained on it for 10 or 15 minutes." It is likely that thechuck indulges in this more than one would ordinarily suppose.I have seen it but once, when a bird was flushed in daylight and flewto a small, gnarled oak, where it alighted among the outer twigs,perching distinctly crosswise. It had two young in the near vicinity.In the reference already made above to Thayer's (1899) accountof this species capturing warblers on a ship off the South Carolinacoast, he noted that, on shipboard, the bird perched crosswise on therigging at times. Another remarkable character was that this birdwas seen, on flights out from the ship, actually to alight on the sur-face of the ocean ! This is certainly phenomenal and constitutesbehavior that is utterly at variance with the bird's ordinary habits.One more instance of crosswise perching is noted by W. S. Long(1935) ; he saw a specimen near Lawrence, Kans., that indulged inthis posture.
CHUCK-WILL'S-WIDOW 157The chuck-will's-widow frequently roosts in the same spot dayafter day, and one may be fairly certain of surprising a bird regu-larly when once the roosting area is located. During migrations itoccasionally is found in rather extraordinary situations, one of themost striking of these being noted by J. M. McBride (1933), of NewOrleans. He writes that he watched one for a week, September 14to 21, 1933, occupy an unprotected branch of a hackberry tree justeven with his second-floor window. It was to be seen daily on thisbranch from 6 a. m. to 6 p. m. His house was in the heart of theresidential district of New Orleans.Voice.?There is no doubt that the voice of the chuck-will's-widowis its most interesting and outstanding characteristic. Indeed, itis the one thing that many ever know of the species. It is a birdeasily heard but comparatively seldom seen; therefore, though thecall may be a nightly sound throughout the summer, the author maybe utterly unknown to many by sight. However, no one who liveswithin the range of the chuck can have failed to listen to the notesperforce, and only a deaf person can fail to be aware of its presence.Though the specific name of "vociferous" has been applied to thewhippoorwill, it is equally true of the chuck-will's-widow, if notmore so, but the generic name of the latter is well chosen, for the mouthis certainly "cavelike."The call of this species is well deserving of comment, particularlyin view of the fact that there seems to be so much confusion aboutit in the recent literature. Why this difference of opinion shouldexist, and why certain positive statements have been made, aresources of wonder to me and to others who know the voice of thechuck intimately. How anyone could listen for only a few minutesto the call and then say that "the song of the chuck-will's-widowis less vigorous than that of the whippoorwill; it consists of threenotes .... with a slight accent on the first syllable" is beyond mycomprehension. And yet more than one ornithologist has so stated.It seems significant that all those so describing it are northerners,that they know the chuck only by reason of short southern trips ofa few days or weeks. Or, perhaps, they take the opinion of otherswho have as little information as themselves. If their experiencewith this bird covered any extended period, they could hardly fallinto such error.The call of the chuck-will's-widow is distinctly 4-syllabled (someobservers say five at times), and therein lies one of the markeddifferences between it and the whippoorwill, which does have a3-syllabled call. The accent is not on the first but on the thirdsyllable; in other words, on the "wid" of widow. Few birds "say"
158 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMtheir names as plainly. The chuck is uttered on a lower tone thanthe rest but is distinctly audible at 300 yards or more. At somedistance one might be excused for thinking the call 3-syllabled, forit may sound like wilPs-widow, but on still nights the first syllableis plainly heard even across broad bodies of water, as occur overmuch of the southern coast region.The notes are not limited entirely to the dusk of evening or night.The bird sometimes calls in full daylight, either on cloudy or brightdays, and sometimes during rains. I have heard it at 1 p. m. ona bright, clear day. It is, of course, not the rule any more thanis the cross perching sometimes indulged in, but it certainly occurs.However, it is during late evening and all through the night thatthe chuck really performs, and it sometimes calls through the entireperiod. In localities favored by the species, several birds may becalling at once, which results in a jumble and overlapping of notes.Herbert L. Stoddard writes that, never having heard a chuck-will's-widow calling in the daytime, he was "greatly surprised to hear twocalling back and forth at 11: 30 a. m. today (May 25, 1928). It wascrystal clear and the sun was hot, but these two called over 5 min-utes, exactly as they do in the nighttime."In rapidity and frequency, there is much variation. A bird mayutter a very few calls or very many. I have counted individualcalls many times, and there seems to be no established custom orsequence. The usual interval between the notes is about 2^^ seconds,when the bird is doing a string of them. I counted thecalls of a bird just outside my window one night and it ranoff 111 without "drawing breath" other than the short spacingbetween each, 2i/2 seconds. The calls were uttered at the rateof 25 a minute, this series taking about 41^ minutes. One ofmy longest counts is 176 calls successively uttered without a break.E. S. Dingle tells me that he has counted 300 consecutive calls. Onthe night of June 2, 1939, at my home in St. Andrews Parish,Charleston, I heard a chuck that beat anything I have encounteredyet. I had gone to bed; the night was warm and I was lying neara window, when a chuck started up about 50 yards away in one ofthe live oaks in my yard. I began counting almost automatically,and kept it up, idly wondering whether it would reach my formerrecord. It did, and then some. I continued to count, and count.Finally, I got up and sat by the window, in order not to miss anyof it. The calls were perfectly continuous, and uttered at the usualrate, although twice there was a slight break in perhaps as muchas a second's lateness between them. The bird .. shifted its perchtwice, moving perhaps a few yards each time, but did not stop call-ing. The total was eight hwidred and thirty-four calls (834).
CHUCK-WILL'S-WIDOW 159The notes are clear-cut, insistent, and sharply enunciated withthe exception of the first syllable. There is a ringing quality aboutthem that is very striking, and one gets the impression of full-voiced effort. The head is moved noticeably when the call isuttered, and doubtless considerable muscular effort is put forth.Some writers have termed the notes "doleful," "monotonous," and
"melancholy," but to me they have never seemed anything but sooth-ing and dreamily satisfying. Charles Torrey Simpson (1920) saysthat the chucks "make night hideous" with their "terrible chatter."Thus do tastes differ
!
When it arrives from its winter quarters the chuck is particularlyvociferous, and keeps this up until after the eggs are hatched. Thereis then a cessation followed by some renewed activity before de-parting for the south on the approach of fall. It must be verysusceptible to cool weather, for it does not remain even as far southas Charleston until early in fall. The first part of September usuallysees it gone, although individuals linger longer than that.Besides the regular, self-naming call, the chuck has another note,which is not well known and is very difficult to describe. It is notthe hissing sound uttered when the bird is caught or handled butis given occasionally when about its hunting. Almost entirely, ifnot entirely, it is a flight note ; at least I have never heard it when thebird is sitting. It is inadequate to describe it as a "growl," andyet that is the only word that seems to approach it. As one fliesby in the gloom, this note is heard, and it is an eerie, utterly indefi-nite sound, possessing a strangely unearthly quality which impres-ses one with wonder that it comes from a bird.It is seldom if ever referred to in the literature but some haveremarked upon it in correspondence to the writer. The late JamesHenry Rice, Jr., of Brick House Plantation, Wiggins, S. C, oncehad an army officer visiting him who remarked on this note, butMr. Rice himself, being very deaf, was not aware of it, thoughhe knew the chuck well. He asks, in a letter to Mr. Bent, whetheranyone has noted what he termed "that clucking sound." I shouldhardly describe it as a "cluck" but it may impress some as such.One other note has been commented on |by those thoroughlyfamiliar with the chuck. It is often given just as the bird is flushedand, like the one above, is very difficult to describe. It can beinterpreted as a "croak" perhaps, and Dr. Eugene E. Murphey(MS.), of Augusta, Ga., calls it "froglike." His allusion to it, aswell as the utterances of the regular call as given in fall, is givenm a communication as follows
:
"I imagine most field ornithologists are familiar with the frog-like croak that the bird makes when flushed, and I am inclined to
160 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMbelieve that this note is much more apt to be sounded when thebird has been flushed from the nest. One observation may be worthyof note, namely, that I have heard the chuck-will's-widow singingas late as September 12 in Edgefield County, S. C. Wlien it comesto interpreting the quality of a bird's song, it is impossible to getaway from a personal construction, which, of course, is invalidin a scientific observation, but it seemed to me that on this occa-sion the song was very definitely less vehement and forceful, cer-tainly less frequently reiterated than is the case in spring; in fact,the whole thing seemed to have a querulous and uncertain character,somewhat as if he were wondering why he should be singing at thisparticular time of year. I endeavored to collect the bird, but therapidly gathering darkness made it impossible for me to secureit, although I was very close to it several times and saw it takeflight. Unfortunately, it chose to fly toward the darkening eastrather than the west where there was still an afterglow."In commenting generally upon the continuity of the chuck's callsduring the early part of the season, Herbert L. Stoddard, of Thomas-ville, Ga., has sent me the following notes
:
"Spent the entire night of April 14, 1927, on the alert in theobservatory at the quail pens on lookout for an owl which has beenkilling quail ... a brilliant moonlight night. Chuck-will's-widowscalled all nighty no 5-minute period between 9 p. m. and 5 a. m.elapsing without one to eight or ten calling. They have manyguttural notes of different inflection, as well as the beautiful callnote, a guttural, low-toned waugh given in questioning tones beingcommon. These notes are most frequently uttered when a pair ofthe birds are together."Fall.?The latest record in fall for the chuck-will's-widow in lowerSouth Carolina is September 28 (Wayne, 1910). The great majorityof the birds have left some time before this date. Indeed, Dr.Murphey's record mentioned above was a late one and impressed himmarkedly, as his account shows.The earliest arrival record for the whippoorwill for the samelocality is September 15, 1928 (Edward S. Dingle, MS.). The latestwhippoorwill record is for April 1, 1911 (Wayne, 1910). Thus, insome exceptional years there may be the slightest overlapping ofthe arrival and departure of the chuck and the whippoorwill, butin the main the one has gone when the other appears, and thereis usually some little interval between the sojourns of the two.Referring to the fall migration in El Salvador, Dickey and vanRossem (1938) say: "Chuck-will's-widows were seen as late asOctober 29 at Rio Goascoran, where they were more common than inany other locality. * * * Most were found well up in trees, once
OHUCK-WILL'S-WIDOW 161
as high as a hundred feet above the ground, and so wild that collect-ing them was usually impossible. At Lake Alomega one flew fromtree to tree through the high forest and at no time permitted anapproach closer than about a hundred yards. * * *"The usual daytime locations were large, horizontal branchestwenty feet or so from the groimd and in rather heavy woods."DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southeastern United States, the Caribbean region, CentralAmerica, and northern South America ; casual north to Ontario andNova Scotia.Breeding range.?The chuck-wilPs-widow breeds north to south-eastern Kansas (Arkansas City and Independence) ; Missouri (Wil-lard, Springfield, and Sulphur Spring) ; southern Illinois (Olney)
;
southern Ohio (West Union) ; and southern Maryland (Point Look-out). South along the Atlantic coast to Florida (St. Augustine,Daytona Beach, Royal Palm Hammock, and Man-o-war Key).South to Florida (Man-o-war Key, Fort Myers, St. Marks, LynnHaven, and Pensacola) ; southern Alabama (Spring Hill) ; southernLouisiana (St. Francisville and Urania) ; and southern Texas (Hous-ton, San Antonio, and Kerrville). West to central Texas (Kerrville,Waco, and Commerce) ; eastern Oklahoma (probably rarely Nor-man and Copan) ; and southeastern Kansas (Arkansas City).Winter range.?The winter range is not clearly defined, but at thisseason it has been found north to Cuba (Isle of Pines and SanPablo) ; the Bahama Islands (Andros Island and Nassau) ; the Do-minican Republic (Catarrey and Samana) ; and Puerto Rico(Arecibo, Sft? Piedras, and Vieques Island). East to Puerto Rico(Vieques Island) ; and northern Colombia (Medellin). South tonorthern Colombia (Medellin and Antioquia) ; Panama (PanamaCity and Divala) ; Costa Rica (Rio Sicsola and Candelaria) ; Nica-ragua (San Juan del Sur) ; El Salvador (Lake Olomega and prob-ably Barra de Santiago) ; and Guatemala (Guatemala City). Westto Guatemala (Guatemala City) ; and western Cuba (Isle of Pines).It appears that occasionally individuals may spend the winter inFlorida, as one was recorded from Orlando on December 1, 1885;one from Lake Jackson on December 5, 1911; and another from thesame general area on December 28, 1903. One also was seen atChenier au Tigre, La., on January 2, 1934.iSynng migration.?Early dates of arrival are : Florida?Orlando,February IT; Melrose, March 3; Palma Sola, March 5; DaytonaBeach, March 9; Merritts Island, March 12. Alabama?Prattville,April 2; Barachias, April 3; Greensboro, April 5'; Montgomery,April 6. Georgia?Savamiah, March 15; Cumberland, March 25;
162 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMSt. Marys, March 28, South Carolina?Charleston, March 12; Frog-jiiore, March 31; Columbia, April 6. North Carolina?Raleigh,April 10; Louisburg, April 17. Virginia?Lawrenceville, April 12;Bowers Hill, April 26. Louisiana?Bains, April 2; Bayou Sara,April 11; Baton Rouge, April 18; New Orleans, April 28. Missis-sippi?Biloxi, April 9; Jackson, April 10. Arkansas?Delight,April 10 ; Monticello, April 10 ; Fayetteville, April 14. Tennessee
?
Chattanooga, April 10 ; Knoxville, April 12 ; Belfast, April 18. Ken-tucky?Covington, April 7; Bowling Green, April 25. MissouriValley Park, April 18 ; Monteer, April 23. Texas?Refugio County,March 17; Corpus Christi, March 18; Austin, March 21; Kerrville,April 8. Oklahoma?Tulsa, April 20. Kansas?Manhattan, April26; Elmdale, April 29.Fall migration?Data on the autumn movement are not plentiful,but late dates of departure are: Oklahoma?Canadian River, Sep-tember 5. Texas?Grapevine, September 20; Brownsville, October1 ; Corpus Christi, October 22. Akansas?London, September 1 ; De-light, October 7. Mississippi?Bay St. Louis, September 25. Loui-siana?New Orleans, September 21. Virginia?^Lawrenceville, Au-gust 24. North Carolina?Louisburg, September 19; Raleigh, Sep-tember 21. South Carolina?Summerton, September 23; Charleston,September 28. Georgia?Athens, September 6; Savannah, Septem-ber 23. Florida?College Point, October 19 ; Pensacola, October 21
;
Punta Rossa, October 30.Casual records.?Among records of this species north of its knownbreeding range are several for Maryland?one heard at North Beachon June 28, 1930; one heard at Clements on August 14, 1932; amounted specimen in the collection of the Cambridge High School,taken at Fishing Creek sometime prior to 1933 ; and one recorded atLaurel on May 12, 1935. A specimen was taken at New Haven,Conn., on May 17, 1889 ; another was captured at East Boston, Mass.,on October 13, 1915 ; one was killed at Pictou, Nova Scotia, on Octo-ber 22, 1890; one was taken at Dayton, Ohio, on May 1, 1933, onewas collected on Point Pelee, Ontario, on May 19, 1906; one wastaken at Indianapolis, Ind., during April or May 1908 ; and one wasobtained at Sugar Creek, in southeastern Iowa, on June 17, 1933.There are several records for Kansas north of areas where it is knownto breed, among them being a specimen collected at Wichita on June12, 1898 ; one taken at Hamilton on April 30, 1912 ; and one obtainedat Lawrence on May 4, 1935.Egg dates.?Arkansas: 11 records. May 15 to June 26.Florida : 53 records, March 7 to June 30 ; 27 records, March 20 toMay 13, indicating the height of the season.Georgia : 28 records, April 25 to June 18 ; 14 records. May 7 to 24.Texas : 17 records, April 4 to June 16 ; 9 records, May 2 to June 5.
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 163ANTROSTOMUS VOCIFERUS VOCIFERUS (Wilsoa)EASTERN WHIPPOORWILLPlates 21-23HABITSContributed bt Winsob Mabbett TtlebAlmost every man, woman, and child living in the wide breedingrange of the whippoorwill knows the bird by name. Those who oncehear it singing, reiterating its name perhaps a hundred times ormore without a pause, cannot fail to realize that they are listeningto a whippoorwill, but how many of this multitude who know thewhippoorwill's name ever saw the bird, or would recognize it if theydid see it? Not, it may be presumed, one-tenth of 1 percent.Yet the whippoorwill lived many long years in denser obscuritystill, for, playing a part behind the scenes, so to speak, its lines wereascribed to another actor in the play ; it was not recognized as a birdat all until the early part of the last century. Prior to this time thewhippoorwill was supposed to be nothing more than the voice of thenighthawk, and even now in many rural districts the two birds arenot clearly distinguished from each other. "William Brewster (1895)says: "They are still very generally regarded by country peoplethroughout New England as one and the same bird."Spring.?The whippoorwill starts northward from central Floridain the latter part of March. This northerly movement evidently rep-resents a general migration from the southern and eastern GulfStates, and through them from points farther south. The bird ar-rives in the latitude of Boston, Mass., late in iipril or early in May,thus flying a distance of a thousand miles or more in 35 or 40 days
?
a migration that corresponds closely, both in time of year and inspeed of travel, with that of the chimney swift. Of this journeyWilson (1831) says:In their migrations north, and on their return, they probably stop a day ortwo at some of their former stages, and do not advance in one continued flight.The whip-poor-will was first heard this season [1811] on the 2d day of May,in a corner of Mr. Bartram's woods, not far from the house, and for two orthree mornings after in the same place, where I also saw it. From this timeuntil the beginning of September, there were none of these birds to be foundwithin at least one mile of the place; though I frequently made search forthem. On the 4th of September, the whip-poor-will was again heard for twoevenings successively in the same part of the woods. I also heard several ofthem passing, within the same week, between dusk and nine o'clock at night,it being then clear moonlight. These repeated their notes three or four times,and were heard no more. It is highly probable that they migrate during theevening and night.
164 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMF. Seymour Hersey (1923) tells of a striking instance of nocturnalmigration when a multitude of whippoorwills arrived suddenly atLakeville, Mass., in the middle of the night.In 1901 [he says], on the evening of May 4, about eight o'clock, a single birdwas heard singing. This was the first arrival noted and no others were heardthat evening. At two o'clock the following morning, six hours later, I wasawakened by birds singing loudly everywhere. I dressed and went out and formore than an hour the chorus continued. There were numbers of birds aboutthe house, on the door-step and ridge-pole, others singing in the road or fromthe stone walls along the road side, while still others could be heard down inthe pastures,?often eight or ten were singing at the same instant. I walkeddown the road for half a mile and the birds seemed equally as abundant onneighbors' farms. It seems probable that the migration takes place at nightas these birds had just arrived.Courtshi'p.?Few observers have had the good fortune to watchthe sexual activities of the whippoorwill. One must be very nearthe birds to see, in the semidarkness, the courtship in detail, andeven should we catch sight of a courting pair?a rare happening
?
we may get but a glimpse of their actions, because, if they flit onlya little way back into the gloom, they are lost to view, fading intothe shadows.Frank Bolles (1912) tells of the following experience. He washidden under a "narrow fringe of spirea bushes, 2^/2 ft. high only3 ft. from the stone"?a stone on which a whippoorwill sang everyevening. He says:It uttered its note about twenty or thirty times when to my astonishmentanother whip, alighted near it, on the left (W.) end of the boulder. One ortwo sounds like the soft popping of corn came from the new arrival, and thefirst bird, which had ceased its call, faced west and began a strange, slowdance, advancing a step at a time towards its mate, raising its body to thefull length of its legs at each step, thus making a sort of undulating approach.The other bird remained where it alit, but seemed to be moving its body upand down or else slowly pulsating its wings. The first bird, which I thinkwas the male, seemed to continue its dance entirely aroun<J the female. Ashe passed hei", indescribable purring and popping sounds were made and oneof the birds flew lightly away?the 2 I think. The male resumed his firstposition, and remained silent. Then he rose and circled in the air, catchingan insect I thought, for he came back at once to the spot on the rock whichhe always covers. A moment later his mate seemed to call from below thehouse, near the lake, and he flew, his white feathers flashing as he spreadhis tail, and the strokes of his wings making a distinct and quite loud soundas he passed close above my head.Henry K. Coale (1920) reporting the observation of his neighbor,Moritz Boehm, says:On different occasions, while the male was calling, he saw the female goingthrough some peculiar antics, but in thedusk could not make out just whatshe was doing. One evening, when he was sitting on the lower step, the birdscame up and performed within ten feet of him. He kept perfectly quiet. The
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 165
male called from a low branch overhead, while the female strutted on thegravel path below, with wings and tail outspread and head lowered, and side-stepped back and forth, half way around to the right, then to the left, all thetime uttering a curious guttural chuckle. This performance was kept up forten or fifteen minutes.Bendire's (1895) account of the whippoorwill's courtship is thebest in the literature ; it has become almost a classic, and ornitholo-gists still deplore the regrettable incident that interrupted theobservation.While on a collecting trip in Herkimer County, New York, with Dr. WilliamL. Ralph, in June, 1893, I witnessed a most amusing performance, which onemay see perhaps once in a lifetime. I happened to be in a little outbuilding,some 20 feet in the rear of the house at which we were stopping, early on theevening of the 24th, about half an hour after sundown, when I heard a pe-culiar, low, clucking noise outside, which was directly followed by the familiarcall of "whip-poor-will." * * * Directly alongside of the small outbuildingpreviously referred to, a barrel of sand and lime had been spilled, and from thenumerous tracks of these birds, made by them nightly afterwards, it was evi-dent that this spot was visited regularly, and was the trysting place of at leastone pair. Looking through a small aperture, I saw one of the birds waddlingabout in a very excited manner over the sand-covered space, which was perhaps2 by 3 feet square, and it was so much interested in its own performancethat it did not notice me, although I made some noise trying to fightoff a swarm of mosquitoes which assailed me from all sides. Its head ap-peared to be all mouth, and its notes were uttered so rapidly that, close asI was to the bird, they sounded like one long, continuous roll.A few seconds after his first effort (it was the male) he was joined by hismate, and she at once commenced to respond with a peculiar, low, buzzing orgrunting note, like "gaw-gaw-gaw," undoubtedly a note of approval or endear-ment. This evidently cost her considerable effort; her head almost touchedthe ground while uttering it, her plumage was relaxed, and her whole bodyseemed to be in a violent tremble. The male in the meantime had sidled upto her and touched her bill with his, which made her move slightly to one side,but so slowly that he easily kept close alongside of her. These sidling move-ments were kept up for a minute or more each time; first one would moveaway, followed by the other, and then it was reversed; both were aboutequally bold and coy at the same time. Their entire love making lookedexceedingly human, and the female acted as timid and bashful as many youngmaidens would when receiving the first declarations of their would-be lovers,while the lowering of her head might easily be interpreted as being done tohide her blushes. Just about the time I thought this courtship would reachits climax, a dog ran out of the house and caused both to take flight.Nesting.?The whippoorwill lays its two eggs on dry, well-drainedground, generally near the edge of a wood of small mixed growth
?
oak, beech, pine?where the floor of the wood is clear of dense under-brush and where the trees are not crowded together, but spaced farenough apart to cast an uneven shade. The eggs may lie on the openfloor or under a small bush?not tucked away near the stems, but outin the shadow of its branches. The bird builds no nest, although a
166 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
slight depression about the eggs may result from the presence of theparent there during incubation ; for concealment it relies solely on thesoft colors of the fallen leaves and the flickering light of the woodland.It is rare to find the eggs laid in a more open situation.Lewis McI. Terrill, in a letter to Mr. Bent, gives in detail the resultsof remarkably close observations on the home life of a pair of whip-poorwills and their brood. His observations were made near St.Lambert, Quebec, in 1933.On May 14 Mr. Terrill came upon a pair of whippoorwills in apatch of deciduous trees, mainly young maple and birch. A weeklater he flushed the female "from a single egg lying on a bed of oldleaves in a small glade" near the spot where he first saw the birds.
"There was no depression whatever, and the egg appeared as if ithad been casually dropped there." The second egg was not laiduntil the 23d, indicating "that egg deposition takes place on alternatedays."Invariably at his subsequent visits Mr. Terrill found the femaleincubating or brooding, but while the young birds remained in thevicinity of the nest he saw the male near it only once (June 20).He says : "The male spent the day in a thicket over 400 yards away.I usually heard him singing from this direction in the early part ofthe evening; later he sang from a point nearer the nest; and finallyfrom its immediate vicinity. I gather from this that he visited hisfamily regularly at night."On May 27 the eggs were resting in a noticeable depression madeby the pressure of the bird's body. One might almost call it a nestalthough no extraneous nesting material whatever had been added.The female was very consistent in her behavior, usually leaving theeggs when I was 10-15 feet away and flying to a dead branch 2 feetfrom the ground where she uttered a few protesting chucks, whichresembled a call of the catbird and to a lesser extent the chuck of thehermit thrush."On the occasion of the male's visit (June 20) both birds werevery worried, and their calls, especially that of the male, resembledthe whip note of his song, although much subdued. He sometimescalled whip-will when excited by the distress calls of the young."When returning to the nest the female frequently hovered beforealighting, often dropping to the ground a few feet from the nest.Even at that short distance she would not attempt to walk onto theeggs, but would fly up again, hover, and then alight directly on thenest."The nighthawk, we may note, progresses differently. To be sure,it occasionally flies short distances when approaching the nest, but thefinal approach is by walking, or perhaps I should say creeping in a
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 167
?Charlie Chaplin-like' shuffle. The different methods of approach tothe nest are, I think, indicative of the different habitats of two verysimilar birds. The woodland whippoorwill hops or flies to avoidobstructions, whereas the nighthawk can gain its objective withoutleaving the ground.
"The female whippoorwill was still incubating on June 10, but onthe 11th there were two young in the nest. The incubation periodfor the last egg laid was, therefore, at least 19 days, and possiblynearer 20.
"The first definite movement away from the nest was noted onJune 18, when the female was brooding the young 50 feet away. Onthe 19th and 20th she was respectively 70 and 85 feet from the nest.The female often alighted crosswise on a limb when excited, or forthe purpose of facing me, but quickly assumed the lengthwise position.
"June 21-22?Female brooding young 100 feet from nest.
"June 25?One young bird flew 15 feet.
"June 26?Older chick flew 25 feet when female was flushed.Younger bird still jumped, then squatted, but when I placed it on abranch, it flew 15 feet. Both young always alighted on the ground,but perched readily. This was the last I saw of the family."Mr. Terrill's report of this family of whippoorwills makes it clearthat the male parent very rarely came near the nest at the times hewas watching it. This accords with the experience of many observersat other nests. For example, H. E. Tuttle (1911) says: "The maleWhip-poor-will I saw only once, and that was after the young werefully grown. He was very conspicuous in the dusk as he sat on a log,uttering rasping sounds in his throat and opening and shutting histail, brilliantly marked with white at the edges. It was only a dayor so after seeing the male bird that I lost sight of the young birdsaltogether."But why should we expect the male whippoorwill to come to thenest in the middle of the night?the whippoorwill's day? Thereis nothing to do there at night except to keep the eggs warm, or,after they hatch, to brood the young, and his mate can do thatwhile she sleeps on the nest. So he sleeps a little way off. Butwhen the dark comes?when his morning breaks?when the nightinsects begin to fly, and food abounds, and his hungry children cry,where is the male parent then? We do not know, but we mayassume, as Mr. Terrill suggests, that he joins his family and aidsin feeding the young.When a female bird is approached while she is incubating (Ben-dire says : "I believe the female attends to this duty almost exclusive-ly") the behavior varies a good deal in different individuals. Inmany accounts of her actions, she is reported to flop about on the
168 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMground, seemingly trying to lead the intruder away. Wilson (1831)reports that "in traversing the woods one day in the early part ofJune, along the brow of a rocky declivity, a whippoorwill rose frommy feet, and fluttered along, sometimes prostrating herself, andbeating the ground with her wings, as if just expiring." On theother hand, H. E. Tuttle (1911) speaks of a bird, brooding young,which was "very fearless, allowing me to touch her back and makingit necessary for me to shove her gently off the young when I wanteda glimpse of them."Arthur C. Bent, in Ms notes, says that late in May he "flusheda whippoorwill from near a woodland path, where it apparentlyhad been roosting regularly as evidenced by its droppings." A fewdays later, not 25 yards from the path, he "flushed the whippoorwillfrom the ground and saw its single egg lying on the flat, bare oakleaves,"C. H. D. Clarke, writing to Mr. Bent from Ontario, Canada,points out how changes in the topography of a region may affectthe local whippoorwills. He says: "The common denominator ex-plaining the local distribution of this species is, I believe, to befound in its feeding and egg-laying habits. The whippoorwill feedsin the open, like the nighthawk, but unlike it, fairly near the ground.Although both birds lay their eggs on the ground, the nighthawknests in the open, whereas the whippoorwill always nests amongtrees. Hence, as a breeding bird, it is found in glades and aroundthe edges of woodlots. Many of the woodlots, however, in thisvicinity are closely grazed by cattle at the present time, a conditionthat prevailed less commonly in the semipioneering stage of ourcountry. The whippoorwill does not tolerate this change; it willnot breed in the grazed woodlots and, as a consequence, has beenreduced in numbers here. It also seems to avoid extensive areas ofconifers, possibl}' because of the absence of hardwood litter on whichto lay its eggs. The area at Frank's Bay, in which the bird breedsvery commonly, is a sand plain that was burned over about 25years ago and has since grown up in many places to dense standsof poplar from 15 to 20 feet high. Here the whippoorwill hasplenty of shelter in the dense poplar woods, an abundance of hard-wood litter, and may cruise about over the treetops not far aboveground."Eggs.?[Author's note: The two eggs of the whippoorwill arebetween oval and elliptical-oval in shape and become somewhatglossy when incubated. The ground color is usually pure white,but occasionally a faint creamy tint is perceptible. The markingsconsist of spots or small blotches of "pale Quaker drab" or "pallidQuaker drab," scattered over the eggs more or less irregularly; an
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 169
occasional egg has large, irregular blotches of this color. Overlyingthese pale gray markings, or scattered among them, are often manysmall spots or fine dots of various browns, such as "cinnamon-brown," "tawny," or "tawny-olive." An occasional egg is almostimmaculate.The measurements of 50 eggs average 29.0 by 21.3 millimeters;the eggs showing the four extremes measure 31.5 by 21.0, 30.48 by22.86, 20.48 by 21.34, and 28.45 by 20.07 millmieters.]Young.?The little whippoorwill chick, hatching out from an in-visible Q,gg^ finds itself lying on the ground, with dead leaves allabout. The dead leaves look like the chick, and the chick lookslike the dead leaves; no one can tell them apart; practically thechick is a dead leaf, and, although hatched, it is still invisible, justas it was when hidden in the egg.Some birds depend on speed for safety, or on agility or strength,but the whippoorwill relies cliiefly on not being seen. Safety comesto the whippoorwill in dim light, half shadows, and the faint, con-fusing obscurity of dusk, and among these, on the borderland ofinvisibility, the whippoorwill lives all its days.Nests of the whippoorwill are found almost always by accident.The old bird starts up from near the observer's feet, and a search
?
sometimes a long one?reveals the eggs or the young birds. Forexample, A. Dawes DuBois (1911) says:The first nest was found on May 16, 1908, in a strip of woods of mediumsize trees, thickly undergrown, on a high bank of the Sangamon River[Illinois]. The ground was well carpeted with dried oak leaves. Our firstintimation of Whippoorwills in this place was the sudden appearance of anadult bird fluttering along the ground in front of us, apparently with abroken wing. We stopped at once and while my companion stood to markthe place, I followed the bird a short distance. She fluttered along noise-lessly, feigning serious injury and leading me away from the nest as rapidlyas I could be induced to follow.A search revealed the nest within a pace of the spot we had marked. Itcontained one egg and the broken shell of another which gave evidence ofhaving hatched. Although I stooped to examine the broken shell I did notsee the bird that had hatched from it until my companion called my attentionto it. The little fellow was crouched, motionless, upon the brown leaves notsix inches from the broken egg-shell.H. E. Tuttle (1911) speaks thus of the young birds: "The newlyhatched birds were very attractive-looking little chicks so long as theykept their mouths shut. They were a uniform buff color, whichmatched well with the leaves, and the instant their mother left themthey each ran in opposite directions and squatted. In this maneuverthe old bird seemed to aid them materially by the vigorous flip whichshe gave them as she rose, often tumbling them over on their backs."178223?40 12
170 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMJ. G. Suthard writes to Mr. Bent from Muskegon, Mich., as fol-lows: "On June 14, 1936, I flushed a whippoorwill from an oak-leafed spot on a steep hillside overlooking a large timbered swamp.I shortly discovered two downy young with their eyes only partlyopened. They made no effort to escape and were silent whenhandled. The parent flew around several times, uttering a whup-whup-whur note, and then perched on a dead limb of a nearby tree.One of the eggshells was about 6 feet below the nest on the hillside,and the feces of the young had not been moved by the parents. Asthis nest was only about 30 yards from the main highway, I re-turned several times between this date and June 24 to see if, owingto my disturbance of the young, the parents would move them.Each time I visited the nest the parent was brooding the youngin practically the same spot."Lewis McI. Terrill, in his study of nest life, quoted under "Nest-ing," says that on June 12, before the young birds were two daysold, "whenever the female was flushed, the nestlings hopped orjumped several inches with the suddenness and unexpected agilityof 'jumping beans,' then squatted in hiding posture in the mannerof woodcock chicks. The entire movement was so rapid that italmost escaped notice." He continues
:
"From the 13th to the 16th the female was brooding the youngeither in the nest or in the shade 2 or 3 feet away. On the latterdate I heard one of the nestlings give a weak, complaining whip^which was answered by the mother 20 feet away. It attempted tofollow her, progressing by little hops, but was jn difficulty when itencountered heavy undergrowth where it was unable to hop. Thesmaller of the nestlings remained in the nest.
"June 26?The older bird when placed lengthwise on a limbquickly turned about and perched crosswise, demonstrating youth'sobjection to slavish custom ! The older bird now frequently used thewhip note, which appears to be the chief motif in the whippoorwillvocabulary. The younger bird still called in wheezy tones that Ireadily imitated by sucking my finger?so well that the mother birdfrequently responded by flying to me and fluttering at my feet. Theyoung at this date, nearly 16 days old, closely resembled theirparents."Terrill definitely established the incubation period of one of theeggs in the nest he observed as not less than 19 days, "and possiblynearer 20." Burns (1915) gives the incubation period as 17 daj^s,and Audubon (1840) gives it as 14 days.PVu/niages.?[Author's note: The downy young whippoorwill isthickly covered with long, soft, silky down, shading in color from"cinnamon" on the back to "pinkish cinnamon" on the chest, and
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 171to "light pinkish cinnamon" on the crown and abdomen; it matchesthe dead leaves on which it is hatched.The juvenai plumage begins to grow at an early age. Ridgway(1914) says that the young male is "similar to the adult male in 'pat-tern' and coloration of lateral rectrices, as well as of primaries andprimary coverts, but rest of plumage quite different, the wing-coverts and scapulars deep brownish buff or clay color, the formerwith coarse and irregular small spots of black, the latter with verylarge irregular spots of balck, the under parts barred with duskyon a brownish buffy ground and, like most of the upper parts, with-out fine vermiculations, the pileum spotted instead of streaked withblack, and the band across lower throat indistinct, more or lessbroken by dusky barring, and buffy instead of white." The youngfemale, he says, is "similar to the young male, but three lateral rec-trices broadly tipped with ochraceous-buffy instead of having a largewhite distal area."A young bird in juvenai plumage, nearly grown, collected inMassachusetts in July, is like the young male described above, ex-cept that the feathers of the interscapular region and the medianwing coverts are from "ochraceous-buff" to "light ochraceous-bluff,"with a narrow shaft streak and a conspicuous subterminal small spotof black.During July and August the juvenai contour plumage is shed, theJuvenal wings and tail being retained, and a first winter plumage isacquired, in which the contour plumage closely resembles that ofthe adult. This is worn until the following summer, when a com-plete molt produces the fully adult plumage. Both young and oldbirds have a complete annual molt between July and September.]Food.?The earliest report on the food of the whippoorwill is thatof Wilson (1831), who was the first writer to show that the whip-poorwill and the nighthawk are different birds. He says: "Theirfood appears to be large moths, grasshoppers, pismires, and such in-sects as frequent the bark of old rotten and decaying timber. Theyare also expert in darting after winged insects."Knight (1908) puts the following items on the whippoorwill's billof fare : "Their diet," he says, "would seem to be entirely insectivorousand among the various things I have known them to eat are Sphinxmoths of various species. Actios lima, Samia cecropia, Samia colv/mhia,Telea polyphemus, and a great variety of species of Noctuidae, alsograsshoppers, crickets, mosquitoes, caddis flies, and in fact almostany sort of insect available."Bendire (1895) reports that "in the Western States, which aresometimes ovemm by swarms of Rocky Mountain Locusts, it alsofeeds largely on these when abundant."
172 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMForbusli (1927) tells of the whippoorwill the following story whichwill endear the bird to all mosquito-haters. He says : "While I sleptunsheltered nightly for a week in the Concord woods, rolled in myblanket, with only a head-net hung to a branch overhead to protectme from mosquitoes, I noticed each morning upon awaking just be-fore daylight that something fluttered softly about my head. Thesound was like that produced by a large night-moth, but soon I heardsomething strike the ground a few feet away, and then a well-knowncluck convinced me that my visitor was a Whip-poor-will. The birdcame nightly while I remained in the woods, and each morning beforedaylight it flew around my head-net until it had caught all themosquitoes there."Eaton (1914) says: "I have taken 36 full-grown moths from thestomach of a single Wliippoorwill which was killed early in theevening, indicating that within an hour and a half he had killedand devoured these full-grown moths, each one of which containedhundreds of eggs."Whippoorwills secure a large part of their food by capturingnight-flying insects on the wing, but Ernest Ingersoll (1920) statesthat they also "have a way of balancing themselves near a tree-trunkor barn-wall, picking ants and other small provender off the bark;and even hunt for worms and beetles on the ground, turning over theleaves to root them out."Francis H. Allen (MS.) says: "One evening I saw one take off fromthe branch of an oak for what was probably its first feeding flightof the night. It opened its mouth wide hefore launching into the air."Behavior.?In order to study the whippoorwill at short rangeit is well to visit its haunts for a few evenings and learn how thebird we are to watch behaves when it wakes from its day's sleep.Whippoorwills move about over a considerable territory when theycome into the open for their daily session of singing and feeding,they follow a route, evening after evening, that varies little, andon the circuit there are stations?a stone wall, a low branch, or a cer-tain spot on the ground?where they are almost sure to stop and singfor a while.If we seat ourselves near one of these stations where the light,which will be almost gone when the bird arrives, will favor ourview, and where a dark background will obscure us from the bird,we shall be able to see the whippoorwill at short range, for if wesit motionless (no easy task, for mosquitoes will torture us) thebird will pay little attention to us. We must sit quiet and wait,following the song as it swings around the circuit, and we mustwatch the spot where the bird is about to alight, for, although inflight it looms big even in the dusk, when it comes to rest, with a
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 173flip of wings it bocomes a bit of dead wood, a clod of earth, or van-ishes altogether.On several evenings late in May 1914, at Wilton, N. H., I visitedwhat appeared to be the whippoorwill headquarters?a dry woodof small deciduous growth bordering a sloping field, on one ofwhich was a moist alder run that ran down to the edge of the wood.When I arrived, between sunset and dark, wood thrushes and
^^eeries were singing, but before they quieted down for the night,the whippoorwills (from one bird to two or three) began to sing,always from the dry wood. They sang intermittently, and gen-erally after each series of lohip-poor-wills their voices came from adifferent part of the wood. By the time the light was becominguncertain (when one would have difficulty in reading print) onebird, leaving the wood, worked up the slope, passing the field eitherby way of the alder run or by a wood of larger growth and anapple orchard that bordered the higher sides of the field.On each of the first evenings when I visited the ground, one birdpaused in the corner of the field where it joined the alder run, andsang a few times, and on two of these evenings I was able to approachthe bird but not near enough to see it. The next evening, therefore,as soon as the bird that was singing in the wood began to change hisposition, I retired to this corner of the field to await him and sat downon a bank where my figure would not show against the sky. Thatevening was unusually dark and cloudy. The bird left the wood bythe lower side, and at 7 : 50 I heard the song coming nearer andnearer through the alders behind me. Then, two minutes later, itcame with startling suddenness from almost at my side. The birdsat on the bare ground at the foot of the bank not 6 yards from whereI sat. In bringing my glass to bear upon him, I disturbed him, Ithink, for he flew silently away. He alighted, however, on a rock andbegan to sing. He was now 12 yards from me and on a level withmy eyes. His side was toward me, and he faced nearly in the direc-tion from which he had just flown. He sat flat on the stone withhis head thrown slightly backward and upward and, on alighting,immediately began to sing.The song at close range sounded like cuch-rhip-oor-ree^ the finalnote accented and held longer than the other three, although the rhipwas louder and longer than the oor. The song was remarkablyregular; twice, however, the bird increased the tempo, and once hedoubled one note?either the rhip or the oor. After a pause thecuch was invariably the first note given when he continued his song.Even in the dim light the band of white across the throat wasclearly visible, and twice during each repetition of the cuck-rhip-oor-ree this band was drawn backward?slightly at the cuch^ mark-
174 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
edly during the final we, when, I think, the beak was open wide.Later, when the bird more nearly faced me, these movements of thewhite band were less noticeable. The bird sat on the rock for threeor four minutes, singing almost continuously. He sat absolutely stillfor the most part, but twice he moved backward about an inch, as ifeach time he took a single backward step. His departure, with noapparent cause, was noiseless and abrupt, breaking the song at oor.F. Seymour Hersey (1923), who watched with great care a whip-poorwill making its nightly round, says: "The time taken to makethis circuit varied from 25 to 30 minutes. I watched this bird fromseveral places of concealment and ascertained to my satisfaction thatit was the same individual that visited each of these places and thatthe order given above was not varied. The spot from which hesang was, in all cases, nearly the same, i. e., within a very few feetof the place where he was seen on a previous evening."Frank Bolles (1912) gives a remarkable picture, seen from almostwithin arm's reach, of a singing whippoorwill. Mr. Bolles, who washidden near a stone to which the whippoorwill came nightly, says
:
Suddenly I hear a rather feeble whip, 12 times S. of me, then silence andthen a bird flies to the stone in front of my face, coming low over the bushesand alighting with its tail towards me. It squeaks or clicks three times,and I fear it suspects me and is giving a slight alarm note, but the nextmoment it begins the piercing quif) o^rip slightly raising its head and dippingits tail each time it makes the sound. The head rises on the quip and fallson the rip. The wings do not move, nor the body save by a slight tipping. Icould see the bird's outline perfectly against the white background of theshingled barn on which the moonlight fell fully.When the whippoorwill comes out in the dusk for its eveninground, alighting on a stone wall, on the ground, or on a big hori-zontal branch high in a tall tree, we may sometimes catch sight ofit against the sky, as it flies from one station to another. In the airthe whippoorwill does not resemble the nighthawk at all. Its wingsare broad and, compared to those of the nighthawk, short, and itmoves them with an easy sweep, with none of the nighthawk's jerki-ness. When we see it flying steadily across an open field, it suggestsan owl moving through the gloom on its broad, silent wings.Taverner and Swales (1907) give a remarkable description of theflight of a whippoorwill seen under such circumstances at PointPelee, Ontario. They say
:
One evening, just as the dusk was darkening into night, a Whip-poor-will washeard near the camp. We stole out, and the bird was located in a large barewalnut tree in the open bush where, looking up against the still faintlyilluminated sky, it could be plainly made out, sitting lengthwise, as is theirfashion, on a rather large and almost horizontal branch. It remained perfectlymotionless except for an occasional jerk of its white blotched tail, when itgave vent intermittently to a guttural "gluck." These notes were repeated at
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 175irregular intervals of perhaps half a minute, several times and then, withoutstart or warning, it launched away into the air, starting off immediately atfull speed, with a drop that carried it in a large, even circle half way to theground, and then up on the same curve, to vanish in the gloom of the trees.Then it appeared on the other side, swinging down on fixed wings in greatelliptical curves as though whirled from the end of a cord, perfectly silentin flight and threading the dusky mazes of the tree tops with the utmostconfidence and precision. Here and there it rapidly wheeled, without anapparent stroke of the wing, now coming into view in the lower arc of itsgreat circling, and then vanishing silently again on the upward sweep on theother side. As suddenly as it started, it ceased in the middle of a swing and,while the eyes vainly searched for the dark object along the continuation ofits course, it was seated again on the branch from which it first sprang, silentand still. This was repeated several times, and then it was joined by another,and the two circled about like great soft, gliding bats until the sky abovegrew so dark that their movements could no longer be watched.Several writers mention the fearlessness of the whippoorwill, orperhaps its failure to recognize man as a danger. For example,Bendire (1895) quotes E. A. Mcllheimy, who says: "These birds arevery tame, for on two occasions, while sitting still in the twilight toobserve the movements of some Owls, I have had them come so closethat I could have caught them. On one occasion one lit on my knee,and another on my foot as it was extended before me." And H. E.Tuttle (1911) says: "Once I watched two males fighting and singingat intervals on a fallen birch sapling. I was quite close to them,
?
within a yard?^but they did not seem to regard me as dangerous,and when I tried to imitate the guttural noises they were making,they circled round my head so closely that one touched me with hiswings. In the darkness I was probably no more than a charredstump."C. W. G. Eifrig (1919) mentions "a unique experience" with awhippoorwill, which, displaying unexpected aggressiveness, dartedrepeatedly at his head.It has been surmised that the whippoorwill uses its capacious mouthto carry its eggs, and even its young, out of danger when its nestlias been discovered. There is no satisfactory evidence that the birdemploys its mouth in this way, but it has been seen, on two occasionsat least, carrying a young bird through the air held between its legs.J. H. Bowles (1895) says: "I flushed a whippoorwill that rose witha baby bird clutched firmly between her thighs^'' and Bendire (1895)quotes H. W. Flint as follows : "I once, and once only, saw a female(the male is never present at the nest) carry a young bird abouta rod, but can not say she used her bill, and don't think she did, butI am almost sure the claws and legs only were used, as the youngwas hugged close to the body."The whippoorwill is fond of taking dust baths. Wlien drivingafter dark we sometimes catch sight of one as it starts up from its
176 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMbath on a country road, and, as it flies off and our headlights pick itup, the white tail feathers, if the bird is a male, shine out for aninstant. Forbush (1927) says: "Mr. Stanley H. Bromley of South-bridge, Massachusetts, tells me that a farmer there placed a large trayof dry wood ashes on the ground, and whippoorwills came thereat night to dust in it."Wilson (1831) states: "The inner edge of the middle claw is pecti-nated, and, from the circumstances of its being frequently found withsmall portions of down adhering to the teeth, is probably employedas a comb to rid the plumage of its head of vermin."Voice.?If the whippoorwill "should smg by day, when everygoose is cackling," the song might lose some of its witchery; we donot know; the bird sings in the dark, or when darkness is comingon fast, and the singer is invisible or almost invisible among theshadows. The song at a little distance comes to the ear as a pene-trating whisper of the bird's name, repeated perfectly regularly,time after time with scarcely a pause between, at a rather rapidrate?about once a second. The fourth note, a cluck before the whip-poor-will, is heard usually only when the bird is fairly near us,although we may hear it at a distance of 200 yards under favorablecircumstances. The syllable luill carries farthest of all the syllables.It is rare to hear any material variation in the song, but thereare individual birds that regularly sing an unusual form, and some-times a bird will introduce occassionally one abnormal phrase intohis singing.Simeon Pease Cheney (1891), speaking from the point of viewof music, says: "In the courageous repetition of his name he accentsthe first and last syllables, the last most; always measuring his songwith the same rhytlmi, while very considerably varying the melody
?
which latter fact is discovered only by most careful attention. Plain,simple, and stereotyped as his song appears, marked variations areintroduced in the course of it. The whippoorwill uses nearly all theintervals in the natural scale, even the octave. I have never detecteda chromatic tone." Describing altercations between two or morebirds, he says
:
These altercations are sometimes very amusing. Three whippoorwills, twomales and a female, indulged in them for several evenings one season, in mygarden. They came just at dark, and very soon a spirited contest began.Frequently they flew directly upward, one at a time. Occasionally one flewdown into the patch near me, put out his wings, opened his big mouth, andhissed like a goose disturbed in the dark. But, the most peculiar, the astonish-ing featxire of the contention was the finale. Toward the close of the trial ofspeed and power, the unwieldy name was dropped, and they rattled on freelywith the same rhythm that the name would have required, alternating in theirrushing triplets, going faster and faster, louder and louder, to the end.
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 177The bird is remarkable on account of the regularity of its songand the great number of times it repeats the whip-poor-will with-out a pause. From 50 to 100 repetitions are not uncommon. For-bush (1927) says: "John Burroughs, however, made a count whichso far as I know exceeds all others. He records that he heard abird 'lay upon the back of poor will' 1088 blows with only a rarelyperceptible pause here and there, as if to take breath."F. Seymour Hersey (1923) writes: "The Whip-poor-will sings mostcontinuously from dusk till about 9.30 p. m. and from 2.00 a. m. tilldawn. During the intervening hours only an occasional song isheard. The song season lasts from their arrival in spring until lateJuly or early August. Then there is a marked falling off in thenumber of singing birds heard until toward the end of August orearly in September an increase in the number of singers is againnoted. The songs of these late birds often lack the energy that char-acterizes the spring performance but a good many continue to singuntil they leave for the south. My latest singing bird was notedSeptember 24, 1901." These dates refer to eastern Massachusetts.Of the possibility of the female singing, he says : "June 15 a Whip-poor-will alighted on the fence and uttered its 'chuck' note, whichusually precedes the regular song, repeating it a number of timesbut not giving a note of the usual 'Wliip-poor-wilP call. It also didthe same while on the wing. This bird was supposed to be a femaleas no conspicuous light area was visible on the tail. If so, she wascapable of singing the same as the male for I later heard and sawher sing, both from the fence and while on the ground in the middleof the road. She finally flew and was followed by another birdwhich may have been her mate."Of the whippoorwill's minor notes, we have seen above that thegrowling gr-gr-gr or gaw-gaw-gaw is presumably associated withcourtship. I have never heard the note except when two (or more)birds were together, on or near the ground. This note suggests alittle a note of the female woodcock, which is used under similarcircumstances. The whirring whup-whup-whirr is evidently analarm note.A. Dawes DuBois (1911) mentions two other notes, evidently ofalarm. He says : "She fluttered from the spot as she had done theprevious day, but this time uttering a very low hissing or 'soughing'sound," and again, "She kept vigilant watch, however, at a shortdistance, moving about near the ground with a remarkably noiselessflight but uttering a 'chip' or 'whit' similar to that of a domesticchick."If we are outdoors at the end of the day, when the sun has gonedown and all the ways are darkened, if we are walking along a
178 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMquiet country road fringed by woods and open fields, or, in a canoe,are drifting down a stream flowing slowly past farmland?pastures,stone walls, orchards?and if we listen, what do we hear? If it issummer, the bird songs are gradually fading away as the birds fallasleep, the robin chorus lessens when the light grows dim, and whenit is almost dark a field sparrow may sing for the last time beforenight comes. If it is autumn we hear little bird song, only a shortperiod of chipping and clucking before the birds settle for the night,and after that only the insects that will sing the night through. Butlet us listen. Was that a whippoorwill ? Do we hear a whippoor-will, or do we imagine we hear one because the scene has changed toa world of shadows?the whippoorwill's world?and association hasbrought the bird to our mind, and its song has come to our ears?The song is faint and comes from far away. Perhaps we did nothear it ; perhaps there was no song to hear.This is a peculiarity of the whippoorwill's song; it is so bound upwith association that we are sometimes misled. It is the same withthe bluebird when we listen for its song over the brown fields ofMarch.Field marks.?The whippoorwill and the nighthawk appear verymuch alike when sitting either on the ground or along a horizontalbranch of a tree, for in such situations it is difficult to see the pointswhere the two birds differ. The whippoorwill is bristly about themouth ; the nighthawk is not. The tips of the whippoorwill's foldedwings do not come to the end of the rounded tail, whereas thenighthawk's wings project beyond the forked tail. The whippoorwillhas a narrow line of white on the upper breast. The correspondingmark on the nighthawk is broader and includes the throat. Perhapsthe best mark for diagnosis is the pale, barred sides of the night-hawk. For purposes of field identification this part of the whip-poorwill may be said to be unbarred.In the air the distinguishing mark of the nighthawk is a con-spicuous spot of white in the wing. The whippoorwill lacks thismark. The flight of the two birds (see above) is very different andidentifies them at a glance.The chuck-will's-widow, although similar to the whippoorwill inplumage, is a much larger bird.Enemies.?The clearing away of a large part of the North Ameri-can wilderness during the past two centuries or so has not materiallyaffected the whippoorwill ; it drove the bird back from the settlementsa little way, farther and farther as the towns grew in extent andbecame the great cities of today, but at the present time, not farbeyond the city limits, whippoorwills find miles and miles of countrywild and secluded enough for their breeding purposes. Fifteen miles
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 179from the city of Boston, Mass., for example, as well as within a mileor two of many small towns in the State, the bird is still abundant,nesting on the dry wooded ridges and eskers.This ability to flourish as man advanced into the country, whenso many birds failed to hold their own, may be accounted for bythe habits and equipment of the whippoorwill, which, when it movesabout, is "bescreened in night" and is so obscurely colored that wemay say "the mask of night is on its face" even in the daytime, as itlies motionless on a carpet of dead leaves.If the bird should be discovered and attacked, we may imaginehow often the whippoorwill, with its marvelous powers of flight, mayescape hawk, owl, or fox.Fall.?We rarely see whippoorwills in autumn, but as we hearthem sing not infrequently at this season we know that they some-times linger in New England almost to the end of September, atime when hard frosts are at hand, which will either kill the insectsor hasten them into retirement.Taverner and Swales (1907) report an unusual gathering of whip-poorwills on Point Pelee, Ontario. They say : "In our various Sep-tember visits we have usually found them more or less common, butat that season they are much quieter, and seldom do more than calla few times in the early evening and then cease. Sometimes onewill be heard again through the night, but more often not. Sep-tember, 1905, beginning the 4th, we saw from one to six until the13th, when a great flight of them appeared on the Point. Thabday, in the red cedar thickets near the extremity of the Point, weflushed thirty between twelve and half-past one in the afternoon."
'Winter.?George Nelson, who has known the wliippoorwill foryears in its winter quarters on the east coast of Florida, tells methat the bird is pretty evenly distributed in the country aboutSebastian, frequenting chiefly the ridges and hammocks where, dur-ing the day, it rests on the ground or on the trunk of a fallen tree.Not infrequently, as Mr. Nelson has been driving after dark alongU. S. Route 1, a bird has started up from almost beneath the wheelsof his car and has flown off in the glare of the headlights. He saysthat the bird is not in song during winter, but just before it startsnorthward, late in March, it sings for a few evenings, and that itsdeparture invariably coincides with the arrival of the chuck-will's-widow.Each evening during my stay at Sebastian with Mr. Nelson inmid-February 1931, just as it was beginning to grow dark, a whip-poorwill appeared in the dooryard, a clearing in a dense hammockon the shore of the Indian River. The bird perched lengthwisehere and there on the thick limbs of a live oak, well up in the big
180 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMtree, but clearly visible from the ground, and made frequent salliesout into the air, sometimes sweeping clear away from the tree, some-times only flitting among its branches, returning either to the perchfrom which it had flown, or to another one. Presumably these sal-lies were made in pursuit of flying insects?there was a businesslikeair in the bird's behavior?but there was no sound of any snappingof the beak audible to me as I stood near the foot of the tree. Ourfirst intimation that the bird had arrived from its day's seclusionwas the sound of a low chuck repeated at short intervals. The birdgave this note from its perch and from the air; it was very similarto the introductory note in the whippoorwill song, but a little sharper.As the bird flew about, it sailed a good deal, wheeling around withsome tilting from one side to the other, the wings held out straightand flat from the body with no, or very little, bend at the wrist joint.I was strangely reminded of the flight of a shearwater?the whip-poorwill seeming to avoid the branches as the shearwater avoids thetops of the waves, tilting over them as it sails.This was when the bird was moving slowly, but at times it in-creased its speed and executed the most intricate maneuvers, appear-ing and disappearing among the branches, ever changing itsdirection, either sailing or flapping its wings, swerving sharply fromside to side, heeling over till one wing pointed nearly to the zenithand the other to the earth, then snapping back to an even keel. Itshot straight upward, dived head downward, and doubled back,twisting and gyrating with such rapidity that it seemed to betumbling about in the air. The turns were so quick and the paceso reckless that the bird appeared in a frenzy and in danger of dash-ing itself against a limb of the tree, yet from the midst of thesecomplicated evolutions it instantly righted itself and, with a flashof wings, settled flat and motionless on its perch.Although there was the appearance of a lack of caution in thesemad dashes among the network of branches, we were convinced, aswe watched, that the bird governed its movements with perfectprecision, with the acme of coordination.The flight seemed silent; even when the bird passed witliin a fewfeet of my head, I heard no sound. It appeared to be alone, andafter remaining for ten minutes or so, it flew off, and we heardor saw no more of it until the next evening.When we flashed a light on it, the eye gleamed back a brightorange.Mr. Nelson said that earlier in the winter the behavior of thebird had been different. It came about the house every eveningfor a while, visiting a small tree (Assonia) to which insects wereattracted by big clusters of open flowers. This tree was about 10
EASTERN WHIPPOORWILL 181feet tall, with large leaves but plenty of open si>ace between thebranches. The bird went to the ground after each flight into thetree, and it appeared to Mr. Nelson that the insects, as they flewamong the flowers, could best be seen against the sky from thispoint. The bird did not return to this tree after the flowers hadfaded.During a second visit to Florida, more than a month later, I saw,presumably, the same bird again. It acted exactly as it had before,perching, indeed, on the identical spot on the limb of the live oakthat had been a favorite perch in February. On this occasion alsoonly one bird visited the tree, and while feeding was silent except forthe low chuck. On March 24, after the bird had been to the treeand had gone away, I heard him singing off in the hammock. Thissinging on his winter quarters indicated that he felt spring was here,and it was time to leave for his summer home in the north.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?United States and southern Canada east of the RockyMountains, south in winter to El Salvador.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the eastern whippoorwillextends north rarely to central Saskatchewan (Prince Albert)
;
southern Manitoba (Gypsumville, Lake St. Martin, Shoal Lake, andWinnipeg) ; northern Michigan (McMillan and Sault Ste. Marie) ;southern Ontario (Sudbury, Algonquin Park, and Ottawa) ; south-ern Quebec (Montreal and Sherbrooke) ; rarely northern Maine(Presque Isle) ; and rarely southern New Brunswick (Scotch Lake).The eastern limits extend southward from this point along the At-lantic coast to eastern Virginia (Ashland and Lawrenceville) ; hencesouthwest through the interior to North Carolina (Ealeigh and High-rock) ; and Georgia (Young Harris and Atlanta). South to north-ern Georgia (Atlanta) ; northern Alabama (Lookout Mountain andSand Mountain) ; central Arkansas (Clinto and Big Piney Creek) ;and Texas (Troup). West to eastern Texas (Troup) ; northwesternArkansas (Rogers and Pearidge) ; eastern Kansas (Ottawa andTopeka) ; eastern Nebraska (Peru, Omaha, and Neligh) ; southeast-ern South Dakota (Vermillion) ; Minnesota (St. Cloud, Fosston,and Williams) ; southwestern Manitoba (Treesbank) ; and rarelycentral Saskatchewan (Prince Albert).Closely related subspecies, Stephens's whippoorwill {A. v. an-sonae), is found chiefly in Mexico, but in summer it has been recordednorth to Arizona (Bradshaw Mountains, Sierra Ancha, Mount Gra-ham, and the Chiricahua Mountains) ; New Mexico (Turkey Creek,Blank Range, and Fort Bayard) ; and southwestern Texas (ChisosMountains)
.
182 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMWinter range.?The winter range of the entire species is north tosouthern Sonora (Alamos) ; southern Texas (San Patricio and PortArthur) ; rarely Louisiana (Baton Rouge) ; southern Alabama(Fairhope) ; northwestern Florida (Pensacola and St. Marks) ; andeast-central South Carolina (Mount Pleasant). East to east-centralSouth Carolina (Mount Pleasant) ; Georgia (Savannah) ; easternFlorida (Amelia Island, Orlando, Lake Worth, and Royal PalmHammock) ; British Honduras (Toledo District) ; and Costa Rica(probably San Jose). South to Costa Rica (probably San Jose andPuntarenas) ; El Salvador (Rio San Miguel, Puerto del Triunfo, andLa Libertad) ; Oaxaca (Tehuantepec) ; and southern Jalisco (ColimaVolcano). West to Jalisco (Colima Volcano and Bolanos Volcano)
;
probably western Durango (Salto) ; and southern Sonora (Alamos)./Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are : North Caro-lina?Louisburg, March 19; Weaverville, March 23; Raleigh, March28. Virginia?Variety Mills, March 29; Lawrenceville, March 30.District of Columbia?^Washington, April 1. Maryland?MardelaSprings, March 29; Cambridge, April 12. Pennsylvania?Williams-port, April 21 ; Berwyn, April 22 ; Philadelphia, April 22. New Jer-sey?Vineland, April 11; Morristown, April 23. New York?Jay,April 14 ; Geneva, April 25 ; Rochester, April 29. Connecticut?Jew-ett City, April 23; Hartford, April 23. Massachusetts?Boston,April 13; Taunton, April 20; Wilmington, April 26. Vermont
?
Wells River, April 25 ; St. Johnsbury, May 5 ; Rutland, May 7. NewHampshire?Charlestown, April 26; Tilton, May 2. Maine?Port-land, April 26; Phillips, May 2. Quebec?Montreal, April 25.New Brunswick?Scotch Lake, May 7. Mississippi?Suffolk, March22. Arkansas?Delight, March 29; Clinton, March 30. TennesseeAthens, March 24. Kentucky?Eubank, April 2; Bowling Green,April 6. Missouri?Pahnyra, April 9 ; St. Louis, April 13. IllinoisChicago, April 13; Port Byron, April 23. Indiana?Fort Wayne,April 11; Bicknell, April 12; Lafayette, April 16. Ohio?Columbus,April 13; Wauseon, April 16; Youngstown, April 18. MichiganDetroit, April 15 ; Sault Ste. Marie, May 3. Ontario?Ottawa, April25 ; Toronto, April 28. Iowa?Keokuk, April 11 ; Sabula, April 16
;
Iowa City, April 18. Wisconsin?Milwaukee, April 21; Madison,April 26. Minnesota?Lanesboro, April 17 ; Elk River, April 24 ; St.Vincent, May 11. Texas?Grapevine, April 7. Kansas?Onaga,April 19; Topeka, April 20. North Dakota?^Larimore, May 20.Manitoba?Aweme, May 1 ; Raeburn, May 1.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are: ManitobaAweme, September 27. Minnesota?Elk River, September 23 ; Lanes-boro, October 2. Iowa?Keokuk, October 2 ; Sabula, October 4. Mis-souri?Concordia, October 3; Palmyra, October 12. Ontario?Ot-
STEPHENS'S WHIPPOORWILL 183tawa, October 16; Point Pelee, October 17. Michigan?Sault Ste.Marie, September 23 ; Detroit, October 6. Ohio?Wauseon, September20. Indiana?Bicknell, September 21; Fort Wayne, September 22.Illinois?Port Byron, September 19. Kentucky?Eubank, October 4.Tennessee?Athens, October 3. Arkansas?Delight, October 4. NewBrunswick?Scotch Lake, September 8. Maine?Phillips, October 6.New Hampshire?Ossipee, October 2. Vermont?^Wells Kiver, Sep-tember 14 ; Rutland, September 21. Massachusetts?Harvard October10. Conecticut?Hartford, October 18. New Jersey?Morristown,October 10. Pennsylvania?Berwyn, October 5 ; Philadelphia, October11. District of Columbia?Washington, October 13. West Virginia
?
French Creek, October 2. North Carolina?Raleigh, November 6.Casual records.?The whippoorwill has been recorded, either byits call or by the collection of specimens, at several points outside itsnormal range. One was taken at Port Collins, Colo., on September "J,14, 1903, and one was heard at Eastend, in southwestern Saskatche-wan, on August 29, 1919. In North Dakota, two specimens havebeen obtained at Grafton, one on October 9, 1923, and the other onMay 24, 1924, while it was recorded at Stump Lake in the spring of1910 and also at Cando. It has been noted occasionally near Wichita,Kans., and one was noted at Harper, Kans., on May 1, 1936. Duringthe period July 5 to September 22, 1905, one was heard calling onIsle Royale, Mich., and in the summer of 1922 one was heard on theCascapedia River, Gaspe Peninsula, Quebec. In Puerto Rico a speci-men was collected for Cory, probably in 1888, and Wetmore reportedseeing a bird that he felt certain was this species on December 23,1911, near the experimental station at Rio Piedras.Egg dates.?Arizona: 12 records, May 3 to August 8; 6 records.May 22 to June 12, indicating the height of the season.Connecticut : 9 records, May 20 to June 18.Illinois: 39 records. May 9 to July 26; 20 records, May 18 toJune 17.West Virginia: 40 records, May 6 to July 7; 20 records, May 15to June 3. ANTROSTOMUS VOCIFERUS ARIZONAE BrewsterSTEPHENS'S WHIPPOORWILLPlate 24HABITSThis southwestern race of the whippoorwill is found in southernArizona and New Mexico, in southwestern Texas, and southwardthrough the mountains of northern Mexico, being replaced by anothersubspecies farther south. Although it is common enough in some of
184 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthe Arizona mountain ranges, it is oftener heard than seen. It sitsso closely, is so inactive during the day, and is so protectively coloredthat it is easily overlooked. The use of a flashlight at night will oftenenable one to locate one of these birds by the "eye-shine," even atconsiderable distance.William Brewster (1881), in naming this subspecies, described it as
"generally similar to A. vociferus but much larger; with the rictalbristles considerably longer; the gular crescent and a pretty welldefined superciliary stripe, ochraceous ; the lores and auriculars tawnyochraceous. The white of the tail barely tipping the outer web ofthe lateral tail feathers and on the others confined to a narrow apicalspace; the under tail-coverts nearly without barring."Mr. Brewster's type came from the Chiricahua Mountains, Ariz.,where they were evidently common, for Frank Stephens, the collec-tor, wrote to him: "I have heard several of these Whip-poor-willssinging at one time and am told that they were heard here last year.I hear A. nuttalli every evening. They keep high up the mountainsides, while A. vociferus affects the lower part of the caiions."Harry S. Swarth (1904) says that this whippoorwill is a "fairlyabundant summer resident" in the Huachuca Mountains, Ariz., "oc-curring principally between 5000 and 8000 feet; they may occa-sionally occur at a little higher elevation, but I have never seen anybelow the lowest altitude given."A. J. van Eossem (1936) writes:The vertical range of Stephens's Whip-poor-will is not limited to the highermountains. Above 6000 feet in the Santa Ritas many birds vpere heard on everyoccasion that we stayed out after dark, but I also heard a whip-poor-will severaltimes at 5000 feet in the Atascos and Dr. Miller collected a specimen at PefiaBlanca Spring, Pajarito Mountains, in June, 1931. These two localities are welldown in the Upper Sonora Zone.I took, all told, six specimens of this common, though seldom collected, whip-poor-will and saw or heard several times that number. In the Santa Ritas theyshowed a decided preference for groves of oaks and sycamores in the canon bot-toms, and nearly all of those which were found at night were feeding in theimmediate vicinity of running water. A pair to the mile seemed to be normalin most cafions which contained water and it was obvious that each pair had itsown territory.Spring.?Mr. Swarth (1904) saw the first arrival in 1903 "on April28, and soon after their notes could be heard every evening, usuallyfrom some thickly wooded hillside, near the bottom of the canyon."But Mr. Stephens wrote to Mr. Brewster (1881) : "I heard the firstWhip-poor-will about the middle of May. By June 1, they were ascommon as I ever knew them to be in the East. Sometimes I couldhear three or four whistling at once."Nesting.?^We did not succeed in finding a nest of Stephens's whip-poorwill in the Huachuca Mountains, but my companion, Frank C.
STEPHENS'S WHIPPOOPvWILL 185Willard, had previously found one there on May 24, 1899; the nestwas on the ground at the base of a bush, and the eggs were lyingon a few dead leaves ; it was at an elevation of about 6,000 feet.Mr. Stephens wrote to Major Bendire (1895) : "The locality whereI found the egg was a gulch near the summit of the ChiricahuaMountains, in a thick forest of yellow pine. The nest, if it can becalled so, was a slight depression scratched in the ground, under theedge of a bowlder."Dr. A. K. Fisher sent Bendire the following notes:The Whip-poor-will's note was not heard at Fort Bowie, Arizona, during thelast three weeks of May, 1894. When we made camp at the mouth of RuckerCanyon, some forty miles south of the Post, in the Chiricahua Mountains,on the last day of the month, we heard a few, and a couple of days laterfound the species abundant higher up in the same canyon, among the pines(P. ponderosa) . Here at early dusk and at dawn their notes were heard almostcontinuously, and numbers of birds were seen. On June 5 Mr. Fred. HallFowler found a nest, if the slight depression in the ground can be so desigrnated, on a steep side hill about 50 feet above the stream. It was situatedunder an overhanging bush at the edge of a flat rock, and contained two young,recently hatched, and the fragments of egg shells from which they hademerged.Mr. Fowler wrote to Bendire concerning the same nest : "The eggswere deposited on a bed of oak leaves by the side of a large rock;there was no nest excepting the bare leaves, which had been hollowedout slightly."Mr. van Kossem (1936) found this whippoorwill nesting in theSanta Rita Mountains, Ariz., of which he writes:Though males, and sometimes, before eggs were laid, mated pairs, wereinvariably found in the canon beds, the two nests discovered were on hill-sides at least a quarter of a mile from water. On the night of June 6, 1931, Icaught the red eye-shine of a whippoorwill some distance away (estimated bydaylight at 150 yards) and across a steep-banked canon. With no expectationof collecting anything I followed the trail to a point where I estimated theshine to have been, but could locate nothing and supposed that the bird hadgone. On my return to the original spot the eye was seen in the same loca-tion as before, and this time, after a little search, I found a female sittingunder the protection of a fallen spray of leafless twigs which lay on a steepbank beside the trail. Three of us had passed within five or six feet of thissitting bird on two occasions the day before. The sitting bird made no effortto escape and was picked up by hand. There was one neai-ly fresh egg inthe shallow depression in the gravelly soil which served as a nest, and stuckto the ventral plumage of the incubating female wore several small pieces ofshell, showing that another egg had been laid and somehow broken.Eggs.?The two eggs laid by Stephens's whippoorwill have beensaid to be pure, immaculate white, but this is not always the case.Mr. Brewster (1882) says of the egg sent to him by Mr. Stephens:"The egg is white with a dull gloss. At first sight it appears to be178223?40 13
186 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMimmaculate, but a closer inspection reveals a few faint blotches ofthe palest possible purple, so faint indeed that they might pass forsuperficial stains were it not for the fact that they underlie theexternal polish." This egg measures 29.72 by 22.10 millimeters.Mr. van Eossem (1936) says of the egg referred to above: "Thissingle egg was by no means immaculate white, but was clouded andmottled with brown and lilac, mostly in the nature of semi-concealedshell markings. It was similar to but very much less highly coloredthan eggs of the eastern vociferus, however." Another nest, foundby him later, "contained one pure white egg and a newly hatchedchick."Philo W. Smith, Jr. (1900), received two sets of eggs, taken byO. C. Poling in the Huachuca Mountains, which "very much resemblein shape and color sets of the common Poor Will in his collection,being possibly a trifle larger, and one egg of each set has a few almostimperceptible pinkish spots on one end, the other egg in each setbeing unspotted."There is a set of two eggs in the Thayer collection, taken in theChiricahua Mountains, Ariz., on June 6, 1904, by Virgil W. Owen,that are decidedly spotted. These eggs are oval and only moderatelyglossy. The ground color is pure white, and both eggs are finely andirregularly marked with small spots and minute dots of "pale Quakerdrab," "pallid Quaker drab," and very pale "clay color."The measurements of 29 eggs average 28.8 by 20.8 millimeters; theeggs showing the four extremes measure 30.9 by 21.8, 29.0 by 22.6,25.8 by 20.1, and 28.9 by 19.9 millimeters.Plumages.?I have not seen the downy young of this subspecies, butthe two newly hatched chicks, taken by Mr. Fowler, are described as
"covered with light brown down, and were not more than li/^inches long." Mr. van Rossem (1936) describes a newly hatchedchick as "clothed with a very respectable covering of down?in colorbetween 'cinnamon' and 'orange-cinnamon' of Ridgway."I have not seen enough material to work out the molts of this race,but I suppose that they are not very different from those of theeastern whippoorwill. Mr. Brewster's type was a male, which isdescribed above. He later received an adult female from Mr.Stephens, of which he says (1882) : "This specimen differs even morewidely from the female, than does my type from the male of A.vociferus. The ochraceous of the lores, superciliary-stripe, and neck-collar, spreads over the entire plumage both above and beneath, givingit a tawny tinge which overlies and obscures the usual dark markings.On the shoulders, breast, lores and throat this color deepens to a finereddish-chestnut, and elsewhere it replaces the ashy, dirty white andother light tints of the eastern birds. In its general coloring the
NUTTALL'S POORWILL 187plumage strikingly resembles that of the brown phase of Scops asiokennicottV^Mrs. Florence M. Bailey (1928) says that the young male is "similarto adult male but top of head spotted instead of streaked with black,throat band indistinct, wing coverts and scapulars broadly barredwith dusky, and irregularly marked with black; underparts barredwith dusky on a brownish buffy ground. Young female: Similar toyoung male but outer tail feathers tipped with brownish buff insteadof white."Behavior.?The food, feeding habits, and general behavior ofStephens's whippoorwill are apparently similar to those of its easternrelative. Mr. van Rossem noticed a peculiarity that I have not seenin the eastern bird, of which he writes : "A, to me, surprising circum-stance, was the marked erectability of the feathers above the eyes.Both of the sitting females carried these tufts constantly erect theentire time they were under observation. A male seen from directlyin front alternately raised and flattened them. On one previousoccasion, when night hunting in El Salvador, I had observed theeastern subspecies (vodferus) to have markedly erectile tufts; in factuntil I picked the bird up I was certain that I had shot some small
'eared' owl. About 45% from the horizontal was the maximum eleva-tion, though when viewed from directly in front the tufts appearnearly vertical."Fall?Mr. Swarth (1904) says that, in the Huachucas, "they seemto remain rather late in the fall, as at the end of August their noteswere heard as frequently as ever, and I have a female taken by H,Kimball on September 29, 1895. An adult male secured on August29, 1902, had not yet quite completed its moult."PHALAENOPTILUS NUTTALU NUTTALLI (Andubon)NUTTALL'S POORWILLHABITSNuttall's poorwill is the best known and the most widely distrib-uted race of this species, occupying a wide range in western NorthAmerica, from southern Canada to Mexico and from the Great Plainsto eastern California. Major Bendire (1895) says of its haunts:In some of its habits it differs considerably from the preceding species ofthis family which are almost entirely confined to the denser woodlands; thePoor-will, however, although frequently found in similar localities, is appar-ently equally as much at home on the open prairie and the almost barren andarid regions of the interior, which are covered only here and there withstunted patches of sage (Artemisia) and other desert plants. The climate doesnot seem to affect it much, as it inhabits some of the hottest regions of thecontinent, like Death Valley, in southeastern California, as well as the slopes
188 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
of the Rocky and Blue mountains, in Oregon, where it reaches altitudes of from6,000 to 8,000 feet. I have heard the Poor-will in Bear Valley, Oregon, in alocality where frost could be found every month in the year.Dr. Alexander Wetmore (1932) writes: "At times poorwills arefound in growths of low forests, but they are more often encounteredin regions where dense clumps of brush are scattered over otherwiseopen ground, as is common in desert and semiarid localities, or inbrush-grown, rocky canyons, where the ground is rough and strewnwith bowlders."Keferring to the Huachuca Mountains, in Arizona, Harry S.Swarth (1904) says: "I found the Poor-will quite abundant duringthe summer months in the foothill region and in the lower parts ofthe canyons ; but though most numerous below 5000 feet they wereby no means restricted to these parts, for I saw or heard some in allparts of the mountains occasionally up to an altitude of nearly10,000 feet."George F. Simmons (1925) designates its haunts in Texas as "high,gravelly flats or bits of plateau grown with post oak timber and withoccasional moist spots; gravel patches dotted with catsclaw bushes,located in post oak growth on slopes and flat tops of hills; highprairies on rough ground along the terraces of valleys ; bare groundon rocky hillsides; among shrubbery or on semi-arid flats."Nesting.?The nesting of the poorwill is a very simple affair. Thetwo eggs are laid on the bare ground, without any semblance of nestbuilding; a slight hollow may be scraped in the bare earth, or theeggs may be laid on hard gravelly ground, or even on a flat rock. Theexact spot chosen for a nest site may be in full sunlight, but oftener itis at least partially shaded by some bush, often a greasewood bush ora bunch of sagebrush, or some other bunch of vegetation. The onlyeggs taken by Major Bendire (1895) were "laid on the bare gToundunder a small grease-wood bush (OMone) and were fully exposedto the sun," near Tucson, Ariz. Prof. D. E. Lantz wrote to himfrom Kansas, regarding the nesting habits of the poorwill in thatregion, that "with one exception the eggs taken were laid uponbare patches of gravel or on low, flat rocks, and placed usually neara bunch of weeds or a tuft of grass. The exception was a set foundon the bare ground in an alley in Manhattan City. This alley was inconstant use and it was strange that the eggs remained for so longa time undisturbed, for when taken incubation had begun in botheggs. The Poor-wills usually keep to the vicinity of steep hills andold dead grass. They seem to return to the same locality from yearto year to breed."E. S. Cameron (1907), reporting from Montana, says: "On June26, 1907, Mr. M. M. Archdale flushed a Poor-will from her two white
NUTTALL'S POORWILL 189eggs on a steep hillside in some rough pine brakes at his ranch nearKJnowlton. In this unfrequented place the eggs were fully exposedon the bare earth amidst the pines. On June 28, we went togetherto the place intending to photograph the eggs, but they had beenalready removed by the bird."Eggs.?The two eggs of the poorwill are generally said to bepure white, but Bendire (1895) says that the color is not pure whiteand that "on close inspection it can readily be seen that it is adelicate cream, with a faint pinkish tint which does not perceptiblyfade. Eggs in the collection taken more than twenty years ago stillplainly show this peculiar tint. The eggs are unspotted as a rule,but an occasional specimen shows a few faint, darker shell markingsaround one end, which are barely perceptible to the naked eye, andwhich fade considerably in time."In shape the eggs vary from oval to elliptical-oval; and they areonly moderately glossy. The measurements of 50 eggs average 26.3by 19.9 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure28.9 by 19.8, 27.5 by 21.6, 22.1 by 19.3, and 24.6 by 18.1 millimeters.Young.?The period of incubation does not seem to be definitelyknown. Dr. Wetmore (1932) says: "Both birds are said to assistin incubation. When disturbed about the nest, they tumble aboutand with widely opened mouths make a loud hissing sound terrify-ingly like the hissing of a snake."Robert B. Rockwell writes to me that he found a female withtwo young "as large as an ordinary week or ten days old chick.They were squatting perfectly motionless on the ground, about afoot apart, each in the shadow of something. Their feathers werequite well developed. They made no move when I picked them up,but opened their eyes when I put them down again."Plumages.?Elmer C. Aldrich (1935) describes the downy youngof the dusky poorwill, less than a day old and about 2^/2 inches long,as covered with a rich buff down. Ridgway (1914) describes thedowny covering of a young nuttalli as "vinaceous-buff, paler on un-derparts." Two small partially downy young in my collection areshowing the growth of the first plumage on the forehead, crown,nape, back, and scapulars; these feathers are dull buffy white, mi-nutely sprinkled with grayish, and have small spots and narrow barsof black; the new feathers on the underparts and flanks are dullwhite, indistinctly barred with dusky; the wings are less than one-third grown, and the tail is just sprouting.Ridgway (1914) says of the young in juvenal plumage: "Not essen-tially different from adults, but markings in general less sharplydefined, especially on underparts, and throat patch buff instead ofwhite."
190 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMI have been unable to learn anything about the molts of eitheryoung or adults, but Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1908) says that a speci-men in Juvenal plumage, "taken August 22, shows many feathers ofthe full adult plumage in the throat and breast. The juvenal plum-age is characterized by having the throat patch buff and the backconspicuously mixed with cinnamon-rufus."A young male, collected by Van Tyne and Sutton (193Y) in Brew-ster County, Tex., on May 25, was in the midst of the postjuvenalmolt; "the crown is uniform gray, without any suggestion of a darkcentral patch, the feathers being only lightly speckled with black.* * * The chest lacks entirely the black patch and band, the feath-ers being lightly and indistinctly tipped with tawny and whitish."The so-called frosted poorwill {nitidus) is now regarded as merelya color phase of nuttalli.Food.?The food of the poorwill consists, so far as it appears bythe data available, entirely of insects, mostly the smaller, night-flying species, such as moths, beetles, chinch bugs, and locusts.Mrs. Bailey (1928) says that "in one stomach, 80 per cent of thecontents was grasshoppers and locusts," Many of these insects arecaught on the wing in the capacious mouths of these birds, but manyare also picked up on the ground.Dr. R. W. Shufeldt (1885) noticed a poorwill "apparently amusinghimself by making short jumps of two feet or more up in the air,then resting on the road to repeat the performance in a moment or so.Another was going through similar capers on the broad walk. Theyseemed to be perfectly oblivious to my presence, and, indeed, somechildren further along were trying to catch them with their hands."He shot one of the birds, and "was much surprised to find in its mouthsome four or five quite sizable moths, and the upper portion of theoesophagus was filled with a wad of a dozen or fifteen more. Fullyhalf of these were yet alive, and two or three managed to fly away whenfreed from the bodies of their more disabled companions. This, then,is what the bird was up to; instead of flying about as a Nighthawkdoes, taking his insect prey in a conspicuous manner upon the wing,he captures it in the way I have described above."A. Brazier Howell (1927) writes:August 28, 1926, I was sitting near midniglit, on the observation platform ofthe California Limited as it stopped at Needles, California. It was with muchinterest that I then noted at least three poorwills {Phalaenoptilus nuttallinitidus?) hawking about a powerful arc light in the railway yards close by.The observation point of one of these was upon the top of a board fencewell within the circle of illumination ; of the others, some point out of mydirect vision and just beyond the fence. One after the other, until my trainleft ten minutes later, they would flutter up in their quest for insects, notjust somewhere near the light but apparently right against the glass globewhich inclosed the arc, returning each time to their respective stations forobservation.
NUTTALL'S POORWILL 191Mrs. Bailey (1928) says: "Wlien hunting for food the Poor-willskims swiftly and noiselessly close over the ground with irregularturnings and windings and rests between, and when its catch con-tains hard indigestible parts like the wing coverts of beetles, ejectsthem in the form of pellets, as do the hawks and owls, kingfishers,and others of similar food habits. A road through a forest with itsabundant flies and insects is said to be one of its favorite huntinggroimds."The stomach of one taken by Van Tyne and Sutton (1937) onMay 25 in Brewster County, Tex., was crammed with four largeJune beetles {PhyJIo-phaga sp.) and a large army ant (maleEciton sp.).Behavior.?Mrs. Bailey (1928) says that a poorwill, wounded byMr. Bailey, exhibited a surprising method of defense; he "openedhis mouth wide and hissed and blew and flopped about on theground, always facing the enemy. Blowing like a blow snake andopening and shutting his mouth, he was enough to terrify all minorenemies."Referring to the eye-shine, common among the Caprimulgidae,Mrs. Bailey quotes Dr. Bergtold as saying : "While motoring at nightthrough a particularly dark canyon, I noticed far ahead in theilluminated road, two small glowing pink spots which were ex-tinguished when a bird flew from the road on the near approachof the car. The bird alighted again, some distance ahead in theroad, when the pink spots reappeared and were identified as thebird's eyes ; it was shot and proved to be a Poor-will."Dr. Wetmore (1932) says that poorwills "rest during the day onthe ground, though after night, when feeding or calling, may seekhigher perches on stones or posts or on low branches. On one occa-sion I saw one by bright moonlight calling from a bush, where itperched crosswise on a small limb, like any ordinary bird, thoughordinarily they rest lengthwise of branches, like others of theirfamily."Dr. Elliott Coues (1874) says: "Like others of its family, Nut-tail's Whippoorwill is oftener heard than seen. When flushed fromits retreat in the daytime, among the shrubbery or tall weeds, itrises hurriedly with wayward flight, dashes a few yards, and re-alights. There is something about it at such times that stronglyrecalls the Woodcock, and the bird is quite as difficult to shoot onthe wing."Voice.?The call of the poorwill is generally recorded as a clearpronunciation of its name, but many observers have noted a thirdsyllable, audible at only a short distance, making the complete songsound like poor-will-low^ or poor-wiU-ee, when the bird is near, or
192 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMpoor-will when farther away, or even p^-will when still farther away.Mr. Simmons (1925) writes it puih-whee-ee.Dr. Cones (1874) says: "This cry is very lugubrious, and in placeswhere the birds are numerous the wailing chorus is enough to excitevague apprehensions on the part of the lonely traveler, as he liesdown to rest by his camp-fire, or to break his sleep with fitful dreams,in which lost spirits appear to bemoan their fate and implore hisintercession."Some other writers give a less unpleasant impression of the song;for instance. Dr. Wetmore (1932) says: "Near at hand these calls areharsh, but with distance the first two assume a pleasant, somewhatmelancholy cadence." And Mrs. Bailey (1928) writes: "When wewere camped on the edge of a canyon in the Guadalupe Mountains,at dusk while the bats were flying down in the canyon, up along theedge came the Poor-wills so near that we could hear their syllablesdistinctly
?
poor-wilV-uck, j)oor-ivilV-uGk. Sometimes two would callantiphonally, faster and faster till they fairly tripped over eachother. The call as it is often given is a delightfully soft, poor-wilV,poor-wilV, poor-wilV-uck, which like the delicious aromatic smell ofthe sagebrush clings long to the memory of the lover of the west."Henry W. Henshaw (1875) says that "their notes are mostoften noticed in early evening, and again just before dawn, but notinfrequently their song is heard through the entire night. * * *When flying, they emit a constantly repeated clucking note, whichis, I think, common to both sexes. * * * The males continue theirnotes till very late in the season ; for I frequently heard them duringthe first part of October, and even as late as the 17th."Field marks.?In superficial appearance the poorwill looks verymuch like a small whippoorwill, and its behavior is similar. It alsosomewhat resembles a partly grown young nighthawk, but its be-havior is different ; whereas the nighthawk flies about high in the airin pursuit of its prey, the poorwill hunts on or near the ground,flitting about like a large moth on silent wings; the poorwill is morestrictly nocturnal in its activities than the nighthawk; furthermore,it exhibits no white patch in the wing, while flying, but shows whitetips on the lateral tail feathers. Its note is, of course, characteristic.Winter.?The poorwill retires from the northern portions of itsrange late in fall and spends the winter near, or beyond, our southernborders. Dr. Coues (1874) reports, in some notes from Ogden,Utah, that "it lingers at its summer home till the autumn is far ad-vanced, as we found it at Ogden as late as October 6, quite far upthe slope of the mountains, in the midst of a driving snow-storm
?
the first of the season?the snow having then already accumulated tothe depth of several inches."
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 1
Tela, Honduras, July 5, 1930. A. F. Skutch.Female on nest.
L lij I \ alley, Honduras, August 5, 1930. A. F. Slcutch.
178223?40 14 Nest of two pairs.Groove- BILLED ani.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 2
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 3
Fairbank, Ariz., May 18, 1922. A. C. Bent.Nest in a willow.
San Diego County, Calif., April 9, 1929. Nest in a prickh'peai".ROADRUNNER. A. C. Bent.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 4
Adult taking lizard to Iced \uuiig.
Arizona. W. L. and Irene Finley.Small young in nest.ROADRUNNERS.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 5
Mojave Desert, Calif., May 28, lVl(j. W. M. Pierce.Young nearly grown.
Arizona. Adult on nest.ROADRUNNERS. \V. L. and Irene Finley.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 6
Logan County, III., June 21, 1^13.Nest of Yellow-billed Cuckoo A. D. DuBois.
Arizona. Nest of California Cuckoo. F. C. Willard.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 7
iattle Creek, Mich., August 30, 1936. L. H. Walkinsha
Ithaca, N. Y. YELLOW-BILLED CUCKOOS AND YOUNG A. A. Allen.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE
Sioux City, Iowa. T. C. Stephens.Nest of Black- billed Cuckoo.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BUULETIN 76 PLATE 9
Omaha, Nebr.. July 1, 1901. Young in juvenal plumage. F. H. Shoemaker.
Hennepin County, Minn., June 11, 1935. A well-made nest.Black-billed Cuckoo. A. D. DuBois.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 10
Showing the sucking pads.
Ithaca, N. Y. A. A. Allen.Showing the unopened feather sheatiis.Young Black-billed Cuckoos.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 11
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 12
Carver County, Minn., June 29, 19jC'.Feeding young at entrance. \. ]). Diiiv
Ithaca, N. Y. Brooding newh- iiatched young.Eastern Belted Kingfishers. A. A. Allen.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 13
Young just hatched.
Ithaca, N. Y. A. A. Allen.Older \ uuiiL-.Eastern belted Kingfishers.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE U
L Ann Arl".r, M ?. N. Wilson.EASTERN Belted Kingfisher.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 15
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 16
Copana Bay, Tex. Nesting site. G. F. Simmons.
Near Los Amales, Guatemala, May 5, 17J2.Young ready to leave nest.TEXAS Kingfishers. A. F. Skutch*
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 17
April 10, 1932. Nestling 2 weeks old.
Near Los Amates, Guatemala, April 26, ly32.Juvenal 29 days old.Young Ringed Kingfishers.178223?40 15
A. F. Skutch.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE li
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 19
Plant City, Fla., May ly.U. A. M. Bailey.Courtesy of Chicago Academy of Sciences.Female and young.
Miami County, Kans., May 24, 1929. Walter Colvin,Eggs in nest.Chuck- WILL'S-WIDOW.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 20
Duval County, Fla., May 22, 1932. S. A. Grimes.
Dade County, Fla., F. N. Irving.Young Chuck-will's-widows.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 21
Ka> nham, Mass., June 5, T'O-i.Nesting of Eastern Whippoorwill. A. C. Bent.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 22
Sangamon County, III., May 17, 1908. A. D. DuBois.Downy young.
St. Lambert, Quebec. Young 16 days old.Eastern Whippoorwills L. \1. Icnill.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 23
St. Lambert, Quebec, June 11, 1933. M. rerrill.Female brooding \'ouiig.Eastern Whippoorwill.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 24
Huachuca Mountains, Ariz. F. C. Willard.
Santa Rita Mountains, Ariz., June 17, V<:,1,NESTS OF STEPHENS'S WHIPPOORWI LL. A. J. \ .Ml Rossem.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 167 PLATE 25
Bi^^^l^^H
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 26
Stanislaus County, Calif., June 2 ;, r<;4. J. I'. ]',Dusky Poorwill on Nest.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 27
San Bernardino County, Calif. W . M. Pierce.
Longbard, Calif. v.. C. Aldrich.Eggs and Young of Dusky Poorwill.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 28
May 20, 1930. Nest and eggs.
Lancetilla Valley, Honduras, May 22, 1930.Young 1 and 2 days old.Pauraque (Nyctidromus ALBICOLLIS ALBICOLLIS). A. F. Skutch.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 29
Michigan, June 18, l'J24, Roof nest.
Near Church Creek, MJ. K. R. Smith.Ground nest.Eastern nighthawk.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 30
Roosting poses.
Charlevoix, Mich., June 20, 1925. VV. E. Hastings.A well-made ground nest.Eastern Nighthawk
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 31
Brunswick, Maine, June 25, 1921. Young 1 day old.
Brunswick, Maine, June 2 7. \. O. Gross.Young 12 days old.Eastern Nighthawks.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 32
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 33
Brunswick, Maine, June 16, 1922. \. O. GrossAdult male roosting.
?v- *A^ -/ ^
r^
1 ? ^^'j^l/Brunswak, Maine, Jui:c lo, I'il. Adult female Incubating,Eastern Nighthawks.
178223?40 16
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 34
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 35
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 36
July 4, 1911.
North Park, Colo., juiu- 2S, 1'>11.NESTING OF HOWELL'S NIGHTHAWK. E. R. Warren.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 37
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 38
May 16, 1923. Downy young 2 or 3 days old.
Azusa, Calif., Maj- 24, 1923. R. S. WoodsYoung 10 days old.Texas Nighthawks.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 39
May 30, 1^23. Young l6 or 17 days old.
Azusa, Calif., May 19, 1923. R. s. w'ooas.Female brooding young.Texas Nighthawks
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 40
i
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 41
g><|^
\)
California State Redwood Park, 1926. i. ,?,U c :,, , i. i iJ,inu\ ^^utll; r. K. 1* uluicNesting site of Northern Black Swift Under Berry Creek Falls.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 42
Nesting site under shadow of a rock beside a cascade.
"resnu Cuuiuv, Calif, Adult on nest.Nesting of Northern Black swift. \. 1'.. 1 hompsoii.
U. S^ NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 43
Sequoia National Parle, Calif., August 7, 1V3 J. S. Dixon.Courtesy of National Park Service.
Yosemite, Calif., August 22, 1926. Five weeks old.Young Northern Black swifts. C. VV. Michael.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 44
Branchport, N. 'i ., Jmif 17, rnill
Quiiicy, 111 NESTS OF Chimney swifts.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 45
Adult on nest in a silo.
Ithaca, N. Y. Young.Chimney Swifts. A. .\. Aller
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 46
U S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 47
Colton, Calif., May 1916 W. C. Hanna.Nests of White-throated swifts.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 48
< 1X i1
1
h ?
?Jl IH ?i i
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 49
^^HkIMi^^* ^^^^^^^i^^H^^I
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 50
Huachuca Mountains, Ariz. F. C. Willard.Nests OF Rivoli's Hummingbird.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 51
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 52
Two WHintc nearly irrovvn.
Huachuca Mountains, Ariz. Nest under roof of a pavilion.Arizona Blue-throated Hummingbird F. C. Willard.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 53
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 54
Oakland County, Mich., June 19, 1921. W. E. Hastings.Adult female.
Ithaca, N. Y. Female feeding full-grown young.RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRDS A. A. Allen.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 55
Holderiifss, N. 1 H. K. Edgerton.Mrs. Laurence J. Webster and her pets.Ruby-throated Hummingbirds.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 56
U S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 57
Holderness, N. H, H. E. Edgerton.Ruby-throated Hummingbirds at Mrs Websters Feeding Station.
U. S NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 58
Azusa, Calif., July 17, 1923.Adult male. R. S. Woods.
Azusa, Calif., June 13, 1938. A durable used nest.Black-chinned Hummingbird. R. S. Woods.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 59
May 15, IVL-i. W. M. Pierce-Nest In a white-sage bush.COSTA'S Hummingbird
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 60
Azusa, Calif., Ma> 22. \'>1'- R. S. Woods.Youne about 11 da^?s old.
Azusa, Calif., June 2, 193 CosTAS Hummingbirds.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 61
: z
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 62
Azusa, Calif., February 22, 1931. R. S. Woods.Adult male feeding.
Claremont, Calif. Nest in a lemon tree.ANNA'S Hummingbird. W. Mi Pierce.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 63\ >^^r3*^A1f\^
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 64
Colorado Springs, Colo., July 16, 1906.Broad-tailed Hummingbird. E. R. Warren.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 65
178223?40 18
U S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 66
July 17, 1914. Female shading eggs.
Flathead County, Mont., July 20, Vn-i. Young 2 da\'s old.Rufous hummingbirds. A. D. DuBois.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 67
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 68
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 69
Nest and small }(juiig in a Monterey c\'piess.
Berkeley, Calif. Ynes Mexia.Nest and two large young in a Monterey cypress.ALLEN'S Hummingbird.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 70
Jackson County, Oreg., June 8, 1925. J. K. Patterson.
Blue Mountains, Wash. S. H. l.\ man.Nests of Calliope Hummingbird.
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 71
U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 72
U. S NATIONAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 176 PLATE 73
Near Tecpan, Guatemala, December 11, Vl^'\ \_ f. SkutchNEST OF White-eared Hummingbird.178223?40 18-A

NUTTALL'S POORWILL 193In Arizona, New Mexico, and central Texas it is usually absentfrom late in October to early in April. It apparently winters moreor less regularly in southern Texas, though its main winter rangeis in Mexico. DISTRIBTTnONRange.?Central and western United States, and southern BritishColumbia, south to central Mexico.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the poorwill extendsnorth to southern British Columbia (Kamloops and Okanagan Land-ing) ; Montana (Billings and Terry) ; northwestern South Dakota(Slim Buttes) ; north-central Nebraska (Long Pine Canyon) ; andsouthwestern Iowa (Pottawattamie County). East to southwesternIowa (Pottawattamie County) ; eastern Kansas (Blue Rapids, Onaga,Lawrence, and Clearwater) ; central Texas (Kerrville, San Antonio,and Somerset) ; eastern Coahuila (Sabinas and Saltillo) ; and probablyMorelos (Cuernavaca). South to probably Morelos (Cuernavaca)
;
southern Sonora (Alamos) ; and southern Baja California (San Josedel Cabo). West to Baja California (San Jose del Cabo, Miraflores,Triunfo, Pozo Grande, San Fernando, Santo Domingo, La Joya, SanTelmo, and probably Todos Santos Islands) ; California (San Diego,Escondido, Ojai Valley, Santa Cruz Mountain, San Geronimo, Covel,and probably Yreka) ; Oregon (Brownsboro, Bridge Creek, andprobably Netarts) ; eastern Washington (Crab Creek and Cheney) ;and British Columbia (Summerland and Kamloops).Winter range.?The species is probably resident in the southern partof its range and during the winter season is found north to southernCalifornia (Berryessa Station, Paicines, Death Valley, and Laguna)
:
rarely southern Arizona (Tucson) ; and southern Texas (El Paso,rarely Kerrville, Laredo, and Falfurrias).The range as outlined is for the entire species, which has beenseparated into four currently recognized geographic races. The typ-ical subspecies, Nuttall's poorwill {P. n. nuttalli) occupies all theUnited States portion of the range except that part of Californiawest of the Sierra Nevada. The dusky poorwill {P. n. californicus)is found in western California from the northern part of the Sacra-mento Valley south to northwestern Baja California; the desertpoorwill {P. n. hueyi) is restricted to the lower Colorado RiverValley, southwestern Arizona, and northeastern Baja California; andthe San Ignacio poorwill {P. n. dicheyi) is found in Baja Californiasouth of latitude 30? N.Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Texas
?
Kerrville, February 4; San Antonio, Februaiy 27. Kansas?Man-hattan, April 7; Onaga, April 7. New Mexico?Chloride, March 31178223?40 19
194 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMState College, April 7; Rinconada, April 10. Colorado?Beulali,April 29; Denver, May 9. Wyoming?Laramie Peak, May 2; Lin-gle. May 3. Montana?Terry, May 16. Arizona?Tombstone,March 20. Utah?Kobe Valley, May 23. California?Piedra,March 5; Daggett, March 12; San Clemente Island, March 30; Las-sen Peak, April 16. British Columbia?Okanagan Landing,April 22.Fall 'migration.?Late dates of fall departure are : British Colum-bia?Okanagan Landing, September 20. California?Daggett, Oc-tober 21 ; Los Angeles, October 25 ; La Verne, October 28 ; Garnsey,November 2. Arizona?San Francisco IMountain, September 29.Montana?Big Sandy, September 4; Bighorn River, September 19.Wyoming?Powder River, September 9; Clear Fork, September 19.Colorado?Beulah, October 8. New Mexico?State College, October30; SieiTa Hachita, November 24. South Dakota?^Wliite River,September 27. Kansas?Onaga, September 27. Oklahoma?Kenton.September 26.Egg dates?Arizona : 5 records. May 2 to August 2.California: 42 records, March 22 to August 8; 21 records, May6 to June 25, indicating the height of the season.Colorado : 5 records. May 26 to July 27.Texas : 11 records, April 29 to June 20.PHALAENOPTILUS NUTTALLI CALIFORNICUS RidgwayDUSKY POORWILLPlates 25-27HABITSThe goatsuckers are now in their proper place in the A. O. U.Check-list, showing their relationship to the owls, which they strik-ingly resemble in several characters. The poorwills are conspicuousin this respect ; they are more strictly nocturnal in their activities thansome of the owls, for which they are well adapted ; the eyes are verylarge, suggesting those of owls; the mouth is very broad, but someof the owls have broad mouths also ; the plumage is fully as soft asthat of the owls; and their flight is noiseless, like that of mostnight-flying birds. The Caprimulgidae are not predators on verte-brate animals, although the chuck-will's-widow has been known toeat birds; but they all live on animal food; and many owls livelargely on insects.The dusky poorwill does not enjoy so extensive a distribution as itsinland relative, nuttalli^ but perhaps it is equally as well knownthroughout its range in California.
DUSKY POORWILL 195Nesting.?The steep slopes and ridges of the foothills and the sidesof canyons seem to form the favorite nesting haunts of this, as wellas other poorwills. Elmer C. Aldrich (1935) gives a very gooddescription of a locality in Tuolumne County, Calif., where a nestwas found on July 5, 1934:The altitude was about 5600 feet, aud the general vegetation of the areaconsisted of yellow pines, incense cedars, white firs, black oak islands, a fewspecies of ceanothus, and a little manzanita, with mountain misery coveringmost of the open hillside. The immediate location of the nest was in a littlecircular clearing about fifteen yards in diameter, surrounded by young yellowpines closely knit together by small, interwoven branches. The clearing con-tained three manzanita bushes aud one ceanothus bush. The greater part ofit was strewn with long dead pole-like logs, which appeared to be one of thebasic requirements for the Poor-will's protection. The entire north side ofthe opening was bordered by a large decayed log of a diameter of three feet,which, because of the common use by the Poor-will, came to be called "the log."The nest was found when we were coming from the north and upon advanc-ing four yards after stepping over this log. When the adult flushed fromthe nest the observer's foot was but eighteen inches from the site. The birdflew across the clearing into the edge of the dense forest, where it lit on asmall log and watched without movement for fifteen minutes while picturesof the two light buff eggs were obtained.Dr. William L. Holt writes to me that he found a nest near Ban-ning, Calif., on June 13, 1909. on the bare ground on the north sideof a sandy hill, nearly bare of vegetation. J. E. Patterson has sentme two excellent photographs (pis. 25, 26) of poorwills' nests. Theone taken in Stanislaus County, Calif., on June 23, 1934, was on theground in open timber; the other, taken in Mariposa County, Calif.,on June 21, 1933, was on the groimd in a fire deadening on a hill-side ; both were in the Transition Zone.A. J. van Eossem (1920) found a nest on April 18, 1919, a veryearly date, on the side of a canyon, where there was a heavy growthof wild lilac and white sage; "no attempt whatever seemed to havebeen made at constructing a nest, the eggs lying on the bare groundamong pebbles, etc., in the shade of some dense brush that borderedupon a small open space." The nest has also been found on barerock, but is usually, at least partially, shaded by some bush, loosebrush, brakes, or weeds. The birds are very apt to return to theexact spot to nest each year.Eggs.?As a rule the eggs of the dusky poorwill, two in number,are similar to the eggs of other poorwills, but van Rossem andBowles (1920) write:In a majority of the descriptions that are given for eggs of the variousforms of the Poor-will, the color is stated as white, without markings, some-times with a pinkish tinge. However, such was by no means the case withthe set of eggs under discussion. Before blowing, the ground color was astrong salmon pink; but this, after blowing, turned to a clear, glossy, pinkish
196 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
white, strongly suggesting eggs of the Mei'rill Parauque (Nyctidromus albircollis merriUi), although the pink of the Poor-will eggs showed a closerapproach to .salmon. Around the larger ends was a rather dense wreath oflavender and dusky spots and dots, making the eggs look exceedingly like themarked eggs of some small petrel. * * * in the course of time many of thesmaller dots have faded out, leaving only a comparatively few spots and dotsto show where the heavy wreath was once located. The strong pinkish tingehas also very largely gone, in spite of the fact that the eggs have been care-fully kept from exposure to the light.The measurements of 40 eggs average 26.3 by 19.4 millimeters ; theeggs showing the four extremes measure 28.4 by 20.0, 27.7 by 21.1,24.2 by 18.2, and 24.9 by 17.0 millimeters.Behamor.?Poorwills are notoriously close sitters, but the pairstudied by Mr. Aldrich (1935) were unusually tame. He was re-peatedly able to approach cautiously to within 3 or 4 feet of theincubating bird ; once, at night, eight observers managed to approachwithin 2 feet, while the bird sat tight all the time. The next morn-ing, "when we were but three feet from the nest, the bird's largeclear white spots on the tail identified it to be the male that wasdoing the incubating. Many pictures were taken, some as close asten inches, without the slightest sign of fear on the part of thesitting bird. * * * Experiments were made to find the extent ofhis 'bravery' by touching him. While touching the head the firsttime he flattened out his wings and spread the fan-like tail overthe tips of them showing all the tail spots. The large head wasthen brought far back on the shoulders, the cavernous mouth openedextremely wide showing the pink interior, and a low guttural hisswas emitted at short intervals."Later in the same day, at 2 p. m., he flushed the female from thenest and sat down 5 yards away to watch her return; "exactly tenand one-half minutes marked the reappearance of the same bird. Shehad flown from behind the log nearly to the top where she couldbarely look over and observe the surroundings. Immediately shestarted swaying from side to side very slowly and rhythmically forabout five seconds before walking to the top of the log, each step insynchronization with the swaying. Here she paused for about twentyseconds, and then flew a few yards, within two and one-half feet ofthe nest, where she began swaying again. The rest of the distanceto the nest was accomplished by this slow walking-swaying process,and she did not seem to get anxious and speed up as she came closer.Two short stops were made on the way."The dusky poorwill is tame and unsuspicious at other times also.RoUo H. Beck (1897) watched one at short range while it was catch-ing insects on a road and finally succeeded in putting his hat overit, though it escaped : he says : "After watching it a while I crawledup within four feet and had a chance to watch it in the bright moon-
DESERT POORWILL 197light. It would fly perhaps twenty or thirty feet into the air afterinsects and return again within four or five feet of me. One timeit flew up and evidently picked an insect off the leaf of a wild cherrytree, fluttering for several seconds in its endeavor to do so. It severaltimes flew by me after food and returning would fly within a foot orso of my head and alight just in front of me."Voice.?H. Gordon Heggeness writes to me of the song of thedusky poorwill as he heard it in the Sequoia National Park : "Some-times early in the morning the poorwill would be heard?the calm,liquid notes carrying far on the cool air. On August 12, 1935, a poor-will began singing back of my cabin at 2 : 30 a. m. His most pleasingnotes were heard continuously for the next half hour."Grinnell and Storer (1924) write: "It is heard most persistently atdusk of evening or in the early morning; but near Pleasant Valleyon the morning of May 23, 1915, one of these birds suddenly brokeout at 10 o'clock and uttered its poor-will-o 85 times (by comit, within2 or 3) at intervals of two or three seconds."R. H. Lawrence wrote to Major Bendire (1895) that, accordingto his hearing, "the words 'Pearl-rab-it' give a fair idea of its call";and that "when startled it gave quickly, two or three times in suc-cession, a low, soft note, like 'pweek, pweek, pweek,' which could onlybe heard a few yards away."PHALAENOPTILUS NUTTALLI HUEYI DickeyDESERT POORWILLHABITSDonald R. Dickey (1928) described and named this pale race ofthe poorwill from a fine series of specimens collected in the valleyof the Colorado River by Mrs. May Canfield and Laurence M.Huey. As to its subspecific characters, he says that it is "nearestin color to the light type of Phalaenoptilus nuttdlli nuttalli (Audu-bon), which Brewster named nitidits and to which he gave theeminently fitting vernacular of the Frosted Poor-will, but averag-ing very much lighter. The backs of hueyi are pinkish tan, almostdevoid of the silver frosting characteristic of more eastern birds,and with the size of the dark dorsal 'owl's eye' marking greatlyreduced, in many cases practically obsolete; under parts lighterthroughout, with the dark band below the white collar narrowerand of lighter tone, and with narrower barring of sides and flanks.Tail lighter and less contrastingly barred above and below."The 1931 Check-list gives the range of this race as the valleyof the lower Colorado River, in southeastern California, south-western Arizona, and extreme northeastern Baja California.
198 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMA. J. van Kossem (1936) took four poorwills near Bates Well, insouth-central Arizona, that were somewhat intermediate betweenhiieyi and nuttalU^ though nearer the latter; this locality probablyindicates the approximate area of intergradation between thetwo races. "All were collected in an arrowweed-mesquite associa-tion along the borders of the dry stream bed. Conditions, both asto habitat and temperatures, closely approximated those found alongthe Lower Colorado Kiver Valley, beyond the confines of whichhueyi has not been detected."lliis poorwill probably does not differ materially in its habitsfrom neighboring races of the species.PHALAENOPTILUS NUTTALLI DICKEYI GrinneUSAN IGNATIO POORWILLHABITSThree races of the poorwill are found on the peninsula of BajaCalifornia. The present form ranges from about latitude 30? south-ward to the Cape region; the dusky poorwill {californicus) extendsits range southward in the northwestern portion to about latitude30?, chiefly on the Pacific slope; and the desert poorwill {hueyi) isfound in the extreme northeastern portion.The San Ignatio poorwill is a small, dark race. Dr. JosephGrinnell, who described and named it, says (1928) that it is "sim-ilar to Ph. n. californicus in degree of general darkness but decid-edly smaller, and with black areas on the individual feathers ofscapulars, top of head and chest greatly reduced, in this respectresembling hueyi^ terminal white of lateral rectrices greater inamount than in califoim.icus; light portions of general color schememuch darker than in hueyi or nuttallii., tinged with clay color ratherthan 'frosted'?in this respect darker even than in average cali-fornicus; dark barring on posterior lower surface much more exten-sive and heavier than in hueyi or nuttalli.''''William Brewster (1902) referred the poorwills of the Caperegion to the race he named the frosted poorwill {Ph. n. nitidus)^based on a pair collected by M. A. Frazar in the Sierra de la La-guna. Mr. Frazar said that on the mountains the poorwills did notbegin singing until about the middle of May. "Their note is apow-we-hoo^ the first syllable given long, the accent on the second,and the last little more than a retraction of the breath. They werealmost invariably in large oaks and very seldom on the ground. Afemale shot June 6 was undoubtedly mated and would have laidsoon."Nothing seems to be known about the nesting or other habits ofthis poorwill.
p MERRILL'S PAURAQIJE 199NYCTIDROMUS ALBICOLLIS MERRILLI SennettMERRILL'S PAURAQUEPlate 28HABITSMerrill's pauraque is the largest subspecies of a widely distributedspecies of goatsucker that ranges throughout Mexico, CentralAmerica, and northern South America, and that has been dividedinto six subspecies. Our pauraque extends its range from northernMexico into the valley of the Rio Grande and northward throughthe Gulf coast of Texas to Nueces, Aransas, and Eefugio Counties.The vernacular name, pauraque, pronounced "pou-rii'-ka," is derivedfrom a fancied resemblance to one of its notes. The Mexican name,cuiejo, pronounced "coo-ya-ho," has a similar origin.This bird was first introduced to our fauna by Dr. J. C. Merrill,who took the first specimen at Fort Brown, Tex., on April 1, 1876.The subspecies was first described and named by George B. Sennett(1888), who gives a full account of its plumages at different agesand says of its relation to other races of the species: "This form,when compared with others of the species from Southern Mexico,Costa Eica, Panama, Guiana, and Brazil, can be distinguished, firstby the prevailing gray color on upper parts, where the others havebrown, rufous or cinnamon; second, by its large size, exceeding thelarge southern Brazilian form in length of wing and equalling it inlength of tail; third, by the males having the outer tail-feathergenerally without white, and the white when it does occur beingmuch restricted, while in more tropical and South American formsthe rule is that males have much white on inner web of outer tail-feather." This third point seems open to question, as this characterseems to be very variable, possibly owing to age.D. B. Burrows, in some notes sent to Major Bendire (1895) says:
"During the winter the birds may be flushed from the dense thicketsin the bottom lands, but as the nesting season approaches they leavethese close retreats and seek more open ground."Mr. Sennett (1878) says of their haunts: "I saw them occasionally,singly and in pairs, about the thickets and open chaparral, and oncein the canebrakes close to the woods." Again (1879) he says: "Theybreed in the more open places among the cactus and scattered bushesalong with C. texenish?Texas Nighthawk. On dark days I flushedthem from thickets in the chaparral, or from copses near the bottom-lands on the edges of the woods."Nesting.?Mr. Sennett's nests "were found in open brush, on thebare ground. One of them was partly concealed by the branches ofa low bush 6 or 8 inches from the ground."
200 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMMr. Burrows wrote to Major Benclire (1895) : "I have never foundthe Parauque nesting in the dense thickets, where they hide duringthe winter. They seek the more open ground, the high, level spotsnear the river, or up some arroya, among scattering bushes and pearcactus, but never on the rocky hills, where the Texan Nighthawkis frequently found. In one instance a nest was found at the edgeof a cultivated field. The eggs are placed on the bare ground, withno attempt at nest building, and usually at the foot of a clump ofbushes. The bird, when flushed from the nest, quietly darts off anddrops to the ground but a short distance away."Dr. James C. Merrill (1878) writes: "On the 15th of May, 1876,I found a set of eggs near camp at Hidalgo, and on returning inabout fifteen minutes to secure the parent, who had disappearedamong the thickets, I found that she had removed the eggs, althoughthey had not been touched."Eggs.?The pauraque lays two very handsome eggs, quite unlikethe eggs of any other species in the family. They vary in shapebetween oval and elliptical-oval, with a decided tendency towardovate or elliptical-ovate, one end often being slightly more pointedthan the other. The shell is smooth, with little or no gloss. Theground color varies from "light ochraceous-salmon" to "pinkishbuff". Some eggs appear to be nearly immaculate, but in mostcases they are more or less evenly covered, some sparingly and someprofusely, with small blotches, spots, or dots of pale "clay color,"pale "cinnamon," or, more rarely, with deeper shades of "cinnamon-rufous" ; often there are underlying blotches or spots of "ecru-drab"or "light cinnamon-drab." Occasionally the markings are concen-trated around the larger end, but usually they are quite evenly dis-tributed.The measurements of 50 eggs average 29.80 by 22.36 millimeters;the eggs showing the four extremes measure 35.10 by 23.10, 31.50 by24.64, 27.18 by 20.57, and 28.96 by 20.32 millimeters.Young.?In his unpublished manuscript on the birds of the Carib-bean lowlands of Central America, kindly lent me, Alexander F.Skutch devotes considerable space to his studies of the care andfeeding of the young of the local race of the pauraque {NyctidromusdlMcolUs alhicollis). As the habits of the different races of thisspecies probably do not differ materially, it seems pertinent to in-clude here some of his remarks on this subject. He says that "dur-ing the day male and female take turns on the eggs, relieving eachother every two or three hours. The male is usually found incu-bating in the early morning. At night, I have found only thefemale covering the eggs." Other species of goatsuckers have beenreported as moving their eggs to a place of safety after being dis-
MERRILL'S PAURAQUE 201turbed, but he found no evidence that this species does so, saying
:
"I have given pauraques all kinds of incentives to move their eggsto a safer place, but they have never shifted their positions even afew inches as a result of my interference. The case v^as quite dif-ferent when I moved the eggs from the spot which the birds hadselected as their nest." In tMs case, he had moved the eggs twice,once only a few inches and once a foot away from an area infested byfire ants ; but each time the parents moved them back again to theirchosen spot ; the result was that, as soon as the eggs began to hatch,the chicks were destroyed by the ants. He did not see how the eggswere moved; probably they were pushed along with the feet andbody, as the nighthawk has been seen to do.Both parents took turns in brooding the young throughout theday, relieving each other at intervals of two or three hours, as theydid on the eggs. As the young were fed in the dusk or deeper dark-ness of evening, it was only after several trials that he was able tosee the performance clearly. He writes: "It was dark now, but atthe critical moment I pushed the button of a powerful flashlight. Themother was resting on the ground in her customary position, lookingtoward me with eyes that shone like rubies in the beam of light. Thelittle ones stood on tiptoe in front of her, their necks stretched up,bringing their heads on a level with her mouth. One was being fedwhile the other waited impatiently for its turn. Though her mouthwas so big she could easily have swallowed her nestling whole, herlittle hill was inserted into its widely open mouth, just as with ahummingbird, and with distended throat and convulsive movementsof the body she regurgitated into it the insects she had captured.When she had given sufficient to the first one, she paused with headerect, clearly much alarmed by the light, but the second continued itssilent importunities and the parent yielded despite her fears, feedingit in the same manner. Then she went off to hunt more insects.
"Presently one of the parents entered the thicket again, but insteadof going to the youngsters it settled on the ground beliind the blind,fully 20 feet from them, and began the low croaking-clucking call,which draws them as the magnet draws the floating needle. The two-and three-day-old bantlings drew themselves up and began hoppingbravely toward the voice, peeping as they went through the darkness.Directly in their path was a young banana plant, which I had felledin clearing a place for the blind. The large, slippery leaves lay in atangled mass that loomed above them; the Alps formed no moreinsurmountable obstacle to the advance of Hannibal's army than thisconfusing barrier to the young pauraques. Dauntless as the re-nowned Carthaginian, they pushed resolutely onward, lured by the
202 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMcontinued calls. I completely lost sight of them in the obscurity, butfor many minutes their weak cries emerged from the dark mass. Atlength they descended victorious into the plains of Italy, and hence-forth their path, although not free from obstacles, was comparativelyeasy. Finally they found a haven beneath their parent's shelteringwings."On this and previous occasions Mr. Skutch discovered that theyoung pauraques were perfectly capable of locomotion, even at anearly age, in response to warning calls from their parents. He sawno evidence that the adults ever carried them in their capaciousmouths, as other species of the Caprimulgidae have been reported todo, or assisted them to move in any other way. He says that "duringthe day male and female take turns on the eggs, relieving each otherevery two or three hours. The male is usually found incubating inthe early morning. At night, I have found only the female cover-ing the eggs."Plumages.?The downy young pauraque is as unique among theCaprimulgidae as are the eggs. It is completely covered with fine,soft down, leaving nothing exposed but the tip of the bill and thefeet. The colors are rich and contrasting; the forehead, crown, andnape are "pinkish buff" ; the lores, cheeks, and auriculars are "mikadobrown" ; the back and rump are "sayal brown," with a central bandof pinkish buff"; the chin and throat are pale "pinkish cinnamon,"and the remainder of the under parts are "pinkish buff."Ridgway (1914) describes a female nestling, not yet fully grown,as follows: "General color of upper parts pale brownish gray, veryminutely vermiculated or stippled with darker ; pileum and scapularswith scattered roundish and subtriangular small spots of black ; inter-scapular region clouded or blotched with black; under parts lightgrayish buff, narrowly barred with dusky on chest, more broadlybarred with the same on throat, breast, and sides, the abdomen andunder tail-coverts immaculate; thighs uniform light fawn color;remiges and rectrices (not fully grown) apparently as in adultfemale." Of a young female, fully grown, he says : "Primaries andrectrices as in adult female; pileum spotted, instead of streaked,with black, the spots mostly of broadly triangular form; back alsoheavily spotted, or blotched, instead of streaked, with black; scapu-lars without buff margins ; barring of under parts much less sharplydefined, less dark in color; throat band light dull buff, barred withblackish."Mr. Sennett (1888) says of the young male: "White wing-patch ofmale mixed with buff ; white on tail not so sharply defined, nor doesit extend so near to base as in mature birds. The outer tail-feathers
MERRILL'S PAURAQUE 203
are barred and streaked with brown and buff. White throat-patchsmaller and barred sparingly with black and bnfF. In this immaturestage the sexes are not easily determined aside from the differencein the white tail-patches; in the males the white on second featherfrom outside is never less than 2.5 inches long, while in the femalesthe corresponding patch is about one inch in length."The above descriptions evidently refer to the juvenal, or firstplumage, which is largely replaced in summer, July and August, bya first winter plumage. In this the contour plumage is much likethat of the adult, the spots on the crown and back being replacedby streaks; but the juvenal wings and tail are retained; the sexesare much alike in this plumage but can always be distinguished bythe amount of white in the tail.I have seen birds in this plumage in October, December, andMarch, from which I infer that it is worn until the first postnuptialmolt the following summer. Mr. Sennett (1888) thought that "atleast two years must elapse before the perfect plumage is attained"
;
but it seems more likely that the first postnuptial molt produces aplumage that is practically adult, except for some dusky mottling onthe tips and edges of the white tail feathers, and some buffy intru-sion of the white wing patch, which may indicate that the full purityof these white areas is not attained at the first postnuptial molt.Dickey and van Rossem (1938) say: "Young birds which haveassumed the postjuvenal plumage may be distinguished from adultsby the narrower, more pointed, and usually impurely colored tailfeathers and by the buffy edgings and mottlings on the tips of theprimaries. The juvenal primaries which are worn until the birdenters the second fall (first annual) molt, are from 5 to 10 mm.shorter than those of adults. Males, at least, breed the first springas shown by dissection of several specimens. The annual molt ofadults takes place in August and September."There are two distinct color phases in the adult plumage, a gray-brown phase and a tawny phase, mainly recognizable in the colora-tion of the upper surface. Kidgway (1914) says of the former,
"pileum, hindneck, and interscapular region grayish brown," and ofthe tawny phase, "general coloration of upper parts much moretawny or ochraceous, the general color of the pileum varying fromfawn color to mars brown or russet."Food.?Bendire (1895) says that "the food of Merrill's Parauque,like that of the rest of the Caprimulgidae, consists mainly of night-flying insects, such as moths, beetles, etc. The crop of a specimenshot by Mr. H. P. Attwater, near Rockport, Texas, was filled withfireflies, Photinus pyralis ?"
204 BULIiETIN 176, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMOn several occasions, Mr. Burrows (Bendire, 1895) observed apauraque "perched upon the extremity of a low, dead limb, or onthe top of a bush. At these times I found that the bird w^as watch-ing for food, and at intervals would leave the perch, dart off a shortdistance as if in pursuit of an insect, and as quickly return, in verymuch the same manner that the Whip-poor-will is accustomed todo. I believe that these birds are strictly insectivorous; but I havenever made an examination of the stomach except in one instance.The stomach of this bird, killed in January, showed parts of thefeet and wings of beetles and other insects."Three stomachs examined by Cottam and Knappen (1939) con-tained parts of ant lions, stink bugs, soldier bugs, locusts, clickbeetles, tiger beetles, ostomid beetles, twig borer, carrot muck beetle,long-horned beetles, and traces of butterflies, moths, bees, or wasps.Beetles made up 89 percent of the whole food.Behavior.?Mr. Burrows (Bendire, 1895) writes:During the daytime the birds were commonly found on the ground at thefoot of a growth of bushes or among fallen branches, and I have occasionallyfound them perched, nighthawk-fashion, upon a low branch not more than afoot from the ground. When closely approached, they dart quickly forwardin a zigzag course, dropping as suddenly to the ground. This flight is short,usually not more than 50 or 60 feet, and when settled they commonly remainperfectly quiet until again flushed. They have a peculiar way of turning orfacing about as they strike the ground, so that they can better watchthe approaching danger. They lie so close that it is with great difficultythat they can be detected, unless the spot is carefully marked. In a numberof instances, where the bird seemed to feel that it was observed, I have hadthem go through a peculiar bowing movement, resembling that of the Burrow-ing Owl, except that the body is raised from its completely prostrate condition.The pauraque has a relatively longer tarsus than our other mem-bers of the goatsucker family; hence it is more active on its feet.Dr. Frank M. Chapman (1896) observes: "I was surprised to learnhow rapidly these birds can run. On one occasion two lit within afew feet of me when it was light enough to distinguish their move-ments. They crouched close to the earth, sometimes running quicklyand with unexpected ease for a few steps, then turned their headssharply from side to side as though looking for insects. They wouldalso spring suddenly fifteen feet into the air to catch a passinginsect."Voice.?Dr. Merrill (1878) writes: "Their notes are among themost characteristic night sounds of the Lower Rio Grande, and areconstantly heard at evening during the summer months. They con-sist of a repeated whistle resembling the syllables whew-whew-whew-wJiew-whe-e-e-e-e-w^ much stress being laid upon the last, which isprolonged. The whole is soft and mellow, yet can be heard at a
MERRILL'S PAURAQUE 205great distance. The preliminary whetvs vary somewhat in number,and late in the season are often omitted altogether."Mr. Burrows wrote to Major Bendire (1895) : "At the approachof the breeding season and as early as the middle of March the pe-culiar whistle of the Parauque becomes general, and along the lowerRio Grande, where they are common, it may be heard on all sides.* * * The birds begin to call as the dusk of evening comes on.The commonest call is a long-drawn 'ko, whe-e-e-e-e-w', much pro-longed, and raised to a high pitch toward the last. This is repeatedoften and with great energy, and on a still night may be heard at along distance. At other times the first syllable is omitted. Again itis varied by a repetition of the first syllable, as 'ko, ko, ko, ko-whe-e-e,' the first syllables repeated deliberately, and the last not solong-drawn and suddenly cut short." He also refers to a short put,put note, resembling one of the notes of a wild turkey.The name of the pauraque is said to have been derived from afancied resemblance to one of its notes ; the same is true of its Mexi-can name, cuiejo.Winter.?The pauraque is a permanent resident in southern Texasand farther south, and even as far north as the Nueces River Mr.Burrows found it "to be fairly common" during the winter andspring of 1894. He met with it during the winter in Starr County,southern Texas, and says : "When the nesting season is over the birdsremain quiet, and their peculiar whistling note is not heard withregularity, and yet, on very warm niglits during each of the wintermonths, I have occasionally heard them. During the winter thebirds may be flushed from the dense thickets in the bottom lands."DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southern Texas and northeastern Mexico; not regularlymigratory.The range of Merrill's pauraque extends north to southern Texas(Refugio County and Aransas County). East to Texas (AransasCounty, Corpus Christi, Rio Hondo, and Browns\dlle) ; easternTamaulipas (Aldama, Altamira, and Tampico) ; and Veracruz (Mira-dor and Jalapa). South to central Veracruz (Jalapa) ; and Puebla(Metlaltoyuca and Tehuacan). West to southeastern Puebla Tehua-can) ; western Tamaulipas (Santa Leonor and Rio Cruz) ; and TexasLomita, Neuces County, San Patricio County, and Refugio County).Closely allied races of this bird are found in Central and SouthAmerica.Egg dates.?Mexico : 9 records, March 22 to June 22.Texas : 66 records, March 5 to June 26 ; 33 records, April 15 to May16. indicating the height of the season.
206 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCHORDEILES MINOR MINOR (Forster)EASTERN NIGHTHAWKPlates 29-33Contributed by Alfred Otto GrossHABITSThe nightliawk, because of its piercing calls and the extraordinaryevolutions and gyrations of its flight, attracts many persons, eventhe casual observers who ordinarily pay no special attention to birds.A bird so unique and striking, one that during its breeding seasonplays such an important role in our experiences out of doors, isdestined to be the recipient of many common names.Long before the white man came to America the nighthawk waswell known to the Indians, and we find it taking a prominent placein their myths and traditions. Apparently the notes of this birdappealed most, since the names chosen by the various tribes wereusually graphic allusions to the calls or to the characteristic boom-ing noise heard during the courtship season. To the tribes alongthe Connecticut River this booming was the sound of the ShadSpirit announcing to the shoals of shad, about to ascend the river,of their impending fate. The nighthawk was known to the Semi-noles of Florida as "Ho-pil-car." In the Milicite Indian NaturalHistory there is the name "Pik-teis-k wes," and according to W. W.Cooke (1884) the Chippewas not only had the name "Besh-que" forthe nighthawk but recognized it as a species distinct from the whip-poorwill, to which they gave the name "Gwen-go-wi-a." That theChippewa Indians differentiated these two species is all the moreremarkable when we recall that this distinction was confused byCatesby and the American ornithologists of the next 50 years whofollowed him. It was Alexander Wilson who first noted that theywere distinct species.When the first European settlers came to our coast they com-pared the nighthawk and the whippoorwill with the nightjar of theirold homes, and hence we find this name in the earlier ornithologicalwritings used as a synonym for the American bird. In certaindistricts of England and Scotland the nightjar is called the goat-sucker, a name that originated from the queer superstition that thisbird with its enormous mouth sucked the teats of goats. Like thename nightjar the name goatsucker also crossed the Atlantic, as ismanifested by such names as long-winged goatsucker and Virginiagoatsucker to be found in the older books and papers dealing withAmerican birds. The name goatsucker is still applied to tlie orderand family but is seldom used today in designating the species.
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 207In parts of the Uiiited States, especially in the South, nightha^Yksare known as bats, since the birds are usuall}^ seen at dusk whentheir erratic flight resembles somewhat that of the common mammal.This resemblance linked with the bellowing or booming sound pro-duced by the wing feathers during the courtship plunge has givensource to the commonly used name bullbat. Audubon (1840) usedthe synonym Virginia bat and stated that the French Creoles ofLouisana knew the nighthawk by the metaphorical French name
"crapau volans," or flying toad. In the Bahamas, as well as incertain localities of America, a common local name is "pick-a-me-dick" a crude imitation of one of its notes. The name mosquitohawk was well earned by one individual that, according to theBiological Survey, had eaten 300 mosquitoes. Other names some-times applied to the nighthawk but less frequently than some ofthose previously mentioned are pisk, pork and beans, will-o'-wisp,burnt-land bird, and bird hawk.The commonly accepted name nighthawk probably originatedbecause of the bird's resemblance to the smaller hawks when observedin flight. However, it has sometimes jDroved to be an unfortunatechoice, since to the layman it suggests a bird of the true hawk type.This name on occasions has been a source of trouble to an innocentbird as illustrated in the following cases. According to B. H.Warren (1890) the Pennsylvania Game Commissioners, in theirinterpretation of the Scalp Act of 1885, took the stand that theyw^ere obliged to allow bounty on all nighthawks because they wereknown as hawks. Mr. Warren also states that there is a somewhatprevalent idea that nighthawks are destroyers of young poultry, thename doubtless having given origin to the absurdity. The followingclipping taken from the Portland (Maine) Press is another exampleof the way the name has misled well-meaning persons. "The Pressbuilding acquired a new claim to distinction yesterday as the hauntof wild fowl when janitor Phillip Ward, upon making an ascent tothe roof, discovered two hen hawk's eggs there. Apparently somebird of the genus so despised by farmers had found the top ofPortland's skyscrapers the right kind of a nesting place, and hadlaid her plans to hatch a few juvenile hen hawks up there. JanitorWard's unexpected arrival put an end to such plans, however, andfarmers may rest assured that the breed of distasteful birds whopillage their chicken yards is two the less." Arthur H. Norton,director of the Portland Society of Natural History, investigatedthe story and found the victim to be an innocent nighthawk. Ad-verse criticisms of the name nighthawk have been numerous but thename although inappropriate is destined to persist.Spring.?Tlie vanguard of the nighthawks in the spring migra-tion reaches Florida and the Gulf States about the middle of April.
208 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThere have been March arrivals reported, but these are exceptional.Large flocks, some of them numbering thousands of individuals,have been seen during May. Many of these southern records maybe representatives of the southern form, Chordeiles minor chapmani.It is not necessary to search the isolated retreats away from thehabitations of man for the first nighthawk arrivals. In fact, theyare more likely to appear in the midst of our populous cities andtowns, where they may be seen flying high above the graveled roofsthat later are to be the scene of their nesting activities.Courtship.?The courtship of the nighthawk is an ardent andamorous performance on the part of the male. He may be seen attwilight or early dawn uttering his sharp peent calls as he flies inwide circles sometimes hovering or soaring in the air high above theproposed nesting site. At more or less regular intervals he swoopsdown often within a few yards of his mate. Just as he seems aboutto dash into the ground he makes an abrupt upward turn, thevibrating primaries producing the well-known boom. After thesepreliminary aerial perfonnances the male alights on the ground orgraveled roof near the resting passive female. He now stands onhis feet instead of resting his body on the ground. His tail is widelyspread like a fan and wagged from side to side while the body isgiven a peculiar rocking motion. The throat is frequently puffedout, displaying a large white patch, which is ordinarily concealedwhen he is at rest. Synchronized with the throat distension is theuttering of guttural croaking notes. In producing these notes thebird holds the beak tightly closed, so that the throat membrane isdistended by the pressure of the air emitted from the lungs. Underthese conditions the sound waves originating at the syrinx beatagainst the tense membrane, producing notes of a striking andpeculiar resonant quality. These notes are not uttered under ordi-nary conditions and constitute a very important part of the courtship.The female, as far as outward manifestations are concerned, doesnot seem to be at all impressed by these extraordinary antics. Themale at times in seeming desperation flies directly over the femaleuttering a sharp peent. He may then circle the female severaltimes but even to this she seems unmoved. At times, when heapproaches too near, the female will take a short flight, alightinga few yards away. The male follows and the performance describedabove is repeated. Eventually the courtship terminates in copulation.The aerial evolutions of the male, including the downward plungesand "booming," are continued throughout the nesting period, butafter the young are hatched his effervescent energies are directedin part to securing food for his offspring. With regard to the court-ship of the nighthawk, Charles W. Townsend (1920b), who gave
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 209the subject of the courtship of birds careful study, stated: "Therapid headlong plunges of the nighthawk may be classed as a displayof motion, a form of the dance. Incidentally, and perhaps accidentallyat first, a loud booming sound is produced by the rush of air throughthe wing feathers. This instrumental music is now the importantfeature, although the dance is by no means a negligible one."Nesting.?The nesting site, according to the procedure of a pairof niglithawks studied by me at Brunswick, Maine, is chosen bythe female. A banded female returned to the same nesting site onthe graveled roof of the high school building for four successiveyears, although the males, during at least two seasons, were differentindividuals.The nighthawk is solitary in its nesting habits, though there havebeen instances where the nests of this species have been placed verynear together, approaching a gregarious tendency. For example,E. A. Samuels (1872) states that on "a ledge of rocks back of thesettlement known as Wilson's Mills, wliich seemed a favorite breed-ing-place for these birds, and, in the space of every four or fiverods, a female was sitting on her eggs." B. H. Warren (1890)writes that he has found several nighthav^'ks breeding within a fewyards of each other. A similar case of this kind was noted atGardner, Maine, where five pairs of birds nested in a very restrictedarea of an old deserted dock. I am inclined to believe that theexistence of a good nesting site rather than a social tendency is themore important factor in causing these birds to nest in proximity.In general, each pair of birds has a relatively large nesting territory,which is vigilantly guarded. I have never noted any marked tend-ency of the birds to flock together until after the nesting seasonprior to and during the migrations.The nests of the nighthawk located on the ground are found ina diversity of situations as far as the surroundings are concerned.It prefers gravel beaches or open barren areas of rock or soil unob-structed by tall shrubbery or trees. It never builds a nest in theseclusion of a forest. In regions where forests abound it nests inplaces where vegetation is sparse or preferably where forest fireshave left a barren waste. C. F. Batchelder (1882) found the night-hawk frequenting burnt lands in the region of the upper St. JohnRiver near Fort Fairfield, Maine, and it has also been found to becommon in the burnt lands of the Restigouche Valley, New Bruns-wick. R. W. Chaney (1910) found a nest in a burnt-over area neara partly burned log in Mason County, Mich. I found three nests ofthe nighthawk in a burnt-over area near the Biological Station,Douglas Lake, northern Michigan, and C. E. Johnson (1920) sawtwo young on a scantily moss-covered and stick-strewn rock outcrop178223?40 20
210 BULLETIN 17G, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMin Lake County, Minn., in a district previously burnt over. It hasbeen noted that in regions that have been burnt over the nighthaw]?:population increases; hence the burning of timber land, which is sodestructive to many species of birds, is not a hindrance but possiblyan aid to the general welfare of the nighthawk.The nighthawk has also been found to breed in cultivated areas.I. E. Hess (1910) noted its nesting in plowed fields in central Illi-nois, and T. G. Gentry (1877) states that old stubble fields are fre-quently selected as nesting sites. H. J. Rust (1911) has reported thewestern nighthawk in cornfields in Idaho and California. TheTexas nighthawk, according to Sharp (1907), is a common inhabi-tant of the vineyards of San Diego, Calif., where the eggs are placedon the ground under or near the vines. Nests have also been foundin potato fields and even in gardens near the houses of man. C. B.Ressel (1889) reported the eggs of the nighthawk placed upon theloose soil thrown up by the woodchuck {Marmota monax), indicatingthat barren places even though they are composed of loose soil maybe preferred to sites covered with vegetation, twigs, or other debris.In Virginia, according to H. H. Bailey (1913), the nighthawkoften departs from its usual ground nest to a place on a stump, fencerail, or tops of drifts formed on the islands off the Virginia coast.Nests on stumps have been reported from various localities. I havefound nests on the flat surface of top rails of fences in centralIllinois; one of these nests was 8 feet from the ground. V. MaxKemery (1925) reports an unusual nesting site between the rails ona railroad track that was in daily use. The bird would fly whenthe cars or engine approached but returned as soon as the train hadpassed. Another unique nesting place that has come to my atten-tion is an old robin's nest located in a tree near Farmington, Maine.This nighthawk, according to Mr. Jewell (1908), nested in thisunusual site for five successive years, the tree being destroyed byfire at the end of that time.The nighthawk in increasing numbers is availing itself of nestingsites provided by the graveled roofs of our cities and towns. Incertain sections of the country this tendency is so marked that night-hawks are now seldom seen remote from graveled roofs during thenesting season, according to Lynds Jones (1909). The chimneyswift, a not distant relative of the nighthawk, long ago forsook itsprimitive nesting sites in hollow trees, and today we no longerassociate them with such places. Occurring simultaneously withthe destruction of the giant forest trees was the erection of chimneysin connection with the homes of civilized races. The chimney swift,deprived of its original nesting site, was quick to make the radicalbut necessary change. Doubtless this adaptability to a changing en-
EASTERN" NIGHTHAWK 211
vironment has been an important factor in the preservation of thespecies. Chimneys have been used in America for centuries, but tliegraveled roof on which the nighthawk builds its nest is a com-paratively recent development. It was not until the middle of thenineteenth century that the mansard and the flat type of graveledroofs were introduced. It was not long after these first roofs werebuilt that the nighthawks discovered the possibilities of a new andadmirable type of nesting site. As early as 1869 W. P. Turnbullwrote that the nighthawk was often seen high in the air above thestreets of Philadelphia and that their nests were frequently foundon the roofs of the warehouses of the city. Louis A. Zarega (1882)reported finding them breeding on a roof on the north side of 7lststreet, Philadelphia, in June 1882. In 1870 and 1871 Dr. T. M.Brewer (1874) found a number of instances of this bird nesting onthe flat mansard roofs of Boston, and a few years later it was dis-covered nesting on the flat roofs of Montreal, Canada, by WilliamCouper (1876). In 1879 a pair of the birds built a nest on a roofin the heart of the city of Cleveland, Ohio, and a few years laterE. Sterling (1885) observed three pairs nesting on a slate roof of alarge building near his study. Since 1880 there are innumerablerecords of nighthawks that have deserted the rural districts to takeup their residence in the city. Today roof-nesting sites of the night-hawk seem no more unusual than the nests of the chimney swiftbuilt in our sooty chimneys. It is difficult to determine the factorsthat have been instrumental in this radical change, for unlike thecase of the swift's hollow trees, there are just as many rockyknolls, pebbly beaches, and barren fields as there were prior to theappearance of the flat-roofed buildings. Although certain insectssuch as flies and mosquitoes are abundant about our cities I do notbelieve that the food supply has an important bearing on this ques-tion, as has been maintained by certain observers. Even in the smallcountry villages, wherever there are graveled roofs there is the usualquota of nighthawks. In these villages the environment, as far asfood for the nighthawk is concerned, is not different from regionsisolated from civilization.W. E. Saunders (1917) states that the young after their firstflight often land on the ground and he asks the question : "Whatchance of survival is there for a young nighthawk on a city streetor vacant lot?" Mr. Saunders believes that the nighthawk hassteadily decreased in numbers since the bird has taken up its abodein the city and states further that immigration is the only thino-that keeps up the city population. To the contrary my observationsof the past 25 years in Maine indicate that the birds are not onlymaintaining but are increasing their numbers. Furthermore, the
212 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
mortality of the birds that nest on roofs is much less than amongthose that choose nesting sites on the ground. In the latter placethe birds are constantly exposed to the ravages of predatory animalsincluding the cat. In the country hundreds of young birds meetwith a tragic end without any of us being the wiser, while in thecity such cases are more likely to be brought to our attention. Onthe city roof there is freedom from natural enemies. In the studyof a large number of nighthawk families I have noted relativelyfew young that left the nesting roof prematurely, and it has beena common experience to see them return to the roof many timesafter the initial flight. One bird, the account of which is relatedin a subsequent division of this paper returned to the roof everyday until it went south on its migration at the age of 52 days.Many of the birds that nest on the roofs are never disturbed byhuman beings during the entire nesting period, and under such,circumstances the young do not leave the security of the roof untilthey are able to fly well. It is obvious that the young of parentsthat nest on roofs are the ones most likely to survive, and they inturn will nest in similar situations the following seasons. It seemsreasonable to suppose that after the habit is established naturalselection and heredity play an important part in the generaldeparture from the old to the new nesting environment.No attempt is made by the nighthawk to construct a nest, andno materials are added to those already present on the nesting sitechosen by the birds. The eggs may be in a slight depression, butno material is excavated or removed by the bird except that inci-dentally shoved aside by the incubating bird.Eggs.?Normally two eggs are laid, and there is seldom a depar-ture from this number. In a letter dated January 20, 1936, F. W.Rapp, of Vicksburg, Mich., writes that he found a nest of the night-hawk containing three eggs on May 22, 1889.The eggs are elliptical-ovate or elliptical-oval, one end beingslightly smaller than the other. The shell is strong, closed grainedand moderately glossy. The ground color varies from pale creamywhite to shades of cream olive-buff and olive-gray. The eggs aremarked and speckled with shades of slate, black, drab, smoke andlilac gray, and tawny-olive, and some of the eggs have shades ofpearly gray, lavender, and plumbeous. In some eggs the markingsare fine and uniform in size, almost obscuring the ground color; inothers they are less numerous but larger and more prominent. Thereis an endless variation in the details of the markings and colors,but the eggs in general exhibit a coloring that blends effectively withtheir surroundings.The average measurements of 81 eggs in the United StatesNational Museum are long diameter 29.97, short diameter 21.84
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 213
millimeters. The largest egg of the series measured 33.53 by 22.86and the smallest 27.68 by 20.57 millimeters. The average capacityof nighthawk eggs, accoi'ding to Walter Hoxie (1887), is 0.448cubic inch.The eggs do not necessarily remain in the position in which theyare first laid, especially when the nesting site is on a comparativelylevel surface such as that provided by graveled roofs. During theperiod of incubation of two nests under daily observation, the eggswere gradually moved for a distance of 5 to 6 feet. This shift inposition comes about by the habit of the female pulling or pushingthe eggs under her breast, thus moving them a short distance eachtime she settled on the eggs. As the direction of the bird's ap-proach was more or less constant, the eggs were moved in the samegeneral direction. This resulted in a distinct trail being formed,giving an appearance that one would expect to see if a giant snailhad traveled over the graveled surface and forced the larger pebblesto one side. B. H. Warren (1890) writes that the eggs of a night-hawk in one instance were moved 200 feet by the bird, which car-ried them in her mouth. I have never been able to verify this ex-traordinary behavior of a nighthawk transporting an object as largeas an egg in its mouth.The following experiment is of interest as it suggests an interpre-tation of the manner in which a nighthawk locates its eggs. Oneevening when the female nighthawk was away feeding I moved theeggs to a place on the graveled roof about 6 feet from their originalposition. When the bird returned she alighted in the accustomedplace and waddled up to the spot where she had left the eggs. Noeggs being there, she went by a few inches, turned around, and re-crossed the spot. This was repeated several times, and finally muchbewildered she flew away. The eggs were in plain view yet werenot discovered. Fearing she might desert her nest, I returned theeggs. In about 10 minutes the female returned, alighted in the usualposition and without hesitation went directly to the eggs. Thisexperiment was repeated on this and other birds with essentially thesame results. It is evident that some factor such as a hypotheticalsense of location or orientation is important, whereas sight plays aminor role for the nighthawk in locating its eggs. The same factoris probably important to the nighthawk in finding its way over thou-sands of miles during migration and its ability to arrive punctuallynot only in the same State and the same town but to the identicalnesting site.Incubation.?Both the male and female have been reported assharing the duties of incubation. George H. Selleck (1916) statesthat the male nighthawk incubated the eggs during the daytime,
214 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMwhereas the female took charge of the nest at night in the case of apair of birds lie observed at Exeter, N. H. Dr. A. A. Allen (1933)states that the male takes his place on the eggs in the evening whilethe female is away feeding. Forbush (1927) states that both maleand female share in incubation. On the other hand, J. H. Bowles(1921), who made an intensive study of the nighthawk, records onlythe female incubating the eggs. T. G. Gentry (1887) states that incu-bation "is the exclusive labor of the female" but that the young arecared for by both parents. It is evident, if the above statements areall true observations, that there is considerable individual variation inthe behavior of the male in regard to incubation. In my own in-tensive studies of several pairs of nighthawks that nested on graveledroofs at Brunswick, Maine, I have never seen the male incubatingthe eggs. In the case of one nest under daily observation the birdswere subject to study day and night by a relay of observers for aconsiderable part of the incubation period. The same held true fora pair of nighthawks studied in northern Michigan. Furthermore,visits made to numerous nests revealed in those cases that only thefemale was incubating the eggs, although the male was often verynear to the female or to the eggs. My observations agree with thestatement of Gentry that the female does all the incubating, but tlu^male in most instances assists in caring for the young.The behavior of the birds in relation to the nest and eggs andcorrelated with the time of day, the weather, environmental condi-tions, and the activities of other birds can be illustrated by fieldnotes taken on June 20, 1921. These notes are representative of ob-servations taken throughout the nesting season. The nest underconsideration was located on the graveled roof of a two-story high-school building at Brunswick, Maine, a village of about 7,000 inhab-itants located on the Androscoggin River. There are numerous giantelms and other shade trees along its streets, and the spacious j^ardsand gardens present an environment attractive to a large number ofbirds. The times given throughout the following notes are easterndaylight saving:June 20, 1921. 2 : 50 a. m. Cloudy, moon hidden by clouds, clearnear the eastern horizon where the stars shine brightly. Entered theblind on the roof at 3 a. m. Female incubating the eggs. Her eyeswere wide open when viewed with the flash light.3 : 20 a. m. The female has been quiet during the past 20 minutesbut has now shifted her position and is facing northeastward directlytoward the first faint light of dawn. (Daily observations revealedthat the nesting bird usually faced the sunrise in the morning andthe sunset in the evening. In other words, she oriented herself to-ward the source of light preceding the times she anticipated leaving
EASTERN KIGHTHAWK 215the nest to feed. It became evident through repeated experimentaltests that her leaving the nest was considerably influenced by thefactor of the intensity of light.)3:24 a. m. The male gives a loud peent call as he awakens on hisperch in the elm tree. (The elm stands in the school yard and someof its branches extend over the roof wall. The male's favorite perchwas on a large horizontal limb just above the level of the roof.When he was through with his activities in the morning or eveninghe usually retired to this limb. He generally perched lengthwiseon this limb, but it was not rare for him to depart from the conven-tional nighthawk position and perch crosswise to the limb.)3 : 40 a. m. Light growing brighter in the east, the female can beseen without the use of the flashlight. She sits with her eyes closed,but from time to time she opens them, then raises her head and peersaround, as if testing the intensity of the light prior to her leavingthe nest.3 : 42 a. m. The male nighthawk alights on the roof and gives asharp 'pee'Yit call, followed by a series of guttural awk-awh-awk notes.3 : 44 a. m. The male shifts his position to the roof wall butcontinues the guttural calls, each time displaying his conspicuouswhite throat patch.4 : 04 a. m. The male leaves the roof wall and alights on thegraveled surface within 8 inches of the female. He utters a singlesharp peent note, then continues with the striking guttural awkcalls. The female shows no outward signs of being impressed b}'the ardent attentions of her mate.4 : 08 a. m. The male leaves the roof but soon returns and isjoined by a second male. Female leaves her nest and flies towardthe males, and all leave under great excitement, uttering sharp,piercing calls. The female lent a hand in driving away the strangemale.4:10 a. m. The female returns and pulls her eggs beneath her inthe usual manner.4 : 14 a. m. The male alights on the roof about 30 feet from thenest and utters a series of aiok calls in rapid succession, as if muchexcited as the result of his combat.4 : 30 a. m. The male is chasing a strange nighthawk and, as hepursues he utters a series of yap-yap-yap-yap calls in rapid firesuccession, a note I have not heard before.4 : 33 a. m. The male is now going through his hair-raising divesand producing the so-called boom notes, which to me resembleswo-o-o-onk^ with the accent on the last syllable.4 : 46 a. m. The sun has not yet risen. The male nighthawk fliesto his perch in his favorite elm tree, and thus end his activities forthe morning.
216 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM9 : 00 a. m. The nighthawks have been quiet since 4 : 46 a. m. Forthe greater part of the time the female has been motionless, withher eyes closed, but at intervals she opens her eyes wide in responseto some unusual disturbance. She did not leave to feed, as is usualfor her to do each morning.9 : 10 a. m. The female shifted her position and turned her eggs.I left the blind at 9 : 15 a. m. and my place was taken by studentobservers, who took notes in relays until my return in the evening.They reported no activity on the part of the male. He remainedon his perch in the elm throughout the day. The female did notleave the nest but merely shifted her position slightly from timeto time in adjusting her eggs. When the heat was excessive shepanted vigorously in order to adjust her body temperature.7:30 p. m. When I arrived at the roof the sun was shining onthe nesting female. Her eyes were opened as I approached the nestbut were again closed after I had entered the blind,8 : 05 p. m. The first peent call of the nighthawk is heard fromthe male nighthawk, perched in the elm tree near the school build-ing, where he had retired at 4 : 46 a. m.8:09 p. m. Male leaves his perch in the elm. Simultaneously an-other nighthawk appears from the elms farther clown the street.8 : 46 p. m. The male alights near the nesting female.8 : 47 p. m. The female, facing toward the western sky, opens hereyes wide and turns from side to side. With this preliminaryaction repeated several times, she leaves the nest. The male remainswithin a few inches of the nest but makes no attempt to incubatethe eggs. He merely serves as a guard while the female is away.8:48 p. m. The male leaves the roof for a moment, uttering thesharp peent calls, and then returns to take up his position near tothe nest.8 : 50 p. m. The female returns to the nest after being away onlythree minutes. The male was quiet while on the roof alone, but assoon as the female returned he started his guttural notes.8 : 58 p. m. The male takes leave without any ceremony and fliesto his perch in the elm tree.9 : 01 p. m. The female leaves the nest quietly.9 : 22 p. m. No nighthawks have been seen or heard during the past20 minutes. The female unannounced returns, after her quest forfood, to brood her eggs for the remainder of the night.Activities began again at 3 :14 a. m. the next day, and the programwas in all essentials similar to that recorded for June 20. Althougha large series of such observations were made the male never wasseen to incubate the eggs, but he regularly visited the nesting femaleeach morning and evening. Sometimes, especially in very cloudy
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 217
weather, the male left the elm tree during the day and flew aboututtering the usual 'peent calls. He was never seen on the roof duringthe middle of the day.The female was always faithful to her task regardless of a parch-ing sun or torrential downpours of rain. At one time the ther-mometer placed on the graveled roof reached 130? F., although itwas only 98? F. in the shade on the street level. At such times herenormous mouth was wide open, and she panted incessantly. Thefemale's presence was needed to protect the eggs from the excessiveheat fully as much as it wjis to supply warmth during the coolevenings when the temperature sometimes dropped as low as 45? F.If the female should leave her eggs when the temperature rises ashigh as 130? F. the embryos inside of the eggs would be killed in afew minutes.It was common for the heat to melt the tar beneath thegravel so that it oozed to the surface of the pebbles. Milton Goff(1932) relates an interesting experience of a nighthawk that nestedon a school roof at Eockford, 111. One of the two eggs becamefirmly embedded in some tar melted by the sun. The female wasunable to move the ^^^ after nine desperate attempts made duringthe course of two hours.Young.?In 1922 the nighthawks arrived at Brunswick, Maine,on May 15. On June 3 the first egg was laid and was marked No. 1.It was not incubated the first day. On June 4 the second <&gg waslaid at 11:05 a. m. and marked No. 2. The laying of the second<ig'g was observed. It was seen when it first appeared and watcheduntil it emerged from the cloaca two minutes later. The egg wasmoist at first but quickly dried in the warm air, after which thefemale turned around and tucked it under her breast. Incubationbegan immediately after the second egg was laid. ,On June 23, 1922, egg No. 1 was pipped at 8 : 30 a. m. and at thistime the peeps of the confined embryo could be heard distinctly. At11 : 00 a. m. the chick had emerged. The ^gg shells of the first eggwere removed about noon. The female took them in her beak anddropped them during flight at a point about a hundred yards fromthe building. Egg No. 2 was pipped at 2 p. m., and at 3 p. m.portions of the shell were broken away. The female seemed littleconcerned about the first chick but lavished all her attentions on theunhatched bird. At times she elevated her body, peered at the ^gg-,and responded to the calls of the embryo with an assuring note. Shefrequently rocked her body over the egg as if to assist in removingthe shell. At 6 p. m. the shell was cracked latitudinally and soonthereafter the cup of the larger end was slightly lifted. At 6 : 30p. m. the young was completely freed from the shell, which broke
218 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMaway in two parts. As the shell membrane dried the two cupsclosed again forming a complete empty shell case. At this timethe first young was being brooded while the second, in a wet be-draggled condition, awkwardly and weakly wavered its head beneaththe bill of the female. The faint peeping notes uttered by theyoungster were answered with guttural purring notes of the proudand triumphant mother. After the down of the second youngsterwas dry it joined its fellow under the breast of the mother. TheGgg, shell was not removed until the following morning. The incu-bation period for this set of eggs was definitely established to be19 days.The next day the female attempted to brood the young continu-ously. One of the young, however, persisted in its attempts tobreak away from parental care in spite of the warning notes of itsmother. In one instance the mother dragged the one young underher body until within reach of the unruly youngster, which wasquickly and violently tucked under her breast with something of anattitude of rebuff.On the second day the young frequently appeared in the openand at such times often pecked at the mother's beak as if recognizingit to be the door of a well-filled cupboard. The young had not yetbeen fed, as they were still dependent on the yolk provided by theegg and stored in their bodies at the time of hatching. The femaleremained with the young throughout the day, whereas the male didnot make his appearance until 8 : 50 in the evening. He announcedhis arrival with a sharp call as he landed on the roof. His call wasimmediately answered by the female, whereupon he made his wayto the nest and without ceremony or delay delivered the first foodreceived by the young.J[ was not prepared to see the male feed the young because themale of the preceding summer (another individual) never assisted inthe care of the young. This striking difference in individual be-havior emphasizes the point that it is not safe to generalize onobservations of a single individual.The next morning the female was brooding her young, and beingaccustomed to my daily presence she allowed me to reach under herbreast to remove the young without exhibiting the least bit of fear,A female nesting on another roof when visited for the first timescooted away hurriedly, fluttered helplessly on the roof, enactinga perfect imitation of a crippled bird, a ruse to attract my attentionaway from her young. When I followed her she quickly flew away.On subsequent visits this bird stood her ground, elevated her wingsin an upright position, and hissed at me in defiance of my approach.The following notes are from observations made of the young thatwere hatched on the high-school roof the preceding year (1921).
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 219The female of that year was the same bird that nested there in 1922.The identity of the female was established by banding and also bya slight deformity of the maxilla, the tip of which was broken off.The males of the two broods were different individuals.The young were fed during the early morning before sunrise andagain in the evening after sunset. During the heat of the day, whenthe temperature frequently went soaring above 110? F., the youngkept well concealed under the breast of the brooding bird in closecontact to her abdominal air sacs. When the temperature was lesstorrid the young peeked their heads through the feathers and oftencame out entirely. At such times they sometimes amused themselvesby picking at the mother's beak and rectal bristles. If the annoyancebecame too great the female would thrust her head beneath her breast.The young then proceeded to pick at the feathers of her crown andnape.The female left the nest regularly about 8 : 30 p. m. (daylightsaving time) to obtain food for herself and young. In the case ofthis brood the female delivered all the food required by the young.The food was delivered by the process of regurgitation. The beakof the female was thrust well into the large and widely distendedmouth of the young when the transfer of food was made. Afterfeeding, the adult brooded her young in the earlier stages of thei]development.For the first three days the young remained near the spot wherethey had been hatched, but on the fourth day after a heavy rainthey had moved to a slightly raised portion of the roof, which wasfree from excessive dampness. The female never left the youngduring a rain at this stage of their growth, even if it meant depriv-ing them of food. The male regularly visited the roof early in themorning and again in the evening throughout the breeding season,but he was never seen to deliver food to the young. The malewas usually stationed on the roof when the female w^as away andthus served as a watchdog in her absence. More than once he wascalled upon to chase away a strange nighthawk that had inad-vertently alighted in his territory on the high-school roof.On the fifth day (June 29) the young had wandered to the south-ern end of the building where the shadow of the roof wall protectedthem from the direct rays of the burning sun. The heat during themiddle of the day was frequently excessive. On Julj^ 7, when theyoung were 13 days old, a thermometer placed on the gravel of theroof registered 140? F. The heat was too much for one of the young,which succumbed and was found dead near the middle of the roof.Its fellow nestling, hidden in the shadow of the roof wall and be-hind a clay ventilating pipe, escaped death but was in a serious con-dition. A sponge soaked with cold water was placed near the
220 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMyoungster, whereupon it ignored its parent to enjoy the comfort pro-vided by the cool sponge. This act probably aided the survival ofthe young nighthawk through the remainder of the record-breakinghot day.As the nighthawk grew older he became very aggressive andpugnacious and never hesitated to pester his mother whenever hewas hungry. At times he seemed mischievous. It was not a rareexperience to see him crouch under his mother's breast and then bystanding up quickly and rigidly topple his mother so that she wasforced to extend her wings to keep from falling over. During theperiod of the rapid growth of the wing feathers the youngster wascontinually extending and stretching his wings as if to relieve theuncomfortable feeling caused by growing pains.Wlien the young nighthawk was three weeks old he was able tomake short flights from one place to another on the gravel roof. Atthis stage of his growth he had become so large that it was difficultfor the female to cover him adequately while brooding. This wasstrikingly demonstrated on the evening of July 17, when he was 23days old. The mother had left him alone on the roof while she wasaway on her regular evening search for food. It was so cool anddamp that the young bird uttered notes that clearly indicated dis-comfort. I placed him in a woolen bag, and this, combined with thewarmth of my hands, was very satisfying, as indicated by his changeto notes of contentment. He remained there in comfort until hismother alighted on the roof and gave the characteristic call note,announcing supper. The little nighthawk struggled out of my bagand ran directly to his mother to be fed. After he was gorged withinsects, the female attempted to brood him, but to her apparent dis-may he rushed back to the woolen bag, clearly recognizing that Icould do a much better job at brooding.On July 19, when the nighthawk was 25 days old, I discoveredthat he was no longer solely dependent on liis parent for food. Ifound him busily engaged catching some white moths that hadcollected about a drain pipe of the roof. He was flying this wayand that, catching the moths with great delight. As I sat therewatching I chanced to pull a small handkerchief from my pocket,whereupon he dashed at the white object with the ferociousness ofa tiger. Evidently to the nighthawk this was some giant moth largeenough to provide for an entire meal.The female now made frequent attempts to entice the young birdaway from the roof by first offering food but flying away before itwas delivered. The youngster would follow her in extended flightsbut invariably returned to the roof.On July 24, when the bird was 30 days old, the female was photo-graphed with the young for the last time. Thereafter she forsook
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 221her offspring for a roost in the nearby elm tree. She then visitedthe roof only for short intervals at feeding times. On each succes-sive day the young bird took longer and longer flights, and each dayI anticipated it would be my last opportunity to photograph and toobserve him. Much to my delight he continued to return, seemingto enjoy my companionship.On August 15 he left with the other nighthawks of the vicinityon their migration to the south. This unusual experience of havingthe bird return to the roof gave me an unprecedented opportunityto make a continuous set of daily observations and measurements ofa nighthawk living under normal natural conditions up to the timeit was 52 days of age. By this time the growth of the juvenalplumage was completed and exchanged in part for the first winterplumage.Plumages.?On the first day the young are able to stand uprightand are very active from the time of hatching. The eyes are open,iris bluish black; skin darkly pigmented darker above than below;bill "pale mouse gray"; tarsus and toes brownish drab. Downpresent on both dorsal and ventral parts of the body. Down of theventral tracts pale gray shading to "pallid neutral gray" on thebelly ; chin gray, malar stripes and patch on the throat "dark mousegray," approaching black. Upper parts mottled and marbled, madeup of patches of pale gray and "dark mouse gray." In the regionof the nape and scapulars the down has a distinct "pale olive-buff"tint. At the base of the beak the down has a tinge of buff. Acircular area about the anus, the outer part of the shanks, and forearm have patches of darker colored down. Patterns of dark andwhite vary considerably in different young. The average length ofthe down on the various parts of the body varies as follows: Crown9, base of bill 4, region over eye 6, throat 12, belly 15, wing 11, andregion of anus 8 millimeters.On the third day the color of the bill has changed to a "deepneutral gray," and the tarsus and toes become a dusky drab. Downat the base of the beak, scapular region, and irregular patches ofthe back has faded from the colors present in the day-old chick toa "tilleul buff." Iris is now a clear brown instead of the bluishblack of the freshly hatched chick.At the age of 10 days the tarsus and toes are "deep Quaker drab,"bill "dark neutral gray," eyelids "light neutral gray." Exposedportions of the eyes are noticeably greater. Down of the back muchworn and matted down, the feather papillae in the region of thecrown, wing coverts, scapulars, and rump now more conspicuousthan the down. The tips of the feathers of the back are unsheathedand exhibit a black and cinnamon color. The color pattern of theback is completely lost since the appearance of the feather papillae
222 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMand their unsheathed tips. The papillae of the tail feathers areonly 8 millimeters long and as yet do not show through the down. Thefeather papillae of the head and tail are the last to unsheath.In chicks 13 days old the "pinkish cinnamon" of the tips of thefeathers of the dorsal tracts has faded to a "pinkish buff," and someof the feathers approach a "tilleul buff." Freshly unsheathedfeathers of the crown are "pinkish cinnamon." Black markingshave faded to a "fuscous-black" or "dusky neutral gray"; yellowishcolor of the breast feathers of the younger stages now faded to graytinged with yellow. The juvenal plumage is rapidly replacing the]iatal down in all parts of the body. The yellowish-gray breastfeathers are barred with "dusky neutral gray." As previously noted,one of the two birds died from exposure to great heat at this timeand the remaining descriptions are based on one bird.At the age of 15 days the down is ragged in appearance but isstill prominent on the breast, sides of the head, wing coverts, andregion of the tail. The down is worn off the feathers in the regionof the crown and scapulars. Feathers of all tracts of the juvenalplumage are partially unsheathed. When the young are handledthere are numerous particles of the feather sheaths that scale off.The wings exhibit a marked development. The tips of the undertail coverts recently unsheathed are ivory colored. The down per-sisting at the tips of the feathers comes off with the slightest pull.The pupil of the eye appears bluish black and the iris has changedto a "Van Dyke brown."When 17 days old the sixth primary has now proceeded withunsheathing so that the white patch is 13 millimeters in extent.Tarsus and toes are "blackish plumbeous," bill is a "dusky purplishgray," eyelids are "dark olive-gray"; otherwise the markings aresimilar to those of the 15-day-old bird.When 20 days old a relatively small amount of down remains, buta few filaments can be seen on the tips of some of the crown feathers,sides of neck, and breast. Feathers of the wings are growing fastand are so heavy from the large amount of blood and large sheathsthat the wings rest on the surface of the roof, the bird being unableto support them. The wings are frequently outstretched, apparentlyto relieve the uncomfortable sensation produced by rapid growthof the feathers. Bristlelike feathers now appear around the baseof the beak. The fifth primary is grown so that the white patchis beginning to unsheath, and the base of the fourth primary showswhite area on sheath, which is destined to form part of the whitepatch on the wing of the fully grown young. The white on thesixth primary made its first appearance in the l7-day-old chick.At this age the crown is "dusky neutral gray" or black, the feathers
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 223tipped, barred, and spotted with "viiiaceous-buff" ; some of the tipsapproach "avellaneous." The feathers of the upper parts are dark,or dusky, neutral gray variously mottled with shades of gray and
"avellaneous" many of the feathers tipped with "pinkish buff.'*Auriculars "light cinnamon-buff" and black, tipped with lightershades. Primaries and secondaries blackish warm gray, some of thefeathers having an olivaceous-black appearance. All the remigesare tipped with "tilleul buff" or "vinaceous-buff." Some of thesecondaries and inner primaries spotted with "vinaceous-buff."Coverts of primaries unspotted "blackish mouse gray" or black.Coverts of secondaries spotted with "tilleul buff" and "vinaceous-buff." Lesser wing coverts variously mottled with colors mentionedabove. Feathers of the breast barred with "dark mouse gray" andshades of gray and white. Throat and chin with a crescentic bandof feathers, which are barred with dark gray and white, the whitepredominating. Band of feathers along the edge of mandible ex-tending below the eyes to the auriculars "neutral gray" and markedwith "vinaceous-buff." Under tail coverts "cartridge buff," narrowlybarred with black. Middle of the belly a heavy mat of down. Eye-lids "light olive-gray," tarsus deep metal gray.At 25 days the down has been lost, except that of the middle ofthe belly and small patches on the legs above the heels.At 28 days the colorings are about as described for the 20-day-oldchick, but the colors are subdued and faded because of exposure tothe intense sunlight. The down is now entirely replaced by thefeathers of the juvenal plumage. Although the outer primaries areonly partially unsheathed, the young bird is capable of long flightsand frequently leaves the roof, but invariably returns.At 30 days the secondaries and the primaries, except the outerones, are now unsheathed. The barred feathers lining the wingsare now in process of unsheathing.At 35 days the prevailing color of the upper parts is olivaceous-black, glossed with greenish, but this base color is very much brokenby irregular markings, spotting, and marbling of buffy gray andwhitish; many of the larger spots approach a light vinaceous-buff,which is especially evident on the crown. Spots of the crown arclarger than those of the back. The throat patch now is clear white,an indication of its sex.At 40 days, all the primaries except the outer two are completelyunsheathed. The white patch of the second to fifth unsheathed, thatof the first is 11 millimeters.The bird, although able to fly as well as an adult, returned to theroof each day and allowed me to make daily measurements andweighings without the least resistance. It never attempted to run
224 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
or fly away when I approached to pick it up. When I arrived onthe roof wall it gave a series of calls, which seems to be a sign ofrecognition. The bird placed before me in a natural sitting posemeasured 187 millimeters from the tip of the bill to the tip of thewings. Distance from level of the crown to the board on which it isseated is 90 millimeters. Tip of tail to front of toe in natural posi-tion 150, and tip of folded wing to toe 165 millimeters.The bird at this age is very active and vivacious and captures allits own food. It offers no difficulty for me to capture it for meas-urements and poses perfectly for photographs.On Monday, August 15", there was a great flight and departure ofnighthawks, and after that date the nighthawk was seen no more.Presumably it went southward on its migration. The bird was 52days old, and I had an unexcelled opportunity to observe the birdup to the time of the completion of its growth.The completed juvenal plumages of both sexes is similar to thatof the adult female except that the throat patch is not so well defined
;
in some it is replaced by blackish and buffy bars. The barring ofthe underparts is more extensive and the coloration in general ispaler than that of the adults. There are whitish tips on all theprimaries.The postnatal molt has already been described in detail under theaccount of the young. There is a partial molt that does not includethe wings and tail in September. There is a partial or completeprenuptial molt in spring when the young attain the plumage ofthe adult. The adults have a complete postnuptial molt before theyreturn for their nesting activities the following year. I have notbeen able to ascertain the time of the postnuptial molt.Albinistic phases of plumage, in which there is an absence ofdark pigment, may appear in any species of birds. W. A. Strother(1886) reports a perfect albino taken at Lynchburg, Va.Food.?The nighthawk is insectivorous in its eating habits. Sincethe major part of the insects it destroys are destructive to usefulvegetation or are otherwise adverse to human welfare, the night-hawk ranks high in the list of birds beneficial to man.The nighthawk captures the insects chiefly during its flight. Thebirds sweep up in their capacious mouths all types of insects fromthe large moths and beetles to the tiniest of flies and mosquitoes.Some of the stomachs examined have contained no less than 50different species of insects, and some of the smaller insects are attimes represented by thousands of individuals.One of the most conspicuous elements of the food is flying ants.In the examination of 87 nighthawk stomachs, the United StatesBiological Survey reports that ants comprised nearly one-fourth of
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 225the total food eaten by the birds. In 24 of the stomachs the numberof ants ranged from 200 to 1,800, and in all the stomachs examinedthere were not less than 20,000 ants (Beal, 1897). In the stomachof a nightha\Yk that met with accidental death at Brnnswick, Maine,on August 20, 1925, there were 2,175 ants. The mass and weightof these insects were so great that they constituted a serious handi-cap and probably a factor in the bird's untimely ending. CharlesDrury (1887) obtained a specimen in August that contained 320 in-sects, chiefly winged ants. W. L. McAtee (1926) found more thanone hundred carpenter ants {Caviponotus herculeanus) in onenighthawk stomach. In most all instances the ants captured arethe mating winged individuals, which fly in immense swarms duringthe late summer. These ants are killed at a time when they arepreparing to propagate their kind, and hence the death of everyfemale means the destruction of thousands of the next generation.According to examinations of the United States Biological Sur-vey (Beal, McAtee, and Kalmbach, 1916) beetles comprised one-fifthof the food eaten by 87 nighthawks examined. May beetles, dungbeetles, and others of the leaf-chafer family were in greatest num-bers. Beal (1897) reported finding the remains of 34 May beetles{PhyJlophaga) in a single nighthawk stomach, in another 23, andin a third 17. In the stomach contents of one specimen no less than17 species of beetles were identified. Chester Lamb (1912) reportsthat all nighthawks collected by him had eaten enormous quantitiesof beetles. Thomas G. Grentry (1877) reports eight species ofbeetles in food examined by him. McAtee (1926) reports variousleaf chafers, sawyers, wood borers, bark beetles, weevils, and plantlice in the food eaten by nighthawks in the course of his study ofthe relation of birds to woodlots in New York State. In the exam-ination of hundreds of droppings of nighthawks obtained fromvarious nesting sites chiefly at Brunswick, Maine, a large percentageof the identifiable remains consisted of parts of various species ofbeetles.Nighthawks, especially in the Middle West, have been known toeat a considerable number of grasshoppers and locusts. Accordingto Ernest Harold Baynes (1915) seven Nebraska specimens werefound to have eaten 348 Rocky Mountain locusts; five specimenscollected in Indiana reported by A. W. Butler (1898) had eaten 9grasshoppers, 19 beetles, 23 Heteroptera, and 4 Neuroptera. B. H.Warren (1890) reported that grasshoppers were an importantelement of the food eaten by nighthawks collected in Pennsylvania.F. E. L. Beal (1897) states that one nighthawk contained the remainsof 60 grasshoppers. A male killed on July 7, 1882, was reportedby Everett Smith (1883) to have "an ichneumon fly, a black cricket,178223?40 21
226 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAX. MUSEUMabout twenty small grasshoppers, and many small, hard insects" inits crop.Flies, plant lice, and mosquitoes frequently form an importantelement of the food of the nighthawk. A nighthawk examined bythe Biological Survey had eaten more than 300 mosquitoes, andE. H. Forbush (1907) reports finding 500 mosquitoes in the stomachof one bird. McAtee (1926) reports that he found 650 plant lice inthe stomach of a single nighthawk. Phoebe Knappen (1934) foundstone flies in 21 nighthawks. The insects were chiefly adults butalso a few larvae, nymphs, and eggs were present.In the South various observers have noted that the nighthawk isan important factor in the control of tlie cotton-boll weevil. F. H.Herrick (1901) writes of a nighthawk that had been feeding onfireflies ; the wide open mouth of an adult observed feeding its youngwas brilliantly illuminated like a spacious apartment all aglowwith electricity. F. H. Carpenter (1886) relates a unique experiencewith nighthawks that darted at the artificial flies on his line whenhe was casting for trout. It is not an unusual experience to seenighthawks after dusk flying about electric lights of city streets(Knowlton, 1896) or about campfires of remote districts where theycapture myriads of insects attracted by the lights.During the migration nighthawks frequently fly near the groundand at such times may take advantage of any insects that appear intheir path. During an afternoon late in August I observed a flightof several hundred nighthawks near Urbana, 111. As I sat in a caralongside a large meadow I noticed that the birds were ravenouslyfeasting on grasshoppers. Some of the birds lingered long enoughto capture half a dozen of the insects before passing on to makeplace for other nighthawks in the migrating procession. A. DawesDuBois, of Excelsior, Minn., relates a similar experience he had inthe vicinity of Salt Creek, Logan County, 111., as follows : "At duskon the evening of May 22, 1913, as I walked along a cloverfield, wewitnessed an assemblage of nighthawks in pursuit of low-flyinginsects. They skimmed over the clover like swallows; and theirdusky forms were so numerous that they seemed to be weaving anintricate pattern in the gray twilight. They were so intent on theirbountiful repast that they paid no heed to our presence, but some-times darted past us only a few feet away."Nighthawks not only capture food on the wing, but they also havebeen observed to drink, in the manner of swallows, as they skim nearthe surface of the water of lakes and streams. F. Stephens (1913)observed a nighthawk drinking from a watering trough. This birddropped its lower mandible into the water, rippling the surface ofthe water as it passed along. A. Dawes DuBois writes of the follow-
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 227ing experience he had at Springfield, 111., on July 29, 1923: "Mr.R. B. Horsfall and I were walking along the margin of a small pondwhen a nighthawk swooped down, touched the surface of the w^aterand rose again; but we could not tell whether it was scooping up afloating insect or a drink of water."Voice.?The nighthawk has no claim as a singer, but neverthelessits notes are of great interest and attract fully as much attentionas the voices of our more gifted songsters.The loud piercing calls uttered by the nighthawk during flightare simple yet, like all bird notes, extremely difficult to represent inwritten words so as to enable a reader unfamiliar with them togain a clear conception of their character and quality. This fact isat once emphasized if we compare the interpretations of a few ofthe many authors who have attempted a written version of its calls.For example to C. G. Abbott (1914) it sounds like a "grating
'beedz, beedz,' " and to Charles Bendire (1895) it is a querulous anda squeaky note resembling "aek-aek, aek-aek" or "speek-speek, speek-speek." W. E. Grover describes this note as a sharp "mueike"; andE. H. Forbush (1907) states that "the note is s-k-i-r-k or s-c-a-i-p-e,a little like the call of Wilson's snipe,?rather a startling squeakwhen heard close at hand." W. L. Dawson (1903) interprets thenote as "mizard, mizard," and E. H. Eaton (1914) describes it as a
"loud nasal 'peent, peent.' " N. S. Goss (1891) writes that its voiceis a "squeak" or a "pe-up" note, and Arkansas Hoosier (1890) statesthat "the note is best produced by speaking the word 'beard' in awhisper." To G. R. Mayfield (1921) the call is a shrill "B-e-e-r-b" andto H. Nehrling it is "Brirrr-brirrr." H. Tullsen (1911) interprets it asa sharp penetrating "Spe-eak," and H. H. Bailey (1913) tliinks itsounds like "Queek-queek."There was probably only the slightest variation in the notes ofthe different nighthawks as heard by the authors mentioned above,yet how strikingly different are the interpretations as represented inthe written or printed words. The note described above is the onemost frequently heard, and it is uttered independently of the seasons.It is the note that announces the arrival of the nighthawk in spring,and it is the call uttered at the time the nighthawks are congre-gating in fall in preparation for their departure to the south, Ihave been unable to ascertain whether this call is heard at theirwinter home in South America.Frequently, during the courtship season, the males in their com-petition for a mate vigorously pursue each other. At such timesboth birds utter a series of sharply accented calls recorded in myfield notes as resembling Dick-a-dick-a-dick-dick-dick-dick-dick,given in rapid succession.
228 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThere is another note of the nighthawk very different in character,an aeolian sound, produced by the rush of air through the primariesof the wings at the termination of the extraordinary downwardpkmge executed during the courtship season. In order to see thisperformance and to hear this peculiar and unique note to the bestadvantage it is necessary to visit the vicinity of the nesting site.Alexander Wilson (1828) described this note as a "loud boomingsound very much resembling that produced by blowing stronglyinto the bunghole of an empty hogshead." E. H. Eaton (1914)offers a modification of Wilson's description in stating that the noteis like that produced "by blowing across an empty bottle." T. G.Gentry (1877) describes it as a sound resembling that "producedby a tense cord set in vibration by a sudden gust of wind;" T.Jasper (1878) states that it is a hollow whir like the rapid turningof a spinning wheel, and F. A. Hartman (1914) describes it as a
"guttural 'woof.' " The note reminds W. A. Stearns (1883) of thesound produced by a bellowing bull. In my field notes I havedescribed this note as a mufiled wT-r^T{i\i\r-oonk^ but sometimes morenearly approaching sio-r^r,r^7'-ooonl\ the last syllable decidedly ac-cented and produced with great resonance. There is nothing aboutthis note suggesting an explosive boom or bellowing.It has long ago been well established that this peculiar note isnot a vocal sound but one produced by the vibration of the primaries.As keen an observer as Alexander Wilson (1828) stated that it is
"produced by the sudden expansion of his capacious mouth." Othersshared Wilson's view or thought that it was a sound produced by thesyrinx. After one has observed the performance it can be readilyunderstood how such an erroneous interpretation was made by theearlier observers. The plunge takes place so quickly that it is onlyby repeated observations made under the most favorable conditionsthat the observer is convinced that the primaries are involved.Audubon (1840) was the first to arrive at a correct explanation.He writes that the source of the singular noise is "the concussioncaused, at the time the bird passes the centre of its plunge by the newposition of its wings, which are now brought almost instantly tothe wind, like the sails of a ship suddenly thrown back." Thisobservation with variation of its details has been made by numeroussubsequent observers. J. B. Canfiekl (1902) gives a description ofthe performance as follows: "He suddenly paused and came soaringtoward me like an arrow. About fifty feet in front of me his wingswere lowered below his body, throwing them forward with the flightfeathers spread wide apart * * * His speed was so great thatthe flight feathers vibrated like a loosely-stretched rubber band whensnapped with the fingers. This performance was repeated in front,back, and beside me twelve times in all, never more than fifty feetaway, and as near as fifteen. In all cases the wings were in the
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 229same position, and his mouth never open." F. A. Hartman (1914)writes, "It is very evident that the mouth plays no part, otherwisetlie sound would be produced at other times [than on the dow^nward<i;lide], * * * The bird threw its wings far to the front at theend of his downward glide, so that the uppermost quill feathers werepointed exactly in the direction of his glide. Going at such head-long speed, these quill feathers when thrown edgewise to the airvibrated strongly, causing the 'woof'." Alden H. Miller (1925)while at Camp Lewis, Wash., during June and July succeeded inattracting nighthawks within 10 feet of himself by merely wavinghis hat in the air. He noticed that if the wings, during the down-ward plunge, were held in the upturned V-shaped position, a normalpose when soaring, no boom was heard, but when the wings werebent downward near the end of the dive the boom sound was pro-duced. The intensity of the sound, according to Mr. Miller, is moreor less proportional to the speed attained. The main explosive boomseems to be preceded by a brief, lesser vibrating sound, which burstsforth into the full bellow. Both parts seem to have a distinctelement of pitch, but the latter part is lower, with greater reso-nance and depth of quality.The sound produced by the wings described above is a part ofthe courtship performance and is usually produced near the nesting-site. After the young no longer require the constant attention ofboth parents, the male loses the glamour of romance and performsless frequently and soon after ceases almost entirely until the court-ship season of another year. However, birds migrating in Augustsometimes "boom."Another note associated with the courtship season is a gutturalcall uttered only when the male is at rest and in the presence ofthe female. It may be described as an oft repeated auk^ auk, auk orawk, aiok, awk. This note is produced by the syrinx, but as it isuttered the bill is tightly closed and the gular membrane is tightlydistended each time the note is produced. The distension is causedby the expulsion of air from the respiratory system. The distendedmembrane, although feathered, acts as a resonator and modifies thenote, giving it a peculiar quality. Such a mechanism is present inother birds. It is especially highly developed in the prairie chicken,in which large lateral vocal sacs are present that give the "booming"notes of this grouse great carrying power.The notes of the female nighthawk are simple calls uttered inresponse to the those of the male or of the young. She may utter apurring, pacifying note w^hen brooding the young, but often thesenotes are so weak that they cannot be heard by the observer unlesshe is stationed very near in a blind.
230 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMGame.?Today we do not think of the nighthawk as a game bird,yet 60 years ago large numbers of them were killed by gunners andsportsmen, especially in the Southern States. M. G. Elzey, writingon September IS", 1876, stated: "Bull-bats (nighthawks) are the bestof the minor game of this country for sport or table; have been veryabundant and in superb condition here (Blacksburg, Virginia) forthe past two weeks. I have killed several hundred. On one occa-sion took out 28 cartridges and brought in 23 birds besides 2 whichfell out of bounds and were recovered by boys. Killed 17 in succes-sion. The bats are quite as fat and better game than the reed birds."Dr. E. Sterling (1885) wrote: "Their rapid and irregular flightmakes them a difficult mark for the young sportsman to practice on,as he never fails to make a target of them when the opportunityoffers. I can now understand the object for which this bird wascreated." Dr. F. M. Chapman (1888), writing of conditions atGainesville, Fla., stated, " 'Bat' shooting is here a popular pastime,great numbers being killed for food, and in August, when the birdshave gathered in flocks, favorite fields may be occupied at nightfallby as many as a dozen shooters." Stockard ( 1905 ) lamented the factthat the birds "are foolishly slaughtered by pseudo-sportsmen whoshoot them merely to watch the bird's graceful fall or to improvetheir skill as marksmen."The practice of killing nighthawks was stopped through laws andby educational methods initiated by the National Association ofAudubon Societies. William Dutcher (1902), in writing of condi-tions in Florida, stated, "It is believed, on very satisfactory evidencethat the new law has stopped to a large degree the disgracefulpractice of shooting 'bull-bats' or Nighthawks {Ghordeiles virgini-anus) for sport," Bird-Lore for September-October 1903 pub-lished the following note: "The Night-hawk, or Bullbat, hasbeen so long considered a legitimate target for shotgun practice, inthe south, that a report of prosecution for killing these birds atGreensboro, North Carolina, marks a new era of bird protection inour southern states."Enemies.?The greatest enemy of the nighthawk has been man.In the past great numbers of the birds were killed for food andoften for mere sport or for satisfying a lust for killing. This wasespecially true in the Southern States, where the birds were slaugh-tered during the great flights of the annual migrations.Nighthawks nesting on the ground are subject to the same enemiesexperienced by other species of ground-nesting birds. Night hawksnesting on roofs are usually free from such molestation, but Albert F.Ganier infomis me that he has known of sparrow hawks invadingthe cities and preying upon the nighthawks, especially the young.
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 231Cats and dogs become enemies of the city dwellers in the event theyoung leave the nest prematurely and land on the streets below.Nighthawks have a remarkable protective coloration and havedeveloped methods of deception such as imitating a wounded indi-vidual when an enemy approaches the nesting site. At times theyassume an attitude of aggression; i. e., raising their elongated wingsin a vertical position and hissing in defiance at an intruder.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?The Western Hemisphere generally, from Yukon toPatagonia.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the nighthawk extendsnorth to Yukon (Sixty-mile River and probably Lapierres House) ;Mackenzie probably Fort Goodhope, probably Fort Franklin,Fort Resolution, and Hill Island Lake) ; northern Saskatchewan(Methye Portage, Stanley, and Reindeer River) ; northern Man-itoba (probably Du Brochet Lake, Grand Rapids, and probablyChurchill) ; northern Ontario (Martin Falls, probably Fort Albany,and probably Moose Factory) ; and Quebec (Lake Mistassini,Godbout, and Mingan Island). The eastern boundary of therange extends from this point southward through the coastal re-gions of the Maritime Provinces, the Eastern United States,the Bahama Islands (Nassau), to Puerto Rico (Mayaguez). Southto Puerto Rico (Mayaguez) ; Haiti (Ilinche and Jean Rubel) ; Ja-maica (Port Henderson and Grand Cayman) ; Cuba (Isle of Pines)
;
southern Texas (Brownsville, San Antonio, Kerrville, and Pecos)Chihuahua (Babicora) ; Sonora (Oposura and Los Nogales) ; andsouthern California (San Bernardino Mountains and Pine Knot).West to California (Pine Knot, Mona Lake, Grass Valley, and Eu-reka) ; western Oregon (Medford, Eugene, Corvallis, Portland, andSt. Helen) ; western Washington (Bumping Lake, Gig Harbor,Seattle, and Blaine) ; British Columbia (Errington, Courtenay, FortSt. James, and Hazleton) ; southeastern Alaska (Wrangell) ; andwestern Yukon (Carcross, Whitehorse, and Sixty-mile River).Winter range.?^^Hien the numerical abundance and extensive breed-ing range of this species are considered, it is surprising that knowl-edge concerning the winter range should be extremely limited. Itseems certain, however, that it is entirely in South America north toColombia (Antioquia) ; Venezuela (Orinoco Valley) ; and centralBrazil (Matto Grosso). East to southeastern Brazil (Matto Grosso,Sao Paulo, and Rio de Janeiro) ; Uruguay (Concepcion) ; and Argen-tina (Barracas and La Plata). South to central Argentina (La Plataand Cordova). West to Argentina (Cordova, Santiago, Tucuman,and the Gran Chaco) ; western Paraguay (Asuncion) ; western Brazil
232 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM(Chapada) ; western Ecuador (Portoviejo) ; and western Colombia(Boc;ota and Antioquia).The outline presented is for the entire species, which has, how-ever, been separated into seven subspecies, or geographic races. Thetypical eastern nighthaw^k {C. m. minor) breeds in the eastern partof the continent west to the edge of the Great Plains from Oklahomato Minnesota and in Canada to British Columbia and southernYukon; the Florida nighthawk (C. m. chapmani) nests in the Gulfand South Atlantic States north to Arkansas, southern Illinois, cen-tral Alabama, and central North Carolina and west to easternTexas; Howell's nighthawk (C. m. hmvelli) breeds in the southernpart of the Great Plains region from northeastern Utah and westernKansas south to Oklahoma, central Texas, and New Mexico; Cher-rie's nighthawk {C. m. asernensis) is found in south-central Texasand the Mexican state of Tamaulipas; Sennett's nighthawk {0. m.sennetti) occupies a breeding range in the northern Great Plainsfrom northeastern Montana and North Dakota south to easternWyoming, Nebraska, and northwestern Iowa ; the western nighthawk{G. m. henryi) breeds in southwestern Colorado, eastern Arizona,New Mexico, Chihuahua, and Sonora; and the Pacific nighthawk(C. in. hesperis) nests in the western part of the continent from\southeastern British Columbia and California east to southwesternSaskatchewan, northwestern Wyoming, and central Utah. In nocase is it passible to indicate subspecific winter ranges, but it appearsthat all forms winter together in South America.Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival in North Amer-ica are: Florida?Orlando, March 20; Palma Sola, March 29; Pen-sacola, April 8. Georgia?Savannah, April 1; Kirkwood, April 19.South Carolina?Frogmore, April 12; Columbia, April 17. NorthCarolina?Hendersonville, April 13; Raleigh, April 15. Virginia
?
Variety Mills, April 10 ; New Market, April 24. District of Colum-bia?Washington, April 18. Maryland?Mardela Springs, April 19.Pennsylvania?Philadelphia, April 23 ; Beaver, April 27. New Jersey?Morristown, May 7. New York?New York City, April 20;Ballston Spa, April 29; Rochester, ISIay 7. Connecticut?Hartford,April 24; Jewett City, May 6. Massachusetts?Harvard, April 19;Amherst, May 10. Vermont?St. Johnsbury, May 6; Rutland, May12. New Hampshire?South Manchester, May 2; Concord, May 14.Maine?Dover-Foxcroft, April 29; South Portland, May 1. NewBrunswick?St. Johns, May 13. Quebec?Quebec City, May 4;Montreal, May 9. Louisiana?New Orleans, April 8. MississippiBiloxi, April 8 ; Rodney, April 19. Arkansas?Monticello, April 11.Tennessee?Athens, April 20. Kentucky?Lexington, April 19;
EASTERN NIGHTHAWK 233Eubank, April 23. Missouri?St. Louis, April 22; Kansas City,May 2. Illinois?Chicago, April 21 ; Odin, April 27. Indiana?LaFayette, May 1; Fort Wayne, May 6. Ohio?Cleveland, April 20;Oberlin, April 21. Michigan?Sault Ste. Marie, April 30; Detroit,May 1. Ontario?Toronto, April 30; Ottawa, May 9. Iowa
?
Keokuk, April 23; National, May 6. Wisconsin?Madison, May 2;Milwaukee, May 3. Minnesota?Minneapolis, April 26; Lanesboro,May 7. Kansas?Onaga, April 30; Manhattan, May 1. NebraskaOmaha, May 8; Red Cloud, May 3. South Dakota?Vermillion,May 10 ; Forestburg, May 16. North Dakota?Grand Forks, May 1
;
Argusville, May 18. Manitoba?Margaret, May 10; Aweme, May 12.Texas?San Antonio, April 2 ; Kerrville, April 22. Colorado?Den-ver, May 4; Yuma, May 9. Wyoming?Cheyenne, May 8; Torring-ton. May 24. Montana?Great Falls, May 15; Columbia Falls, May29. Saskatchewan?Indian Head, May 18; Eastend, May 26. Ari-zona?Oracle, x4.pril 20; Santa Rita Mountains, May 1. Utah?KobeValley, May 24. Idaho?Ruper, May 18; jSIeridian, May 20. Al-berta?Flagstaff, May 27; Banff, May 28. California?Red Bluff,April 1; San Diego, April 22; Eureka, May 7. Oregon?Coos Bay,May 1; Klamath Lake, May 26. Washington?Tacoma, jNIay 22.British Columbia?Burrard Inlet, May 26; Okanagan Landing,June 1.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are : British Colum-bia?Okanagan Landing, September 15. Washington?Tacoma, Sep-tember 11. Oregon?Weston, September 9. California?San Fran-cisco, September 21. Los Angeles County, October 27. AlbertaBanff, September 17. Idaho?Meridian, September 15; Rupert, Sep-tember 16. Arizona?Chin Lee, September 25. Saskatchewan?East-end, September 15. Montana?Columbia Falls, September 28 ; GreatFalls, October 6. W^yoming?Yellowstone Park, September 15.Colorado?Yuma, September 25; Denver, October 14. Texas?Tay-lor, October 2; Palo Pinto, October 21; Corpus Christi, November6. Manitoba?Winnipeg, September 19; Aweme, September 24.North Dakota?Charlson, September 22. South Dakota?Forest-burg, September 21; Sioux Falls, October 1. Nebraska?BlueSprings, October 5 ; Red Cloud, October 10. Kansas?Topeka, Octo-ber 6; Onaga, October 22. Minnesota?Minneapolis, September 15;Lanesboro, September 30. Wisconsin?Madison, October 6. IowaNational, September 30; Keokuk, October 8. Ontario?Ottawa, Sep-tember 23; Toronto, October 11. Michigan?Detroit, September 17.Ohio?^Wauseon, September 30; Cleveland, October 8. Illinois
?
Chicago, October 7; Odin, October 14. Missouri?Concordia, Octo-ber 18. Kentucky?Eubank, October 9. Tennessee?Athens, Octo-
234 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMber 5. Arkansas?Rogers, October 4; Dardanelle, October 25.Louisiana?New Orleans, November 3. Quebec?Montreal, Septem-ber 17. New Brunswick?St. Johns, September 27. Maine?Port-land, September 26; Livermore Falls, October 2; Vermont?Rutland,September 12; St. Johnsbury, September 13. Massachusetts?Am-herst, September 27; Harvard, October 3. Connecticut?Hartford,September 26. New York?Rochester, September 28; New YorkCity, October 1. New Jersey?Morristown, October 11. Pennsyl-vania?Renovo, September 23; Philadelphia, October 15. Districtof Columbia?Washington, October 11. North Carolina?Raleigh,October 6 ; Hendersonville, October 13. South Carolina?Columbia,October 22 ; Mount Pleasant, November 9. Alabama?Autaugaville,October 11. Florida?Orlando, October 13; Pensacola, October 20.Casual records.?^With a range that covers most of the WesternHemisphere, it is not surprising that comparatively few nighthawksshould be recorded beyond the known normal limits. A specimenwas taken by an Eskimo at Allakaket, on the Koyukuk River innorthern Alaska, late in September or early in October 1923. Onewas seen at Grand Falls, Labrador, on May 31, 1895, and a specimenwas collected at Makkovik in June 1929. The species is a fairlyregidar visitor at Bermuda during migration, sometimes being verycommon.Egg dates.?CcxWiovnm: 36 records, March 20 to July 26; 18records, June 18 to July 1, indicating the height of the season.Colorado : 11 records. May 31 to July 18.Florida: 40 records, April 7 to July 17; 20 records, May 15 toJune 3.Georgia: 16 records. May 17 to July 13; 8 records. May 24 toJune 10,Kansas : 28 records. May 31 to July 7 ; 14 records, June 13 to 28.Maine : 30 records. May 24 to July 3.Michigan: 13 records. May 15 to July 19; 7 records, June 2 toJuly 3.New York : 9 records, May 29 to July 8.South Dakota : 9 records, June 10 to July 1.Texas (Brownsville region): 28 records, April 5 to June 28; 14records, May 10 to June 5.Texas (elsewhere) : 62 records, April 11 to July 29; 31 records.May 15 to June 1.
WESTERN NIGHTHAWK 235CHORDEILES MINOR HENRYI CassinWESTERN NIGHTHAWKHABITSDr. Gross has contributed such a full life history of the easternnighthawk that it hardly seems necessary to say much about the othersubspecies, as they are all much alike in general habits.The above name formerly covered most of the western races thatare now recognized as subspecifically distinct. This race is nowsupposed to be confined to the southern Rocky ISIountains and adja-cent high plains, from Colorado southward into Mexico, Chihuahua,and Sonora. Other races are recognized in the more lowland plains.Cassin (1862), in his original description of this bird, named it asa species in honor of Dr. T. Charlton Henry and said of it: "Thisbird may be distinguished from other American species by its color,which is lighter and of a different style of variegation, the prevailingtone being a dull, pale reddish and yellowish, somewhat approachingwhat is called buff or drab color. It is larger than ChordeilesvirginianusPDr. Harry C. Oberholser (1914), in comparing it with some morerecently described races, says that it is "similar to Ch^ordeiles mrgin-ianu^ howell'i., but upper surface, both ground color and markings,much darker, the latter more tawny and also coarser; lower partsposteriorly more huffy, anteriorly more rufescent." It is lighter andmore brownish than hesperis^ darker and more rufescent than sen-netti, and lighter and more brownish than virginianus.Nesting.?The nesting habits of the western nighthawk are verysimilar to those of the eastern bird. Dr. Edgar A. Mearns (1890)says of his experience with it in the mountains of Arizona : "I havenever known this species to infringe on the territory of the TexanNighthawk during the breeding season; each keeps to its ownground, the latter being confined to the region below the pines, andthe former residing in the pines and spruces, breeding in great num-bers in these limited areas. * * * Two fresh eggs were taken atFlagstaff on June 18, 1887, in a level place, bestrewn with volcanicscoria, beneath the pines."We found only the western nighthawk in the mountains and onlythe Texas nighthawk in the lower A^alleys. After I left, Mr. Wil-lard found a nest on July 9, 1922, at an elevation of 5,200 feet in theHuachuca Mountains, Arizona. The eggs were lying in the open ojigravelly soil ; just before the eggs were taken, a heavy hailstorm oc-curred, during which nearly 6 inches of hail fell ; evidently the femalehad covered the eggs during the storm, or the eggs might have beenbroken.
236 BULLETIX 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL, MUSEUMEggs.?The t^YO eggs of the western nighthawk are indistinguish-able from those of other nighthawks, showing the same variations.In shape they are between oval and elliptical-oval, usually with littleor no gloss, though some incubated eggs are quite glossy. Theground color is dull white, or grayish white, rarely "dark" or "deepolive-buff''. Usually they are quite evenly marked; some are closelysprinkled with fine dots, but oftener they are covered with smallspots, streaks, or small blotches of "olive-brown," "sepia," or"mummy brown" ; occasional eggs are marked with brighter browns,such as "russet" or "hazel" ; very often there are underlying spots orblotches of "pale Quaker drab." The measurements of 19 eggs aver-age 30.2 by 21.6 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremesmeasure 33.0 by 21.1, 30.0 by 23.1, 27.3 by 2lT5, and 27.5 by 19.7millimeters.Food.?^Irs. Bailey (1928) says of the food of the western night-hawk in New Mexico: "Ants in large proportion and also beetleswhich are the adult forms of noted pests. Specimens taken at FortStanton?caddice flies and gnats, together Avith injurious insects,including ants, plant bugs, leaf hoppers, crane flies, click beetles,wood-boring and engraver beetles, clover root weevils, and nutweevils."Beal, McAtee, and Kalmbach (1916) say that these birds are "soexpert in flight that no insects can escape them. They sweep up intheir capacious mouths everything from the largest moths anddragon flies to the tiniest ants and gnats, and in this way sometimesgather most remarkable collections of insects. Several stomachshave contained fifty or more different kinds, and the number of indi-viduals may run into the thousands."Dr. Mearns (1890) writes:In our summer tamp, near the summit of the Mogollou Mountains, a smallbeetle was annoyingly abundant, flying into our tents in great numbers duringthe day, and at niglit swarming around our log fires. As the twilight gathered,hundreds of these Nighthawks appeared upon the scene, preying upon thetroublesome insects. Careless of our presence at the fires and of the noisyhilarity of camp, they flitted through the smoke with astonishing freedom fromdiffidence, capturing myriads of the hated beetles, as they passed and repassedabove, between, and around us, until their flickering forms were as familiaras the stirring of the pine boughs overhead, and the fanning of their wingsalmost as little heeded.Field Tnurks.?There are two other races of this species, hesperisand howelli.) that are likely to be seen within the range of the westernnighthawk on migrations ; these three races are not easy to recognizein life, though henryi is lighter than hesperis and darker thanhowelli.The western nighthawk can be distinguished in flight from theTexas nighthawk by the position of the white wing band; in the
FLORIDA NIGHTHAWK 237
western nighthawk this band is about halfway between the bend ofthe wing and the tip ; in the Texas nighthawk the white wing bandis nearer the tip than the bend of the wing.Fall.?Mrs. Bailey (1928) says that after the breeding season andin the fall the Avestern nighthawks range up to higher altitudes inthe mountains, even as high as 12,600 feet. "They all desert theState for the winter, beginning their southward journey soon afterthe middle of summer. They are most numerous in migration dur-ing August and have nearly all left [New Mexico] by the end ofSeptember. * * * On the return journey in the spring theyare among the very latest migrants, seldom reacliing northern NewMexico before May 10."CHORDEILES MINOR CHAPMANI CouesFLORIDA NIGHTHAWKHABITSThis small race occupies the southern Atlantic and Gulf States,from North Carolina to eastern Texas. In general appearance itdiffers but little from the eastern nighthawk, except in size. Dr. H.C. Oberholser (1914) characterizes it as "like Chordeiles virginianasvirginianus, but decidedly smaller; upper parts averaging a littlemore mottled and spotted with whitish and buffy, particularly onback, wings, and scapulars, and the ground color averaging slightlyless deeply blackish (more grayish or brownish) ; posterior lowerparts usually more purely white."Nighthawks are tender birds and spend their winters in SouthAmerica, from Colombia to northern Argentina. Even in Floridathey usually do not arrive until some time in April. Arthur H.Howell (1932) says of the haunts of the Florida race: "The FloridaNighthawk frequents open pine forests, old fields, pastures, prairies,cultivated lands, marshes, and ocean beaches. Although most activeearly in the morning and late in the evening, the birds frequentlymay be seen flying about in search of food in bright sunshine."Nesting.?Mr. Howell (1932) says on this subject: "The two eggsare deposited on the ground, with no semblance of a nest, in an opensituation, often in a pasture, broomsedge field, or wood lot, or inpalmetto scrub in open forest or on the prairie, or sometimes amongsparse grasses on or near the ocean beaches."Major Bendire (1895) says that Dr. William L. Ralph took sev-eral sets of eggs in Putnam County, Fla., and that here "duringthe breeding season at least, the Florida Nighthawk frequents mainlylow, flat pine woods, especially such as have recently been burntover, the eggs generally lying on the bare ground. Sandy soil seemsto be preferred for nesting places. One set of eggs was found by
238 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMhim under a small orange tree in an orange grove on the side of asandy hill; three others were taken in flat pine woods, and in oneinstance the eggs laid on a few fragments of charcoal left where afallen tree had been partly burnt, between the remaining part ofthe tree and the stump, about 3 feet from each,"On Cat Island, off the coast of Mississippi, I found the Floridanighthawk "very common in the extensive forest of tall, long-leafpines, with which the island is largely covered. Here, on June 16,1910, I saw two pairs with young, the old birds fluttering along theground to toll us away from their little ones; and I found onenest with two eggs on the bare, sandy ground among the pines.The only other nests of this subspecies that I have seen were onsome low, sandy islands in Galveston Bay, Tex., where several pairswere breeding on May 4, 1923 ; two nests- were seen, the eggs lyingin slight hollows in the bare sand, in such situations as might bechosen by least terns. In some of the southern cities this nighthawkhas developed the habit of nesting on the flat, gravel roofs of build-ings, after the manner of the species elsewhere.Eggs.?The eggs of the Florida nighthawk are similar to those ofthe eastern nighthawk but will average somewhat more heavilymarked with darker colors and are somewhat smaller. The measure-ments of 38 eggs average 28.86 by 21.23 millimeters; the eggs show-ing the four extremes measure 31.75 by 21.59, 31.59 by 22.61, 26.42by 20.32, and 28.20 by 20.10 millimeters.The habits of the Florida nighthawk are not essentially differentfrom those of its northern relative; the two are not easily recogniz,-able in life; and the two forms are seen on migrations all throughthe Southern States, where heavy flights often occur. R. J. Long-street noted an unusually heavy flight at Daytona Beach on May 11,1926; "in about an hour, from 6 to 7 p. m., he estimated that about3,000 birds passed north over the beach" (Howell, 1932).Heavy flights also occur on the fall migration, mainly duringAugust, when formerly large numbers of "bullbats," as they werelocally called, were shot for food or sport. Dr. Chapman (1888),writing of Gainesville, Fla., in 1888, said: "'Bullbat,' or as it is morefrequently termed, 'Bat,' shooting is here a popular pastime, greatnumbers being killed for food, and in August, when the birds havegathered in flocks, favorite fields may be occupied at nightfall by asmany as a dozen shooters." This bad practice is now outlawed, andvery wisely, as the small bodies of the nighthawks have very littlefood value, and the nighthawk is one of our most useful birds ; it hasno objectionable food habits and is so valuable as a destroyer of trouble-some and injurious insects, such as grasshoppers, beetles, gnats,mosquitoes, and the destructive cotton-boll weevil, that it ought to berigidly protected.
SENNETT'S NIGHTHAWK 239CHORDEILES MINOR SENNETTI CouesSENNETT'S NIGHTHAWKHABITSThe nighthawks of the northern plains were given the above nameby Dr. Elliott Coues (1888), who gave as the characters of thesubspecies "silvery grayish-white predominating above, the whitebelow greatly in excess of the narrow, irregular or broken, dark bars,and little or no rufous anywhere." It is a bird of the treeless plainsand prairies, ranging from northern North Dakota and northeasternMontana south to eastern Wyoming, northwestern Iowa, and north-ern Nebraska. It migrates southward through Oklahoma andTexas, and probably to South America.F. A. Patton (1924) says of its haunts in South Dakota: "TheSennetts Night Hawk, is a bird of a barren, isolated region, movingahead and away from settlements, to a thinly settled section, pre-ferring a dry, almost a desert region."Through the eighties and up until about 1890 this bird could befound much over the entire State of South Dakota. At present itsrange is confined to that part of the state from the Missouri Riverto the Black Hills, frequenting the Bad Lands section, well up in thefoot hills, preferring barren knolls and stony places. Never have Iseen the bird or its eggs in any way concealed by grass or vegetation."Nesting.?The same observer writes: "A favorite nesting place isin a cattle or horse trail over a stony knoll destitute of vegetationand what sets I find are found mostly by the bird flying from be-neath my saddle horse. * * *
"The eggs are laid on a rock or stones. No depression or forma-tion towards a nest whatever, the eggs are plain gray in color andso blend with the rock that though they may be almost at one's feetare difficult to see."Eggs.?The Sennett's nighthawk lays two eggs, the usual numberfor the species, which are practically indistinguishable from those ofthe eastern nighthawk, though they may average a trifle paler withsomewhat smaller markings. The measurements of 9 eggs averageSl.l by 22.3 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure33.8 by 21.6, 31.5 by 23.3, 29.3 by 23.1, and 29.6 by 21.5 millimeters.Young.?Ernest T. Seton (1890) made an interesting observationon two young nighthawks, which were apparently about three daysold and still retained the shell tooth on the tip of the bill ; he says
:
I gently touched one of them, whereupon it crouched down more closely tothe ground; but its companion, rising, hissed with open beak and snappedsavagely at my fingers. On being further teased they ran off, exactly in themanner of young ducks, with outstretched wings and with neck and body atan angle of 45 degrees. After running a few feet they stopped, squatted asbefore, and closed their eyes. This they repeated several times, but at best
240 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthey only made little progress, and each time on being Qvertaken the bold onewas always ready to fight. * * *In the light of these observations it seems likely that in some of the casesin, which the Night-hawks are supposed to have carried off their young, thelatter had really run from danger, or were led away by the parent birds.Plumages.?Dr. Louis B. Bishop (1896) has called attention to thefact that the females of this race do not show the characters of therace as well as the males. He collected a series of 13 birds in NorthDakota, of which he writes : "Three females from the same localitytaken in June and July?one of them a breeding bird taken with atypical male and two eggs?are similar but with the upper partsdarker and the entire lower parts tinged with buff, which becomesochraceous-buff on the throat. Two other female Nighthawks fromthe same region, one taken on June 11, and the other with two eggson June 24, are quite different, the prevailing tint of the entireplumage, except the greater wing-coverts, wings and tail, beingochraceous-buff. These birds might readily be referred to henry i^but all the males taken or seen during the breeding season wereunmistakably semietti.''''He says further: "The pale colors of the male protect him admira-bly, hannonizing with the dull gray of the fences and rocks, perchedon which he passes the day, while the darker colors of the femalerender her less conspicuous when seated over her eggs on the blacksoil."Behamor.?F. A. Patton (1924) says that "these birds will perchon a hot rock in the blazing sun the hottest summer day, the rock sohot one cannot hold a. hand on it. You would think they wouldcook, they however seem stupid, they seem to lack the pep of otherNight Hawks, to get out and soar at twilight, but are a quiet re-tiring bird, and I have known them on a hot day to let one approachclose enough to strike them with a stick."CHORDEILES MINOR HESPERIS GrinnellPACIFIC NIGHTHAWKPlates 34, 35HABITSWliat was formerly part of the range of the western nighthawk{henryi) is now assigned to this more recently described race. Ac-cording to the 1931 Check-list, it "breeds from southeastern BritishColumbia to southwestern Saskatchewan, central Montana, centralUtah, and northwestern Wyoming south along the Pacific coast tonorthern California and in the Sierra Nevada south to the SanBernardino Mountains, southern California."Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1905a) named this race and described it as"most nearly resembling Ch. v. virginiamis, but:?outer surface of
PACIFIC NIGHTHAWK 241
closed wing grayer toned; lower tail-coverts and feathers of bellyregion more narrowly and sparsely dark-barred; and, in the male,white patches on throat, wings, and tail more extensive." He re-marks further:In tone of coloration the male is much darker than in either Ch. v. sennetti orCh. V. henryi. Altho somewhat lighter than virginianus, this is in the directionof pale gray and white rather than ochraceous. The extended mottling of theotherwise blackish feathers dorsally is responsible for this lighter tone, andespecially notable is the extensive silvery gray mottling on the wing coverts.Yet this dorsal tone does not nearly reach the paleness of sennetti. * * *The [white] patch on the outer primary invades across the shaft to includethe outer web ; and the same is observable of the patches on the tail-feathers.* * * The female of hesperis is gray rather than tawny, and is thus atonce distinguishable from the female of henryi.Nesting.?Major Bendire (1895) writes:A set of eggs of this subspecies was found by me on July 3, 1875, in thefoothills of the Blue Mountains, some 6 miles northeast of Camp Harney,Oregon, laid among some pebbles on the bare ground under a little sage bush.The sitting bird allowed me almost to touch it, and was very reluctant toabandon its eggs, which were but slightly incubated. On my approach, itrufQed its feathers and emitted a hissing sound, resembling somewhat the spit-ting of a cat when mad. Their favorite nesting places in that vicinity were thecrests of gravelly ridges, always selecting a well-drained spot, where the rainscould not chill the young or eggs. Bare, rocky table-lands are also frequentlyresorted to for similar purposes, and less often the flat tops of bowlders.Extensive burnt tracts also furnish favorite abiding places for them in themore northern portions of their range; in fact, in such localities they arefully as abundant as on the more open sagebrush plains.Henry J. Kust (1911) tells of a nest that he found near Coeurd'Alene, Idaho, in an open space in a cornfield, where the scatteredcornstalks and a few weeds furnished scanty shade for the young.D. E. Brown tells me that "on the prairies of Pierce County [Wash-ington] the bird nests on small patches of gravel, where the twoeggs blend perfectly and the bird itself is hard to see. In KingCounty, I find most of the nests in burnt-over sections. The eggsare usually placed among the remains of a rotten and charred log,where both egg and bird blend with the surroundings."A. Dawes DuBois has sent me some notes on three nests found byhim in Flathead County, Mont.; in one of these the eggs lay on athick bed of coarse moss which covered the rocky ground for somedistance around it; this was on the top of a high foothill. Of thisnest he says: "The bird was sitting when I approached, July 16.When she saw me coming she closed her eyes and appeared to beasleep. By covering the large shiny eyeballs with the lusterless lidsthe nighthawk makes herself much more a part of her surroundings.The eyes are not shut tight; a narrow slit is left through whichto peek. While I was in the tent blind, placed near the nest, her178223?40 22
242 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
eyes were usually wide open; but if I slipped out at the rear andlooked around the corner of the tent she slowly closed her eyes untilonly a narrow slit remained."Dr. Grinnell (1908) found the Pacific nighthawk "to be a com-mon species of the Boreal and upper Transition zones" in the SanBernardino Mountains. On June 18 he flushed a female from hertwo eggs at an altitude of about 9,000 feet. "These were laid on thebare ground in an open place among the pines. Nothing but a fewpine needles separated them from the granite gravel."Eggs.?The eggs of the Pacific nighthawk are similar to those ofthe eastern nighthawk, but will average somewhat paler. The meas-urements of 38 eggs average 30.23 by 21.6 milluneters ; the eggs show-ing the four extremes measure 32.5 by 21.8, 31.5 by 23.1, and 24.6 by19.0 millimeters.Food.?Dv. Grinnell (1908) says: "A specimen shot at dusk, July4, 1906, was skinned at 11 o'clock the next day. The capaciousthroat and gullet were found to be crammed with large winged whiteants. By actual count there were forty-three of these and manyof them were still alive, although it was at least fifteen hours sincethey had been captured by the nighthawk."'Like other nighthawks this subspecies feeds mainly during thedusk of early morning and evening, but all observers seem to agreethat it hunts largely during the day, even in bright sunlight. Itsfood consists of a great variety of insects, such as beetles, moths,ants, grasshoppers, and other flying insects.Voice. This nighthawk indulges in all the characteristic notes ofthe species, but Mr. DuBois mentions a note that he heard on August20, which is somewhat different ; he writes : "For two weeks or moresome of the nighthawks flying over the hill by the ranger stationhave been uttering a click-click-click-clich?rapidly repeated andcontinued at considerable length. It is somewhat like a series ofhigh-pitched quacks. Other nighthawks, flying with these birds,are calling the characteristic peenk at the usual intervals. I sup-pose the rapidly uttered quacks to be the notes of the young."CHORDEILES MINOR HOWELLI OberholserHOWELL'S NIGHTHAWKPlate 36HABITSThe 1931 Check-list gives the range of this subspecies as "southernGreat Plains and central Kocky Mountain regions; from Wyomingto middle Texas, Colorado, Oklahoma, middle and western Kansas,northeastern Utah, northeastern New Mexico, and southwesternNebraska, casually to North Dakota."
CHERRIE'S NIGHTHAWK 243In naming this bird in honor of his friend Arthur H. Howell, Dr.Harry C. Oberholser (1914) characterized it as "somewhat likeChordeUes virginianus sennetti, but male with upper parts morerufescent and somewhat paler, the dark brown color more rufescent,less grayish, and the light markings much more buffy or ochraceous
;
posterior lower parts more buffy, and the anterior dark brown areasmore rufescent."Robert B. Rockwell writes to me that this nighthawk is commonin the region about Colorado Springs and that he has seen it imvarious other parts of Colorado, on the plains, in the valleys, andin the mountains up to 10,000 feet altitude.George Finlay Simmons (1925) says that it reaches about itssouthern limit in the vicinity of Austin, Tex., and that its habitatincludes "the plains; barren fields; cowtrails in pastures; roadsidesand along railroad tracks; barren gravelly ridges, and gravelly sur-faces in the open, barren hills; backland plowed fields; rocky hill-sides; edges of woodlands; flat, gravelly roofs of office buildings intown."I cannot find anything to indicate that the habits of Howell'snighthawk differ essentially from those of the other neighboringsubspecies. Mr. Simmons (1925) says of the fall migration in Texas:
"Gathers in flocks in late summer, mid-July to third week in August;migration begins early in August, and by the end of that month thelocal breeding birds have departed; hundreds pass through, August10 to August 30, but the last have not gone until late in October.During one fall migration flocks containing as many as 200 to 300birds were observed on the open prairies northeast of Austin. Dur-ing both migration seasons the various subspecies of nighthawksmix up on their way to and from South America, so that identifica-tion of migrants is hopeless without a specimen in hand."The eggs are similar to those of other nighthawks. The measure-ments of 26 eggs average 30.2 by 21.7 millimeters ; the eggs showingthe four extremes measure 33.0 by 21.9, 31.7 by 23.4, and 26.3 by 20.2millimeters. CHORDEILES MINOR ASERRIENSIS CherrieCHERRIE'S NIGHTHAWKHABITSGeorge K. Cherrie (1896) described this race from a bird collectedon November 2, 1893, in the valley of the River Aserri, Costa Rica.It is a small, pale race, about the size of chapmani. Nothing wasknown about its distribution at that time, but it has since been foundto be the breeding form of southern Texas, from San Antonio south-ward and into Tamaulipas.
244 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMDr. H. C. Oberholser (1914) describes it as "resembling Chordeilesvirginianus sennetti^ but decidedly smaller; general tone of upperparts lighter and more ochraceous, the light areas more buffy orochraceous (less grayish or whitish) and somewhat more extensive;and the dark brown areas of anterior lower surface less grayish."He remarks further: "This heretofore unrecognized race seems tobe in color most nearly like Chordeiles virginianus sennetti^ thoughin this respect also near Chordeiles virginianus howelli and probablyin reality most closely resembling this form, which it adjoinsgeographically."Mr. Cherrie's type specimen seems to have been lost; at least,neither he nor Dr. Oberholser have been able to locate it, but thefull description of the type convinced Dr. Oberholser that "there isno doubt that Mr. Cherrie had in hand a male nighthaAvk of thevirginianus style in fully grown juvenal or first autumn plumage,not adult, as he supposed. Allowing for this immaturity, the char-acters that Mr. Cherrie gives are just those distinguishing the small,pale race which summers in southern Texas."The nesting habits, eggs, food, and behavior of this nighthawkprobably do not differ materially from those of other races living insimilar environment. The measurements of 43 eggs average 29.3 by21.4 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 32.5by 22.5, 27.1 by 21.3, and 28.4 by 20.6 millimeters.CHORDEILES ACUTIPENNIS TEXENSIS LawrenceTEXAS NIGHTHAWKPlates 37-39HABITSThe Texas nighthawk is a large, pale race of the species Chordeilesacutipennis, which is divided into additional races in Central andSouth America. Our 1931 Check-list states that it "breeds in theLower Austral Zone from north-central California, southern Nevada,southern Utah, and central Texas south to about lat. 30? in Lower Cali-fornia, and to south-central Mexico."The Texas nighthawk is a common summer resident in the warmerportions of the Southwestern United States; we found it generallydistributed throughout the arid desert regions of Arizona, along theriver bottoms and dry washes, and, in the more fertile regions, aboutthe sloughs and coursing over the alfalfa fields, H. S. Swarth(1920) writes: "In all the valley towns of southern Arizona theTexas nighthawk is a familiar sight. It has not, as yet, acquired thehabit of its eastern relative of nesting upon the flat roofs of build-ings, but throughout the summer the birds may be seen in numbers
TEXAS NIGHTHAWK 245
at dusk, hawking about, low over the houses. In walking about onthe desert one is sure to flush Texas nighthawks from their restingplaces under the bushes, where they usually remain during thedaytime."In Texas Dr. J. C. Merrill (1878) found it most plentiful justoutside of Brownsville, and he discovered several sets of eggs withinthe fort. In the San Bernardino Mountains, Calif., according toDr. Grinnell (1908), "the Texas nighthawk is a characteristic breed-ing bird of the Lower Sonoran zone, but like several other species ofthe same zone wanders up even into Transition during the late sum-mer." And farther north, "in the Yosemite section it was observedonly at our lowest stations, west of the foothills" (Grinnell andStorer, 1924).Courtship.?Mr. Swarth (1920) says: "The male Texas nighthawkperforms no such spectacular evolutions as the eastern nighthawkdoes in the breeding season, but he has a comparable, though lesserperformance, usually given when in pursuit of the female. Bothbirds flying low over the bushes, the male repeatedly utters a low,chuckling sound, 'tuc-tuc-tuc-a-tuc-tuc?c-r-rooo,' a rolling note, thefinale very dove-like in effect. While uttering this call the wingsare held stiffly extended downward. Then, in ordinary flight, thereis repeatedly given a long drawn, nasal 'w-a-ng.' "Grinnell and Storer (1924) give the following account of it:It was the height of the nesting season [May 5] and the birds were courtingactively. A male, distinguished by the larger and whiter bands on his wingsand the more conspicuously white chin patch, was pursuing a female. Themale always followed, but at close range, rarely more than two lengths behindthe female. Occasionally a second male joined in the pursuit, but evidentlywith only partial interest, for he frequently circled off by himself. Less oftenthe two male birds pursued one another, weaving an irregular course up anddown, in and out, but never rising much if any over 50 feet above the ground.The progress through the air was easy yet swift, a few strokes of the longwings suflBcing to carry the birds through a long glide. Often as they passedclose over the observer the barred pattern of the under surface was clearlyvisible, as was also the broad subterminal band of white on the lower sideof the tail. While the males were on the wing their low crooning trills wereheard almost continually, swelling and diminishing as the birds approachedor departed. When they rested on the ground between flights they gave thesame notes, prolonged but also with longer inteiTals of quiet. One trill lasied2.5 seconds and another fully a minute. These notes remind one of the quaver-ing call of the Screech Owl save that they are longer continued, on one key,and uttered in almost the same cadence throughout.Alden H. Miller (1937) adds the following observation: "The con-trast in degree of whiteness in wing and throat patches of males andfemales was at once evident. That this sexual difference apparentlywas recognized by the birds and that it was specifically accentuatedby the actions of the male were facts new to me. As a male swung
246 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMinto line behind a female, his white throat was displayed so that, asthe pair flew toward me, the brownish white throat of the femalewas scarcely noticeable, whereas that of the male was a conspicuouswhite beard. The impression was gained that the feathers of thethroat of the male were lifted and that the whole throat area wasexpanded. Usually, perhaps always, this 'flashing' of the throatpatch was accompanied by vocal notes."Nesting.?The nesting habits of the Texas nighthawk are no moreelaborate than are those of its relatives in the mtTior group ; the eggsare laid on the bare ground, without any attempt at nest building oreven scooping out a hollow, in some open sandy or gravelly spot, andusually with little or no cover to shade them from the full glare ofthe sun. We were too early for eggs while I was in Arizona, but.after I left, my companion, Frank Willard, found two nests in PimaCounty on June 10, 1922; each was on the ground at the foot of agreasewood bush; he says that after the female had been flushedfrom one of the nests the male attempted to drive her back onto theeggs.Bendire (1895) says that he has "found its eggs on the parchedgravelly mesas of southern Arizona, miles from the nearest water.Their favorite breeding resorts here are dry, barren table-lands, thesides of canyons, and the crests of rocky hills." Dr. Merrill (1878)says that in Texas the eggs "are usually deposited in exposed situa-tions, among sparse chaparral, on ground baked almost as hard asbrick by the intense heat of the sun. One set of eggs was placedon a small piece of tin, within a foot or two of a frequented path.The female sits close, and when flushed flies a few feet and speedilyreturns to its eggs. They make no attempt to decoy an intruder away.I have ridden up to within five feet of a female on her eggs, dis-mounted, tied my horse, and put my hand on the bird before shewould move."Robert S. Woods has sent me some photographs (pis. 38, 39) ofa nest that he found on April 27, 1923, in the San Gabriel Wash,in Los Angeles County, Calif., where he says this nighthawk is acommon summer resident; the eggs, he says (Woods, 1924b)
?
were deposited in a gravelly area covered with Iovf second grov^^th, mostlydeer-weed or vpild broom {Syrmatium glahrum). It may be observed in thephotograph that the gravel, which was here loose because of previous levelingof the ground, had been smoothed by the removal of the larger pebbles over aspace such as would be covered by the body of the nighthawk. The few stonesscattered over it were probably rolled there by the movements of the bird inrising or alighting after the eggs had been laid. * * * On one hot day theeggs were moved back several inches into the partial shade of the nearestshrub, being restored to the original position after the warm weather hadpassed. The mother would remain on her eggs until approached within perhaps
TEXAS NIGHTHAWK 247ten feet, but after being once disturbed she would not return as long as anyperson or suspicious object remained anywhere in the vicinity. The otherparent, if present in the neighborhood, showed no interest in the family affairs.In the Fresno district, according to John G. Tyler (1913), thegreat majority of the Texas nighthawks nest in the vineyards; fourof the five nests observed by him were in vineyards, either at thebase of a vine or on bare ground between the vines; the fifth was
"on soft ground at base of a sunflower growing in a field of melons."Mrs. Bailey (1928) says that "at Brownsville, Texas, hundreds ofTexas Nighthawks are said to be found in the city nearly throughoutthe year nesting on the flat roofs of the adobe houses."Eggs.?I cannot do better than to quote Bendire's (1895) descrip-tion of the eggs, as follows
:
They are exceedingly difficult to detect on account of their similarity incolor to their general surroundings, which usually harmonize very closely.The shell is strong, close grained, and rather glossy, while in shape the eggsare more variable than those of other Nighthawks, ranging from oval toelliptical oval, and again to elliptical ovate. The ground color varies frompale gray (a sort of clay color) to pale creamy white, with a faint pinkish tint.This latter phase of coloration is rather unusual however. The whole surfaceis minutely marbled, speckled, or rather peppered, with fine dots of differentshades of grays, lilac, and a few darker and coarser markings of fawn color,slate, and drab. Occasionally a specimen is found which, to the naked eye,appears entirely unmarked ; but on more careful examination a few darkspots, mere pin points, can readily be noticed. They are much lighter coloredthan the average eggs of our other Nighthawks, and readily distinguishedfrom these on this account, as well as from their smaller size.The measurements of 52 eggs in the United States National Mu-seum average 27.05 by 19.53 millimeters; the eggs showing the fourextremes measure 29.72 by 21.08, 27.18 by 21.59, 24.89 by 19.05, and25.65 by 18.29 millimeters.To^Ti.^.?Carroll D. Scott writes to me that one of the favoritepastimes of his childhood was playing hide and seek with youngTexas nighthawks: "The sport on our part was to find the babybirds squatting on the ground, almost invisible, and to see themother trail away, endeavoring to decoy us by the broken-wing ruse.The next day we were faced with the same puzzle?Where were thenestlings? For they were always somewhere else. We alwaysfound them again, 20, 50, or 100 feet away. We wondered if theparents carried them in their wide mouths, or shoved them over theground, inch by inch, or flew with them on their backs."Several other observers have noticed this same behavior; youngnighthawks have moved, or been moved, for greater or lesserdistances, either because they had been disturbed or to take advan-tage of some slight shade from the hot sun. Mr. Woods (1924b)found that young birds less than three days old "could open their
248 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
eyes and crawl over the ground at a very fair rate of speed." Dr.Gayle Pickwell and Miss Emily Smith (1938), who made extensivestudies of several nests of this nighthawk, found that the youngcould move by crawling haltingly, to the call of the female, as muchas 6 or 8 inches when not over 48 hours old ; these young birds werehatched between May 25 and 27; on May 29 they had moved 8 feetmore, and on June 2, when about 8 days old, they were found 56yards from the nesting site.The same observers learned that the period of incubation was 18days in one case and 19 days in another. Incubation was performed,during the daytime at least, by the female alone, but both sexes didtheir share in feeding the young.All feedings w^re by means of regurgitation, wherein the bill of the parentwas thrust into the open mouth of the young, the food brought forth byperistalsis in the regurgitation. Each feeding was terminated by a violentagitation of the heads of both the bird supplying the food and the one beingfed. * * * Feedings noted were all creipuscular, at 9 p. m. or earlier, oragain at 4 : 30 a. m. or later. * * *The protective behavior of the young had the following elements: (1) aslong as the young were brooded, concealment by the parent bird sufficed asprotection for them : (2) flushing the parent would leave the young incrouch-concealment wherein they supplied their own self-concealment throughcoloration, which became strikingly protective as their feathers advanced
;
(3) almost from the beginning these precocial young were able to run to cover,however haltingly, though this cover consisted of the female bird who causedthem to run to her by her calling; (4) not until they were about three weeksold were they able to substitute flying for running; (5) the astonishing methodof protective behavior presented by the nighthawks was their intimidationdisplay which was first presented when they were approximately 12 days old.Plumages.?Dr. Oberholser (1914) has given us full descriptionsof the various plumages of this species ; of the downy young nestling,he says: "Upper surface fawn color, clouded or obscurely mottledwith mars brown ; lower parts fawn color, unmarked, but paling onthe median portion of breast and abdomen. Very young birds, bothmale and female, before they are full gi-own, are above very palebuff, finely and sparingly spotted with black, and vermiculated withsilvery gray; and below, pale buff, with narrow widely spaced barsof dusky or blackish."In the Juvenal plumage, the sexes are unlike; he describes themas follows
:
In this plumage both sexes are decidedly lighter and more closely and evenlymottled than in the adult, particularly above. In the male the upper partsare also more uniform, with more ochraceous or gray and less black ; the tailand wing-quills are broadly tipped with buff; the light bars of the tail aremore deeply buff ; the white throat-patch is more buffy ; the lower surfaceduller, more ochraceous, more uniform, less distinctly and less broadly barred.The subterminal bar on the tail is white, about as in the adult.
TEXAS NIGHTHAWK 249The Juvenal female differs from the adult female much as above detailedfor the male, but somewhat less so. She is similar to the juvenal male, buthas the light spot on the primaries smaller and more deeply buff or ochraceousbuff, instead of vphite or slightly bufEy ; the light throat-patch more deeplybuff, never whitish ; and she lacks the subterminal white bar on the tail.What he calls a first autumn plumage, which is also the plumageof the first winter, "is practically the same in both male and femaleas that of the adults so far as the contour feathers are concerned, andotherwise differs only in having whitish or buffy tips on the pri-maries, secondaries, and rectrices. These light tips mostly wear offbefore the next molt, but usually persist sufficiently, at least on theshortest secondaries, to serve for the discrimination of year-oldbirds." He says of the molts
:
From the fugitive natal plumage the young bird molts directly into thejuvenal plumage, growing the while, so that at least by the time, often before,it has attained full size of body and wings, the juvenal pliynage is complete.Then by a practically continuous molt, usually in September, it again changesits contour feathers, but retains the remiges and rectrices. The combinationplumage of the first autumn is worn apparently until the following summer,when the regular sequence of adult molt is begun. The adult of this speciesmolts but once a year, usually between the last of July and the middle ofSeptember, most individuals chiefly in August, during which period all of thefeathers, including remiges and rectrices, undergo a renewal.Food.?The food of the Texas nighthawk consists of a variety offlying insects, which it scoops up in its capacious mouth while on thewing; almost anything in this line seems to be acceptable. Mrs.Bailey (1928) writes: "Their food consists of almost any insects thatmay be out when they are. The stomach of one had a mass of mosqui-toes and a small bug. Another contained one or more ground beetles,injurious click beetles, large leaf chafers, leaf hoppers, and greenplant bugs, together with 150 winged ants (Merrill MS)." Dr.Grinnell (1908) says that one collected in the San BernardinoMountains "contained in its stomach four of the immense seven-lined June beetles." A. J. van Kossem (1927) made the followingobservations on the feeding habits of this species in Salvador
:
The Texas Nighthawks were more varied in feeding habits than any of theothers. During the winter they were very common in favorable lowland locali-ties, and shortly after sundown would appear in hundreds, flying high andtoward the sunset. A little later in the short interval of dusk, they flew muchlower and the general direction was opposite to that taken at first. We sup-posed them to be working back to the localities from which they first started,feeding as they went. It was some time before we found out anything oftheir nocturnal activities, for their eyes gave only a pale green reflection, whichwas easily overlooked and not visible beyond a few feet. Many spiders gavea much brighter glow than these nighthawks, and only by careful search insuitable places, could we find them. All the individuals which we found afterdark were on the ground in the open. Chordeiles acutipcnnis therefore hunts
250 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthrough three air levels, high in the air at sundown, closer to the ground atdusk, and on the ground after dark. Because of this versatility, its food mustnecessarily be more varied, and, because obtained from three strata of insectlife instead of one or two, must be more regularly plentiful.A. W. Anthony (1892) says that "a large part of his bill of fareis obtained by jumping up from the ground and catching passinginsects, without taking wing?a habit also noticed in PhalaenoptilusPBehavior.?RohQvt S. Woods (1924b) writes:The flight of the Texas Nighthawk gives the impression of ease to a greaterdegree than that of any other of our smaller birds. While not slow, it appearsleisurely and is frequently varied by periods of gliding. The large expanse ofwung gives great buoyancy and the bird seems to float through the air almostwithout effort, while a turn of the wing serves to change its course at anabrupt angle. The Texas Nighthawk flies at a much lower altitude than isthe usual habit of swallows and swifts. While hunting it never ascends toany great height, and often skims close to the ground, passing among thevegetation. In the evening its activities begin about sunset or earlier, usuallyceasing before dark, and in the morning it is apt to remain in the air forsome time after sunrise. It may sometimes be seen hunting at mid-day,especially in cloudy weather. The nighthawk displays some curiosity andoften swoops down within a few feet of one's head. Even at that distancethe flight is entirely inaudible.Major Bendire (1895) says: "Its flight is equally as graceful asthat of the other Nighthawks, but it rarely soars as high as tlieformer, and generally skims just over the tops of the bushes or closeto the surface of the water. In fact, I have repeatedly seen themtouch the surface, as if drinking or catching insects, probably thelatter." Mr. Dawson (1923) has seen them drinking "hen-fashion"from a waterhole or dipping on the wing to drink from a largerbody of water.Texas nighthawks have favorite roosting places, to which they re-turn regularly for their daytime rest. Near our camp in the valleyof the San Pedro Eiver, Ariz., one roosted regularly, apparentlysound asleep all day, sitting lengthwise on a horizontal limb of alarge willow. Ned Hollister (1908) says that about Needles, Calif.,
"the nighthawks here spend the day in the thickets of arrow-weedfrom which I frequently flushed them." Grinnell and Storer (1924),referring to the Yosemite region, write : "Each individual nighthawkseemed to have a favorite resting place to which it returned regularly.This was on the gravel, at the side of, and partially shaded by, a lupineor other bush. The male bird of the pair mentioned was seen to re-turn to the neighborhood of such a spot time and time again, and uponflushing him directly and thus ascertaining its exact location, the sitewas found to be marked by an accumulation of droppings of character-istic form?each a small spiralled mass composed chiefly of finelytriturated insect remains,"Voice.?Mr. Woods (1924b) writes:
TEXAS NIGHTHAWK 251In general the vocul utterances of tbe Texas Nighthawk are of three kinds
:
first a low soft cluck, repeated slowly ; second, a louder, querulous, nasal cry,repeated more rapidly and used when two or more of the birds are together
;
third, a series of throaty staccato notes delivered in monotone so rapidly asto be almost continuous, sustained for several seconds at a time and resumedafter a short pause as if for breath. This trill is usually given from theground, but sometimes also while flying. [The foregoing sentence was in-correctly printed and was revised in a letter to the author.] It is used onlywhen the birds are undisturbed and is not ordinarily heard at close range.While the tone is soft, the carrying power is great, and sometimes on summerevenings when several of the nighthawks are about, the air seems filled withan indefinable vibration.Alden H, Miller (1937) recognizes four main types of vocal notes:(1) Long-continued guttural trills, well characterized by Dawson as am-phibian-like, but also remindful of the sound of a motor at a distance ; (2)a twing like the picking of a banjo (Dawson) or, more prosaically, like thetwang of a jew's-harp; (3) staccato clucks; and (4) melodious trills of vary-ing intensity, similar to those of western screech owls (Grinnell and Storer),except for cadence. The twang and melodious trill may follow one anotherin rapid succession. The guttural trill seemed not to enter into the courtshipon the wing. I could not be certain that this note was given on the wing atall; its source always seemed stationary. The melodious trill was occasion-ally given by birds perched in mesquite trees in the heat of midday.M. W. deLaubenfels (1925) heard an unusual note, both in Arizonaand again in Texas, which he described as "a loud ringing whistle
?
whee-ee^y-poor-will. The notes were not at all like those of the
"Whip-poor-will, which are repressed and muffled by comparison."Dr. Merrill (1878) says: "The notes are a mewing call, and a verycurious call that is with difficulty described. It is somewhat like thedistant and very rapid tapping of a large woodpecker, accompaniedby a humming sound, and it is almost impossible to tell in whatdirection or at what distance the bird is that makes the noise. Boththese notes are uttered on the wing or on the ground, and by bothsexes."Field marks.?The most conspicuous character by which the Texasnighthawk can be distinguished from the nighthawks of the minorgroup is the position of the white band (buffy in the female) in thewing; in 7ninor this is about midway between the bend of the wingand the tip; in acutipennis it is nearer the tip than the bend. TheTexas nighthawk is also somewhat smaller, rather browner, and hasa somewhat shorter and broader wing. But perhaps the most satis-factory means of identifying the two species in the field is the decideddifference in the notes, as described under each; from the Texasnighthawk one never hears the harsh, rasping peent note or sees theplunging "booming" flight.Winter.?Dickey and van Rossem (1938) record this nighthawkas an
?
252 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
abundant winter visitant and migrant in the Arid Lower Tropical and locally inthe Arid Upper Tropical Zones [in El Salvador]. Although observed as highas 3,600 feet, its metropolis is along the seacoast. * * *At Puerto del Triunfo hundreds of these nighthawks appeared shortly aftersundown over the tide flats in front of the town, on first appearance flying atsome height toward the simset and later, In the dusk, flying in the oppositedirection and close to the water and mud. After real darkness had set in theywere found on the ground, most frequently in open, sandy places such as corn-fields. The visibility on sandy gi'ound is, of course, much better than on leafmold or similar dark surfaces, and it may well be that this species has not sogood a nocturnal vision as have some of the other Caprimulgidae. The eyes oftexensis reflect pale, dull green and not the bright red of most members of thefamily. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southwestern United States, Mexico, and Central andSouth America ; casual in Colorado.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the Texas nighthawkextends north to central California (Eed Bluif, Dales, and GrassValley) ; southern Nevada (Fish Lake and Oasis Valley) ; southernUtah (St. George) ; east-central Arizona (Fort Verde and the SaltRiver Reservation) ; southern New Mexico (Cuchillo, Socorro, andLakewood) ; and southern Texas (Pecos, probably Kerrville, andSomerset). East to Texas (Somerset, probably Corpus Christi, andBrownsville) ; Tamaulipas (Jaumave) ; Campeche (Campeche)
;
northeastern Colombia (Turbaco and Rio Hacha) ; Venezuela (Alta-gracia and Guarico) ; French Guiana (Cayenne) ; and eastern Brazil(Banaos, Barra, and Rio de Janerio). South to southeastern Brazil(Rio de Janeiro) ; and southern Peru (Santa Lucia). West toPeru (Santa Lucia and Tmnbez) ; western Colombia (Rio SanJuan) ; Guerrero (Chilpancingo and Coyoca) ; Nayarit (Acaponeta) ;southern Sinaloa (Rosario) ; Baja California (Triunfo, EspiritoSanto Island, and Santo Tomas) ; and California (Santa BarbaraIsland, Winslow, Paicines, Gilroy, Coyote, and Red Bluff).The range as above outlined is for the entire species, which has beenseparated into several subspecies, all but one of which are found southof the Mexican border. This race, the Texas nighthawk {C. a.texensis) , breeds south to south-central Mexico and winters from thatpoint south to Panama and Colombia. The San Lucas nighthawk{C. a. inferior) is found in the southern part of the peninsula of BajaCalifornia.Winter range.?It appears that at least some of the Central andSouth American races are nonmigratory, which, without extensivecollections, makes it difficult to outline the winter range of the formoccurring in the United States. Nevertheless, the winter range oftexensis may be said to extend north to southern Sinaloa (Escuin-apa) ; Michoacan (Lake Patzcuaro) ; and southern Veracruz (Ori-
SAN LUCAS NIGHTHAWK 253
zaba). South at least to Panama (Colon and Veragua) ; and Co-lombia (Noanama),Sjyring migration.?Earlj^ dates of spring arrival in the UnitedStates are : Texas?Brownsville, March 8 ; northwestern AtascosaCounty, March 29; Refugio County, April 11. New Mexico?StateCollege, April 20; Apache, May 6; Deming, May 17. Arizona
?
Gadsden, March 6; Tucson, April 7; Fort Mojave, April 17. Cali-fornia?Mecca, March 20; Buena Park, March 22; Pasadena, March31 ; Azusa, April 2.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are: CaliforniaClovis, September 18; Buena Park, November 1. Nevada?Charles-ton Mountains, September 14. Arizona?Paradise, September 25;Yuma, October 5; Boundary, October 5. New Mexico?Apache,August 11; State College, September 21. Texas?Atascosa County,October 4 ; Corpus Christi, October 22.Casual records,?A specimen was collected at Hoehne, near Trini-dad, Colorado, on June 11, 1908. A winter record for Arizona is aspecimen collected at Phoenix on December 27, 1897, and a similarcase for California is the observation of one near Calexico on Janu-ary 23, 1922.Egg dates.?California : 60 records, April 21 to July 11 ; 30 records,May 11 to June 12, indicating the height of the season.Baja California : 3 records. May 12 and July 22.Mexico : 7 records, May 20 to July 6.Texas: 60 records, April 16 to June 29; 30 records. May 8 toJune 3. CHORDEILES ACUTIPENNIS INFERIOR OberholserSAN LUCAS NIGHTHAWKHABITSThe San Lucas nighthawk is apparently a permanent residenton the peninsula of Baja California, breeding north to about lati-tude 30? and wintering in the extreme southern part. It is a smalleredition of the Texas nighthawk, which it closely resembles in gen-eral appearance except in size. It is larger and and somewhat lighterin coloration than the other Central American races of the species,William Brewster (1902) observed that his specimens from LowerCalifornia "average a trifle smaller and, as a rule, are somewhatlighter colored than a number of Texas specimens," but evidentlydid not think that the difference was worth recognizing in nomen-clature. He writes
:
At Triimfo the bii'ds were Jibundant during the last three weeks of June,appearing regularly every evening near the ranch, and skimming back andforth close over a large wood pile, which evidently harbored insects on which
254 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthey were feeding. After a succession of lieavy showers which occurred atthis place early in July they suddenly and wholly disappeared. At San Jos6del Cabo a few were seen at intervals through the autumn up to November11, and several were observed near Santiago on December 3. * * * It seemsfair to assume that the December instance * * * was not exceptional, andthat at least a few birds regularly winter in the Cape Region. Mr. Frazarobtained a set of two eggs, slightly incubated, at Pierce's Ranch, on July 20.We have no reason to think that the habits of the San Lucas night-liawk differ materially from those of the closely related form foundfarther north.The measurements of 9 eggs average 25.6 by 18.8 millimeters; theeggs showing the four extremes measure 27.4 by 18.8, 26.0 by 19.8,23.1 by 18.1, and 25.6 by 18.0 millimeters.Order MICROPODIIFORMESFamily MICROPODIDAE: SwiftsNEPHOECETES NIGER BOREALIS (Kennerly)NORTHERN BLACK SWIFTPlates 40-43HABITSI prefer to follow Ridgway (1911) in the use of the above com-mon name. The name black swift properly belongs to the type race,Nephoecetes niger mger (Gmelin), which is found in the West In-dies. Moreover, Baird (1858) and some other early writers calledit the northern swift. The range of the northern black swift, asnow understood, extends from southeastern Alaska to southern iMexico,including much of the Rocky Mountain region, Colorado, NewMexico, Nevada, and California. It breeds wherever it can find suit-able rocky cliffs in which to nest, but as these are widely scatteredits distribution is naturally spotty; however, its marvelous powersof flight carry it over a large expanse of country, far from its nest-ing area.Tlie northern black swift is somewhat larger than the type race,but it is apparently similar to it in coloration.Baird (1858) states: "This remarkable swift was first indicatedas North American by Dr. Kennerly (1857), in the proceedings ofthe Philadelphia Academy, where it is described as Cypsehis horealis.It was obtained in the northern part of Puget's Sound, at Simiahmoobay, the locality of the main camp of the Northwest Boundary Sur-vey. A large flock was seen one day sailing about the camp, but,owing to the height at which the birds flew, only one specimencould be procured.
NORTHERN BLACK SWIFT 255
"It seems very remarkable that so large a swift could have re-mained iimioticed in North America until the present day."J. K. Lord (180)6) next reported it from British Columbia, saying:"Amongst the earliest of these visitors I noticed the Northern S^vift{Nephocaetes Niger, Baird) . It was a foggy day early in June, and,the insects being low, the birds were hovering close to the ground.I shot four. The next day I searched in vain, but never saw thebirds again until the fall of the year, when they a second time madetheir appearance in large numbers?birds of the year as well as oldones."On June 23, 1868, Ridgway (1877) "found it abundant" in thevalley of the Carson River, Nev.; "they were observed early in themorning, hovering over the cotton-wood groves in a large swarm,after the manner of Night-Hawks. * * * They were evidentlybreeding in the locality, but whether their nests were in the hollowcotton-wood trees of the extensive groves along the river, or inctevices on the face of a high cliff which fronted the river nearby,we were unable to determine on account of the shortness of our stay."Frank M. Drew (1882) discovered this swift at Howardsville,Colo., and collected a series of ten birds in 1880 and 1881; he saysthat "they always hunt in flocks, range far above 13,000 feet andbreed up to at least 11,000 feet." During the next two decades itwas noted as a migrant in New Mexico and in California; but themystery of its nesting habits was not solved until 1901, nearly 45years after its discovery as a North American bird.Spring.?It is as a spring and fall migrant that the northern blackswift is usually observed, as it covers a wide expanse of territoryin its movements to and from its more restricted breeding grounds,often occurring in large scattered blocks, feeding more or less on theway, and giving an interesting exhibition of its great powers of flight.Samuel F. Rathbun (1925) has published in detail his numerousobservations on the migrations of this swift in the vicinity of Seattle,Wash., to which excellent paper the reader is referred. He writes:During the vernal migration in the region about the Sound the first BlackSwifts will be seen sometime between the fifteenth antl the twenty-fifth ofMay. Quite frequently during the latter half of this month there will occura spell of foul weather, and the arrival of the birds seems to be coincident.When this fact was first noticed it was regarded as incidental, but as itoccurred with a degree of regularity our attention became attracted to it andwe then gave the matter especial attention. Soon after the first of Maywe began to closely follow the weather conditions of this region and also thoseexisting far southward, and after a time a good idea was obtained as towhen to expect the arrival of the Swifts. In fact, on several occasions ourexpectations were confirmed almost to a day. * * * From what we haveseen of this spring movement it appears to be soon completed, not lastingmuch more than ten days.
256 BULLETIX 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCoiirtshij).?The courtship of the black swift and apparently copu-lation also are accomplished on the wing. Mr. Rathbun (1925) says:Black Swifts appear to mate in June. There is no sign that this has takenplace when they arrive in May, as then the birds are always seen in com-panies and not in pairs as is subsequently often the case. But soon after theyhave become distributed in colonies about the region and begin to make thedaily flight to and from the lower country, indications of mating are seen.All may be gliding about when suddenly?iierhaps from a far height, a Swiftwill dash at one beneath, this followed by erratic flight actions on the part ofboth and their disappearance in the distance. This dive I have seen madewith such speed that the eye could scarcely foUow it, and during the time thptthe birds are darting and twisting about it is a common thing for them todescend almost to the ground.He says, in some notes sent to me : "On one occasion the latter partof June, I saw a pursuit by one black swift after another that lasteda full 15 minutes. This was the longest of any we ever observed, andwe have seen many of them."Nesting.?The honor of discovering the first nest of the northernblack swift belongs to A. G. Vrooman (1901), who relates the historicincident as follows
:
On the morning of June 16, 1901, I, with a companion, started out with theintention of taking a few sets of Cormorants' eggs on the cliffs a few mileswest of Santa Cruz, California. On reaching the locality, I noticed a pair ofBlack Swifts flying about over the cliffs, much lower than they usually fly.One bird rose high in the air and struck off in a bee line, at the rate of a milea minute. I then resumed my search for the Cormorants, which I found onthe face of the cliff, where shore line turns sharply inland and about where theSwifts had been seen. * * *After moving my ladder a little, I proceeded to reach out and down for amore distant set of Baird's Cormorant eggs when suddenly, right from iniderthe pole and not more than three or four feet from my han^, a Black Swiftflew out and down toward the water and passed around the angle toward theocean. It did not rise above the cliff, in the immediate vicinity, as my com-panion above the cliffs did not see it at all, though I called to him to watcbif it came above.I then moved my ladder a little closer and went down farther so that my facewas about a foot and a half from the egg which the Swift had just left. It wasplaced on a shelf or crevice in the lower edge of a projection standing outperhaps four or five feet from the main wall and about ninety feet from thebreakers below. This crevice was four or five inches high, five or six inchesdeep, and about twenty inches long, very narrow at one end, and about thirtyfeet from the top of the cliff, twenty feet of which is earth sloping back tothe level laud above. This portion of the cliff was wet and dripping constantly,causing tufts of grass to grow here and there, where there was earth enoughto support the roots. It was just behind one of these tufts of grass, in a slightdepression in the mud, formed no doubt by the bird, that the egg was laid.I did not disturb the egg or nest, not going nearer than a foot and a half,intending to return a week later to get possibly a full set, which I did, butfound things just as I had left them a week before and no Swifts were insight. I took the egg, and pealed off the nest, grass and all, and have it in mycollection.
NORTHERN BLACK SWIFT 257Mr. Vrooman's report of finding the black swift nesting in crev-ices in sea cliffs and laying only one large Qg<;; was received withincredulity by many ornithologists. The generally accepted theorywas that the bird would be found nesting in cliffs in the mountains,as indicated by Major Bendire's observations on the upper ColumbiaKiver in 1879; here, he reported (1895) "quite a colony nestedin a high perpendicular cliff," which "was utterly inaccessible, beingfully 300 feet high." Others had seen the swifts in similar localitieselsewhere, where they were doubtless breeding, but no one had everactually seen a nest. The incredulous ones thought that Mr. Vroo-man must have found an egg of some small petrel, rather than thatof the swift. Mr. Vrooman remained silent over the skepticism butkept steadily at work every season, sometimes without success, andeventually collected enough eggs to convince his critics. There are sixeggs and one nest of this swift in the Thayer collection in Cambridge,all from Mr. Vrooman, including the type egg and nest ; the latter isa clod of mud, rather deeply hollowed, and now dry and hard, withthe tuft of dried grass in front of and partly surrounding it.Many years passed before we learned anything about the inlandnesting habits of the northern black swift, and, strangely enough,the first report came from a locality that is not included in theCheck-list range of the species. This report came to me in a letterfrom Clarence E. Chapman, who discovered a nest in Johnson Canyon,near Banff, Alberta, on September 2, 1919. He describes the incidentso clearly and convincingly that there can be no doubt about it. Hisletter states : "A walk of a mile brought us up through a lovely, smallcanj^on to the falls; the upper canyon, just below the falls, was crossedby a high footbridge. While I was standing on this bridge, myattention was attracted by a bird flapping its wings under and againstthe overhanging rock wall. Mrs. Chapman and I each had high-power glasses (8 diameters). We saw a young black swift, not quiteready to fly, and close watching showed that it was exercising andstrengthening its very long wings; it could not fly, as its feathersnear the base were still covered with the scaly sheaths. The nestwas built in a niche in the overhanging wall ; the niche was about 18inches long, 18 inches high, and 8 inches deep at the lower part; itwas evidently made by a bit of rock being broken out by frost; thebottom of the niche sloped downward. The nest was a semicircle,not much more than a dam to prevent the egg from rolling out; wecould not determine what the nest was made of, but considerablemud was used."The nest was within 20 feet of Mr. Chapman's face, and within 30feet of the fall, close enough to have the spray blow over it in certainwinds. The single black young, clinging to the rock wall and to the178223?40 23
258 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMedge of the nest, and jflapping its long wings, which projected wellbeyond the end of its tail, could hardly be anything but a black swift.The next account comes from Charles W. Michael (1927), who, onJuly 6, 1926, discovered a colony of northern black swifts, containingat least six pairs, nesting in a canyon in the Yosemite Valley, Calif.He writes:In the inner chasm of the Tenaya Gorge a hundred paces beyond the
"wedged boulder", where vertical walls rise two hundred feet or more, theswifts had chosen a nesting site. The nest was placed on a bit of projectingrock which presented a level space of perhaps four by six inches. The projec-tion was located within the shelter of an overhung wall, thirty feet directlyabove a deep pool in the creek. Towering above the nest the cliff rose sheer fora distance close to two hundred feet. The inner chasm is here very narrow;the vertical walls stand not fifty feet apart. The channel is dark and cool;in the long summer days the sun lights its depth for but a brief hour. Andat no time or season does the sun ever play on the nest of the swift?crampedquarters, I should say, for birds of the wide skies.It was the wild, erratic wingings of a lone Black Swift, as he whizzedback and forth through this narrow flight lane, that first attracted my atten-tion. * * * While I watched, tlic bird suddenly swooped and fairly seemedto plaster himself to the wall not fifty feet from where I stood. Then, withfluttering wings the bird moved upward?not straight upward, however, but inan angling course across the face of the cliff. As I followed the movementsof the swift the nest was suddenly descried. The swift paused, clinging to theprojection that held the nest, and I thought at first that he was feeding young.After a moment he scurried on upward a few feet, fell backv.ard, and thentwinkling wings carried him away down the channel. * * *As for the nest itself, as best I cotild see it, it resembled in form and con-struction that of the Western Wood Pewee; but in size it appeared larger.Also it reminded me of certain cormorant nests I have seen plastered to theledges above the sea. The general appearance of the structure, its apparentadhesion to the shelf, and the droppings plastered to the granite immediatelybelow, led me to suspect that the nest may have been occupied through severalnesting seasons. The rock wall roimdabout was absolutely bare and di'y- Therewas not a growing plant within ten feet of it.Of a later visit, July 11, he says
:
Beyond the "wedged boulder" I moved cautiously, but before I had come withinsight of the nest a swift was seen to leave the wall and dash down the canyon.I was afraid that I was not to find the swift at home, but as I came opposite thesite, there was the bird in plain sight. She sat on the nest with her tail ap-pressed against the wall and with one long wing drooping over the side. Herbody rested in a horizontal position and she appeared much too large for thenest.While I was watching the bird a second nest was discovered. The second onewas tucked away in a niche and, but for the droppings below, it would hardlyhave been noticed. The nest was a little round cup, shallow, and composed,apparently, of some soft, brown material like dry leaves ; the rim was tintedslightly green. On a later visit, with assistance and encouragement from "Big"Con Burns, I managed to climb to a point within eight feet of the nest. Andthen it was learned that the nest was composed of the delicate pinnae of thefive-fingered fern. Great banks of these ferns hung from neighboring walls,
NORTHERN BLACK SWIFT 259and it would be quite possible for the swifts to procure material while on thewing. Perhaps, though, the swifts may gather nesting material while clingingto a wall, as I have often seen swifts alight on a ferny ledge above Vernal Fall.In any event, this nest was rimmed with fresh green leaves.Another nest was later discovered near these two, all three within aradius of three feet. Three other nests were discovered later in thesame canyon. Sunnning up his experiences, he says
:
I now feel that I have the system for locating Black Swifts' nests. Knowingthe precise requirements demanded by a nesting swift, the thing to do is to findthe locality that approximates these requirements. * * * What really sim-plifies the problem is the scarcity of suitable nesting localities for Black Swifts.There must be cozy niches in which to place the nests, and these niches must beso situated as to afford complete protection against rain, wind, and sunshine.Perhaps, too, there should be many of these niches, that nesting swifts may havenesting neighbors.Then comes Emily Smith (1928) with her report of finding threenests of black swifts close to and behind Berry Creek Falls in a notvery remote canyon in Kedwood Park, Santa Cruz Mountains, Calif.The first nest seen "was not behind the falls, but a little to one sidein a niche twenty feet above the pool which lies at the base of the sheerseventy-foot cliff. * * * j could not get closer than the edge ofthe pool, but from there the nest thirty feet away was in plain view,a thick, round mat of moss and possibly some mud, set in an almostsquare little niche in the rock wall. The wall roundabout, coveredwith mosses, five-finger ferns, and other moisture-loving plants, wasdripping wet."The other two nests were behind the falls, one only 8 feet abovethe pool, and the other much higher up and "hardly more than teninches back from the main stream of the falling water. Some of themoss of which the nest was constructed appeared green and living,giving the nest a cushiony look."Joseph S. Dixon (1935) records the first nests found in the southernSierra Nevada
:
We found three nests, but there probably were others in the vicinity, sinceover a dozen Black Swifts were seen. The three nests were located within alinear distance of twenty feet, so that the species might reasonably be said tohave colonial nesting habits, at least in this instance. The nest site was locatedin the deep granite gorge of the Marble Fork of the Kaweah River. All threenests were located in a shallow cave that had been formed by the falling of asection of the cliff, leaving a broad auch about thirty feet in height. The bare,wet, dark granite wall rose precipitously above a deep pool beside a waterfall,spray from which kept the entire surroundings drenched with mist.In all three instances the swift nests were made of green resurrection moss,pressed down but not stuck together with saliva, and were placed on andsupported by a clump of fragile five-fingered ferns. The first nest was a firm,mossy cup placed about eigliteen feet above the water. This nest measured out-side 3 by 4 inches in diameter and was 3 inches high. The trampled-down shallowcup was empty, the young bird evidently had just left the nest [August 7].
260 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe latest nesting record comes from Albert Ervin Thompson(1937), who found a nest "near the western boundary of GeneralGrant National Park in Fresno County, California, in the TransitionLife Zone at an elevation of five thousand two hundred feet abovesea level in the Sierra Nevada Mountains." He says further
:
The narrow mountain gorge in which the nest was found is forested with tall
?sugar and yellow pines, white fir, incense cedar, and giant sequoia, and, becauseof a steep slope to the northwest, receives very little direct sunlight except duringa brief portion of the afternoon. At other times only random shafts of lightfind their way among the trees.The nest was built in a hollow of a granite wall, sheltered by an overhangingprojection of rock. It was about six feet above the bed of a mountain brook andnot more than twelve feet removed from a rushing cascade that boiled down achute from a cliff above. Because of the smoothness of the sheer face of therock, the situation was inaccessible to snakes and small mammals. The nestwas formed by moist mossy material, imbedded in a natural growth of the sameplant. Seeping water and spray from the waterfall kept the site continiiallymoist. For this reason the nest was at first mistaken for that of a water ousel.One egg was laid, but after it hatched the young bird mysteriously disappeared,perhaps devoured by an enemy.Eggs.?The single ^gg of the northern black swift is usually, in thesix specimens that I have examined, elliptical-ovate in shape, thoughsome are nearly elliptical-oval. The shell is smooth but withoutgloss. They are dull, pure white in color, but one is somewhat nest-stained. The measurements of 34 eggs average 28.(5 by 19.0 milli-meters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 31.5 by 18.3,28.0 by 20.6, 24.5 by 19.5, and 28.5 by 17.8 millimeters.Young.?Nothing seems to be known about the period of incuba-tion or to what extent the two sexes assist in incubation and the feed-ing of the young, though it seems to be assumed that the female doesmost of the brooding and feeding. All observers seem to agree thatthe young swift is fed at infrequent intervals, mainly early in themorning and late at night. Mr. Michael (1927) says: "Most youngbirds receive food every few minutes, but here we find young birdsthat go for hours without food. Raking the sides all day long, theold swifts probably return in the evening to pump their young full ofconcentrated nourishment." Many hours of patient watching yieldedvery little information on this point, but on August 15
?
at 12 : 30 an old bird arrived. She flew up the canyon and alighted directly onthe edge of the nest. Clinging here with her tail appressed and one long wingspread out across the surface of the wall she apparently pumped food into theyoung bird. She appeared to fairly stuff the young one, pumping food into himten times in twenty seconds with but slight pauses between times. At firstthe young one was very eager and squirmed with delight while being fed. Soon,however, he was full and had to be coaxed to take the last two or three helpings.When through feeding her young one, the mother bird crawled iip onto thenest and the young one squirmed and twisted until his head was quite snuggled
NORTHERN BLACK SWIFT 261
under his mother's breast. Not an audible sound was uttered during the meal,but just before the parent bird departed she uttered two sharp, squeal-likenotes ; and then three more as she tumbled backward into space to speed offdown the canyon. The young bird stretched and preened and once moresettled down. * * * i believe that the female takes upon herself all theduties of incubation and of the feeding of the young.Miss Smith's (1928) observations at Berry Creek Falls corroboratedMr. Michael's statement that the young birds can, and do, go longhours v\'ithout food. She writes
:
On each visit my chief interest was in finding out how often and when theyoung birds were fed. Unfortunately, I was not able to spend a whole daywith the swifts uutil August 2.5, and then the youngest bird was more than twoweeks old. I had not seen Primus (so named because he was first discovered)fed during my four previous visits with him. I had, however, seen Secundusfed at about four o'clock in the afternoon, and again the next morning at halfpast nine. I suppose being a very young bird he was fed more than once oneach of these two days. But August 25 they all were fed only at nightfall.That day my sister and I managed to cover the four and one half miles fromcamp to the falls before a quarter past five o'clock in the morning. As weapproached we heard soft, low cheeping notes, and then in the dim light sawbirds circling and darting about in the small amphitheatre in front of the falls.It was impossible for the eye to follow them or count them, they flew so swiftlyand the light was so faint. One could be seen chasing another, and then wecould see several fluttering up the clif? and disappearing behind a log, andalmost immediately half a dozen swept by us. By half past five, before it waslight enough to see clearly, every bird had left. From then until sunset notone of the swifts returned.Just before sunset Primus backed out of his nest, and clinging to the thresholdof the niche, exercised his long wings. Seven times he vibrated them, withshort intervals of rest during which his wonderful wings were stretched wideagainst the rock. Suddenly, a swift, surprisingly light gray in color, "plastered"itself against the wall below Primus, and motionless watched us for fifteenminutes. Primus, seeing no reason for concern about us, scrambled back ontothe nest and waited patiently for his meal. Finally the old bird fluttered upand for two minutes in the fading light we could see it feeding the young oneby regurgitation. Then the other parent arrived, darker and seemingly larger,and immediately we guessed it was the mother. She fed the young bird forfour minutes with only very short pauses, while the father looked on.Mr. Dixon (1935) says of the young swift that he observed iuSequoia National Park: "The outstanding feature of the youngswift was his aversion to light. He always turned around in thenest so as to face the darkest corner. Another feature was the easeand tenacity with which he clung to the nest with his sharp, strongly-curved claws. When placed against a vertical granite cliff, he had notrouble clinging by one foot, but tucked his head down to avoidthe bright light."Plumages.?Mr. Dixon (1935) says that a recently hatched cliickwas "bluish black in color. Its eyes were closed, and there was nota bit of natal down on its body." An older young bird, found dead
262 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMin a nest on July 25, 1912, and now in the Thayer collection, iscompletely covered with long, soft down, "dusky drab*' to "blackishbrown" ; the down is longest on the back and rump and shortest onthe head ; the wing coverts are growing, and the primaries have bursttheir sheaths for over a quarter of an inch.Frank M. Drew (1882) estimates that four years are necessary forthe black swift to acquire its fully adult plumage, wdiich hardlyseems likely. Based on a study of ten specimens, collected in Colo-rado, he describes the succession of plumages as follows
:
A young male of the year, taken Sept. 17, was marked as follows. Generalcolor dull black, every feather tipped with white, scarcely appreciable on upperback and throat, broader on upper tail coverts and rump. Crissum almostpure white. In birds of the second year the general plumage has a brownishcast ; feathers of back tipped with brown, the head whitish, belly feathers yetbroadly tipped with white. The third year the color is black, with a very faintedging of white on under tail coverts. In the fourth year pure black, fore-head hoary, neck with a brownish wash.Tail in young of first year, rounded; in second year, slightly rounded; inthird year slightly emarginate, feathers becoming more acute. In adult,forked, outer feathers three-eighths of an inch longer than inner.I have never seen a young black swift, with "every feather tippedwith w^hite," but I am inclined to believe that Mr. DreAv is correctin describing this as the juvenal plumage. The juvenal plumageapparently has never been described in the manuals, and probablythere are no specimens in young juvenal plumage in collections. Thedowny young, described above, has the incoming feathers of the wingcoverts, and the remiges tipped with white. Enid Michael (1933)had a young black swift brought to her on August 10, 1932, that hadfallen out of a nest and was unable to fly ; from what she had pre-viously learned from her study of young swifts in their nests, sheestimated that this bird was about five weeks old; and she says:
"Every feather on its back, tail, wings and crown was daintily tippedwith white. The tiny feathers of its crown and forehead, beingfringed with white, gave its crown, and especially its forehead, afrosted appearance." Mr. Kathbun has sent me the following de-scription of a young black swift picked up dead in the WillametteValley, Oreg., September 20, 1924: "Seemingly an immature bird
?
not in good condition of preservation. Back and abdominal featherstipped with grayish white. Head from bill to crown also withgrayish-white-tipped feathers. Primary wing feathers edged ingrayish white. Length 7 inches." From the above descriptions, andfrom what shows in the few published photographs of the youngswifts in the nests, it seems fair to assume that the ju.venal or firstplumage is characterized by the white tips of the body plumage, aboveand below, and by the white-tipped primaries. How long this plum-
NORTHERlSr BLACK SWIFT 263age is worn, or how soon the white tips wear away, we do not know
;
but evidently this plumage is worn until after the birds leave for thesouth.Considerable discussion has occurred and much has been publishedon the plumages of the black swift, particularly on the significanceof the white spots on the under parts, as sex characters or agecharacters.Mr. Eidgway (1911) evidently considered this a sex character, forhe says: "All the sexed specimens examined by me, from whateverlocality, show that all those with white-tipped feathers on posteriorunder parts are females and all those without these white-tippedfeathers are males." This is not so in a series of 42 specimens, of vari-ous ages and sexes, that I have examined. More than one-third of allthe birds that showed conspicuous white spots, or more or less whitetips, on the feathers of the abdomen and under tail coverts are sexedas males, and less than two-thirds are sexed as females. Perhaps thischaracter is more persistent in females than in males.Mr. Drew (1882) implies that the sexes are alike in all plumages,and says: "In birds of the second year the general plumage has abrownish cast ; feathers of back tipped with brown, the head whitish,belly feathers j'^et broadlj^ tipped with white." He seems to be sub-stantially correct on both of these points. The white-spotted birdsthat I examined were collected mainly in June, though two weretaken in May, two in July, and one in August. All these birds havesquare, or slightly emarginate, tails ; and none of them white-tippedremiges, which are characteristic of the juvenal plumage, as indicatedabove. They could not be young birds of the year, for the youngbirds of the year were still in the nests at the time nearly all of thesebirds were collected. They agree perfectly with Mr. Drew's descrip-tion of the second-year bird, and I am inclined to think that that iswhat they are. They are numerous in collections, as perhaps immaturebirds may be easier to collect than adults. If this assumption is cor-rect, then the conspicuous characters of the second-year plumage arethe absence of white tips on the remiges and the presence, in varyingdegrees, of white spots or tips on the feathers of the abdomen andunder tail coverts. This assumption has been made after giving dueconsideration to all that has been published on the subject and a lotof data from and correspondence with my friend S. F. Rathbun; hehas made an extensive study of the black swift for many years andis inclined to agree with Mr. Eidgway ; but it seems to me that all theevidence fits into the theory advanced above and agrees with Mr.Drew's (1882) idea of a second-year plumage.Mr. Drew's statement, that "four years are necessary for them toacquire their complete plumage," seems open to question. He says
264 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthat in "the third year the color is black, with a very faint edging ofwhite on under tail coverts." There is great individual variation inthe amount of white on the under parts of immature birds, probablydue to wear or earlier or later molting in different individuals. Itseems fair to assume that the "very faint edging" referred to by Mr.Drew may be only evidence of further advance in second-year birds.Apparentl}^ these swifts molt their contour plumage, perhaps theirwings and tails, during the early summer, Mr. Rathbun tells me thathe has always noticed that summer specimens "appear to have almostfresh plumage"; and Harry S. Swarth (1922) says that the birds hecollected in the Stikine region, between August 19 and 30, "had en-tirely finished the annual molt and were all in the new plumage."In the adult plumage the sexes are very much alike in coloration,though females average somewhat paler and browner on the underparts, and the female tail is not so deeply emarginate as that of themale. Mr. Drew (1882) says that in the adult the outer tail feathersare three-eighths of an inch longer than the inner feathers, giving thetail a forked appearance; this is undoubtedly true of fully adultmales, and perhaps of some very old females. Mr. Rathbun tells methat he can usually distinguish the two sexes in flight by the extentto which the tail is emarginated. In the series that I have examinedall the young white-spotted birds have square or slightly emarginatetails, all the adult males have deeply emarginate tails, and allthe adult females have only slightly emarginate tails. MajorBrooks, who probably has handled more black swifts than anyonein North America, wrote to Mr. Rathbun: "Swarth and myself, to-gether with another observer in the last century, have carefullyrecorded that some females, probably about 10 percent, are absolutelyindistinguishable from the adult male in every external character,emargination of tail, absence of white spots, etc." In a series of blackswifts, collected by Mr. Swarth (1912) in southeastern Alaska in Juneand July 1909, "there is one female that in color and markings isindistinguishable from the males. * * * Like the others, however,it differs from the males in having a square, rather than a forkedtail." This particular female contained an egg, almost ready to belaid, so that there was no doubt about the sex.Mr. Rathbun (1925) writes: "The males are larger and darkerthan the females. As a rule their sooty underparts from the breastdown lack any trace of light tipping on the feathers, and when thisdoes occur the tips are of a brownish tint and very faint. In allour males the under tail coverts are tipped with brownish, ratherwell defined though much obscured in some individuals. There is alarse variation in the amount of hoariness on the forehead."
NORTHERIvr BLACK SWIFT 265He tells me that this swift has a complete molt during summerand is in full fresh plumage before leaving in fall.Food.?The northern black swift feeds entirely on the wing, whereit is very successful in catching the flying insects, on which it feedsexclusively; it captures a great variety of insects, and anything inthe way of aerial insect life seems to be acceptable to it. Mr. Rath-bun (1925) publishes a detailed list of the contents of six stomachs,collected by him near Seattle between June 22 and September 7 andreported on by the Biological Survey. The list is too long to beincluded here. The stomachs were reported as all full and allcontaining 100 percent animal matter. Prominent among the con-tents were caddisflies, Mayflies, crane flies and various other flies, avariety of beetles, many termites and flying ants, numerous plant lice,leafhoppers, treehoppers, wasps, and a few moths and spiders.Clarence Cottam has sent me the following notes on the contentsof 36 stomachs of this swift, as analyzed in the laboratory of theBiological Survey:
"Both in frequency of occurrence and in total percentages o'fvolume, ants, bees, and wasps (Hymenoptera) appear to be thedominant food items taken by the black swift. Ants of the genusLasius were consumed by 6 of the 36 birds here considered and com-prised 90 to 100 percent of the total content, averaging about 150individuals per stomach. The paper wasps (Vespula) were ingestedby one-sixth of the birds and formed 51 to 87 percent of the food.Traces or small percentages of the Ichneimionidae, or parasitic wasps,occurred in the majority of the stomachs.
"Flies (Diptera) were a close second in importance and formed atleast a trace in most of the stomachs ; in many they made up 70 to 95percent of the total content. The principal types met with were thelong-legged flies (Dolichipodidae), flesh flies (Sarcophagidae), rootmaggots (Anthomyiidae), crane flies (Tipulidae), midges (Chirono-midae), Ephydridae, and the grass-stem maggots (Chloropoidae). Ina series of six birds from King County, Wash., flies of nine generamade up 100 percent of the contents."Many species of beetles (Coleoptera) were encountered in the fooditems, but most of them made up only minor percentages or traces,and in only a few cases did they amount to as much as 6 percent ofthe total. The chief families of Coleoptera taken were the groundbeetles (Carabidae), rove beetles (Staphylinidae), weevils (Curcu-lionidae), leaf beetles (Chrysomelidae), click beetles or wireworms(Elateridae), and scarab beetles (Scarabaeidae).
"Large termites, or white ants {Thermopsis angusticollis) , alsoknown as Isoptera, were the principal items consumed by four of
266 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthe 36 swifts and comprised TO to 99 percent of the contents, withnumbers per stomach varying from 15 to 90 individuals. Mayflies(Ephemeridae) and caddiceflies (Trichoptera) were also taken attimes and formed 5 to 35 percent of the content."Behavior.?Mr. Rathbun (1925) writes admiringly of the powersof flight exhibited by the northern black swift
:
In all its flight actions this Swift shows a power and an easy grace thatwin our admiration. It seems to live upon the wing, and to restrict its flightmost of the time to a considerable elevation, the height being seemingly in-fluenced by the character of the weather. It is generally the case that duringthe continuance of a low atmospheric pressure the Swifts will not fly veryhigh, but when this condition ceases they then ascend. At the time of highpressure the Swifts are often at a great height and it is not uncommon to seethem gliding at the very limit of vision. At such times so high are some ofthem that even with the aid of field glasses they show but faintly against thesky. It would be mere surmise as to the height that they attain, severalthousand feet certainly, and as some have even disappeared from view, whenthe glasses were in use, one has no knowledge of the height to which they go.On a bright summer day to see these dark birds circling far above is alwayscaptivating. Should the sky happen to have clouds some of which are whiteand shining, the Swifts as they wheel across their glistening surfaces, areplainly outlined, but seem to fade insensibly from view when in turn they crossthe open spaces of the sky. At such times it is the constant shifting view withthe seeming change in distance of the gliding Swifts that adds to our interestwhen watching them. * * *But this bird has also the power of very rapid flight. Infrequently it hap-pens near the close of day that some will be seen hastening to their mountainretreats, at such times being widely scattered and flying rather low. Withstrong and rapid wing beats an almost direct course is followed, and but afew seconds elapse from the time one is first seen until after passing it fadesfrom sight in the distance. And when thus observed in full flight, the powershown for fast flying never fails to impress the beholder.The position of the Black Swift's wings as it glides or circles is dihedrallydown. We have never seen anj^ variation from this, and in this respect acontrast is shown by our Chaetura, whose wings are often highly elevated whensailing short distances or on entering their nesting places or roosting resorts.This wing position of the Black Swift seems worthy of mention, although itmay be possible that it varies at times under conditions with which we are notfamiliar.He mentions in his notes an occasion on which the swifts wereflying low; he was crossing Lake Washington in a row boat on arainy day in June: "While crossing, we noticed very many of thesebirds flying about at quite a low height above the water. Two weretaken, and then we proceeded on our way. It was not long before aheavy rain began to fall and this hastened our return ; but, when wereached the spot where first the swifts had been observed, suddenlyon all sides of the boat were numbers of the birds hawking aboutquite close to the water's surface, some flying past not more thanfifteen or twenty feet away."
NORTHERN BLACK SWIFT 267Referring to the summer movements of the swifts, about Seattle,Wash., he writes (1925) :The Swifts that remain in this region undoubtedly nest far within the Cas-cade range, and each morning from their chosen retreats make a trip to thelowlands where they seem to stay most of the day. * * *By the middle of June, the Swifts instead of associating in such large num-bers seemed to have separated into colonies of varying sizes, each of which,during the summer months, appears to follow a certain more or less definedroute every day, which the birds used each morning when flying from theirmountain resort to the lower country, returning over it with equal regularity asthe evening drew near.These journeys have the appearance of being long excursions, but the widedistances mean little to this Swift with a power of flight to which there seemsbut little limitation. Tlie valley of the Middle Fork of the Suoqualmie River,some thirty miles almost due east of Seattle, is one such route that we havenoticed the Swifts following; and here at various times during several sum-mers we have watched the daily flight of a colony of these birds that numberednearly one hundred and fifty.In a valley of one of the mountain rivers, on an afternoon in June,Mr. Rathbun observed a flight behavior, which he describes in hisnotes as follows : "No swifts were seen until about 5 : 30 p. m., whena few flew by widely scattered. At 6 : 30 p. m., more swifts beganto straggle past. While watching them, I noticed a dark, dense cloudmoving slowly toward where I stood. I expected to see some swiftsin company with it. I was not disappointed. There were about 50,and it was of interest to see them gliding around in advance of andbelow the cloud. By their actions it looked as if they were feeding,arid all kept pace with the slow movement of the cloud. None of theswifts were below 400 feet, some much higher. As the cloud passedthe swifts kept company with it ; and then followed an interval whennone were seen. Half an hour or so later another of the heavy cloudsrolled up from the west. Only a short distance in front of it weremore swifts circling, these soon followed by others gliding aboutbeneath the cloud. In this flight were at least 60 of the birds, and,as in the first instance, they moved along with the cloud until losbto our sight."M. P. Skinner has sent me the following notes on a flock of swiftsthat he watched at the Vernal Falls in the Yosemite Valley : "Aftercircling once or twice around at the falls, they flew down the canyonbelow for half a mile rvith great swiftness, then whirled in a circleand came back. They repeated this over and over again. They keptin the early morning shade as long as I watched them. Periods ofwing beating alternated with gliding on set wings, and both periodsvaried very much in length."Ralph Hoffmann (1927) says : "The flight of the Black Swift isamazingly swift; it includes sudden sharp turns, steep downward"
268 BULLETIN" 17 6, UI?riTED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMplunges and hurried upward flights. The long, narrow wings attimes 'twinkle' rapidly, or when the bird is sailing, are either helduplifted over the back or curved downward with the tips well belowthe body. The tail is very slightly forked but in flight it is con-stantly spread and appears fan-shaped w^hen the bird makes a suddenturn."I can find no evidence that the northern black swift has ever beenseen perching on a tree or wire, or resting on the ground ; its regularresting places seem to be the steep, rocky walls, often dripping withmoisture, such as they choose for nesting sites. Though their feetare small and light, they have very sharp claws, and are able tocling to the rough surface for long periods. Mrs. Michael (1926)has seen them clinging to the wet walls behind the Vernal Falls andnear it. "From the distance of fifty yards the birds appeared tostick as limpets do to the wet rocks of a sea shore." But, on closerexamination, she found that "they were not sticking to the wall aslimpets, but their bodies were held slightly away from the wall, withnot even their tails touching." With one bird, she noted that "hisstrong toe nails were hooked to some tiny support and his entire tar-sus rested firmly against the w^all, thus holding his body and tailfree." Later (1933) she saj^s of a young black swift that she had incaptivity: "When climbing up a sheer surface the swift used itswings, feet, tail and sharply hooked bill. When in repose it lay flaton its belly in the manner of a poor-will. * * * The legs seemedto have swivel joints, and it was strange to see the bird reach upits foot between the body and wing to comb its back and crownfeathers."Voice.?There is not much to be said about the voice of the blackswift. All observers agree that it is generally a silent species; itsnote is seldom heard, except during the mating season and on itsbreeding grounds. Mr. Rathbun (1925) writes:During its spring migration and shortly following, a period when the birds areassociated in numbers, we have watched them for long spaces of time andalways a perfect silence seemed to prevail among them. And this apparently isthe case until the time comes when by their actions they show that they aremating. Even now their chatter-like note is but seldom heard, although in-variably it is given at the time when one dashes at another, and this oftenproves the case when a pair may happen to fly in close company. During themidsummer we have heard their rapid notes as the birds passed in flight nearthe close of day, and in the autumnal migration when rarely one would makea quick dash at another. But these instances are uncommon and the speciescan properly be regarded as quite silent, being very different in this respectfrom the Chaeturine Swifts whose shrill twitterings are so frequent as they flyabout. And the chatter of the Black Swift somewhat resembles that of thesmaller ones ; it being as rapid, but smoother in quality and more rolling, infact rather pleasing to hear.
NOKTHERN- BLACK SWIFT 269Grinnell and Storer (1924) describe its note as "a high-pitchedtwitter, not so shrill or long-continued as that of the White-throatedSwift."Field Tnarks.?^The black swift can be recognized by its size andcoloration. It is the largest of the three western swifts. The white-throated swift, which most nearly approaches it in size, differs fromit in having a well-marked and conspicuous pattern of black andwhite on the under parts, as well as the white rump patches, whichshow from above. The black swift appears wholly dark, exceptunder certain conditions of reflected sunlight ; the white markings onthe immature bird are not conspicuous, except at close range. Vaux'sswift is the smallest of the three and does not show in flight theslightly forked and fan-shaped tail of the black swift. Mr. Hoffmann(1927) suggests that "the beginner may take the much commonerPurple Martin for a Black Swift; the deeply notched tail, neverspread like a fan, the habit of perching on stubs, the loud, musicalnotes and the difference in the sexes should readily identify theMartin." Grinnell and Storer (1924) state that, in the black swift,
"the fore margin of the two wings as viewed from below is a doubleconvex, and not a single continuous arc as in the Wliite-throatedSwift; moreover, the movements of the wings are more deliberatethan in that species."Fall.?Mr. Rathbun says in his notes: "The autumnal migrationstraggles over a more or less extended period. In the Puget Soundregion it begins to take place soon after September 1, and it laststhree weeks or slightly more. I have observed this for many years,and the swifts do not pass by in the large groups that one will see inspring. Day after day in fall they straggle by in small numbers.Very often we have noticed that these groups were in multiples ofthree, which in our opinion would represent the parent birds withtheir single young. Invariably associated with the black swifts werethe Vaux's swift, and if either was seen you could expect to see theother. And quite often, in company with both species of swifts,would be violet-green and barn swallows, all straggling past at oddtimes throughout the day."In the Stikine region Mr. Swarth (1922) observed: "At SergiefIsland, August 17 to September 7, black swifts were abundant, thoughseen only in cloudy or rainy weather. Then large flocks appeared, asmany as seventy-five or a hundred being in sight at once flying overthe marshes, the individuals moving about in wide circles, and theflock as a whole moving in a definite path. The birds sometimes flewvery low, occasionally skimming along just over the tall grass. Aflock would appear, circle about overhead awhile, and then vanish.About fifteen or twenty minutes later, others, or perhaps the sameflock, would come in sight again."
270 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMDISTRIBUTIONRange.?Western North America; closely related nonmigratoryraces are found in southern Central America and in the West Indies.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the black swift extendsnorth to southeastern Alaska (Portage Cove) ; and northwesternBritish Columbia (Telegraph Creek). East to British Columbia(Telegraph Creek, Hazelton, and 158-mile House) ; southwesternAlberta (Banff) ; probably western Montana (Libby, Glacier NationalPark, and Stryker) ; and southwestern Colorado (Howardsville).South to southwestern Colorado (Howardsville) ; and southern Cali-fornia (Cerro Gordo, Sequoia National Park, and Santa Cruz). Westto California (Santa Cruz, Berry Creek, and Yosemite Valley) ;western Washington (Seattle and Bellingham) ; British Columbia(Chilliwack and Okanagan Landing) ; and southeastern Alaska(Boca de Quadra and Portage Cove).Winter range.?Unknown. Despite repeated statements that thisspecies spends the winter season in southern Mexico, an examinationof the available data fails to substantiate the assertion, the dates ofobservation or collection being entirely within the seasons of migra-tion. Accordingly, while it is possible that these birds do winterwith the resident form in southern Central America, factual evidenceis at present lacking.Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Baja Cali-fornia?San Telmo, April 30. California?Haywards, April 19;Grapevine, April 24; Yosemite Valley, May 11. Washington?Seat-tle, May 16; Simialmoo, May 27. British Columbia?Chilliwack,May 8 ; Courtenay, May 15 ; Lulu Island, May 25 ; Alberni, June 9.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are : Alaska?SergiefIsland, September 7. British Columbia?Hazelton, August 29;Errington, September 20; Okanagan Landing, September 26; Cour-tenay, September 29. Washington?Bellingham, September 1;Seattle, October 7. Oregon?^Albany, September 22. California
?
Santa Cruz County, September 13; Haywards, October 1.Casual records.?Among the records of occurrence of the blackswift outside the range as above outlined are the following cases:New Mexico, reported from Willis in September 1883 and noted atLake Burford, on September 28, 1904; Arizona, seen at Flagstaff onAugust 18, 1920; eastern Colorado, two seen on July 8 and three onJuly 10, 1910, in Estes Park, several seen near Trinidad, July 8-14,1892, while a specimen in the collection of George B. Sennett waslabeled as taken at Denver on June 26, 1884; and Idaho, taken orobserved on the Malade River on August 13, 1834. A specimen came
CHIMNEY SWIFT 271on board the S. S. Antigim on September 20, 1933, while the vesselwas 84 miles off the coast of Guatemala.Egg dates.?California : 27 records, Jmie 16 to July 29 ; 14 records,June 24 to Jul}^ 9, indicating the height of the season.CHAETURA PELAGICA (Linnaeus)CHIMNEY SWIFTPlates 44-46HABITSContributed by Winsor Markett TylerFrom its unknown winter quarters, somewhere in Central Americaor on the South American Continent, the chimney swift comes north-ward in spring and spreads out over a wide area, which includes alarge part of the United States and southern Canada.Individually the swift is an obscure little bird, with a stumpy, dull-colored body, short bristly tail, and stiff, sharp wings, but it is sucha common bird over the greater part of its breeding range and col-lects in such enormous flocks, notably when it gathers for its autumnalmigration, that as a species it is widely known.The birds also have the habit of continual flight during the hoursof daylight throughout the summer, and therefore keep always beforeour eyes when we look up at the sky. They exemplify speed and tire-less energy; they sail and circle on set wings, then with flickeringwing beats they are off in a burst of speed, shooting like an arrowthrough the air, chattering their bright notes as they race along
?
little arrows "cutting the clouds" over country, town, and woodland.Spring.?Swifts move up into the northern latitudes only whenspring is rather far advanced, not until their aerial insect food isplentiful well above the ground. Therefore their arrival varies agood deal from year to year.Kopman (1915) reports that the average date of appearance in NewOrleans is about March 18. In New England, in an average year,we do not expect the birds for fully 30 days after this date; hencewe may infer that they spend a month in moving across a dozendegrees of latitude.A daylight migrant, solely, so far as is known, we see the firstarrivals of this swift commonly in the afternoon, sailing in smallcompanies?perhaps only a single bird?often high in the air. Asthey fly along, they give an occasional chatter, or a few rather feeblechips, but with none of the energy and volubility characteristic of thebreeding season. On cloudy days in spring, when the swifts dip down
272 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
over the surface of a pond and feed among the twittering swallows
?
a common habit of theirs?they are apt to be silent.When the birds appear, leisurely drifting up from the south, theyoften fly in great loops. They turn slowly aside from their northerlycourse, swinging farther and farther around until they are movingfor a time toward the south, then, veering gradually, they resumetheir journey, but soon turn again and make another sweeping curve,each loop carrying them nearer their destination.An hour before dark, in the lengthening evenings of early May,we often see a little gathering of New England swifts that havesettled on their nesting grounds but are not occupied as yet withbreeding activities, flying about in company, high over their chosenchimney, chattering together. The birds may be so high in the airthat the sound of their voices barely reaches our ears. These newlyarrived birds pay little attention to each other and do not approachnear or chase one another as they will in June, yet they keep in aloose flock, sailing and flickering in a somewhat circular path andsometimes coast down from their high elevation, and climb up to itagain. Then, as dusk deepens, at about the time the bat appears, theygather around their chimney and drop into it.Although swifts, during their spring migration, often collect, beforegoing to roost, in flocks of considerable numbers, they are less con-spicuous at this season than during their impressive gatherings inautumn. These are described under "Fall."GowrtsMp.?In June, here in New^ England, the swifts become verynoisy. Even from within doors we hear their voices as the birdshurry past not far from our roof. As we listen their chips appearsharper and faster than they did the week before, more clearly enun-ciated, and they run in a long series that seems to grow in intensityas the birds come nearer, reaches a maximum when they pass over-head, and dies away as they rush on.When we watch the birds at this season we notice also a differencein their behavior. There is little of the slow, apparently aimlesscircling of early spring, when, although the birds gather in smallcompanies and follow similar paths in the air, they are seeminglyindifferent to one another's presence.The breeding season is here. Purpose has come into the swift'sbrain, and purpose has brought intensity and speed, and concentrationon a mate. Now they fly close together, two birds, three birds, some-times four in a little bunch. The length of a swift's body scarcelyseparates them as they tear along, ripping through space, followingthe twists and turns of tlie bird in the lead.Soon two birds are left alone, the others circling off for a time.Both of these birds are chipping sharply, flying fast, close together,
CHIMNEY SWIFT 273and during their mad dash, one, if not both, uses a peculiar note?
a
line of chips, a chatter, then the chips again. This combination ofnotes accompanies the height of the pursuit, and the swifter and closerthe chase the sharper and quicker the notes. It seems also that thenearer the birds are to one another, the faster they fly. They mayfly sometimes, their wings almost touching, at a pace that seems reck-less ; then the notes spatter out as if self control were lost, and at last,as the pursuer overtakes his goal, he rises a little above her and liftsup his wings, and there appears to be a moment of contact.The probability that the nuptial flight leads, at least sometimes, tosexual contact in the air is increased by Sutton's (1928) careful studyof the swift. He says: "In this courtship flight, the pair of birdsmay fly rapidly about, twittering loudly; suddenly the upper birdwill lift its wings very high above the back and coast through theair, sometimes for several seconds, while the bird beneath may soarwith its wings held in a fixed position below the plane of the body.It may be that this graceful and interesting display is at the cul-mination of courtship activity."From the fact that swifts in the courting season so often fly threetogether when engaged in their pursuits?in the initial part at least,for at the culmination the pair find themselves alone?a surmise hasarisen that one male and two females make up the trio and that theswift is polygamous. This surmise, however, is not yet attested byany conclusive evidence.Nesting.?Of the few North American birds?and they are veryfew?that were influenced favorably by civilized man when he set-tled on this continent, the chimney swift received the greatest bene-fit. Before the coming of man, the swifts had been building theirnests for thousands of years in hollow trees, here and there in theAmerican wilderness. Then man came, and unwittingly supplied,within his chimneys, exactly the situation the swift required for nest-ing, an upright surface inside a cavity, protected from the weather
?
the equivalent of a hollow tree. Thus the birds' nesting sites wereincreased a millionfold.Nowadays the typical site is in a chimney, "from near top to 22feet below it," Forbusli (1927) says. Yet, as the following quota-tions show, the swift occasionally avails itself for nesting purposesof some other of man's works; also from time to time it is foundbreeding in its ancestral manner.The nest itself is a little hammock?half-saucer-shaped?composedsolely of dead twigs, which the bird breaks off as it flies past a tree.The twigs are attached to the wall, and the twigs themselves are fas-tened to one another by the glutinous saliva of the bird, whichhardens and fixes the structure so firmly to its support that it with-stands, as a rule, the rain of summer storms.178223?40 24
274 BULLETTN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMLewis (1927) reports that "a pair of Chimney Swifts built a nestand hatched a brood of young in an open well near an old desertedfarm-house in the southern part of the county [Lawrenceville, Va.].The nest was typical for the species and was stuck just above a bulgein a rock in the well wall, just as they are stuck to the rocks in achimney. It was located about 7 feet below the surface of theground, and 10 feet above the water."Hyde (IQM) found an occupied nest "in an abandoned cisternabout one mile east of the town of Magnolia, Putnam County, 111."He says : "The cistern was half hidden by vegetation. The diameterat the aperture was three feet and at the bottom nine feet. Therewas water nine feet below the aperture. The nest was in an entirelysheltered position four feet above the water. All these figures beingapproximate."Kennard (1895), speaking of a nest in New York State, says: "Ifound a Chimney Swift's nest placed just under the ridge pole ofan old log barn and against the side of one of the logs of which itwas constructed. * * * j|. ^^^g within a foot of an enormoushornet's nest. The five young birds which were nearly fledged wereclinging to the bark of the logs in the immediate vicinity and seemedto get on much better with the hornets than I did."Evermann (1889) describes a "peculiar nidification of this species"as follows: "A pair fastened their nest in 1884 upon the inside ofthe door of an out-house at the Vandalia depot in Camden [Indiana].The birds entered the building through small holes made in thbgables. This building was in daily use, but those who visited it werecautioned by the railroad agent to open the door with care so as notto jar the eggs from the nest. Four eggs were laid, one of which wasjostled from the nest, the other three hatched, and the young werereared in safety. The nest was repaired and used again in 1885, andagain in 1886, a brood being reared each season."Most astonishing records of nesting are reported by Moore (1902b)thus: "In this locality [Scotch Lake, New Brunswick], more nests arebuilt inside buildings than there are inside chimneys. The nests areusually glued to the gable end of the building?sometimes barns,sometimes old uninhabited houses are chosen?and one nest, the pastsummer, was built in a blacksmith shop within fifteen feet of theforge. A number of years ago a pair nested in the upper part of ahouse in which a family lived, and near to a bed in; which childrenslept every night. In this case the birds entered through a brokenwindow."Daniel (1902) gives an instance of the nesting of swifts in hollowcypress trees in the Great Dismal Swamp. He says
:
Along the southeastern shore, growing in the lake some distance out fromtlie shore line, are a number of large hollow cypresses. The roots or "knees" of
CHIMNEY SAVIFT 275these trees extend upward and outward from the surface of the water, curvinginward some distance up, and in most of them, between the water and base ofthe tree proper, there are openings large enough for a canoe to enter. By push-ing our canoe in these intervals between the roots, we were able to examine theinteriors of the hollow trees. In these we found the swifts nesting in theirprimitive fashion, the nests being fastened to the interior walls about midwaydown.T. E. Musselman wrote me in 1935 that he has noted that swiftsare beginning to use silos as nesting sites in the Middle West.Eggs.?[Author's note : The chimney swift lays three to six eggs,more commonly four or five. These are pure white and only mod-erately glossy. In shape they vary from elliptical-ovate to cylin-drical-ovate. The measurements of 56 eggs average 20.10 by 13.24millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 21.59 by13.46, 21.34 by 13.72, 17.53 by 13.72, and 18.29 by 12.70 millimeters.]Young.?The young swift starts life in a world of danger. Itcomes from the egg a blind little naked thing, no bigger than yourfingernail, lying in a frail cradle of sticks that overhangs a black
"drop into nothing." The little swift, however, is equipped to dealwith the dangers of its birthplace. Very early in its life it can clingand crawl ; it can hide under its nest ; it can move about over the wallsof the abyss in which it lives; and, when the time for flying comes, itcan clamber toward the free air, taking, perhaps, the longest andlast walk of its career.Frederic H. Kennard illustrates in his notes the hardiness of theyoung swift when it comes from the egg. He says : "On July 15, 1918,somewhere between 9 and 10 a. m. at Duck Lake, Maine, I foundamong the ashes of the fireplace, in a friend's unoccupied camp, achimney swift's nest which I had been watching and which, when Ihad last seen it, the previous noon, in the chimney, had containedtwo eggs. It had evidently been dislodged from its proper place bya thunderstorm and torrential rain of the night before.
"The nest and both eggshells lay among the ashes, close together,at the back of the large fireplace. Both eggs were broken, and theshells lay just where they had fallen. One of them was evidentlyaddled, while the content of the other was apparently missing.
"Imagine my surprise, when after hunting for some time, I discov-ered that the content of the other egg was a tiny swiftlet, which,blind and with the back of its skull badly bruised and suffused withblood from its fall down the chimney, had nevertheless made its wayout through the ashes, dropping down the thickness of a brick fromthe fire place proper to the hearth beyond, then across the hearth;and had climbed, in a style worthy of a young hoatzin, and was stillclinging in an upright position to the finely woven wire fender thathad enclosed the fireplace, but which I had moved aside in order tofacilitate inspection.
276 BULLETIN 17 6, UlSriTED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
"Of course this bird might have been hatched the day before, son>e-time between noon and the time of the storm, which occurred about10 p. m., but my impression was, from the position of the eggshell asit lay broken in halves among the ashes, that the little fellow readyto hatch had come down either in the shell or in the act of emergingfrom it. There were no signs of any yolk to be seen. Judged fromhis size and development he must have been less than a day old. Therehad been but one nest in the chimney; and there was no possibilityof any outside intermeddling, as the camp was kept locked and Ihad been the only one to enter it in weeks."Of the young when nearly ready to fly he says : "Found a swift'snest down in Charlie Boyce's boat house on the wall about 5' 9'' abovethe floor, and the four nearly fledged young clinging to the prettysmoothly sawed board wall from IS'' to 24" away from the nest.Upon investigating I found that their toenails were long and sharpand that they could flutter up or across the wall at will, though whenundisturbed they kept well together in a compact little group, proppedup on their tails. When disturbed the young birds squealed loudlysomething like an exaggerated rattlesnake."Burns (1921) states that the eyes of the young swift become wideopen on the fourteenth day. This accords with the observation ofMary F. Day (1899), who watched at close range the development ofa brood of swifts and noted that the incubation period was 19 days
;
that "even at the tender age that must be reckoned by minutes, theseyoung birds were fed, seemingly, by regurgitation" ; that the "two firstventured from home when nineteen days old" ; and that they flew fromthe chimney four weeks after hatching. Speaking of t,he exercising ofthe nestlings, she says : "The young aspirants would stand in the nestand for a time vibrate the wings rapidly, so rapidly that the identityof wing was lost." And of the fledglings 26 days after leaving theegg she says : "They take flying exercises up and down the chimney,but I believe have not yet left it."Carter (1924) studied the feeding of five fledgling swifts at anest built on the wall of an abandoned cabin in Ontario. He says
:
The old birds gained access to the interior of the building through a brokenwindow and were remarkably tame, feeding the young within three feet of theobservers, thus giving an excellent opportunity to observe the process of feeding.The parent, with greatly extended cheeks and throat, alighted upon the wallamong the young. Immediately there was a great commotion. After a shorthesitation a young bird would be fed by forcing some of the food from themouth of the parent into that of the offspring. After a moment's feeding therewas a pause and then the process was repeated, either to the same yoiang oranother. As many as three were served at a single visit.Lewis (1929) describes thus the feeding of a brood of young birdsthat had fallen when their nest had been dislodged by rain but wereclinging to the wall of the chimney
:
CHIMNEY SWIFT 277From the start the old birds did not see me sitting on the hearth, or, seeingthey paid little attention. I was much surprized to see that they always fluttereddown and lit on the wall a little below the young birds, bracing themselves inthe same manner as the young and reaching up to feed them. The youngwould turn their necks down as far as possible without changing the positionof their bodies. The old birds would stretch up, putting the bill inside thegaping mouths of the young, and seemingly feed by regurgitation. This wasinvariable during the time I spent watching them, which amounted to a numberof hours.The four young clung to the wall without moving noticeably, always side byside, and were fed from daylight until dark at intervals of from 1 to 28minutes until July 31, when I was obliged to leave home. [The nest had beendislodged on June 25.]After the nest had fallen, but before the parents came down intothe lower part of the chimney to feed their young, the little birds gavea note that Mr. Lewis describes as "a loud, harsh squeal, quite unlikethe chattering they always make when being fed."Townsend (1906) comments on the noisiness of a nestful of chatter-ing swifts he found inside "a small hay barn" at Cape Breton. Hesays : "The shrill twittering of the young was almost deafening in thesmall hay loft."Guy A. Bailey (1905), in a study of a swift's nest built inside abarn near Syracuse, N. Y., shows that the parent bird urges theyoung to leave the nest even before (according to his photographs)the flight feathers are more than half released from their sheaths.He says
:
Generally, after feeding the young, the old bird crawled over to one side ofthe nest and cautiously insinuated its body behind the yoimg birds. The adultbird kept crowding until all but one or two of the brood of five were forced outof the nest and took up positions on the vertical roost. The remaining birdswould sometimes leave the nest of their own accord and follow their mates.This was noticed especially after those clinging to the boards had been fed.It often happened that the adult birds would remain away from the youngas long as twenty minutes, during which time the little ones would return tothe nest. Usually, however, one parent would remain with the brood untilrelieved by the mate. On such occasions there was a period of several minuteswhen both parents were present.Plumages.?[Author's note: The young swift is hatched nakedand blind, but the spinelike quills soon begin to appear, and thesedevelop into a juvenal, or first-winter, plumage, which is much likethat of the adult; there are some light edgings on the scapulars andrump, which soon wear away, and the under parts are somewhatdarker than in adults, especially on the throat. I have seen youngbirds acquiring the first winter plumage as early as August 10 andothers still in the postnatal molt as late as September 25. This plum-age is probably worn through the winter, though no winter speci-mens have been available for study. Forbush (1927) says that a
"complete prenuptial molt beginning in late winter or early spring
278 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
is followed by a plumage as adult; adults apparently molt twice ayear, a complete postnuptial molt in autumn and a partial (possiblycomplete) molt in spring."]Food.?Pearson (1911) quotes a letter from W. L. McAtee of theUnited States Biological Survey: "The bird's food consists almostwholly of insects, and beetles, flies and ants are the principal items.It gets many beetles (Scolytidae), the most serious enemies of ourforests, when they are swarming, and takes also the old-fashionedpotato beetle {Lema trilmeata), the tarnished plant-bug {Lyguspratensis).! and other injurious insects. The bird is, of course, largelybeneficial to the agricultural interests of the country."Knight (1908) says: "The food of the Chimney Swallow consistsof almost any of the smaller insects which fill the air of a summer'sday."Behavior.?The relationship between man and the chimney swiftis a rather curious one. Although the species spends the summerscattered over a large part of the North American Continent, it never,except by accident, sets foot upon one inch of this vast land. Thebirds build their "procreant cradle" in the chimneys of thousands ofour homes and crisscross for weeks above our gardens and over thestreets of our towns and cities, yet, wholly engrossed in their ownactivities far overhead, they do not appear to notice man at all. In-deed, it is easy to believe that the swift is no more aware of manduring the summer, even when it is a denizen of our largest cities,than when in winter it is soaring over the impenetrable jungles ofCentral America.How do we regard this bird that does not know we are on earth?We are glad to have swifts breed in our chimney ; we like to see themshooting about over our heads, and we enjoy their bright voices, yet,do we feel such friendship for them as we feel for a chipping sparrow,for example, which builds sociably in the vines of our piazza? Thelittle sparrow may be wary, and may fly away if we come too near,but at least it pays us the compliment of recognizing our existence.The swift, however, is not even a semitrustful neighbor ; it is a guestthat does not know we are its host. We may almost think of it as amachine for catching insects, a mechanical toy, clicking out its sharpnotes.But let us note this fact. Every ten years or so the swifts do notappear about our house in the spring. Something has gone wrong ontheir journey northward. Our chimney will be empty this year;there will be no dark bows and arrows dashing back and forth aboveour roof, no quick pursuits and chattering in the evening. All sum-mer something is lacking because there are no swifts to enliven theseason. We realize, now that they are gone, how we should miss their
CHIMNEY SWIFT 279
active, cheerful presence, if they never came back again. But we maybe sure they will come back?next year perhaps?to visit us again,this most welcome "guest of summer."Bird banding has brought man and the chimney swift for the firsttime into close association. During the past few years, swifts havebeen banded in very large numbers. At daybreak, as the birds pourout of the chimneys where they have roosted during their autumnalmigration, they are captured in traps placed over the chimney and soingeniously devised that the outward flow of hundreds of birds is notinterrupted. The banders who have handled the birds report thatthey show little or no fear (or consciousness) of man and appeartame to an extraordinary degree.The following quotations from Constance and E. A. Everett (1927)illustrate their behavior after being caught. These authors statethat: "In less than five minutes, with but one casualty, one hundredsixty-four Chimney Swifts were inside of that cage ['a six-foothouse trap'], clinging to its walls of wire mesh like a swarm of bees,except that though densely massed, they were clinging to the wireand not to each other. A few were at all times on the wing, as theychanged from one group to another, bewildered, perhaps, bat not inthe least frightened. Most of them, however, promptly alighted andtucked their heads under the wings and tails of those birds abovethem, until the inner walls of the cage took on the appearance ofbeing shingled with birds."Wlien removed from the cage, "these swifts were very quiet, andapparently comfortable at all stages of the game. Wlien held in thehands they would snuggle between the fingers confidingly ; and whenheld against the clothes they would wriggle under the folds of thegarments and contentedly go to sleep."Of the next morning's work they say: "Since there were so fewbirds, we took the time to enjoy playing with them. Miss Constanceand the boys tried wearing them either singly as a brooch, or collec-tively as a breast plate; and always the birds snuggled down asthough perfectly willing to join the game, provided their naps werenot interfered with. Finally some passing school girls were adornedwith live breast pins to take home for show, while several birds, cling-ing to Constance's coat rode many blocks in the car, and, scolding,had to be dragged off to their liberty."These observations were made at Waseca, Minn., on September 8and 9, 1926.In flight, the swift, perhaps from necessity because the bird spendsso much of the day in the air, relieves its wings from time to timefrom their quick flickering and sails?^the wings held motioiiless, fullyextended from the body. When beating its v/ings, the bird appears
280 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMalways in a liurry ; it seems to be moving tliem up and down as fastas it can; it often rocks from side to side, as it turns this way andthat, and ever seems to be trying to fly a little faster.Sutton (1928), in an able study of the swift's flight, aided by ex-amination of captive birds, states that "no intermediate, half-spreadposition [of the wing] was ever maintained in healthy individuals.In fact, such an intermediate position seemed impossible [on accountof anatomical structure]. * * *
"It may be stated broadly, therefore, that the Chimney Swift wing,so far as its spreading is concerned, has but two normal positions;one, folded at rest, the other, open for flight, whether that flight berapid forv/ard flapping, soaring, coasting, or even sudden descent."One evening Dr. Sutton, standing at the mouth of a chimney whileswifts were going to roost, watched the birds enter, within arm'sreach. Describing this experience, he says
:
I was amazed at their precision and speed. As a rule, they slowed upabruptly just before making the final plunge, this being accomplished by aspreading and lowering of the tail, and by rapid, vigorous, downward andforward strokes of the wings, during which the loosely and widely spreadprimaries seemed to aid in checking the speed. When a proper point abovethe mouth of the chimney was reached the birds suddenly pressed the spreadtail downward as far as possible, and with oiitstretched wings high above theback, still loosely fluttering, through an arc of about forty-five degrees, eitherdropped directly, turned jerkily from side to side, or twirled gracefully down-ward into the chimney.Again, in the morning, peering down the chimney as the birdsemerged, he says : "I was surprised to see that the birds were flyingalmost directly forward, but in an upward direction. Their bodieswere not in a horizontal position ; they were almost vertical, and thewhole spectacle gave the impression that the birds were crawling upinvisible wires."
' For years there has been a controversy concerning the swift'sflight. Some observers held that the swift moved its wings simul-taneously, like other birds ; others believed that the wing beats werealternate, like the strokes of a double-bladed paddle. It is easy tosee how confusion between fact and appearance might arise. Swiftsdo appear to fly with alternate wing beats, but chiefly, if not wholly,when the birds tilt to one side in making their quick turns. Then onewing appears to be up and the other down, and as a matter of factsuch is the case in reference to an imaginary line drawn across theswift parallel to the ground?one wing is above the line, and theother is below it. But the bird being tilted to one side, in order toshow the relative position of one wing to the other, we must allow forthe tilting, and we must draw the imaginary line, not parallel to theground, but through the short axis of the bird^s body. The observer.
CHIMNEY SWIFT 281
standing- on the ground, does not make this adjustment, for he doesnot take into account the instantaneous tiltino: of the bird.The question was definitely settled by Myron F. Westover fi?8^,who demonstrated by motion photography that '-'there luas no instancewhere there ^oas any alternation of loing-movement; the wings mo-\'ein unison as do those of other species of birds." _jDr. Chapmanappends an editorial note to the article: "Mr. Westover's film wasshown in the American Museum to the members of the Bird De-partment who agree that it demonstrates beyond question the truthof his conclusions."There is a difference of opinion also among observers as to whetherthe swift, when collecting nesting material, breaks off dead twigswith its feet or with its beak. Coues (1897), questioning the cor-rectness of a drawing by Fuertes representing the bird snapping offa twig with its feet, says: "We have always supposed the bird se-cured ih.& object with its beak, as it dashed past on wing at fullspeed; or at any rate that has been my own belief for more yearsthan I can remember. But Mr. Fuertes vouched for the correctnessof his representation from actual observation. The question beingthus raised, I set it forth recently in a query inserted in one of ourpopular periodicals, asking for information."There are six replies to Coues' query printed in The Nidologist(vol. 4, pp. 80, 81), five of which are in accord with his opinion,while one is against it, as is one more reply published in The Osprey(vol. 1, p. 122). Dr. Coues declares that "these leave the case stillopen !"More recently Shelley (1929), from an ample experience of 13uninterrupted years of observation of swifts at close range, statesunequivocally that the.v "gather their nesting material * * *with their feety He adds: "I never yet observed a Swift grasp orcarry a twig in its beak."Mr. Shelley's well-weighed opinion added to that of Mr. Fuertes,whose accuracy and skill in observing birds have never been sur-passed, should be accepted with confidence until motion photographyshall prove or disprove the correctness of their view, although theswift may adoj^t both methods of collecting nesting material.We may recall that Audubon (1840) appears to have had nodoubt upon the question, for he says: "They throw their body sud-denly against the twig, grapple it with their feet, and by an instan-taneous jerk, snap it off short, and proceed with it to the placeintended for the nest."Although without much doubt swifts pluck off twigs with theirfeet, they may find it convenient to arrive at the nest site with theirfeet free to grasp the wall of the chimney. To gain this end, it is
282 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMpossible that on the way to the nest, the birds may transfer thetwig to their beak, for William Brewster (1937b) in his Concordjournal says that on June 15, 1905, he saw one "drop into thechimney this evening carrying a short twig held crossways in itsAn entry in Brewster's Concord journal also indicates that the swiftmay be more nocturnal in its habits than is commonly believed. Hewrites under the date August 5, 1893: "At about 2 a. m. I was sur-prised to hear Chimney Swifts twittering outside the window. Thereseemed to be a good many of them and the sound of their voices indi-cated that they first circled about the house several times and thenwent off towards the South. When I first heard the twittering, therewere also several birds making their peculiar rumbling in the chim-nej^, but this soon ceased and was not again repeated. The night wasdark and still at the time, with rain falling gently and steadily."We must remember also that Wilson (1832) states that "the youngare fed at intervals during the greater part of the night," and HenryC. Denslow writes to Mr. Bent of "the vivid memory" of an observa-tion of the birds' nocturnal activities. He says that "the chimneyswift feeds its young in the middle of the night, going out and inthe chimney several times with the usual rumbling of wing beatsand the usual chirring sound of the young birds while being fed. Ichanced to sleep in a small room with a chimney, near Rochester,N. Y., for several years, and so became familiar with this habit ofthe bird."Frederic H. Kennard, in his notes, describes an interesting habitthat he observed at very close range at a nest containing young builton the inner wall of a boathouse. He says: "She( ?) [a parent bird]sat very close, moving her head only occasionally, panting with theheat, and did not appear to mind me much until her mate flew in,lit on the wall nearby, when she got off the nest and fluttered up anddown the wall beside or below the nest, snapping her wings together(apparently behind her), a note of warning or anger, or something ofthe sort, perhaps to scare me away or to show her displeasure. Shewould raise her wings slowly until they stood out straight behind herback, parallel and almost touching." And later he adds: "They donot seem to snap their wings except when disturbed by me. Thereis no snapping when they ordinarily leave their nests. Wlien theydo snap they slowly raise their wings until they are straight up fromtheir backs and then snap them a couple of times."At the same boathouse he "saw one of the swifts fly through a crackin the door just after I had come out and closed it. He didn't slowdown at all, never missed a beat, but merely turned on one side andwent through, full speed."
CHIMNEY SWIFT 283Voice.?The notes of the swift remind ns of the bird itself?ener-getic and quick; sharp and hard like the bird's stiff wings. Thenote most commonly heard as the birds shoot about over our headsis a bright, clear, staccato chip or ^^.si/i.-?whichever suggests thesharper sound?often repeated in a series and sometimes runningoff into a rapid chatter. The chip note varies little, if at all, exceptfor the quiclmess of the notes, and seems to punctuate the bird'sceaseless rush through the air. Sometimes, when the birds are veryhigh in the air, the chattering call comes down to our ears, soft-ened by distance?like sparks slowly falling to the earth after arocket has burst.Simple as these notes are, the birds introduce a good deal ofvariety into them by modifying the interval between them, therebychanging the expression of their lively theme.One modification, which I have mentioned under "Courtship," hav-ing heard it only in the breeding season and only when the birdswere under stress of excitement, serves to illustrate this ability andmay be regarded as representing the song of the swift. It is madeup of a long series of notes in which the birds, after giving severalisolated chips, change abruptly to a series of very rapid notes, asort of chatter, then, with no pause between, change back to thechijos, then back again?chips-chatter-chips, and so on. We mayterm it the "chips and chatter call."Another modification of the chip note, often heard in summerwhen the birds are in a comparatively quiet mood, is a long chatterin which the volume increases and lessens, suggesting the soundingof a minute watchman's rattle.There is one note quite different in quality from the above notesand less frequently heard than any of the variations of the chip.This is a musical monosyllable?sometimes divided into two syl-lables?a squeal, almost a high whistle with a slight upward in-flection, like eeip, sometimes repeated once or twice. I have heard itboth in spring and fall; hence it cannot be, as I once thought itwas, a note of immature birds.Field marks.?The swift may be distinguished readily from anyof the swallows by the shape of its wings and the manner in whichit moves them. Swallows' wings are roughly triangular, the tri-angle seeming to join the bird's body by a fairly wide base, whereasthe swift's wings are narrow at the base?they are pointed, andslightly curved like the terminal part of a sickle's blade?and appearto be set on well forward.The stroke of the swift's wing gives a jerky, hurried effect com-pared with the more leisurely movement of a swallow, and thetips of the wings are not swept backward, even when the birds are
284 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
sailing, as they are, in varying degree, in the flight of all theswallows.The swift has been likened to a winged cigar, tapered at bothends, flying through the air. The resemblance is very close, exceptwhen the bird fans out its stumpy tail, as it does from time to time.The nearly uniform dull color of the swift's under parts and itsvery short, square tail, combined with its characteristic flight, serveto identify the bird even at a considerable distance.Enemies.?Because the swift spends a large part of its life movingrapidly through the air, almost never coming to rest except at its nestor when roosting in a chimney or a hollow tree, it is practically outof reach of any mammal that otherwise might prey upon it. Andwhile flying its speed and its erratic course render it almost immunefrom attack by hawks.In his notes T. E. Musselman cites an exception to this immunity.He says : "I was watching a flock of about 1,500 swifts circling abouta chimney in Quincy, 111., forming an avian funnel which was drop-ping into its black depths. It was almost dusk when a sharp-shinnedhawk flew from a neighboring sycamore tree to the top of the chimneyand seized one of the swifts as it was poised with upturned wings andwas just about to drop into its night's sanctuary. The swift squealedas it was being carried away, so I was able to follow the course of thetiny hawk as it flew through the semidarkness back to the tree."Musselman (1931) also reports an occasion when swifts were over-come by gas while roosting in the chimney of a church in Quincy, 111.He says : "One cold October night it was necessary to turn on the fire,which resulted in the killing of between 3000 and 5000 ChimneySwifts that had harbored there. Three bushel baskets of dead birdswere taken from the flue."Julian Burroughs (1922) tells of an instance in which a large numberof swifts, taking refuge in a chimney, dislodged the soot. Many weresmothered in the chimney, while others, several hundred, evidentlyconfused by the soot, continued down into the house where they werefound "on all the mouldings and pictures." These were released ap-parently unharmed. "There were about fifty live ones and fifty deadin the furnace?also ten water-pails full of dead ones in the pipes andbottom of chimney."The greatest hazard of the swift's life, perhaps, comes in the springor early summer when, once in a dozen years or so, a prolonged, drench-ing downpour of rain clears the air of insects, and threatens the localbirds with starvation. Brewster (1906), referring to such a storm,says: "The Swifts * * * were seriously reduced in numbers,throughout eastern Massachusetts, during the cold, rainy weather ofJune, 1903, and the losses which they suffered that season have not as
CHIMNEY SWIFT 285yet been made good." Since 1903 the birds here in New England havebeen decimated by several minor storms but have quickly recoveredtheir loss.Fall.?Fall comes early in the yearly cycle of the swift's life. Atthe end of the summer there is a long journey before the birds, oldand young, to the warm air of the Tropics where they can find foodthroughout the winter months.Late in July and earl}^ in August we often see small groups ofswifts in the air, evidently preparing for migration. These flocksare doubtless made up of our local birds, those that have spent thesummer in our vicinity, and they are accompanied, presumably, by asmany of their young as are on the wing. They travel such longdistances through the air, often curving round and round a chimneyor chui'ch tower, that they derive a good deal of exercise from theflights?exercise that must serve to strengthen the wings of the youngbirds.Under date of August 7, 1917, my notes mention this habit. 'Tnthese exercising flights, as I take them to be, the birds fly mostly inlong curves ; they are really circling, although they may turn at anytime to either side. The birds, a dozen or more of them, are sailingin a great ring; they suggest bits of wood floating in an eddy of aslow-moving stream. They are far from one another, flying silently,mainly on set wings. One veers toward another, which quickens itspace by rapid, flickering wing beats. A chase is on. One or morebirds join in, giving the long chatter. Now they hurry through theair, close together. When one comes near another, it may raise itswings in a V above its back, soaring for a moment. The chases aresoon over, however; the birds seem to lose interest in speed and re-sume their circular, soaring flight. They often turn out from thecircle, tilting to one side, the outer wing uppermost.
"During the middle of the day I do not see the swifts gatheredabout the house; it is chiefly in the morning and evening that theyare most active. This evening two birds, close together, flew slowlyover my head at a low elevation. One gave the long chatter andchips alternatel}^, but in a quiet way with little staccato quality."It is at about this time, the first two weeks of August, that wesee evidence of molting in our local swifts. As they fly overhead wenotice a narrow gap in their wings where a flight feather or twois missing, and in every case the little gap in one wing correspondsalmost exactly with the gap in the other, but this slight bilateralloss of wing surface seems to hinder the birds' flight little, if at all.Apparently molting does not cripple them, as it does many wood-land birds; indeed, the swift, spending the hours of daylight in thesky, must not be disabled for even a single day.
286 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe most spectacular event in the swift's life, from our point ofview, occurs during the autumnal migration when the birds, latein the afternoon, congregate in a large, wheel-shaped flock and circleabout the chimney they have selected as their roosting place for thenight. . The following quotations describe in detail such gatherings.Townsend (1912), writing of the bird in the St. John Valley, NewBrunswick, says:At Fredericton, on July 25, I watclied a large flock of Swifts enter for thenight a chimney on the southwest corner of the Parliament Building. Sunset at about 8 p. m. At 8.24 p. m. one bird set its wings and dropped into thechimney and soon they began dropping in fast, while the flock circled first oneway then another or crowded together in a confused mass, twittering loudlyall the time. Owing to the proximity of the dome regular circling was some-what interfered with, but as a i-ule the birds circled in the direction of thehands of a clock, and individuals would drop out and into the chimney indozens when the circle passed over it. Occasionally they would all swoop offto the other side of the building, soon to return. At 8.45 p. m. practically allthe birds had entered the chimney and I had counted roughly,?at first singlyand later by tens,?2200 birds.The setting of the wings, which Dr. Townsend speaks of, takesplace just over the mouth of the chimney. The bird raises its wingsabove its back and drops into the chimney or very often shies off, likea horse refusing to take a fence and, after making another circuit,tries again.Linton (1924) gives us a vivid picture of the Swifts "at bedtime,"showing a spirit of play among the birds. He writes from Augusta,Ga.:October 5, 6.5 p. m. : Sky overcast ; large numbers of Swifts in the upper air
;
look like swarm of bees ; general direction of flight in circle, counter-clockwise.6.7 : A few began to enter the chimney, when a passing auto frightened themfor a short time. 6.8: Entering again, average probably not far from 15 persecond, at times many more than this [the flue of this chimney was said to be 3feet square] ; circling continuously counter-clockwise. As the circle approachesthe chimney, a column of Swifts, from a point 20 feet above the level of thetop of the chimney descends to the chimney. The Swifts in this column whichfail to enter continue the circle at a lower level, joining the higher level at theopposite side of the circle, and in a position which makes them contributingparts of the descending column, when they again come to that point. Greatswarms of Swifts could be seen in the upper air, their paths apparently cross-ing and recrossing, but really all flying in circular paths at different levels.Many appeared as minute specks in the upper air. At 6.23 all were in, stop-ping abruptly ; probably no more than a dozen stragglers in the last 5 seconds.It thus took the flock a little over 15 minutes to enter the chimney.October 8, 6.12 p. m. : Sky clear ; 3 or 4 Swifts seen from window. 6.13 : 12 ormore Swifts in sight. 6.15 : 100, more or less, in sight. 6.15 : 20 : 500, more orless, in sight. 6.16 : Increasing in numbers rapidly ; general course in wide cir-cles, counter-clockwise. 6.17 : Seem to be enjoying themselves too much to goto bed ; immense numbers ; upper air full of them. 6.19 : 20 : Getting closer tochimney ; some of them dipping down to within a foot or two of the top. 6.20
:
Changed their minds for a few seconds ; again enjoying themselves in the air.
CHIMNEY SWIFT 287
6.21 : Getting closer again. 6.21 : 30 : Changed minds again. 6.22 : 30 : Lookas if they were getting ready to go to bed. 6.23: Getting closer; circlesvariable, 150 to 200 feet in diameter nearest level of top of chimney, lowerportion, at times, possibly no more than 50 feet in diameter. 6.23 : 30 : Pass-ing near top of chimney. 6.24 : Passing very close to top of chimney. 6.24 : 30
:
A few going in. 6.24 : 40 : Entering at rate of 15 or more per second. Samemaneuvers as on previous evenings. 6.25 : 30 : Going in very rapidly ; 15per second a very conservative estimate. 6.2S: A second or two when they didnot go in so rapidly, being disturbed by the puffing of a locomotive on theGeorgia Railroad near by. 628:30: Going in as rapidly as ever. 6.30: All in;stopped suddenly.Audubon (1840) gives an interesting account of a large numberof swifts he found roosting in a hollow tree in Louisville, Ky. Hesays:I found it to be a sycamore, nearly destitute of branches, sixty or seventyfeet high, between seven and eight feet in diameter at the base, and about five forthe distance of forty feet up, where the stump of a broken hollowed branch, abouttwo feet in diameter, made out from the main stem. * * * Next morning Irose early enough to reach the place long before the least appearance of day-light, and placed my head against the tree. All was silent within. I remainedin that posture probably twenty minutes, when suddenly I thought the greattree was giving way, and coming down upon me. Instinctively I sprung fromit, but wlien I looked up to it again, what was my astonislimeut to see it stand-ing as firm as ever. The Swallows were now pouring out in a black continuedstream. I ran back to my post, and listened in amazement to the noise within,which I could compare to nothing else than tlie sound of a large wheel revolvingunder a powerful stream. It was yet dusky, so I could hardly see the hour onmy watch, but I estimated the time which they took in getting out at morethan thirty minutes. * * *The next day I hired a man, who cut a hole at the base of the tree. * * *Knowing by experience that if the bii'ds should notice the hole below, theywould abandon the tree, I had it carefully closed. The Swallows came as usualthat night, and I did not disturb them for several days. At last, provided witha dark lantern, I went with my companion about nine in the evening, deter-mined to have a full view of the interior of the tree. The hole was opened withcaution. I scrambled up the sides of the mass of exuviae, and my friendfollowed. All was perfectly silent. Slowly and gradually I brought the light ofthe lantern to bear on the sides of the hole above us, when we saw the Swallowsclinging side by side, covering the v/hole surface of the excavation. In no in-stance did I see one above another. Satisfied with the sight, I closed the lan-tern. We then caught and killed with as much care as possible more thana hundred, stowing them away in our pockets and bosoms, and slid down intothe open air. We observed that, while on this visit, not a bird had dropped itsdung upon us. Closing the entrance, we marched towards Louisville perfectlyelated. On examining the birds which we had procured, a hundred and fifteenin number, we found only six females. Eighty-seven were adult males ; of theremaining twenty-two the sex could not be ascertained, and I had no doubt thatthey were the young of that year's first brood, the flesh and quill-feathers beingtender and soft.Audubon estimates that the number of birds "that roosted in thissingle tree was 9,000." This investigation took place "in the monthof July." He visited the tree again on August 2, after the local
288 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM3^oiing birds "had left their native recesses." Of this visit he Says:
"I concluded that the numbers resorting to it had not increased;but I found many more females and young than males, among up-wards of fifty, which were caught and opened."Musselman (1926), writing of SM'ifts overtaken by wintry condi-tions with snow in Quincy, 111., says: "I discovered that on dayswhen the thermometer indicated an approach to the freezing pointthe birds remained in the chimneys until about nine o'clock in themorning. During the daj^time the birds quickly returned from theirfeeding over the river, circled but a time or two, and droppedinto the chimney until warm. * * *
"The most popular chimneys were those which connected belowwith the basement, and served, therefore, as warm air flues. In suchchimneys the temperature reached 70?. Little wonder that the birdspreferred these chimneys on damp and cold nights !"The two following quotations describe very unusual departuresfrom the swift's regular habit of roosting.Latham (1920), writing from Orient, Long Island, N. Y., states:About oue p. M. August 17, 1919, while collecting insects near the easternborder of a broad brackish meadow, my attention was attracted to ChimneySwifts iChaetiira pelagica) frequently flying slowly in from the west anddisappearing in the fringe of vines and shrubs that separated me from theextreme east boundary of the marsh. In this heavy growth, from waist to headhigh, were elderberry bushes (Samhucus canadensis) heavily hung with ripefruit. I selected a bird for special study. It advanced on descending, hov-ering flight. About four feet above the tangle, near the farther side, it pausedand dropped abruptly into a clump of elderberries. Carefully marking thelocality, I worked my passage to a few feet of the spot. The swift was cling-ing to the cymoid head of the elder eating the fruit. The ease with which thebird took flight from its slender perch, rising directly upward several feetabove the cover and dropping rail-like back into it, was interesting and worthyof note.The cover harbored at the time not less than fifty swifts. Most of themwere flushed with more or less difficulty, but some individuals took wing withinarm-reach of the observer. No others were noted eating fruit. * * *It is evident that the birds had established a roosting, or resting place outof the ordinary. It is not satisfactorily settled whether the birds sought thebrush to feed on elder-berries or for shelter. The writer is of the opinion thatthe bird seen eating berries was only an exceptional case where the bird tooka berry after alighting within reach of it.E. K. and D. Campbell (1926) report from Cold Spring, N. Y., anastonishing roosting place for swifts, the 'bark of an oak tree. Theystate
:
At 2.30 p. M. September 5, 1926, we observed an excited flock circling be-tween the house-front and the adjacent oak trees, and above the house-top andback. Their flight seemed to focus at a point 25 feet up on the trunk of atall oak. The day was dull and we judged there was some sort of food there.Eeally, however, they were gradually alighting on the bark, as we discovered
CHIMNEY SWIFT 289
at 4.30 p. M., when most of the flock was found to have grouped itself in closeformation, as shown in the rough sketch. * * *The birds seemed two or three deep, and several of us estimated well over ahundred of them. They were snuggled together, seemingly to keep warm, andthe heads all concealed beneath the wings of those above. This patch of birdswas of irregular shape, nearly 5 feet high and 7 to 8 inches wide at the widestpart. It was constantly changing, as some birds seemed to lose their grip andfly off and return, so that a dozen or two were on the wing and seeking aplace to work into the group. We saw some alight at the edge and work upclose, while others lit in the middle of the group and must have reached throughwith claws to grasp bird or bark, those failing falling back and taking wing.All had their heads concealed but the few upper ones. Toward dusk the birds,matching the moist bark, were invisible, but we examined them again by flash-light after dark, and all was quiet.Next morning, to our surprise, they were still there, in broad daylight,and some remained through to the afternoon.Cottam (1932) describes in detail some remarkable gatherings ofswifts "at niglit circling the great dome of our national capitol, feed-ing on the small insects attracted there by the powerful flood lights."He observed the birds on many evenings, both in spring and fall, oncein a flock of "approximately 2,000," circling "the dome?the area ofgreatest light concentration?where they remained until the lightswere turned off shortly after midnight." Of the bird's evolutions, hesays:On the nights when flocking occurred at the capitol, the birds began to arrivein small groups from all directions about sundown, and by the time they nor-mally would have been going to roost they had formed into one great swarm.For the first fifteen or twenty minutes after sundown the birds foraged overthe tree tops and flew in all directions without any apparent system to theirmovements, except that they remained in a rather restricted area. Gradually,as it grew darker, a greater number were seen to fly more or less in the samegeneral circular direction ; in other words, there was a distinct impression ofgroup movement. About the time the lights came on or shortly thereafter, allAvere following a definite course. Each time flocks of incoming birds disruptedthe rhythm and unison of the concentric flight there was a momentary disband-ing. When tiiey reformed, however, all seemed instinctively to fly in the samedirection. Most often the flight was uniformly circular, but occasionally it tookthe form of a conical cloud somewhat resembling a cyclone funnel. On oneoccasion it was seen to form a great figure "8" with one loop at a lower elevationthan the other.Frederic H. Kennard (MS.) makes this note of an unusual roostingplace at Duck, Maine: "In the evening [August 8, 1924] I was treatedto a performance of flocking, roosting chimney swifts, which at sun-down flocked up and, flying in circles about one end of the smaller ofCharlie Boyce's barns, gradually dribbled into a little window upunder the ridgepole of the gable end and there clinging by the hun-dreds in an almost solid sheet against the gable end of the barn. Weclimbed up into the hayloft and flashed a light onto them, and theygradually flew out until only perhaps 75 to 100 were left. There178223?40 25
290 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMmust have been 500 or 600 in all, though, of course, difficult toestimate."Winter.?In 1886 all that was known of the chimney swift in win-ter was that it passed south of the United States (A. O. U. Check-listof North American Birds, ed. 1, 1886). The third edition, pub-lished in 1910, adds that the bird winters "at least to Vera Cruzand Cozumel Island [Yucatan] and probably in Central America."The fourth edition, 1931, extends the probable winter range toAmazonia.Chapman (1931) cites two specimens of the chimney swift, takenlate in autumn in West Panama at a time when many South Ameri-can bound migrants were passing through this region. He says:If we may assume that they [the chimney swifts] winter in a forested, ratherthan an arid region it is not improbable that they were bound for Amazonia,where the presence as permanent residents of five species of Chaetiira shows thatthe region offers a favorable habitat for birds of this genus. From at leasttwo of the Brazilian species, pelagica could not certainly be distinguished in theair. Sight identification, therefore, is out of the question, and until a specimenis secured we shall not know where the Chimney Swift winters. But, as everycollector of birds in tropical America knows, to see a Swift is one thing, to getit quite another. Native collectors are not willing to expend the ammunitionrequired to capture Swifts, and even visiting naturalists secure comparativelyfew. With our attention directed toward Amazonia as the possible winterquarters of the North American species it may be long, therefore, before ourtheory is confirmed by specimens.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Temperate North America east of the Rocky Mountains,wintering probably in northeastern South America.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the chimney swift extendsnorth to probably southeastern Saskatchewan (Indian Head) ; south-ern Manitoba (probably Carberry, Portage la Prairie, Winnipeg, andIndian Bay) ; southern Ontario (Goulais Bay, Sault Ste. Marie,Algonquin Park, Kirks Ferry, and Ottawa) ; and southern Quebec(Montreal, Quebec City, probably rarely Godbout, and GrandeGreve). From this northeastern point the range extends southwardalong the coast of the Maritime Provinces of Canada and the UnitedStates to Florida (St. Augustine, Daytona Beach, and Orlando).South to Florida (Orlando, Tarpon Springs, St. Marks, Chipley, andPensacola) ; southern Mississippi (Biloxi) ; southern Louisiana (NewOrleans, Thibodaux, and New Iberia) ; and southeastern Texas(Houston). West to eastern Texas (Houston, Troup, andCommerce) ; Oklahoma (Norman, Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Co-pan) ; eastern Kansas (Wichita, Topeka, and Onaga) ; Nebraska (Ne-ligh and Cody) ; eastern South Dakota (Sioux Falls, Dell Eapids,
CHIMNEY SWIFT 291and Fort Sisseton) ; central North Dakota (Bismarck and DevilsLake) ; and probably southeastern Saskatchewan (Indian Head).Winter range.?Unknown, but probably over the dense rain forestof the Amazon Valley, in Brazil. During the winter of 1937-38,however, two of these birds remained on the campus of the LouisianaState University, at Baton Eouge. U Vo^y-i i .. ' ' ;/Spring migratio7i.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Florida
?
Pensacola, March 24; Orlando, March 30. Alabama?Autaugaville,March 28. Georgia?Savannah, March 19 ; Atlanta, April 4. SouthCarolina?Charleston, March 18 ; Columbia, March 26. North Caro-lina?April 4; Hendersonville, April 5. Virginia?New Market,April 7. District of Columbia?Washington, April 5. MarylandCambridge, April 15. West Virginia?White Sulphur Springs, April20. Pennsylvania?Philadelphia, April 2; Beaver, April 14. NewJersey?Morristown, April 18; Vineland, April 22. New YorkGeneva, April 19; New York City, April 20; Syracuse, April 23.Connecticut?Jewett City, April 19; Hartford, April 23. Massachu-setts?Boston, April 21 ; Northampton, April 23. Vermont?Kutland,April 18 ; Wells River, April 26. New Hampshire?Hanover, April20; Tilton, April 24. Maine?Portland, May 1; Phillips, May 3.Nova Scotia?Wolfville, May 4 ; Pictou, May 10. New BrunswickChatham, April 29 ; St. John, May 8. Prince Edward Island?NorthRiver, May 19. Quebec?Quebec City, April 25 ; Montreal, April 27.Louisiana?New Orleans, March 13. Mississippi?Biloxi, March 23.Arkansas?Monticello, March 17; Helena, March 21. TennesseeAthens, March 29 ; Knoxville, April 10. Kentucky?Lexington, April2. Missouri?Concordia, April 2 ; St. Louis, April 4. Illinois?Odin,April 8; Chicago, April 10. Indiana?Richmond, April 1; FortWayne, April 5. Ohio?Columbus, April 7; Youngstown, April 8.Michigan?Ann Arbor, April 9 ; Sault Ste. Marie, April 20. OntarioLondon, April 16; Ottawa, April 22. Iowa?Keokuk, April 7; IowaCity, April 17. Wisconsin?La Crosse, April 15 ; Madison, April 21.Minnesota?Minneapolis, April 26. Texas?Houston, March 24 ; Bon-ham, April 2. Kansas?Ottaw^a, April 3 ; Manhattan, April 10. Ne-braska?Omaha, April 27. South Dakota?Vermillion, April 24.North Dakota?Fargo, May 6; Grafton, May 8. Manitoba?PilotMound, May 14.A swift banded at Charlottesville, Va., on May 2 was found deadon May 19 at Cape May, N. J.; while two birds taken in easternMassachusetts in May and July had been banded the precedingOctober at Tuskegee, Ala., and Hattiesburg, Miss., respectively.Fall inigration.?Late dates of fall departure are : Manitoba?Win-nipeg, August 27. North Dakota?Grafton, September 5. South Da-kota?Sioux Falls, September 11; Yankton, September 26. Ne-
292 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMbraska?Dunbar, September 28 ; Omaha, October 15. Kansas?Law-rence, October 11 ; Ottawa, October 12. Texas?Bonham, October 20.Minnesota?Lanesboro, September 18. Wisconsin?Madison, October12. Iowa?Keokuk, October 18, Ontario?Toronto, September 30;Ottawa, October 3. Michigan?Detroit, October 2. Ohio?Youngs-town, October 17 ; Oberlin, October 23. Indiana?Fort Wayne, Octo-ber 21 ; Kichmond, November 13. Illinois?Chicago, October 6 ; Ran-toul, October 11. Missouri?Concordia, October 11 ; St. Louis, October19. Kentucky?Eubank, October 9; Lexington, October 19. Ten-nessee?Knoxville, October 23 ; Athens, October 29. Arkansas?Hel-ena, October 19. Mississippi?Biloxi, October 20. Louisiana?NewOrleans, November 4. Quebec?Montreal, September 10; QuebecCity, September 30. Prince Edward Island?^North River, Septem-ber 11. New Brunswick?Scotch Lake, September 11 ; St. Jolin, Sep-tember 18. Nova Scotia?^Wolfville, September 15; Sable Island,September 30. Maine?Phillips, September 11; Orono, September17. New Hampshire?Tilton, September 10. Vermont?St. Johns-bury, September 1. Massachusetts?Boston, September 20 ; Harvard,September 28. Rhode Island?Providence, October 9. Connecticut
?
Hartford, October 19. New York?Ballston Spa, October 9; NewYork City, October 11. New Jersey?Morristown, October 17; Penn-sylvania?Beaver, October 8; Philadelphia, October 29. District ofColumbia?^Washington, October 25. Maryland?Hagerstown, Oc-tober 16. Virginia?Naruna, October 11 ; Newport News, October 14.North Carolina?Raleigh, October 4; Hendersonville, October 11.South Carolina?Columbia, October 28; Charleston, November 5.Georgia?Atlanta, October 12; Savannah, October 26. AlabamaAutaugaville, October 27. Florida?Orlando, October 23 ; Pensacola,November 2.Further insight into the fall migration of the chimney swift isprovided by the consideration of a few of the several hundred band-ing records that have been accumulated. One banded at Lexington,Mo., on September 23 was recaptured at Baton Rouge, La., on Sep-tember 27 ; one banded at Newark, Ohio, on September 20 was retakenat Nashville, Tenn., on September 27; while a third, banded onAugust 23 at Kents Island, New Brunswick, was retrapped at Ope-lika, Ala., on September 20. A swift banded at 5 : 30 a. m. on Sep-tember 22 at Glasgow, Ky., was taken that same evening in a chimneyat Nashville, Tenn., 90 miles from the point of banding. Anotherrecord, which seems to indicate the direction of the movement alongthe Gulf coast, is of a bird banded at Sanford, Fla., on August 9 andfound with a broken wing near Tallulah, La., on September 25.Casual records.?Some of the following records in Latin Americaprobably indicate the migration route of this species, but lack of
CHIMNEY SWIFT 293intermediate data makes it appear desirable to list them under thisheading.Panama : Two specimens were obtained on the Caribbean coastnear the Colombian border on April 24 and 25, 1934 ; a specimen wastaken at Bocas del Toro on October 28, 1927; another was taken atAlmirante Bay, on October 24, 1926; while Dr. Frank M. Chapmansaw a flock of about 40 at sea, some 10 miles north of the mainlandnear Porto Bello, on April 18, 1937. Costa Rica: About 30 wereseen and a specimen was obtained at Villa Quesada on October 24,1933. Nicaragua: Two specimens were taken at Eden on April 1,1922. Guatemala: There is said to be a specimen in the BritishMuseum (Natural History) taken in this country, but details are lack-ing. British Honduras: A specimen was taken (accidentally de-stroyed) in March 1905. Mexico: A specimen was obtained at Pre-sidio, Veracruz, on May 6, 1925, while another was obtained on April4, 1902, at Pueblo Viejo in this State, the collector reporting thatswifts were crossing the lagoon all day, headed north; one was ob-tained at Rio Givicia, Oaxaca, on March 21, 1906 ; one was taken inNuevo Leon on April 24, 1911 ; and the species also is believed to havebeen taken on Cozumel Island, Quintana Roo. Haiti : Several wereseen over Port-au-Prince on April 19, 1917; a specimen was taken atTortue Island, on May 18, 1917 ; a flock of 40-50 was seen over MorneLa Selle on April 15, 1927 ; it was noted at Hinche on April 23, 1927
;
and several were observed at Belladere, on April 30, 1927. DominicanRepublic : Several were seen at Comendador on May 1, 1927.A specimen was taken on September 13, 1849, in Bermuda ; severalothers were seen in the same locality on the 24th of that month ; andone was collected there in September 1874. There seems to be noauthenticated record for Newfoundland, but one was taken at Suk-kertoppen, Greenland, in 1863. One was collected at Anticosti Islandon June 9, 1901 ; in western North Dakota two were seen at Sanishon July 27, 1918, and a pair were noted at Charlson during the sum-mer of 1923 ; four were seen at Miles City, Mont., on May 20, 1917,and two specimens were collected in Custer County on July 17, and27, 1919 ; a specimen was found dead at Indian Head, Saskatchewan,on October 11, 1905, and they were seen in that locality on Septem-ber 2, 1897; two were noted at Edmonton, Alberta, on May 17, 1897;and in New Mexico a specimen was taken at Rinconada on March 1,1904, and another on the Mimbres River on May 22, 1921.Egg dates.?Illinois : 6 records. May 15 to July 3.New York : 17 records, May 27 to July 5 ; 9 records, June 8 to 20,indicating the height of the season.Quebec : 5 records, June 14 to July 3.Virginia: 11 records. May 27 to July 13.
294 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCHAETURA VAUXI (Townsend)VAUX'S SWIFTHABITSThis, the smallest of the North American swifts, replaces in thenorthwestern part of our continent the common chimney swift of theeastern States. It breeds from southeastern Alaska and central Brit-ish Columbia southward to the Santa Cruz Mountains of Californiaand eastward to Montana and Nevada; but it is rare east of theCascades and the Sierra Nevada.Throughout most of its range it is much less numerous than thechimney swift is in the East. Most observers speak of it as rare dur-ing the breeding season, but S. F. Rathbun tells me that in the vicinityof Seattle, Wash., "the little Vaux's swift is more or less a commonbird. It arrives late in April and, though widely distributed, is moreapt to be seen in the river valleys, somewhat open, in which are tall,dead trees; and quite likely one reason for this is that among suchtrees are some that are hollow and will afford nesting places for thebirds."Spring.?^While migrating, or when preparing to migrate, this littleswift often gathers into immense flocks. The following observationby H. H. Sheldon (1922b), made at Santa Barbara, Calif., illustratesthis point: "On April 29, 1922, about 7 p. m., the largest flock ofVaux Swift {Chaetura vauxi) I have ever seen or, in fact, heard of,circled over my house several times. By careful estimate I judgedthe number to be very nearly six hundred individuals. My observa-tions of the Vaux Swift have heretofore been made only within itsbreeding range ; while this is my first observation of a migrating flock,such an immense gathering of this rather rare wilderness dweller isno doubt a most unusual occurrence."Courtship.?Mr. Rathbun writes to me: "This swift does not ap-pear to be mated when it comes, but after a short time some changeis noted in its actions. As they fly about, suddenly with a shrilltwitter one of the swifts makes a dash or a dive at another, and awayboth rush, each striving to out-fly or out-dodge the other, the chasebrought to an end only when one escapes, or, as often is the case, bothfly off in company. As it appears to be quite playful, these actionsmay be partly in sport, though at this particular time some must havean earnest intent, for the courtship of this little swift evidently takesplace upon the wing."Nesting.?He says in his notes : "It begins to nest quite soon afterit has mated. Its nest is built inside a hollow tree, as in this respectthe bird chiefly follows the ancient habit of its kind. But with thearrival of man changes have taken place in some of the primitive
VAUX'S SWIFT 295
sections where this swift is found, and it seems to have begun toadapt itself to these, for on occasions it is known to build a nest insome disused chimney, a practice of its eastern relative, the chimneyswift, which so commonly uses a like place in which to nest.
"The nest of Vaux's swift is a small, rather saucer-shaped affair.It is attached to the inner wall of a hollow tree, or on" rare occasionsin a chimney, and usually some distance from the top. It is madeof small pieces of twigs stuck together with a gluey saliva of thebird, the twigs broken off from the tips of dead limbs of trees bythe swift as in flight it passes the branches. It does not seem tobe quickly made, as shown by an instance when we found a pair ofthese birds nesting in a chimney. A few years ago, on a day in earlyJune, we went to a little schoolhouse near the Snoqualmie River inthe foothills of the Cascade Mountains, to find out whether the chim-ney of the building was in use as a nesting place by Vaux's swift.This was about 40 miles east of Seattle. When we reached the spotno swifts were to be seen, but after a wait of a half hour or so apair of the swifts appeared and flew in circles about the chimney.Without warning one of the birds dived into it so quickly the eyecould scarcely follow it. After a brief stay within the swift cameout of the chimney and was joined by its mate, and for a short timeboth flew around in the vicinity, then ascended very high to minglewith some swallows. Nearly an hour elapsed before one of the swiftsreturned. It circled the chimney several times, then dropped intoit so quickly as to resemble a dark streak. This time it remainedin the chimney at least ten minutes. After another long wait bothof the swifts returned, one entered the chimney, and several minuteselapsed before it came out. From these actions we assumed thatthe one that went into the chimney was making a nest, and invariablyeach time it flew out it gave a sharp twitter. For some time there-after we stayed in this locality, but although a number of theseswifts were seen none entered the chimney.
"Eleven days later we once more visited the schoolhouse. It wasabout 10 o'clock in the morning when we reached the place, butno swifts were in the locality. After a short time a pair of the birdsarrived, both circled the top of the chimney six times, and thenone entered by a straight-down dive. Tlie other, which had remainedoutside, flew away but returned five minutes later and twittered.Immediately the swift in the chimney came out, and in companyboth left the vicinity. Forty-five minutes elapsed before the paircame back. With rapid twittering notes they swiftly circled thechimney a number of times, then flew from sight. We went onthe roof of the building and looked down the mouth of the chimneybut could see no sign of any nest. Next we entered the school-
296 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMhouse and, as the large stovepipe hole in the side of the chimneywas high above the floor, we stood upon a table, stuck our headthrough the hole, and carefully looked at the inside of the chimney.A good sight of its upper part was had because of the light, but itslower part was dim, and no nest could be seen. Then we went to thelower i^art of the building into which the chimney extended tothe ground, and by the removal of a few loose bricks from one ofits sides we had a good view of the lower part of the inside of thechimney. Here we found the nest. It was about 5 feet from thebottom of the chimney and firmly attached to the wall in the angleof the southeast corner, which might give some protection from therain, as usually this comes with a wind from some point south. Thenest was a small, slightly shallow structure, compact and w^ellmade, but it contained no eggs. We left the locality soon afterbut returned later in the day, and during our brief stay one ofthe swifts came back and went into the chimney."A few days later we again went to the schoolhouse to see ifany eggs were in the swift's nest. In this we were disappointed,for since our preceding visit the building had become occupied by afamily who, of course, made use of the chimney for its ordinarypurposes; for, while we were there, smoke issued from it, and evi-dently the swifts had deserted their nest as it still lacked eggs. Weremained some long time in the vicinity of the schoolhouse, but nosigns of any swifts were seen at all."D. E. Brown writes to me that "on July 8, 1924, a nest was foundin an old chimney near Seattle that contained young birds. I couldnot tell whether there were four or five young birds. On June 30,1925, a nest with four eggs was found in an unused chimney of afireplace in Seattle. The nest w^as 6 feet from the bottom of thefireplace, and the female bird was on the nest. The eggs wereslightly incubated at this date."Although there are other records of nesting in chimneys, the greatmajority of Vaux's swifts apparently still cling to the ancestral habitof nesting in hollow trees. The trees chosen are usually tall, deadstubs, frequently charred by forest fires and often hollow nearly orquite down to the ground level, and the nest is generally well downfrom the top, or even near the ground level. W. L. Dawson (1923)says : "Almost invariably the birds nest within twenty inches or sucha matter of the bottom of the cavity, no matter how elevated theorifice. * * * The Vaux Swift also nests, according to Mr. C.Irvin Clay, of Eureka, in the stumps of logged-off redwood lands.The birds enter by weather fissures, and since the stumps are almostalways undermined by fire, it sometimes happens that the nest isfound beneath the level of the ground."
VAUX'S SWIFT 297There are four nests of this swift in the Thayer collection in Cam-bridge, all from Eureka, Calif. One nest is made of pine needles,glued together, and was fastened to the inner wall of a hollow stuband only 2 feet above the ground level. Another was made of sprucetwigs and needles and was placed in a burnt redwood stub, 20 feethigh; the nest was 12 feet down from the top on the inside. Threeof these nests are very small and narrow, so that the eggs had to belaid in two parallel rows; and the bird must have incubated length-wise of the nest, for two of the nests held six eggs each, one five andone four. One larger, well-made nest was constructed of spruce andfir twigs and was profusely lined with spruce and fir needles,smoothly laid; this nest was 3 feet from the ground inside a hollowredwood stub 18 feet high. The other nest was taken from a red-wood stub 60 feet high and about 10 feet in diameter at the base; itwas burned black on the outside, but the inside was smooth and un-burned; a V-shaped break on one side afforded an entrance to thehollow 20 feet below the top of the stub ; the cavity below this open-ing was 14 feet deep, and the nest was placed only 8 inches from thebottom of the cavity.Some unusual nesting sites have been reported. Charles A, Allen(1880), of Nicasio, Calif., writes: "They are to be found only on thehighest hills or mountains, where there are plenty of pines. Inthese trees they construct their nests, which they build in old holesexcavated by the California Woodpecker. They invariably selectold, decayed trees, and build at great heights, so that it is impossibleto get their eggs." As Mr. Allen evidently did not actually see anest in such a situation, his statement is subject to confirmation andis offered here only as a suggestion.J. A. Munro (1918) says: "Mr. T. L. Thacker sent me a nestlingin the flesh, from Yale, B. C. It had fallen from a nest that wasbuilt under the roof of the C. P. R. water tank. There are a numberof small openings under the eaves, and Mr. Thacker tells me thatseveral pairs breed there every year."William L. Finley (1924) tells of a still more remarkable -nestingsite: "At Wiedemann Brothers' nursery, is an engine house with ametal smokestack sixty feet tall and thirty inches in diameter. Thelower end of the flue broadens out and opens into the front of theboiler. A pair of Vaux Swifts dropped down the metal flue sixty-two feet and built their nest on the front of this metal boiler. * * *
"Mr. Wiedemann did not find the nest until he heard squeakings inthe boiler and thought some bats had taken possession. Openingthe metal doors of the boiler, there he saw the parent Vaux Swiftwith her four young birds. He saw her go and come and even
298 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMcaught her, but she did not object, for when she flew out of the doorshe was soon back through the top of the stack with more food."Eggs.?Vaux's swift lays three to six eggs ; four, five, and six seemto be the commonest numbers. The eggs are usually elliptical-ovateor elongate-ovate, rarely ovate. They are pure dead white, withoutgloss, or sometimes faintly creamy white in color. The measurementsof 51 eggs average 18.5 by 12.4 millimeters; the eggs showing the fourextremes measure 19.8 by 12.2, 18.5 by 13.5, 16.8 by 12.0, and 18.8 by11.8 millimeters.Y(nmg.?Mr. Finley (1924) watched the feeding of the youngswifts in the nest described above, of which he writes
:
I stood outside at twelve o'clock, noon, and saw one of the parent Swiftscome flitting along just above the chimney top, suddenly swerve and drop in.He, or she, whichever it was, was feeding every fifteen or twenty minutes.I went below and with the aid of an electric light, I could see the bird feedher young. Sometimes she would light on one side of the nest and sometimeson the other, to feed. Once I saw her clutch the edge of the nest and braceherself with her tail underneath, and she jabbed her bill in the mouth of ayoung bird and fed by regurgitation. As she started up the long climb, shequivered her mngs, hooked her sharp toes in the sooty side of the stack andwalked right up as if she were going up a ladder.William B. Davis (1937) made some observations on a nest locatedin a brick chimney, and about 12 inches below the roof of the build-ing, in Bellingham, Wash. ; on August 2, between 9 : 37 and 11 : 15a. m., the parent, or parents, made eight trips to the nest to feed theyoung. He writes
:
When I first looked into the chimney, I was greeted by the clamor of theyoung. Their calls consisted of series of rasping notes uttered in rapid succes-sion. The young were i)erched on the edge of the nest, each with its posteriorend projecting over the edge and with its head directed toward the corner ofthe chimney. Below the nest the chimney was streaked with excrement, a cir-cumstance which indicated the young were not defecating in the nest. Thisprobably explains the clean condition in which Edson found the empty nest whenit was collected two days later. No evidence was obtained that the parent birdremoved the fecal sacks of the young, although one can infer that it probablydid when the young were smaller and unable to perch on the edge of the nest.Each time the parent returned from a trip afield, the young became vociferous,their calls lasting until the old bird left. By listening for the calls of the young,one could mark the coming and going of the adult.After the parent had returned from its sixth trip, I moved close to the chimneyand witnessed the feeding of the young. When first observed, the old bird wasclinging to the chimney beside the nest, supported partly by the stiff tailfeathers. The young were facing her (?), each with its mouth wide openclamoring for food and vying with its nest mates. I was led to wonder whatrelation existed between lustiness of voice and the chance of being fed at thatparticular visit. Later, after additional observations, I learned that proximityto the parent determined to a large extent which of the young was fed. At suc-ceeding visits, the old bird alighted first at one side of the nest and then at theother, feeding the one, or ones, closest. The food, consisting of insects, largely
VAUX'S SWIFT 299leaf hoppers (as determined by gullet examination of the young), was placedfar back In the open mouth of each young one. * ? *After the parent bird had fed one of the young, it caught sight of me anddropped to a lower level in the chimney where it alighted out of sight. I movedcloser and placed my head directly over the opening to get a better view. As Idid so, I heard the rapid beating of wings and, thinking the bird was comingout, I instinctively jerked my head to one side to avoid being hit. It did notappear, so I looked in a second time and again I heard wing beats. This time Ikept my position, and after my eyes had become adjusted to the darkness, Iobserved its stunt several times. The bird would let go its hold on the wall, and,by rapidly beating its wings, suspend itself in the middle of the chimney and atthe same time produce the br-r-r-r-ing sound. Apparently the sound was pro-duced by the beating of the wings themselves, for I could not observe themtouching the sides of the chimney. During these performances the young werequiet. I interpreted this behavior as a means employed to intimidate theintruder, much as does the hissing of the chickadee or the swooping dive of theRed-tailed Hawk.Pliuniages.?As far as I can learn from the rather scanty materialexamined, the sequence of plumages and molts in Vaux's swift is aboutthe same as in the closely related eastern chimney swift. The spinyquills of the nestling develop into a juvenal, or first winter, plumagethat is much like that of the adult. The narrow whitish edgings onthe scapulars of the young bird soon wear away ; and adults will aver-age paler on the throat and under parts.I have seen adults molting the contour feathers and primaries inAugust, but the molt of the primaries must be very gradual in a birdthat spends so much of its life on the wing. Mr. Rathbun tells methat this swift has a complete molt during summer.Food.?Almost nothing has been published on the food of Vaux'sswift, beyond the statement by Mr. Davis (1937) that the food fed tothe young consisted of insects, largely leafhoppers. Probably its foodconsists wholly of small flying insects, such as mosquitoes, gnats,various flies, and perhaps small beetles. On dull, damp days muchof its food is gathered at low levels, but on clear hot days, when theinsects fly high, it ascends to great heights in pursuit. I can find norecord of stomach contents.Behavior.?Mr. Rathbun says in his notes that "Vaux's swift flies atall heights, at times just above the surface of the ground, and againit will be seen high against the sky. Its flight need not be mistakenfor any swallow. It is fast, lacks a certain smoothness, and is aptto fly more directly, circle less; also, it has at times somewhat of adarting movement, erratic as it were, which brings to mind theactions of a bat. In fact, this bird is always in a hurry."Ralph Hoffmann (1927) notes a marked difference in flight betweenthis swift and the swallows: "A close observation of the tail showsthat it never displays a forked tip; it either ends in a point like acigar or is spread like a fan when the bird makes a sudden turn.
300 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
* * * The Swift takes a number of very rapid strokes, its wingsfairly twinkling through the air, and then sails with the long narrowwings curved backward and slightly downward."Vaux's swift shares with its eastern relative the social habit ofroosting in chimneys in large numbers at certain seasons. Mr. Rath-bun has described this very well in the following elaborate notes:
"About the middle of August the actions of this swift show the timeis near when it intends to leave the region for its winter home. Nowthe social trait of this bird is much in evidence. For late in eachday the swifts begin to assemble in the vicinity of some hollow treeof size, or some good-sized chimney not in use, within which they aimto pass the night. W? have watched this action on the part of thebirds from its commencement to the close. In one case where a large,tall chimney was used, 25 days elapsed from the time when first theybegan to use it until the last of the swifts ceased to do so. Theswifts began to resort to the chimney about the middle of August,and each evening thereafter for the next 10 days showed an increasein their number until at least 500 made use of it. Then for 16 daysthe number of birds steadily grew less until only three swifts enteredthe chimney to pass the night, and after this for several days no morewere seen to use the place."The swifts began to come to the locality where the chimneystood an hour or two before sunset. Usually they flew about thechimney or quite close to it. From time to time there were arrivals,which mingled with those in flight, all forming a long and narrowflock of flying swifts that swept around the top of the chimney, theirtwittering so loud and ceaseless as to be heard some distance. Attimes a few would leave the flock and enter the chimney, but theconstant arrival of others seemed to keep the flock entire. As theycircled some made feints to enter, and this appeared to be a signthat soon an entrance would be made by all. Usually these actionslasted for more than half an hour, but ceased when the twilightreached a certain stage. For then the swifts would suddenly entertheir retreat, and while this act was taking place, it bore a likenessto a long black rope one end of which dangled in the chimney'smouth."Each evening the performance was much the same, but sometimesan incident would be connected with it. Once when the swifts wereracing, a pigeon hawk appeared and dashed at them. Instantly thebirds scattered, with the hawk in chase of one it had singled from theflock, but as it made no capture it returned and perched for a shorttime in a tree not far distant from the chimney. But when it leftthe swifts at once returned in close formation, hung above the chim-ney for an instant, and then appeared to fall therein. Not one
VAUX'S SWIFT 301
wavered in the act, all seemed to have a single aim?to get inside thechimney just as quickly as they could.
"But this we noticed : that the temperature and the amount of lightprevailing each evening influenced the swifts as to the time theywould enter the chimney. On the cooler and darker ones the en-trance would be made much earlier, whereas on the warmer andfairer evenings they would enter it quite late."Dr. S. A. Watson (1933) made the following observation on an-other method of roosting at Whittier, Calif., during the springmigration
:
On the evening of May 12, 1933, large numbers of Vaux Swifts (Chacturavauxi) were noticed circling around the barns of Mr. John Gregg near Whittier.As night came on they began flying into a hay loft where they would cling tothe walls and to each other. At places they would cover large sections ofthe wall five or six deep. It was estimated that at least three thousand swiftsfound shelter in the barn that night.Next morning the birds began leaving the barn at about eight o'clock. Theywould fly out, a few at a time, circle around a while and then fly ofE in groups.They returned again the next two nights in about the same numbers, and forthe two nights following these the numbers decreased rapidly, and on thesixth night they failed to return. The birds were heavily parasitized withlice and seemed wealj and emaciated. A dozen or more were found dead eachmorning during the period they were taking refuge in the barn.Since there was considerable snow in the mountains when the swifts werestaying over, it is assumed that the unfavorable weather barrier caused themto accumulate here until warmer days and better feeding conditions called themfarther north.Voice.?^Mr. Rathbun tells me that "its note is a rapid twitter, givenoften as it dashes through the air with other swifts and sometimeswith the swallows, for it is a bird fond of company, though at timesonly one or two are seen." Charles A. Allen (1880) says that thenote is different from that of the chimney swift : "They do not utterthe sharp, rattling chipper of that species, but have a weak, lispingnote, which is, as near as I can imitate it, chip-chip-chip-cheiueet-cheweet, and this is only to be heard during the pairing season, whentwo, probably the male and female, are chasing each other." Mr.Hoffmann (1927) says: "On the breeding ground pairs of Vaux Swiftspursue each other with a faint chip-chip-chipyField marks.?^Vaux's swift looks and acts like a small chimneyswift. It might be mistaken at a distance for the black swift, butit is much smaller and much lighter in coloration below. It canbe easily distinguished from the white-throated swift, as it lacks theconspicuous white areas on the breast and the flanks. Its flight, asdescribed above, is different from either of the other western swifts.Fall.?^Mr. Rathbun's notes from the vicinity of Seattle, Wash.,containing the following observations on the migration through that
302 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMState: "Throughout the first three weeks in September we haveobserved Vaiix's swift to pass by in its flight toward the south. Thebirds will be seen at intervals all day and at times even at twilight.They fly at all heights, singly or in groups, and as a rule quiterapidly. It is not uncommon to see them in the company of otherbirds : black swifts, nighthawks, and certain of the swallows, speciesthat are on the wing southward at the same time. Even whenmigrating the playfulness of this little swift is seen, for often onewill pursue another of its kind. And on occasions we have seen itmake a dash at a black swift, or a nighthawk, though when this tookplace no notice was taken of the act by either of these birds."On one occasion in fall we observed a large number of Vaux'sswifts in flight whose actions were quite different. It was at thewest coast of this State, along the ocean beach. When first seen,the swifts were 'milling' in the air within a narrow limit, the sightbearing a resemblance to a swarm of bees about a hive. Again andagain this action was repeated. At times the birds would suddenlyscatter as if a wind had strewn them, but soon they reunited andonce more began to mill, though meanwhile the flock slowly driftedsouthward and at last was lost to view. On this occasion in com-pany with the Vaux's were a number of the black swifts. Thesewere at some height above the smaller swifts, and their gracefulcircling flight was in marked contrast to that of the Vaux's."Winter.?The winter range of Vaux's swift is imperfectly knownbut is supposed to be in Central America. An important addition toour knowledge has been recently made by George H. Lowery, Jr., whofound this swift wintering on the campus of the Louisiana State Uni-versity, East Baton Rouge Parish, La. He has kindly lent me hisunpublished manuscript on the subject, from which I quote as follows
:
"Swifts were first observed in Louisiana outside of the regularseasons of occurrence during the winter of 1937-38, when two indi-viduals were recorded almost daily from November through February.One of them was captured and banded on February 16, 1938."During November 1938 swifts were again noted in the same chim-ney on the university campus. This time a larger number, 5 to 10, werefound. They were observed almost daily from November throughFebruary. Six specimens were caught, five of which were banded andreleased; the sixth was prepared as a study skin. Only after beingplaced alongside specimens of O. pelagica in the Museum of Zoologycollection was it noted that the bird differed from that species. Beingsmaller and paler, it was immediately suspected of being C. vauxi.The question arose as to whether the five birds banded and releasedwere the same species as the one made into a skin. These were re-captured on February 15, along with four additional unhanded birds,
VAUX'S SWIFT 303and all proved to be of the smaller and paler variety. The four un-handed birds were retained as museum specimens, and the others werereleased,
"After careful comparison with material kindly lent by the Museumof Vertebrate Zoology of the University of California and by theBureau of Biological Survey, it is obvious that the five specimens takenat Louisiana State University in February belong to Chaetura vauxi.Both Dr. H. C. Oberholser and George Willett have examined thespecimens and confirmed this identification. It is therefore probablethat the specimen captured and released in February 1938 was alsoof this species." DISTRIBUTIONRange.?^Western North America.Breeding range.?The breeding range of Vaux's swift extends northto southeastern Alaska (probably Baranof Island and probablyThomas Bay) ; and northern British Columbia (probably FloodGlacier and probably Telegraph Creek). East to British Columbia(probably Telegraph Creek, Hazelton, Lac la Hache, Vernon, Edge-wood, and Newgate) ; western Montana (probably Glacier NationalPark, probably Kalispell, and Eed Lodge) ; west-central Oregon(Fort Klamath and Mount McLoughton) ; and eastern California(Meadow Valley, probably Campbells Hot Springs, and probablyKenawyers). South to central California (probably Kenawyers, andSanta Cruz). West to the coastal regions of California (Santa Cruz,San Rafael, Sebastopol, and Eureka) ; Oregon (Tillamook andBeaverton) ; Washington (Tacoma, Seattle, Crescent Lake, andBellingham) ; British Columbia ( Chilliwack, Comox, and Courte-nay) ; and southeastern Alaska (Chickamin River and probablyBaranof Island).Winter range.?Imperfectly known. At this season the specieshas been detected north to East Baton Rouge Parish, La. (see above),Taxco, State of Guerrero, and Leguna del Rosario, State of Tlaxcala,Mexico ; and south to San Lucas and Mazatenango, Guatemala.Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Arizona
?
Chiricahua Mountains, April 13; Agua Caliente, April 22. Cali-fornia?Eureka, April 10; Buena Park, April 14; Redwood City,April 16; Azusa, April 23. Oregon?Mercer, April 29; Beaverton,April 30 ; Fort Klamath, May 6. Washington?Nisqually, April 11
;
Tacoma, April 23; Clallam Bay, May 3. Idaho?Coeur d'Alene,May 6; Rose Lake, May 11. British Columbia?Chilliwack, April26 ; Arrow Lakes, April 28 ; Revelstoke, May 12.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are: Alaska?Cas-cade Bay, September 9. British Columbia?Kispiox Valley, Septem-
304 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMber 3; Errington, September 15; Okanagan Landing, September 15.Idaho?Priest Kiver, September 10; Trestle Creek, September 11.Washington?Mount Rainier National Park, September 16; Seattle,September 25; Tacoma, October 1. California?Nicasio, September24 ; Buena Park, September 24 ; Santa Cruz, October 5 ; Los Angeles,October 14. Arizona?Tombstone, September 20; Pima Indian Res-ervation, September 26 ; Santa Catalina Mountains, October 6.Casual records.?Two individuals were recorded in Jasper NationalPark, Alberta, on July 6, 1918. The British Museum (Natural His-tory) has two specimens taken in Costa Rica, one at Los Cuadros deLaguna, in July 1898, and the other at Carrillo on November 7, 1898.This institution also lists a specimen from Honduras without exactlocality or date of collection, but it seems probable that all three ofthese examples may be referable to the form resident in southernCentral America.Egg dates.?California: 44 records. May 7 to July 9; 22 records,June 12 to 30, indicating the height of the season.MICROPUS PACIFICUS PACIFICUS (Latham)WHITE-RUMPED SWIFTContributed by Francis Charles Robert JoxirdainHABITSThe first and, up to the present, only record of this species withinour limits is that of a female that was obtained on St. George Island,Alaska, on August 1, 1920. It was observed flying over the tundraand along the cliffs by G. D. Hanna and was recorded by Mailliardand Hanna (1921).Like most of the swifts, this is a bird of extremely powerful flightand has an enormous range, breeding in eastern Siberia west to theAltai range and east to the Pacific, as well as in the Japanese andother island groups of the northwest Pacific Ocean. Southward itsbreeding range extends to the northwest Himalayas, where it is rep-resented by a local race, Micropus paci-ficus leuconyx., and to Burma,where another form is found nesting, M. p. cooM. In all probabilitythese two races are resident, or at any rate do not migrate far, andhave not been proved to leave the Asiatic Continent. The typicalrace, with which we are concerned, on the other hand migrates by wayof the Malay Archipelago to Australia.The white-rumped swift was first described by Latham in 1801under the name of Hirundo paci-fica^ not from the bird but from thecelebrated Watling drawings, which were executed in Australia (NewSouth Wales). Nothing was known at that time as to its breeding
WHITE-RUMPED SWIFT 305grounds, but when Pallas' great work on the zoology of Asiatic Russiaappeared in 1811, he described a variety of the common swift underthe name of ^^Hirundo apu.s^ var. B. leucopyga^'' which was subse-quently proved to be the same species that Latham had describedten years previously. John Gould later named it Cypselus australis,and Jardine and Selby introduced a fourth name, C. vittatus^ butfinally it was recognized that Latham's name had priority, and ithas been generally accepted ever since.The Himalayan bird, M. pacificus leuconyw, was first described byBlyth in 1845. It is considerably smaller than the typical race andthe feet are flesh-colored, instead of blackish, but it is treated as asubspecies of M. pcbciflcus in the second edition of "The Fauna ofBritish India." A third form, M. paciflcus cooki, was described in1918 from the northern Shan States in Burma by the late Maj. H. H.Harington. This is also a small race, with black feet and dark shaftstripes to the feathers of the chin and with dark mantle. More re-cently Domaniewski has suggested the separation of the northernbirds into three more races?the typical form {M. p. pacijicus) fromVladivostok; the Japanese race {M. p. kurodae)^ said to be muchdarker; and the Kamchatkan bird {M. p. hamtscliaticus) ^ fromPetropaulovsk. It may prove to be necessary to accept some of thesenew forms, but without an adequate series of skins for comparisonit seems at present desirable to let the matter remain as it is andto treat the Japanese, Chinese, and Siberian birds under one heading.Spring.?In Japan and eastern Asia this species is a summer resi-dent. As there is some doubt with regard to the Burmese and Hima-layan subspecies as to whether they are partially migratory or not,it is best to confine our attention to the dates of arrival in the countriesnorth of India and the Malay Peninsula. J. D. D. La Touche (1931)
,
writing on the birds of eastern China, gives its distribution as follows
:
"China Coast, Shaweishan Is. (migrant) . Islands off Fohkien coast.Shantung coast and Is. (summer). Chihli (summer and migrant).Yangtse Valley to Szechuen (summer and migrant) ." He does not,however, give any data as to the time of arrival of the migrantsfrom Australia, but the gap can be partially filled from other sources.The same writer, in an article on spring migration at Chinwangtao,on the coast of Chihli, quotes as the earliest date April 14 (2), 1913.Another was obtained in Fohkien on April 22. The next date is May9, 1913, when two more were seen, and flocks were observed subse-quently in May and June, the latter probably merely visits fromadjoining breeding places. There are, moreover, earlier dates ofspecimens obtained, for there is a specimen in the Hume collection(British Museum) from Takow, China, dated March 22, obtainedby Swinhoe, and he also states (1870) that he secured a specimen from178223?40 26
306 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
a large flock in Nychow Harbor, Hainan, apparently on March 19.T. H. Shaw (1936), writing on Hopei Province, says that it is a regu-lar migrant to the plains, arriving in April. R. E. Vaughan andK. H. Jones (1913) record the first arrival on March 26, but mostcome in April. In the Japanese Islands specimens in the BritishMuseum collection were obtained at Nagasaki on March 18 and May30 by P. Ringer, and from "Japan" in May (Hume collection). InSakhalin, L. Munsterhjelm (1922) records the date of first arrival asJune 4, when three birds were seen.C. Ingram (1908) saw one near Kioto, Japan, on May 4 andseveral at Lake Kawaguchi on May 23. Blakiston and Pryer (1878)also record it as present in May. The late Alan Owston noticed thedate of first arrival in Japan for two consecutive seasons on May 15.In Siberia it is recorded as arriving in the second half of May; atDarasun in Dauria it was first noted on May 24 by Dybowski, butPrzewalski records its arrival in southeast Mongolia on April 12,1872, a very early date.Nesting.?^Accounts of the nesting of this species differ very con-siderably, and there is no doubt that the species adapts its habits to itssurroundings. R. Swinhoe's (1860) statement that these swifts werebreeding among the huts of a coastal village on Lamyit Island in theFormosa Channel receives some confirmation from the accounts ofnesting in Siberia, but it does not seem to have been authenticated onthe spot. At Chefoo (Shantung Province), however, he (1874) ob-tained a dozen birds, caught on the nests on June 22 by his collector,on a small rocky islet about 15 miles out to sea. Here the swifts werebreeding in numbers in crannies of the rocks, and out of the 12 birdscaptured 5 were males and 7 were females, showing that both sexestake part in incubation. A nest of the year was like a shallow saucer,nearly 4 inches broad, thicker behind than in front, and constructedof refuse straw and a few bits of catkins and feathers, all agglutinatedwith the bird's saliva. In another case, six nests had been built insuccessive years on top of one another and strongly glued together.From the same coast, off the Shantung littoral, we have an excellentaccount of a breeding colony by Capt. H. L. Cochrane (1914) nearWei-Hai-Wei. After stating that one breeding colony on a rocky islethad been destroyed by an army of hungry rats, he adds
:
Nevertheless, it was a considerable surprise to find a small colony of Micropuspacificus established on an unpretentious rock of the most modest dimensions,both in length and height. This particular rock, much broken up, some 50 yardslong, and at its highest point 39 feet high, is situated 1400 yards from themainland, and 400 yards from a respectably sized island, which latter is un-tenanted by Swifts of any description. Of limestone foundation, the rock isseamed with deep fissures and long narrow crannies, and it is in these recessesthat the White-rumped Swift was found breeding in such elevated situations
WHITE-RUMPED SWIFT 307that sea and spray, in their most angry moments, are ineffective to disturb thetranquility of the site chosen. On landing upon the rock and commencing toclimb over it, not a sign of any bird life was visible, with the single exception ofa solitary shag {Phalacrocorax pclagicns) which flew off hurriedly from thefar side of the rock near the water's edge, where it had been dreaming awaythe hot summer afternoon. Altogether seven Swift's nests were found ; of thesetwo were in vertical crannies, the remainder in horizontal fissures, and all a fullarm's length in. Only two nests contained eggs (June 6th), and only threeSwifts were seen on the rock. The first nest found contained two eggs. Thefemale bird was on the nest, and the male bird underneath the nest, clingingto it with both feet. So narrow was the cleft, that the birds were con-strained to remain in one position, turning round being out of the question.The nest itself, wedged between the rock faces, was a small, perfectly roundplate of straw, three and a half inches in extreme diameter, thickest at the rimand very slightly dished in the centre. A few feathers had been worked into theouter part of it, which was hardened with glutinous matter produced by thebird. The two birds at the first nest made no attempt to fly, and allowedthemselves to be drawn out, a somewhat difficult operation. They clung verytenaciously to the fingers with exceedingly sharp claws, but when thrown intothe air, immediately flew off with a strong swinging flight. A single bird flewfrom the second nest discovered, which was two feet down in a horizontal crack,and was similar in all respects to the first nest and contained three eggs. Theeggs of the Micropus paciflcus are typical Swift's eggs?pure white in colourand elongated in shape. Three apparently new nests were found close to eachother in the same cranny, a long narrow aperture between two boulders. Theremaining two nests were adjacent but separated, the whole area for thepurpose being very restricted.The rock was again visited five days later. All the nests now contained eggs,three of them one apiece only. No other nest beside that previously mentionedcontained three eggs. One additional nest was discovered containing two eggs;this made eight nests in all. A Swift was found on each nest, but both birds atonly two nests. Three Swifts made their appearance when the rock wasapproached on the latter occasion, and continued to fly around during the visit.Captain Cochrane's excellent paper is illustrated by a plate show-ing the rocks, with deep fissures, and the nest and eggs in positionwithin the cleft.From Japan we have a few all too scanty notes from Alan Owston,who informed A. J. Campbell (1901) that on a yachting cruise hevisited an island called Ukishima, about half a mile long, 200 feethigh, and about 20 miles south of Yokohama. Here he exploredsome caves on the south side of the island, where he roughly esti-mated that there must have been not less than 2,000 of these birdsnesting. There is also a well-known breeding place (which isshared with the spine-tailed swift, Ohaetura cavdacuta) behind theKegon waterfall, near Nikko, Japan. Here the rocks consist ofalternate hard and soft strata, making a series of shelves, and be-tween these the swifts place their nests. Since the outer edges ofthe ledges are weathered and so rotten that they will not bear theweight of a man, the place is practically inaccessible.
308 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMIn Sakhalin, Marquis Yamashima describes nests found on therocky coast as being built of seaweeds, fallen leaves, and Usnealongissima, stuck together with saliva and forming a dish-shapednest, 7 to 12 centimeters in outside diameter and 1 to 4 centimetersin depth.In Siberia and Mongolia most of the breeding places appear to bein cavities and recesses among rocks, not only in the lower zones,but even at 12,000 feet or more. Madame Kozlova (1932) describesthe nests as sometimes placed in cavities and at other times builtopenly under a prominent ridge. At Yakutsk, however, R. Hall(Hartert and Hall, 1904) states that these swifts nest on beamsunder the market-place verandas and among them but do not breedin close company. The inhabitants have a superstitious fear aboutdisturbing them, so it was only through the good offices of the chiefof police that Mr. Hall was able to secure two specimens of adults andtwo full-grown nestlings at dusk from a quiet corner of the marketplace by the help of a local youth. The nest consisted of a fewstraws and feathers cemented together by saliva, and the grasp of thebird's claws was strong enough to pierce the fingers and draw blood.Eggs.?The clutch is composed of two or three eggs, which closelyresemble those of other species of swift, being "cylindrical-ovate" anddull white without gloss. In the new work in course of publication onthe eggs of Japanese birds, by K. Kobayashi and T. Ishizawa, twoeggs of the Kobayashi collection are figured, taken on Mount Fuji,Hondo. It is here stated that in Japan the normal clutch is two,but that three have been recorded. The average of 17 Japanese eggsis given as 26.76 by 17.44; maxima, 29 by 17.7 and 28.7 by 18.4;minima, 25.2 by 18.2 and 25.5 by 17.6 millimeters. Twenty eggsfrom Siberia, China, and Formosa (14 measured by the writer and6 by Dybowski) average 26.06 by 16.61; maxima, 28.1 by 17.1 and26.1 by 17.5 ; minimum, 23.5 by 15.6 millimeters ; Japanese eggs, there-fore, seem to be slightly larger. The average weight of 10 Japaneseeggs is 4.4 grams (Kobayashi).Plumages.?R. Hall notes that in the two nestlings the feet werereddish brown, and E. Hartert (1904) states that the juvenile plum-age is similar to that of the adult. T. H. Shaw (1936) says theupper parts are browner, feathers with whitish edges ; wing covertsand inner webs of inner primaries bordered with white.Adult: Upper parts blackish brown; back, upper tail coverts,almost black with faint gloss; chin, throat, and broad band acrossrump white, with narrow black shaft stripes to feathers ; under partsotherwise dark brown, each feather with broad white tips and sub-terminal blackish band. Iris deep brown; bill black, feet purplishblack. Weight, 32-39 grams (Shaw).
WHITE-EUMPED SWIFT 309Measurements (in millimeters) : Exposed culmen, 6-7; tarsus, 10;wing, 166-173 (Shaw), 176-184.5 (Hartert). Tail deeply forked,77-79 (Shaw), 72-84 (Hartert).Food.?Entirely insects, taken on the wing, but little definitelyrecorded. J. C. Kershaw (1904), however, says that on the Kwang-tung coast it feeds largely on a species of beetle that infests the "paddy"(rice).Behavio7\?All writers call attention to its extraordinary powersof flight, often at great heights, coming down to lower levels inthundery and stormy weather. Przewalski describes it as spendingwhole days on the wing, shooting through the air and among therocks, but in morning and evening coursing low over the steppesand feeding.Voice.?On the whole it is not a particularly noisy bird. Cochrane(1914) speaks of "a moderate amount of subdued screaming" whilehunting. C. Ingram (1908) also, comparing it with M. apus., says ithas very similar habits, but is a much more silent bird and moresparing of its screamlike cry; and La Touche (1931) also speaks ofit as extremely silent, only a faint scream being now and thenaudible.Field 7)iarks.?At close quarters the white rump, taken in connec-tion with the large size, renders identification easy, as the white-rumped swifts of the aifinis group are much smaller. It is fre-quently seen on the wing in company with the large spine-tailed swift{Chaetura caudacuta)., from which it is readily distinguishable bythe difference in the shape of the tail, square in ChaetuTa and deeplyforked in M. pacifiGus.Fall.?Toward the end of August the flocks disappear from Mon-golia, but in Japan they seem to linger till October, and an extraor-dinary incident occurred in 1897, when Mr. Owston saw more than adozen on December 26, when they should have been in Australia, asrelated in A. J. Campbell's work (1901). It may be a coincidence,but this was the year of the great bush fires in Tasmania and Aus-tralia, the smoke from which covered thousands of miles at land andalso at sea. Swinhoe obtained a specimen at Amoy in November,now in the British Museum, and at Hongkong departure takes placeearly in September. It arrives in India about September, but thebulk of the migrant horde comes in October and November.
'Winter.?From the Asiatic mainland and the islands of the NorthPacific this species migrates across the Pacific Ocean to Australia andalso in smaller numbers to Tasmania. On the way it has been re-corded from Borneo by Salvadori; also from New Guinea by thesame author, E. B. Sharpe, and O. Finsch; it winters in Australia,rarely visiting Tasmania. During its stay in Australia it is usuallyseen on the wing, coming down only in stormy weather.
310 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMA. J. Campbell (1901) states that he has only two records of thisspecies perching; one a case of an apparently over-fatigued bird,which settled for a moment on the ground; the other, by Dr. W.Macgillivray, who reports a passage of thousands of these birds atPortland on February 14, 1899; he was informed that a flock tookup their quarters for the night in a large gum tree, where their con-stant twittering could be heard till quite dark.DISTRIBUTIONBreeding range.?^In the North Pacific : Kurile Islands, Hokkaido,Seven Islands of Izu, Quelpart Island, Tanegashima, Yakushima,Tokuroshima, Loochoo (Riu-kiu) Isles, Botel Tobago, Sakhalin, andFormosa.On the Asiatic mainland: Kamchatka, east Siberia west to theAltai, Manchuria, Mongolia, Korea, China, Kansu, and Tibet. Re-placed in Burma by M. p. cooki and in the northwest Himalayas byM. p. leuGonyx.Migration range.?Southeastern Asiatic mainland, passing throughIndia and Malay Peninsula, through the Malay Archipelago, Papua,etc., to Australia generally and occasionally also Tasmania.Egg dates.?China, 8 nests with 1 to 3 eggs between June 6 and11 (Weihai-Wei).Japan, June and July; June 19 (Hondo, Kobayashi).Siberia, fresh clutches in Dauria June 14 (Dybowski), also July17; also Makutsk, June 19.AERONAUTES SAXATALIS SAXATALIS (Woodhonse)WHITE-THROATED SWIFTPlates 47, 48HABrrsIn the mountainous regions of the far west, especially where pre-cipitous, rocky cliffs tower above deep canyons, one may catch aglimpse of these little winged meteors darting about far overhead.It was in the Huachuca Mountains in Arizona where I first saw thismarvelous swift; a mountain brook flows swiftly over its rocky bedthrough a steep and narrow canyon, known as "the box," so narrowthat in some places one can almost touch both sides of it at once;on each side the rocky cliffs rise to a height of 100 or 200 feet, almostshutting out the light of day; and far above us we could see theseswifts darting in and out of crevices in the rocks, or cleaving the skyin their rapid gyrations. Swifts are well named, for, in proportionto their size, they are the swiftest birds that fly, and this species is
WHITE-THROATED SWIFT 311
one of the swiftest of them all. I am tempted to quote the followingappreciation from the writings of Dr. George M. Sutton (1935) : "TheWliite-throated Swift belongs to the heavens, not to earth. Beautifulas the creature is, when seen lying among the rocks where it hasfallen, or on your hand, it somehow is no longer a White-throatedSwift at all. Like a fish from the deep sea that has burst in shallowwater, it is only a mass of flesh already starting to decay?of feathersthat so recently had pushed aside the thin atmosphere of dizzyheights; feathers that twanged and rustled as the bird shot forwarda hundred yards in a twinkling; feathers that knew nothing of theshadows of forests, that knew only the shadows of clouds, the fullblaze of the sun, the coolness of clean unsealed pinnacles."Courtship.?Courtship seems to be performed largely, if not wholly,on the wing. W. L. Dawson (1923) writes: "That most friendlyof encounters, the nuptial embrace, appears to take place, also, inthe air. In this the birds come together from opposite directions,engage with the axes of their bodies held at a decided angle laterally,and begin to tumble slowly downward, turning over and over thewhile for several seconds, or until earth impends, whereupon theyseparate without further ado."Enid Michael (1926) says: "White-throated Swifts we have seencling together and pin-wheel down through the air for a distanceof five hundred feet."Several others have noted a similar performance; and FrederickC. Lincoln has twice collected, with a single shot, two birds in theact, which in both cases proved to be a male and a female (Bradbury,1918).But coition may take place in the nesting crevices also, for JamesB. Dixon says in his notes: "The males are so amative that whenwe would take the females out of the cracks they would pounceonto them while in our hands ; and we actually caught a pair in thisway while hanging onto a ladder in front of the nest crack."Nesting.?The white-throated swift nests in cracks and crevices inalmost or quite inaccessible rocky cliffs on the sea coasts on rockyislands oif the coast, and in the mountains up to elevations of 10,000to 13,000 feet. Much has been written about the difficulties encoun-tered in reaching the nests of these birds, for the nesting cliffs aredifficult, or impossible, to scale, and when the nesting crevice isreached the nest is placed so far back in a narrow crack that it isoften beyond reach and sometimes even out of sight. Some few nestshave been found in niches at a comparatively low height in a cliff,but usually a climb on a rope for 75 or 100 feet from the top or thebase of a cliff is necessary to reach the nests. This swift is evidentlyone of the most successful of birds in placing its nest beyond the
312 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
reach of predatory animals and birds, not excepting the humanegg collector.James B. Dixon has sent me the following not?s: "This bird isa common breeder in the rougher, more mountainous sections of thewhole of southern California, as I have found them nesting in everycounty south of Tehacipi, and from the ocean cliflfs to the highestpeaks up to 6,500 feet above sea level. I have seen them nesting in thedug-out holes of rough-winged swallows and right in the middle of alarge colony of swallows, where it was extremely difficult to teilwhich one of a myriad of holes the swifts were inhabiting.
"Usually the nests are very flimsily built of feathers glued togetherinto one complete structure. The nest naturally takes the shape ofthe crack in which it is located and therefore takes all kinds of shapes
;
but where they have room they will build a nice, round, well-cuppednest that is so well stuck together that il can be dropped from thecliff and not a feather will be lost. Nest building begins very earlyin spring and continues for a long time. I have seen birds enterthe cracks in a cliff early in March with feathers in their bills, whichthey must have carried for miles, as the feathers were chickenfeathers and there were no poultry yards nearer than 6 or 8 milesin an air line.
"In 1915 I made a special effort to collect several sets of eggs.As we did not know when the eggs would be laid and had seen thembuilding their nests so early, we started operations in April. Atthis time we found the females sitting on their nests and still build-ing by adding occasional feathers. We inspected these locationsweek by week from early in April until the last of May before anyeggs were laid. The females were in^ the nests the better part ofthe time, and the minute a female left a nest every male withinsight would take after her."The main colony of about 12 pairs was located in the center of a400-foot hard granite cliff. Here we located three nests that couldbe reached; the others were too far back to be seen, although thesitting birds could be heard twittering and giving their typicalshrill calls."There is a set of four eggs, with the nest, collected by J. B. Dixonand C. T. Schnack, in the Thayer collection in Cambridge, whichcame from the same nesting site. In the elaborate data that camewith it they state that the nest was located on a large granite cliffin a steep, narrow canyon near San Pasqual, San Diego County,Calif. It was taken on May 25, 1913, from a diagonal crack on theface of the cliff, 175 feet from the top and on a projecting point ofthe cliff. The nest is a compact wad of white plant down, mixedwith feathers, all securely glued together, and is lined with white,brown, buff, and black feathers, with a few small, bright-yellow
WHITE-THROATED SWIFT 313feathers; it measures about 4 inches in longest diameter and is hol-lowed to a depth of about three-quarters of an inch; the eggs arebadly "flyspected," as seems to be frequently the case in nests of thisspecies.There is another interesting nest of this species in the collection,perhaps a different subspecies, taken by Gerald B. Thomas in theCoxcomb Mountains of British Honduras on May 27, 1906. It waslocated in a cave, 50 feet from the ground, in a high cliff; it wasglued to the wall of the cave 10 feet from its mouth. The nest re-sembles that of the chimney swift in shape and size, being almosttoo small for the five eggs it contained; it is made of weed stemsglued together into a firm basket, and is profusely lined with smallfeathers, dark brown and white, which look as if they might havecome from the parent bird.Wilson C. Hanna has published two interesting accounts (1909and 1917) of the nesting habits of the white-throated swift in aquarry on Slover Mountain in the San Bernardino Valley, Calif.He describes the difficulties involved in securing the eggs, showsphotographs of the nests, and gives a series of measurements of boththe nests and the eggs. In his second paper, he says of the nests:Both the vertical and the horizontal cracks are used as nesting sites, butwith the exception of set no. 5, all that I took were from vertical cracks. It isalmost impossible to take nests from horizontal fissures without destructionof the eggs and in the exception noted, a rock weighing at least 35 tons wasremoved. * * * The location of nest no. 6 was rather unusual, being reachedby going into a vertical crack about three feet, then up eighteen inches,then to the side about eight inches. * *Nests are constructed, for the most part, of chicken feathers and grassescemented together and to the rocks, probably by saliva. They vary in sizeto suit the space between the walls of rock and are usually shallow andnarrow. * * *All nests that I have examined have been infested with numerous "bugs."In the two nests where birds could be seen while incubating, the insectscould be observed crawling on the birds' heads. The eggs, in every case, weremore or less spotted as a result of the insects, depending upon how long theyhad been in the nest.William C. Bradbury (1918) made some elaborate preparationsand, with the help of three young men, collected several sets ofeggs near Hot Sulphur Springs in Grand County, Colo. He writes
:
The cliffs where the birds were seen, bordering the Grand River, east of Sul-phur Springs, are of a mixed lava formation, with some parts of hard, ringingmaterial, and others of cracked, crumbling formation, intermixed with seamsand deposits of soft lava ash, through which the river has cut its way in agespast. The visible base of the cliffs is at the top of a steep slope of debris,extending to the Grand River several hundred feet below. * * *The first available prospect, located by Niedrach through the presence ofexcrement about eight feet up, and to which he was able to climb, was in a
314 BULLETIISr 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL. MUSEUMhorizontal crevice about two and one-half inches in width, sloping slightlydownward and partly filled, in places, with lava, sand and vegetable matterevidently deposited by the wind. Upon reaching the crevice a Swift dartedforth nearly in his face, and he caught sight of its mate retreating back intothe crevice, from which it was not seen to emerge. Less than an hour's workresulted in collecting, from a point about eighteen inches back, our firstnest, containing four fresh eggs.Florence Merriam Bailey (1907) made the interesting discoverythat white-throated swifts were nesting in cracks in the walls of theold mission building at San Juan Capistrano, Calif. She locatedfour nests by seeing the birds enter the cracks ; bnt only one nest wasactually seen, of which she says: "The nest behind the end of thestone arch was the only one seen and this?as it was ten feet fromthe ground?only by climbing and peering up the crack. The crack,as seen in the photograph, was behind the capitol of the pilaster onwhich one end of the arch rested, the capitol having been jarredaway from the wall by an earthquake?doubtless that of 1812.About ten inches up this crack the nest could be seen tightly wedgedin between walls less than two inches apart. As well as could beseen without destroying the nest, it was made of bark, feathers, grass,and, wool."Eggs.?The white-throated swift lays three to six eggs, oftenestfour and frequently five. The eggs vary from elongate-ovate tocylindrical-ovate, or almost narrowly elliptical. They are dead whiteto pale creamy wliite and without gloss. As mentioned above, theeggs are often more or less spotted with the excrement of the insectswith which the nests are often badly infested. The measurements of50 eggs average 21.24 by 13.74 millimeters ; the eggs showing the fourextremes measure 25 by 15, 19.1 by 12.9, and 21.9 by 12.7 millimeters.Young.?Enid Michael (1926) had a young swift in captivity thatshe kept alive for ten days.This captive swift slept much of the time, but during his wakeful hours hewas a very active bird ; shoving and flopping along on his breast he could moverapidly. He was kept in a wooden box with a screened cover, where therewere folded flannels into which he could snuggle away and sleep. When awak-ened he would set out at once to explore his box. He could crawl up the ver-tical wall of the box without the least difficulty, and one of his favorite stuntswas to race about, back down, on the under side of the cover screen. Thisscreen was ordinary mosquito-proof netting. When the screen cover was re-moved he would scurry up the waU of the box and topple headlong onto thefloor. No sooner had he hit the floor than he would begin to skid about on hisbreast, using his feet as propellers. He had a fancy for dark cracks, and ifhe should find such a place he would surely disappear. Best of all, he lovedto crawl up one's sleeve to snuggle warmly under one's arm. He had verystrong feet and claws like a mammal. When attached to one's garments heclung tenaciously, and each hooked toe nail had to be pried loose before hecould be removed.
WHITE-THROATED SWIFT 315Plumages.?I have seen no very young white-throated swifts, butbirds in the juvenal plumage show the same color pattern as theadults, though the colors are duller and less clearly defined. Thelong, curved claws are highly developed for climbing.Food.?As the food of this swift is obtained wholly on the wing, itprobably feeds on whatever small flying insects it can capture. Mrs.Bailey (1928) lists "winged ants and other hymenoptera, bugs, flies,dung beetles, engraver beetles, clover root weevils, leafhoppers, etc,"Clarence Cottam contributes the following report on the stomachcontents of white-throated swifts: "In 21 stomachs of the white-throated swift analyzed in the food-habits laboratory of the Biologi-cal Survey, the dominant food items appear to be flies (Diptera),the root maggots (Anthomyiidae) being the most important, withthe long-legged flies (Dolichipodidae), the flesh flies (Sarcopha-gidae), and the March flies (Bibionidae) occurring in lesser numbers.March flies make up 100 percent of the food of a bird from Wyomingbut did not occur in any of the remaining 20 stomachs. Flies werepresent in nearly every stomach and formed from 6 to 100 percentof the total contents.
"Beetles (Coleoptera) were well represented, especially the dungbeetles (Aphodius), and entered into the diet of ten of the birds withamounts varying from 2 to 84 percent, although they averaged about10 percent of the total content. Other Coleoptera identified wereweevils (Curculionidae), hister beetles (Histeridae), leaf beetles(Chrysomelidae), rove beetles (Staphylinidae), skin or larder beetles(Dermestidae), bark beetles (Scolytidae), and the antlike flowerbeetles (Anthicidae),
"Bees, wasps, and ants (Hymenoptera) entered prominently intothe bill of fare of about a fourth of the birds and were present astraces in three-fourths of stomachs examined. Bees were found torepresent from 1 percent to as much as 86 percent of the total con-tent, and ants in two cases formed over 90 percent of the food."The true bugs were moderately abundant, the most importantbeing stink bugs (Pentatomidae), treehoppers (Membracidae), leaf-hoppers (Cicadellidae), and squash bugs (Coreidae) ; of the lastnamed family, 50 specimens in one stomach formed 67 percent of thecontent."Behavior.?The one striking characteristic of the white-throatedswift is its dashing, exceedingly rapid, and erratic flight. Of thethree western swifts, Vaux's may be swift, and the black swift swifter,but the white-throated is certainly the swiftest of the three. S. F.Rathbun writes to me : "If there is a faster-flying bird than the white-throated swift, I would like to see it. Always it appears to fly at topspeed. At times the velocity of its flight seems beyond belief. The
316 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMflight of this swift is often more or less direct, but it darts and swoops,and turns so quickly as it flies that the eye is not quick enough to seehow the reversal in the direction of its flight takes place. You watchone as it passes, almost disappears, and in an instant it returns andflashes by. Its flight is so unpredictable that one never knows whatnext it will do. At rare times, we have seen the white-throated andthe black swift in company, and this gave us an opportunity to com-pare the flight actions of the two. Always the flight of the formeris dashing, whereas that of the latter is easy and graceful, as it glidesaround."Mr. Hanna (1917) writes:It is claimed by some that these birds do not use their wings in unison, butI am of the opinion that they do flap both wings at the same time, at leastpart of the time if not always. When flying about feeding upon insects, usuallyat several hundred feet elevation above the ground, they make a few rapid beatswith the wings, then soar a little while, then beat their wings rapidly for a fewmoments and so on. They vary their flight by sharp darts in other directions,probably to catch insects. When returning to the cliffs they often keep theirwings beating fairly steadily. Both when penetrating and leaving the crevicesthey seem to use both their wings and feet as aids to locomotion. * * *During the heavy rains of January, 1916, quite a number of swifts were foundon the ground in a helpless condition. It seems that some of the crevices hadbecome flooded with water which had drenched the birds, causing them to attemptto escape, but it was impossible for them to fly with wet feathers. Several ofthese birds were kept in a warm place till their feathers were dry enough forthem to fly away.The white-throated swift has well been called the rock swift, for itlives its life in the rocky cliffs and in the air. So far as I know, noone has ever seen one alight on the ground, on a tree, or on any kindof perch. Its feet are not well formed for walking or perching, butthey are well adapted, with long, strong claws, for climbing about inthe caves and crevices in the cliffs. Mr. Dixon says in his notes:
"Their legs are so malformed from nonuse as to be almost nothingbut claws, to propel them through the cracks; and they can climbaround much the same as bats or mice in such a location."The photograph and the diagram published by Enid Michael(1926) illustrate this character.Dr. Gayle Pickwell (1937) gives an interesting account of theroosting habits of this swift in Santa Clara County, Calif.
:
The niche in which the swifts quartered themselves in 1931, and throughoutthe observations here reported upon, consists of a recess of unknown depthextending beneath a rock face that lies at an angle a little short of the vertical.It is about fifteen feet immediately above Sycamore Canyon Road. The crevicethrough which the swifts enter and leave measures, it is estimated, from twoto three inches in width and about two and one-half feet in length. All theswifts noted, during the dates specified, used this aperture and this one only.
WHITE-THEOATED SWIFT 317On August 3, the swifts were flying about in the canyon when first observedjust at sunset. A crude estimate made of tlieir numbers in the air gave fromone hundred to two hundred individuals. Prior to entering the night roostthe birds streamed in a procession into the shadows by it and then turned outinto the light of the canyon. Shortly thereafter they entered the rock, stream-ing in with unbelievable rapidity. Three or four struck the crevice simul-taneously, and now and then they struck one another. Twenty or more enteredin an interval of one or two seconds. The entire flock was housed between7 : 20 and 7 : 25 p. m., and a constant chattering thenceforth welled from therock face. The sun had set some time previously, and deep shadows filled thegorge of the canyon.On September 21, a similar performance was witnessed, but thenumber had decreased to approximately 49 birds ; these all entered therock in exactly two minutes, between 6 : 30 and 6 : 32 p. m. On Oc-tober 24, "the birds went into .the roosting niche as fast as shot pouredthrough a funnel ; faster than the tongue could waggle in an attemptto count." They all entered within a space of ten seconds. Laterobservations were made in November and in January; at the lattertime only about a dozen swifts were seen to use the roost.Voice.?Dr. Alexander Wetmore (1920) says: "The call note ofthis bird is a shrill laughing he he he he heard usually when two orthree are coursing along together." Ralph Hoffmann (1927) writes:
"In spring and during the breeding season while pursuing each otherabout the cliffs in which they nest they utter a shrill twitter, sug-gesting the syllables tee-dee, dee, dee, dee.''"' Mr. Hanna (1909) de-scribes the vocal powers more fully, as follows: "The swifts do notseem to have any musical ability, but their notes or calls are pleasing,especially to one who is studying them. One series of peculiar shrieksis given while the bird is in rapid flight and is suggestive of joyousfreedom. Another series of notes is given when the birds are in thecrevices, which sound very much like the twitterings of small chickensas they cuddle under their mother's wings, only the swifts' notes aremuch louder. These twitterings are quite a contrast to the wildslirieks, and they cannot help but suggest comfort and satisfaction."Field mp/rks.?White-throated swifts are very apt to be associatedwith violet-green swallows, when insects are flying low and the birdsare coursing about at no great height above the ground; at suchtimes it is often confusing to try to pick out the swifts, as they dartabout among the swallows. But the shape of the swift is very distinc-tive, with its long, narrow wings set, as it sails, in the form of across; and its wing strokes, as it flies, are much more rapid thanthose of the swallow. Moreover, the swallow is all white on theunder parts, whereas the swift looks mainly black, except for theconspicuous white throat, a central streak of white on the breast, anda white patch on each side of the rump. These white markings will
318 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
easily distinguish the white-throated from the other two westernswifts.Winter.?At least a few white-throated swifts attempt to spendthe winter as far north as west-central California, although some ofthem evidently perish in the attempt, for lack of food or from theeffects of the cold. Dr. Gayle Pickwell's (1937) observers reportedthat during January 1937 only about a dozen swifts were seen enteringthe roosting place in the rock in Santa Clara County, referred toabove, and that two or three dead birds were found on the groundbelow the rock.Mr. Hanna (1917) reports that "during the extremely cold wave ofearly January, 1913, eight, to me perfectly healthy, swifts were takenout of a crevice where they, with many others, seemed to be roostingin a dazed or numb state. They were kept in a room for about sixhours and then turned loose, one at a time, a few hundred feet fromthe point where they were captured. All flew^ away in a dazed fashionand nearer the ground than usual and none were observed to return tothe place where they were captured. * * * The facts are thatthese birds are not observed for many days in the coldest weather,yet are found to be plentiful within the rocks, in a dormant state."DISTRIBUTIONRange.?^Western North America north to southern British Colum-bia.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the white-throated swiftextends north to southern British Columbia (Vaseu.x Lake) ; Mon-tana (Libby, Columbia Falls, Yogo Creek, and Billings) ; and north-western South Dakota (Slim Buttes). East to western South Dakota(Slim Buttes, Elk Mountains, and Hot Springs) ; northwestern Ne-braska (West Monroe Canyon) ; southeastern Wyoming (Goshen HoleRim) ; eastern Colorado (Chimney Canyon, Golden, and Garden ofthe Gods) ; New Mexico (Lake Burford, Caiion el Diablo, AntonChico, and Capitan Mountains) ; western Texas (Davis Mountainsand Chisos Mountains) ; Tamaulipas (Jaumave) ; Hidalgo (Chico)
;
and El Salvador (Los Esesmiles). South to El Salvador (LosEsesmiles) ; western Guatemala (Duenas) ; southwestern Chihuahua(Jesus Maria); and Baja California (Guadalupe Island). West toBaja California (Guadalupe Island, San Fernando, San Ysidro, andLos Coronados Islands) ; western California (Escondido, San JuanCapistrano, Santa Cruz Island, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo,Pine Canyon, and probably Mount Lassen) ; central Washington(Lake Chelan) ; and British Columbia (Fair View and VaseuxLake).
RIVOLI'S HUMMINGBIRD 319The range above outlined is for the entire species, but a southernsubspecies {A. s. nigrior), apparently resident in the southern partof the range, is now recognized.Winter range.?In winter these swifts are found north to Cali-fornia (Alum Rock Canyon, Santa Clara County, Redlands, Indio, andSalton Sea) ; casually central Arizona (Big Sandy Creek andPhoenix); and southwestern New Mexico (15 miles southwest ofHachita and Chloride) . From these northern limits the winter rangeextends southward, probably to Guatemala and El Salvador.Spring migration,.?Early dates of spring arrival are: New Mex-ico?Chloride, March 6. Colorado?Colorado Springs, March 20;Durango, April 4; Palisades, April 25. Wyoming?Laramie, April24; Midwest, April 28. South Dakota?Sioux National Forest, May12. Montana?Billings, April 23. Arizona?Tucson, March 9 ; Par-adise, March 14; Grand Canyon, March 25. Utah?Salt Lake, May1. Washington?Everett, May 10.Fall migration.?^Late dates of fall departure are : Utah?^Willard,September 4. Arizona?Grand Canyon, October 6. South Dakota
?
Hot Springs, September 9. Wyoming?Laramie, September 9. Col-orado?Boulder, October 2.Casual records.?A specimen of this species was captured alive atHillsdale, Mich., in August 1926; and another was obtained at HotSprings National Park, Ark., on May 4, 1935.Egg dates.?California : 86 records, May 8 to June 21 ; 43 records,May 21 to June 3, indicating the height of the season.Family TROCHILIDAE: HummingbirdsEUGENES FULGENS (Swainson)RIVOLI'S HUMMINGBIRDPlates 49, 50HABITSThis fine, large hummingbird is the largest of our North Americanhummingbirds, though the blue-throated hummingbird closely ap-proaches it in size, the two appearing about equally large as seen inlife. It is also one of the handsomest, although not so brilliantlycolored as some of the smaller species. In the male the crown is arich metallic violet-blue, and the throat a brilliant emerald-green,abruptly contrasted with the glossy-black breast and the bronzy greenof the back ; this color pattern is so arranged that every change in thebird's position brings a different color into view.It is mainly a Central American species, ranging as far south asNicaragua, through the tablelands of Guatemala and Mexico, and
320 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMbarely crossing our southern border into the mountains of southernArizona and New Mexico. It was added to our fauna by Henry W.Henshaw (1875), who took the first specimen at Camp Grant, Ariz.,in 1873. Since then, as he expected, it has been found to be a fairlycommon summer resident in various other mountain canyons.We found it in the Huachuca Mountains, Ariz., in several of thecanyons, where its favorite haunts seemed to be among the maplesalong the mountain streams, and where it ranges from 5,000 feet up to7,500 feet on the slopes just below the main pine belt, where therewere scattering yellow pines. Otho C. Poling (1890) says of itshaunts in this same region
:
It arrives in May, but is nowhere plentiful until the mescal shrubs begin toblossom, about the middle of June. From this time on during the entire summerone may observe on almost any hillside below the pine belt large clusters ofbright red or yellow flowers spreading out from stalks ten or fifteen feet high.There are many varieties of this plant and all are favorite feeding resorts ofthe Rivoli Hummer. I have shot as many as a dozen in a day simply by sit-ting down and watching for them to come and feed. It is necessary to select awell-matured plant, and at the proper elevation, as well as in good surroundingsof spruce pines. "While feeding, these birds range from 4,500 to 8,000 feet alti-tude or up to the pine belt, their favorite grounds being where the pines endon the downward slope.Bendire (1895) quotes from some notes given him by Dr. A. K.Fisher, as follows:The Rivoli Hummer was not met with by us in the Chiricahua Mountainsuntil we made camp in the upper part of Ruckers Canyon, among the yellowpines (Piniis ponderosa) . On the morning of June 5, 1894, an adult male dashedthrough the camp, paused a moment over a flower spike of a scarlet Pentstemon,and then disappeared up the canyon as rapidly as it had come. No more wereseen until we reached the high mountains at Fly Park. * * * They wereusually found in the more open parts of the forest where fire had killed a por-tion of the evergreens, and a deciduous undergrowth of aspens and shrubsthrived about the cool springs and little rivulets. A boreal honeysuckle {Loni-cera involucrata) was abundant and just coming into bloom. All the Hummersin the vicinity, the Rivoli Hummer among them, delighted to glean from theflowers and to sit half concealed among the large leaves of this shrub."Dickey and van Rossem (1938) say of its haunts in El Salvador:
"E-ivoli's hummingbird was found only among the oaks and pinesand among the scrubby, flowering growths between 7,000 and 8,000 feeton the south slope of Los Esesmiles, and about some flowering agaveplants scattered over rocky portions of the summit of Volcan deSanta Ana at 7,200 feet."Nesting.?Mr. Henshaw (1875) seems to have reported the first nestdiscovered, of which he says
:
A very beautiful nest was discovered, which, save in its large size, resemblesin its construction the best efforts of the little Eastern Rubythroat. It is com-posed of mosses nicely woven into an almost circular cup, the interior possessing
RIVOLI'S HUMMINGBIRD 321
a lining of the softest and downiest feathers, while the exterior is elaboratelycovered with lichens, which are securely bound on by a network of the finest silkfrom spiders' webs. It was saddled on the horizontal limb of an alder, abouttwenty feet above the bed of a running mountain stream, in a glen which wasoverarched and shadowed by several huge spruces, making it one of the mostshady and retired little nooks that could be imagined, * * * The dimen-sions of the nest are as follows : depth, externally, 1.50 ; internally, 0.75 ; greatestexternal diameter, 2.25 ; internal diameter, 1.15.Major Bendire (1895) received two nests from W. W. Price, takenin the Huachuca Mountains, Arizona: "The best preserved one of thetwo measures 2^^ inches in outer diameter by 2 inches in depth; itsinner diameter is ly^ by li/4 inches in depth. It is composed of soft,silky plant fibers, and is thickly coated exteriorly with small pieces oflichen, and lined with fine down and one or two soft, fluffy feathers,apparently those of a species of Titmouse. It resembles the nest ofthe Ruby-throated Hummingbird very closely in its general make up,but is naturally considerably larger. It was found by Mr. L. Milleron June 22, 1894, at an elevation of about 7,000 feet, saddled on awalnut branch about 10 feet from the ground, and contained oneyoung nearly able to fly."Apparently this hummingbird does not like to have its nest locationobserved, for, on May 28, 1922, as we were walking up through thenarrow, roclcy canyon known as "the box," we happened to see a par-tially built nest on a horizontal branch of a maple overhanging thestream. While we were watching it the female came to the nest withbuilding material and evidently saw us. On our return, a few hourslater, we were surprised to find that the nest had been entirely re-moved, and it was never again rebuilt in that same spot.On the following day we found another nest in Miller Canyon, inthe same general region in the Huachuca Mountains. It was about 80feet from the ground, saddled on a horizontal branch of a mapleover the trail, and so far out on the branch that it could be reachedonly with the aid of a rope. My companion, Frank C. Willard, suc-ceeded in securing it for me, however. It was a beautiful nest, muchlike those described above, made of plant down and other soft sub-stances, covered with lichens on the outside, and all bound togetherwith cobwebs. This, and other nests that I have seen, though sug-gesting those of the rubythroat, are proportionately broader and notso high.Mr. Willard records seven other nests in his notes, all found inthe Huachuca Mountains. Five of these were in maples at heightsranging from 20 to 55 feet above ground; one was 40 feet up on ahorizontal branch of a large pine and 20 feet out from the trunk;the other was placed 40 feet from the ground in a sycamore near thetip of a branch at the top of the tree. Of this last nest he says : "Thenest appeared to be built in an old western wood pewee's nest, and178223?40 27
322 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMwas made of sycamore down, covered with lichens. The female sat inthe nest until I reached the branch, and then flew, returning againalmost immediately and sitting on the nest until I almost touchedher with the net; she tried to get under the net while I was takingthe eggs out, and finally settled right in the net. After the eggs weretaken she returned and rearranged some of the lining while I wascutting off the branch." All these nests were found at altitudesranging from 5,000 to 8,500 feet, mostly nearer the former level.Bendire (1895) says that they range up to 10,000 feet.Mr. Willard, in his published article (1899), describes the bird'sactions in building its nest
:
Returning the next day, what looked like the beginning of a nest could beseen ; so I sat down to watch. The bird soon came with something in her billwhich she stopped just a second to place in position, then flew ofE through thebranches of a large pine nearby. On her return I could see nothing in herbeak, but she evidently had some spider web, for she laid something on oneside of the nest and then, turning around, reached under the branch and tookhold of it and pulled it under and up, fastening it in place by a strokingmotion with the side of her bill. This work continued with great regularityduring the hour spent in watching her, nearly every other trip seeming to beafter spider web. Once a short stop for rest was made, and several expeditionsagainst neighboring Wood Pewees or an inquisitive Jay relieved her labors.Just a week was required to build the nest and lay two eggs.Of the behavior of the bird at another nest, he writes in the samepaper: "While I was trying to get within reach the female madenumerous dashes at me. She would fly from an oak a few rods dis-tant, straight as an arrow right at my head, turning off and upwardat a sharp angle when within two or three feet of me. I instinctivelydodged several times, she came so close. During the last few feet ofher flight the wings were held perfectly steady, not vibrating in theleast until after she had turned. The humming of her wings was likethat made by an immense beetle or a bumblebee, lacking the sharpnessof that of small hummingbirds."Eggs.?The Kivoli's hummingbird lays almost invariably two eggs.These are like other hummingbirds' eggs, pure white, without gloss,and varying from oval to elliptical-oval, sometimes slightly elliptical-ovate. The measurements of 43 eggs average 15.4 by 10.0 millimeters ;the eggs showing the four extremes measure 16.5 by 10.4, 15.3 by11.4, 14.0 by 10.0, and 15.1 by 9.4 millimeters.Plvmiages.?I have seen no nestlings and can find no description ofthem. Kidgway (1892) says that the immature male is "intermediatein coloration between the adult nlale and female, * * * the crownonly partly violet, the throat only partly green, chest slightly mixedwith black, etc., the tail exactly intermediate both in form and color."And that the young female is "similar to the adult female, but allthe contour feathers of the upper parts margined with pale buffy-
RIVOLI'S HUMMINGBIRD 323grayish, and under parts darker, with entire sides distinctly glossedwith bronze-green." These characters are well shown in a largeseries that I have examined. Four young males, collected in July,all show more or less green in the throat, but only one, taken July 25,shows any violet in the crown. Others, taken in September and onNovember 1, show further progress toward maturity; and two youngmales, taken July 9 and 12, are still in first winter plumage.Food.?Not much has been published on the food of Rivoli's hum-mingbird. Bendire (1895) mentions a boreal honeysuckle {Lonicerainvohicrata) as one of the plants from which Dr. Fisher saw themgleaning food, and says: "Thej^ are said to be especially fond ofhovering about the blossoms of the mescal {Agave americana) ; theseare generally infested by numerous small insects, on which they feed,and, like all our hummingbirds, they are exceedingly greedy andquarrelsome, chasing each other constantly from one flower stalk toanother."He quotes Mr. Price as saying that "during the flowering season itfeeds extensively in the flowers of the Agave farryi in the HuachucaMountains. In the Chiricahuas I have found it early in the morningsin open glades, feeding on the flowers of an iris." Mr. Poling (1890)mentions its fondness for the bright red and yellow flowers of themescal on the slopes of the Huachucas.Probably any brightly colored flowers, to which insects are at-tracted, are resorted to by this and other hummingbirds, the insectsfeeding on the nectar and the hummingbirds feeding on both insectsand nectar. Mr. Fowler (1903) saw it feeding "among some scarletgeraniums in a large flower-bed."Three stomachs examined by Cottam and Kjiappen (1939) con-tained leaf bugs, plant lice, leafhoppers, parasitic wasps, beetles, flies,fragments of a moth, and undetermined insects and spiders. "Nofewer than eight species of insects and spiders were noted in onestomach." Spiders made up 31.66 percent and flies 26 percent of thewhole food.Behavior.?While I was collecting birds with Frank Willard inthe Huachuca Mountains, he asked me not to shoot any blue-throatedhummingbirds, as they were so rare, and I agreed to respect hiswishes. One morning we were sitting on a steep hillside watchingsome large hummingbirds that were chasing each other about in thetops of some tall pine trees on the slope below us. I wanted aRivoli very much, so he pointed out one that I could shoot, but,much to his disgust, when we picked it up, it proved to be a malebluethroat. This illustrates the similarity of the two species in gen-eral appearance.The flight of Rivoli's hummingbird is somewhat different from thatof the small hummers that I have seen. It is a large, heavily bodied
324 BULLETIN 17C, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMbird, and its flight, though swift, is somewhat slower in proportion toits size than that of the smaller species; its wing strokes are lessrapid, and it indulges in occasional periods of sailing on set wings,much after the manner of a swift.F. H. Fowler (1903) writes of one that he saw: "Its motions areunlike any other hummer I have ever seen as its wings did not humin the manner that has given this family its name, but cut the airwith strong, firm, wing beats. Its flight was erratic, like that of thehummingbird moth, and at times like that of a bat. It would evensoar, or sail for a few feet. It was not very shy, but when it made upits mind to go it w^ould flit away on an erratic course without theslightest warning."Mr. Poling (1890) observes that "their flight is exceedingly rapidat times but they often fly slowly so that the wings can be easilyseen during the beats. The noise made by this bird's wings during arapid flight is not like the buzzing of the small Hummer's wings, thebeats being more slow and distinct, without any buzzing noise."Like many other hummingbirds, the Rivoli is very quarrelsome;those that we watched, as mentioned above, were evidently quarrelingwith the bluethroats. And Mr. Ridgway (1892) quotes the followingremarks of Mr. Salvin, who was trying to collect a specimen of thisspecies: "Another Humming Bird rushes in, knocks the one I covetoff his perch, and the two go fighting and screaming away at a pacehardly to be followed by the eye. Another time this flying fight issustained in midair, the belligerents, mounting higher and highertill the one worsted in battle darts away seeking shelter, followedby the victor, who never relinquishes the pursuit till the vanquished,by doubling and hiding, succeeds in making his escape. These fierceraids are not waged alone between members of the same species.Eugenes fulgens attacks with equal ferocity Amazilia dumerilii,and, animated by no high-souled generosity, scruples not to tilt withthe little Trochilus colubrisyVoice.?Mr. Poling (1890) says that their "note is a twitteringsound, louder, not so shrill, and uttered more slowly than those ofthe small Hummers."Field marks.?The large size of Rivoli's hummingbird and its man-ner of flight will distinguish it from all except the blue-throatedhummingbird. The adult males of these two species may be easilydistinguished by the different color patterns, if the bird is nearenough ; the bluish-purple crown, the brilliant green throat, and theglossy black breast of the Eivoli are very different from the greenishcrown, dull blue throat, and grayish-brown breast of the blue-throated. More conspicuous at a greater distance are the broadwhite tips of the three outer tail feathers of the blue-throated, as
ARIZONA BLUE-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 325compared with the uniformly dark, greenish-bronze tail of the maleKivoli. The females of the two species are more alike but can berecognized by the tails; the female Rivoli has the three outerfeathers tipped with grayish, whereas in the blue-throated these tipsare white. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southern New Mexico and Arizona; south to Nicaragua.Breeding range.?Eivoli's hummingbird breeds north to southeast-ern Arizona (Santa Catalina Mountains and Fort Huachuca) ; south-western New Mexico (Chiricahua Mountains and San Luis Moun-tains) ; and Nuevo Leon (Bravo). East to Nuevo Leon (Bravo);western Tamaulipas (Rampahuilla) ; and Guatemala (Momostenangoand Tecpam). South to Guatemala (Tecpam, San I^ucas, and prob-ably Santa Marta) ; and Guerrero (Omilteme). West to Guerrero(Omilteme) ; State of Mexico (Volcano of Toluca) ; Durango (Ar-royo del Buey) ; western Chihuahua (Pinos Altos) ; eastern Sonora(Oposura) ; and southeastern Arizona (Huachuca Mountains, SantaRita Mountains, and Santa Catalina Mountains).
'Winter range.?Present information does not permit exact deline-ation of the winter range, but at this season it apparently is not foundnorth of Guerrero (Taxco). From this point it occurs southwardcasually to Nicaragua (San Rafael).Migration.?Early dates of spring arrival in Arizona are: Hua-chuca Mountains, April 24; Tombstone, May 9. No data are avail-able for the fall migration.Egg dates.?Arizona: 24 records. May 6 to July 28; 12 records,June 14 to July 14, indicating the height of the season.LAMPORNIS CLEMENCIAE BESSOPHILUS (Oberholsei)ARIZONA BLUE-THROATED HUMMINGBIRDPlates 51-52HABITSAlthough the blue-throated hummingbird had been known formore than half a century, as a Mexican bird, it was not until 1884 thatit was introduced to our fauna. William Brewster received the firstspecimen, which was taken by Frank Stephens's assistant in the SantaCatalina Mountains, Ariz., on May 14, 1884. Since then it has beenfound in the Huachuca, Chiricahua, and Santa Rita Mountains inArizona and in the San Luis Mountains in New Mexico ; it probablywill be found to occur in summer in some of the other mountainranges in that general region. This race of the species also is foundin the Sierra Madre of western Mexico.
326 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe species was split into two subspecies by Dr. H. C. Oberholser(1918), who named the northern race Gycmolaemus clemenc'iae hes-sophilus and described it as "similar to Cyanolaemus clemenciae clem-encicie^ but bill shorter; male with upper parts duller, particularlyon the rump, which is more washed with grayish ; lower surface de-cidedly paler; and throat duller. Female duller above and palerbelow than the female of Cyanolaemus clemenciae clemenciae?'' Thedifference in the length of the bill between the two races is not veryimpressive; in typical clemenciae^ the average for eight males is23.8, and for two females 26.7 millimeters; whereas in hessophilus,the average for ten males is 22.2, and for two females 24 millimeters
;
however, there seems to be no overlapping in the list of measurementsgiven.The Arizona blue-throated hummingbird will always be associatedin my mind with Ramsay Canyon, that interesting bird paradise onthe eastern slope of the Huachuca Mountains in southeastern Arizona.The approach to it lies across some gently sloping, grassy plains,which rise to an elevation of about 4,500 feet at the base of themountains; from here the trail in the canyon slopes upward to aheight of about 9,000 feet at the summit of the divide. Around themouth of the canyon an open parklike grove of large black-jack oaksfurnishes a congenial home for a number of noisy and conspicuousArizona jays. The lower and wider portion of the canyon, alongthe bed of the stream, is heavily wooded with giant, picturesque syca-mores and various oaks, maples, ashes, walnuts, alders, and locusts;while on the drier slopes are dense thickets of scrubby oaks and vari-ous thorny bushes, with scattered red-stemmed manzanitas and smallalligator-bark cedars; and on the hillsides the rounded head of ahandsome madrone towers occasionally above the forest.The canyon is well watered by a clear, cool mountain stream thatcomes bounding down through a narrow, rocky gorge, furnishes thewater supply for a summer colony, and finally disappears belowground in the washes out on the plains. We made our headquartersat Berner's place, at an elevation of about 5,000 feet, a cool and de-lightful place in the wider part of the canyon, where a number ofneat cottages and small gardens are maintained for the summer col-ony. Here the stream ran almost under our cabin; and here weoften heard the loud buzzing of the blue-throated hummingbird orobserved its direct and rapid flight, as it whizzed by our doorwayalong the stream. It seemed never to wander far from the narrowconfines of this mountain gorge and always seemed to feel perfectlyat home and unafraid among the cottages and gardens.Courtship.?Once we saw two males contending for the affectionsof an observant female; they were chasing each other about in thetreetops and displaying their widespread, long tails, with the con-
ARIZONA BLUE-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 327spicuous white tips on the outer feathers; perhaps the bluethroatswere more in evidence than they appeared to us. They saw us anddeparted before the ceremony was completed.Nesting.?One of our main objectives in Arizona was to find thenest of the blue-throated hummingbird; but all our efforts were invain, for we never succeeded in finding an occupied nest. We did,however, find some old nests in two entirely different situations.There was an open dancing pavilion, roofed over but open on allfour sides, that stood close to the stream. My companion, FrankC. Willard, told me that this hummer had nested under the roof ofthis building in the past, and he pointed out to me the remains of twonests of previous seasons on a dead branch that extended under theeaves. We saw the hummer near this pavilion several times, but, upto the time that we left, she had not built another nest there.We had been told that the blue-throated hiunmingbird had beenknown to build its nests on the stems of some flowering plants thatgrow in clusters on the rocks, above the pools or waterfalls, in anarrow rocky gorge, known as "the box," a short distance above ourcabin. While passing through this gorge on several occasions wehad heard or seen this hummer flying past us, and had looked for itsnest in vain. But one day, while examining a large clump of car-dinal monkeyflower {Mimulys cardinalis) growing on a sloping ledgenear a little waterfall, we found a last year's nest of this hummerattached to the stem of one of these plants and not over a foot abovethe ledge.George F. Breninger (Childs, 1906a) found and collected a nestand two eggs of this hummer, which came into the collection ofJohn Lewis Childs, who published a colored plate of it in TheWarbler. The nest was found on May 29, 1897, in the gorge wherewe found the nest referred to above. It was attached to some of thetaller stems in a large clump of maidenhair ferns, "which grew inthe side of a wall of rock in a cut worn by water." It was a largenest, apparently about three inches high and about two inches wide
;
it was "composed of oak catkins, green moss and spiders' webs."Frank C. Willard (1911) has found several nests of the Arizonahummingbird, of which he writes
:
In July, 1899, I located a nest built In an old Black Phoebe's nest on a rockoverhanging a shallow pool. * * *Although I made repeated efforts I failed to locate another nest until theseason of 1910. I made my headquarters at Berner's ranch in Ramsay Canyon.He has a flower and fruit garden, with several small greenhouses for winteruse. Hanging from a nail in the roof of one of these was the handle of a lardbucket, and built upon the lower crook was a many-storied hummer's nest,some four inches high. It contained one newly hatched young. The tell-tale
"squeaks" of an unseen bird identifled my And and by keeping out of sight,and quiet, I was able to get a good look at the female parent. Later I saw
328 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
very frequently both parents feeding among the flowers and occasionally withinarm's length of me. * * *During the last few days of my previous visit, I had seen the female In abunkhouse that had formerly been used as a greenhouse. A piece of balingwire was wound around a nail in a rafter and formed a sort of hook. WhenI found the young one gone, I went at once to this bunkhouse and found thefemale sitting on a completed nest. She flew as I entered the room. I secureda ladder and soon held the nest and two fresh eggs in my hand. Some chil-dren were occupying this room so I did not dare leave the nest for furthernotes. I put another wire up, however, to furnish another nesting site.June 21, the nest where the young had been seemed to be receiving additions,and the sides were somewhat built up, but I could not see the birds around.June 25 the nest contained one egg and the next morning there were two. Avisitor told me that it was liable to be taken by some small boys who werethere, so again I was afraid to leave it for observation and collected the nestand set, flrst taking a picture of it, showing the eggs. * * *The nest is made largely of oak blossom hulls, and stems of the same, witha small amount of plant down intermixed. The whole is well tied togetherwith cobwebs. The nest cavity is shallow and the edges are not incurved,differing in both these respects from the nests of other hummingbirds withwhich I am familiar.There is a nest, with a set of two eggs, of this hummer in theThayer collection in Cambridge that was taken by Mr. Willard inthe same locality on May 31, 1913. It was placed "on a wire hangingfrom the ceiling of an old barn; this pair had already raised onebrood of young this season." It is a large and roughly made nest,nearly 3 inches high by 2% inches in diameter and the inner cavitynearly an inch deep. It is made of a great variety of plant material,as described above, felted closely into a compact structure, reinforcedwith coarse straws and weed stems, bound together with fine fibersand cobwebs, and lined with finer pieces of similar material. Thematerial used reminds me of the kind used in bushtits' nests. Similarmaterials were used in the nest we found in the Mimulus cardinalis,referred to above.Milton S. and Kose Carolyn Kay (1925) found a nest in a narrowcanyon in the Huachuca Mountains on May 28, 1924. It was "sus-pended on a wire hanging from one of the rafters" in a small de-serted building. Mr. Ray says of it : "The nest is beautifully woven ofmoss, plant down and cottony fibers, webbed together on the ex-terior and decorated there with bits of very bright green moss andpale green lichens. The lining of the nest consists almost entirely ofcottony fibers and down. It is unusually large for a hummingbird,measuring 3^4 inches high by 2% across. The cavity is 1% across by1% deep."Eggs.?The Arizona blue-throated hummingbird lays either one ortwo eggs, normally two. These are like other hummers' eggs, ellip-tical-oval, pure white, and without gloss. The measurements of eighteggs average 15.1 by 10.0 millimeters; the eggs showing the four
ARIZONA BLUE-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 329
extremes measure 16.8 by 10.0, 15.0 by 10.4, and 13.8 by 9.7 millimeters.Plumages.?I have seen no naked young and no partially fledgednestlings. In the young male the forehead and more or less of thecrown are brownish gray, with no green feathers ; the green feathersof ihQ upper parts are margined with gray ; the postocular and rictalstripes are less clearly defined than in adults; and the blue throatis only partially developed. I have seen birds in this plumage inJuly, August, and September. Probably the fully adult plumage isnot assumed until the following summer, for I have seen birds inthis plumage in March and April and as late as June 12.Food.?In Ramsay Canyon, this hummingbird feeds regularly andfearlessly at the flowers in the gardens about the cottages and evenin the greenliouses, where it doubtless secures small insects as wellas the nectar from the flowers. Mrs. Bailey (1928) says that, in NewMexico, its food consists of "insects from flowers of the shrubby honey-suckle, gilia, agave, and other plants."In the summary of the contents of three stomachs, Cottam andKnappen (1939) include fragments of true bugs (Hemiptera), smallbeetles, flies, wasps, spiders, daddy-longlegs, pollen grains, and plantfiber. In two stomachs 10 percent and 15 percent, respectively, ofthe food was pollen. "One bird had made 92 percent of its meal onseven specimens of a fly {Hypocera john^oni), which is rare incollections."Behamor.?The flight of the blue-throated hummingbird seemedto us to be exceedingly swift, as it whizzed by us up or down thestream, uttering at intervals its squeaking note. It always seemedto fly directly over or along the stream; and it was gone almost assoon as it appeared. It was not at all shy and seemed to pay littleattention to human beings, coming into the gardens freely whilepeople were about. It would often alight within a few feet of aquiet observer and seemed to spend much time perched quietly onsome dead twig, treetop, or other open perch.Voice.?The only note we heard was the squeaking note, which wasrepeated every few minutes; Mr. Willard (1911) noted that thesecond note is higher pitched than the first, and the third note lowerthan either of the other two. Mr. Ray (see Rose Carolyn Ray,1925) refers to it as "a rather far-reaching but not overloud alarmnote, 'seek'-*seek'-'seek'." Dr. Alexander Wetmore (1932) says: "Thebirds utter sharp, squeaking calls, and the male has a simple song ofthree or four notes, repeated at short intervals while the singerperches upright with head elevated."Field marks.?This large hummer is not likely to be confused withany other hummingbird except the almost equally large Rivoli's.The most conspicuous field mark of the blue-throated is the long,
330 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL. MUSEUMbroad tail, with the prominent white tips of the three outer rectrices,recognizable in both sexes and at all ages; only the female Rivoli'shas light tipped outer rectrices, and these are gray rather than white.The blue throat of the male is not conspicuous, except at short rangeand in good light, but the white postocular and rictal stripes aremore easily seen at short distances, especially the former.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southern Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas south tosouthern Mexico.Breeding range.?The blue-throated hummingbird breeds north tosoutheastern Arizona (Santa Catalina Mountains, Paradise, and theChiricahua Mountains) ; southwestern New Mexico (San Luis Moun-tains) ; southwestern Texas (Chisos Mountains) ; and Nuevo Leon(Bravo). East to Nuevo Leon (Bravo and Galindo) ; and Veracruz(Las Minas, Las Vigas, and Huamantla). South to southern Vera-cruz (Huamantla) ; State of Mexico (Mexico and the Volcano ofToluca) ; and Guerrero (Omilteme). West to central Guerrero (Omil-teme) ; Durango (Arroyo del Buey) ; western Chihuahua (JesusMaria and Pinos Altos) ; eastern Sonora (Oposura) ; and southeasternArizona (Ramsay Canyon, Tombstone, and Santa Catalina Moun-tains).
'Winter range.?During the winter season the species is apparentlyconcentrated in southern Mexico, chiefly in the States of Michoacan(Nahuatzen and Mount Tancitaro) ; and Guerrero (Taxco andChilpancingo)
.
The range as outlined is for the entire species, which has been sep-arated into two subspecies. The Texas blue-throated hummingbird(Z. c. Glemenx)iae) ranges from southern Mexico north to westernTexas, while the Arizona blue-throated hummingbird {L. c. hes-sophilus) is found through the Sierra Madre of western Mexiconorth to Arizona and New Mexico.Migration.?^Very little is known about the migrations of thesebirds, but they have been observed to arrive in the spring at Tucson,Ariz., as early as April 21.Egg dates.?Arizona : 7 records. May 14 to July 17.Mexico : 2 records, February 17 and September 9.LAMPORNIS CLEMENCIAE CLEMENCIAE (Lesson)TEXAS BLUE-THROATED HUMMINGBIRDHABITSSince Dr. Oberholser (1918) has described the Arizona bird assubspecifically distinct from the Mexican bird of the earlier authors,this type race of the species has been restricted in its distribution
TEXAS BLUE-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 331to central and southern Mexico from Michoacan and Oaxaca north-ward to the Chisos Mountains in western Texas. It would seem asif this race might more properly be called the Mexican blue-throatedhummingbird, as most of its range is in Mexico; furthermore thebirds from the Chisos Mountains do not seem to be quite typical ofthe southern race; Dr. Oberholser (1918) remarks that these birds"show in some specimens a tendency toward typical Cyanolaemusclemenciae chmenciae, but are decidedly referable to Cyanolaemusclemenciae hessophilus.'''' On the other hand, Van Tyne and Sutton(1937) refer the Chisos Mountains birds to the Mexican race, Lam-pomis clemenciae clemenciae.Typical clemenciae, the subject of this sketch, has a somewhatlonger bill, darker under parts, a slightly more brilliant blue throat,and more extensive as well as brighter green on the upper parts andflanks, than the Arizona bird.Nesting.?Dr. E. W. Nelson wrote to Major Bendire (1895) asfollows
:
Coeligena clemenciae is a sparingly distributed summer resident of all themountain regions of south central Mexico, between 7,500 and 12,000 feet. Theyare rather quiet birds, often found perched on the tips of large maguey leaves.In the forests of pines of the higher slopes they are not often seen except asthey dash by among the trees. On the 9th of September, 1893, a nest con-taining two eggs was found at an altitude of 11,500 feet on the north slope ofthe volcano of Toluca, in the State of Mexico. At this time the nights hadalready become quite frosty here. The nest was built in the fork of a smallshrub, growing out of the face of a cliff about 30 feet above its base, on theside of a canyon, in the pine and fir forest. The nest was discovered by seeingthe parent approach its vicinity. She flew quietly close up to the nest, andthen, turning so that she faced out from the cliff and away from the nest,she moved backward several inches and settled lightly on the eggs. She waseasily alarmed, darting away through the forest, and was not seen again. Thenest was nearly inaccessible, and one egg was thrown out and broken in secur-ing it.Major Bendire (1895) says of the nest:This nest, No. 26332, United States National Museum collection, now beforeme, is a handsome and rather bulky structure, which is apparently composedentirely of fine mosses, the whole evenly quilted together into a smooth, homo-geneous mass, and bound firmly together with silk from cocoons and spiders'webs. It is saddled in a tripronged fork of a small twig, the three stems beingincorporated in the walls of the nest, holding it firmly in position, the mainstem being only one-twelfth of an inch in diameter. It measures 2% inchesin outer diameter by 3 inches in depth ; the inner cup is 1^/4 inches in diameterby three-fourths of an inch deep. The walls of the nest are three-fourths ofan inch thick, and the inner cup appears very small for the large size of thenest. It looks like a warm and cozy structure, and it needs to be so. As theeggs were only slightly incubated when found, the young would probably havehatched by September 20, and would scarcely have been large enough to leavethe nest before October 12, by which time one might reasonably look for snow-storms at such an altitude. There is but very little inner lining, not enough
332 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
to hide the moss, which looks to me like the down from willow catkins. Twoeggs are laid to a set, and probably two broods are raised in a season.At the other end of the breeding season, Josiah H. Clark (1900)found a nest on February 16, 1899, near Las Vigas, Veracruz, Mexico,in a canyon at an elevation of about 4,500 feet, of which he writes theseinteresting circumstances
:
On February 12 we had snow, with the thermometer down to 32? F. at 4 p. m.,and on February 13, at 7 a. m., down to 29? F. All the plants and trees werecovered with ice, and the leaves of almost everything were killed; we foundmany frozen birds, and that was the fate of the owner of this nest. We onlyhad two cold days, but that was enough to destroy many birds.The nest was fastened to a vine one tenth of an inch in diameter and aboutthree feet above a small stream of water. The vine hung from a large rock,and would have been sheltered from rain by the overhanging rock. The nestis of bulky structure, and is perhaps a new nest built on top of an old one.It is composed of fine moss massed together, and bound with spiders' webs orsimilar material. It measures, outer diameter, 2% inches, depth 4 inches;inside diameter, li/4 inches, depth, % inch. There is very little lining, onlyenough for the eggs to rest on, consisting of down from some fern.Eggs.?The only two sets of eggs of this hummingbird of which Ihave any record consisted of two eggs each. The eggs are indis-tinguishable from those of the Arizona race, dull white and elliptical-oval. The measurements of the only egg I have been able to locate,in the United States National Museum, are 16.26 by 12.45 millimeters.The food, behavior, voice, and general habits of this subspecies donot differ materially from those of the Arizona race.ARCHILOCHUS COLUBRIS (Linnaeus)RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRDPlates 53-57HABITSContributed by Winsor Mabrett TtlebThe ruby-throated hummingbird is the only species of hummingbirdthat enters the eastern two-thirds of the United States. A minutespritelike bird, scarcely bigger than a good-sized insect, it is whitebelow and burnished, sparkling green on the back. The adult malehas a gorgeous flaming throat, which, when the sun strikes it, flashesback a deep, glowing orange or red.The hummingbird moves its wings with such extraordinaryrapidity that it seems to be moving through the air between twowisps of mist. Its buzzing wings hold it steady in the air. We seeit poised before a flower, most often alone, its body motionless, itstail swaying, as firmly fixed in space as if it were standing on aperch. We see it dart adroitly from one blossom to another, and
RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 333another?an inch away, six feet away?pausing exactly in front ofeach one, probing it with its beak, starting and stopping with a jerk,almost, turning at any angle with a sudden twist; or it may shootoff and away, bounding along at full speed. A remarkable power,unbirdlike, more like an overgrown bee.Spring.?In spring the ruby-throated hummingbird leaves its trop-ical or semitropical winter quarters and presses northward, keepingpace as the season advances with the opening of its favorite flowers.The bird's preference for some of these is so marked that it seemsoftentimes to regulate its migration so as to arrive on the very dayof their blossoming. For example, Austin Paul Smith (1915), writ-ing of the Boston Mountains, Ark., says: "The arrival of the 'ruby-throat' and the blossoming of the dwarf buckeye {Aesculus parvi-flora) were found to be coincident. For it is upon the flowers ofthis shrub that the ruby-throat finds most of its subsistence for thefirst two weeks after arrival."At the start of the northward journey many of the tiny birds flyover a wide stretch of the Gulf of Mexico on their way to the south-ernmost States. They cross these dangerous waters with little con-cern, apparently, for W. E. D. Scott (1890) speaks of seeing them
"at considerable distance from land" while he was fishing off theDry Tortugas. "One morning" he says, "I counted six pass by theboat. * * * At such times their flight was direct and very rapid,and all were going in a northerly direction. They flew about twen-ty-five feet above the water and did not appear in any way fatigued,nor show any desire to alight on the boat, as small birds crossing thewater so frequently do."Even in the Southern States hummingbirds run the danger of late,killing frosts. "Didymus" (1891) tells thus of the calamity thatovercame them in Florida. "It was a warm winter and the earlyopening of spring brought out the flowers and started myriads ofthese little creatures on their journey toward the north. Then camethat blighting frost?which they could stand, but the 'death of theflowers' was too much for them and they were picked up dead anddying everywhere. They came in unusual numbers and seemed to benearly all males. After the frost but few were seen. * * *"On the other hand, Charles B. Floyd (193Y) describes an occasionin which some hummingbirds withstood prolonged low temperatureand even snow
:
The following observations with Hummingbirds * * made in theLaurentian Mountains of Canada during the last two weeks of May, 1936, areof interest. * * *On May 20th the temperature in the early morning was 22 degrees Fahren-heit above zero after a snowfall during the night of six inches. This snow didnot completely melt until late in the afternoon. The temperature the following
334 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
night was 28 degrees above zero. Early on the following morning the tem-perature was again 22 degrees. Ice formed in water-pails and a cold wind blewall day. * * ?During the morning of May 20th the ground and trees were covered with sixInches of heavy, wet snow. I spent several hours paddling along the lake-shoreon which our camp was located, observing the Hummingbirds and warblers thatcame there to feed. * * * All these appeared sluggish with the cold, andthe Hummingbirds fluttered about on the underside of the snow-covered leaves,which were about half-developed, apparently capturing minute insects (probablyaphids), on which they fed, occasionally dropping to the logs that floated alongthe shore to secure something so small that I could not determine what it wasthey were eating. * * *All the birds permitted so close an approach that I could not use field-glassesduring these observations. The last day of my stay the Hummingbirds wereobserved in their usual feeding places and apparently survived the cold weatherunharmed.Usually in spring we meet hummingbirds singly, or at most twoor three together, but once in a while we come upon a gatheringof migrating birds?almost always of one sex?collected sometimesin a single favored tree. About noon on May 22, 1936, I came uponsuch a gathering. The birds were in a good-sized red horse-chest-nut tree in full flower. They must have numbered more than adozen, perhaps twice this number. As I came near the tree thereburst out a long series of short, sharp, high, jerky notes, the pitchrising and falling, the volume increasing and decreasing. The indi-vidual notes had a squeaky quality suggested by the letters sk^ butin spite of this I was reminded of the house wren's chatter. Bydirect comparison, however, the wren's voice was much more mellow,and the delivery more indolent, if one may use the word in referenceto that sprightly bird.Looking in among the branches, I could see here and there twoor three birds flying about, making darts at each other. Sometimesa bird or two birds, one chasing the other, flew out and, after flyingaround the tree a little way, shot in among the branches again. Thetree seemed swarming with hummingbirds. Soon the activity calmeddown, and the birds perched motionless on small branches, hereand there.The sound quieted also, but rose again energetically when thebirds resumed their activity. They probed the blossoms, evidentlyfeeding, but for the most part seemed interested in one another
?
playfully, or with little hostility. Once I saw two birds fly straightup in the air, close together like mating bees or a swallow feedingits young on the wing, strike at each other, I think, then turn anddive head-downward into the tree. Again a bird flies out from thetree at an approaching bird, utters zzzt-zzz^ and drives it off.The notes varied a good deal. Sometimes a note was so fine, high,and drawn out that it was only a hiss; generally they were very
RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 335
short and clearly cut, either single or double; sometimes they tookon a rhythmic form and were repeated over and over, for example,s, s, 2, z, s, s, zzt, the last note emphasized; and often they camein a long series?single, double, and triple notes all intermixed likea telegraph instrument in action.It was difficult, owing to their activity among the dense branches,to see the birds clearly, and impossible to count them accurately, butI believe that most, if not all, of them were males, their throats inthe dark shadow of the branches appearing black.On the 24th there were fewer birds in the tree?the petals werefalling to the ground?and on the 25th only two or three remained.Jane L. Hine (1894) reports a similar gathering of female birds.She says : "About nine o'clock one spring morning, when lilacs werein bloom, we discovered that the old lilac bush by the well was
'swarming' with Hummingbirds?just come; we knew they werenot there a few minutes before. There are five large lilacs on ourpremises and those of a near neighbor. On investigation I foundfour of these bushes alive, as it were, with Hummers?all females.The fifth bush, a Persian, they did not favor."From these observ^ations, and several more in the literature, wemay infer that the sexes do not as a rule migrate together, andaccording to the opinion of many observers the males always precedethe females.Courtship.?In his courtship display the male rubythroat makesuse of his marvelous proficiency in flight as well as of the brilliantlyglowing feathers of his throat. As we watch him performing suchflights as are described below, swinging back and forth along thearc of a wide circle, we get the impression of a bird upheld by aswaying wire; his swings are so accurate and precise that they sug-gest a geometric figure drawn in the air rather than the flight of abird. Carl W. Schlag (1930), speaking of the courtship flight, says:It is comparable to the strutting actions of various species of birds. It isperformed several times daily during the breeding season. While the femaleis quietly feeding from flower to flower, the male will go through this perform-ance, calculated no doubt to impress her more fully with all his charms. Ris-ing up about eight or ten feet above and five or six to one side of her, he willsuddenly swoop down, wings and tail outspread, right at her, passing within afew inches of her, the wings and tail making a terrific buzz for a bird sosmall. Passing her, he rises to an equal height on the opposite side, andturning comes down again in the same way, describing an inverted arc, withthat surprisingly loud buzz just as he gets nearest to her. He keeps up thiscontinuous swooping, as I term it, as long as half a minute, at times; at theconclusion of which he usually flies to some near-by perch and rests. Duringthis performance the female feeds quietly at the same cluster of blossoms,not moving any distance away, and sometimes resting on a flrwer-slalk untilhe is through.
336 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMMrs. Charles W. Melcher, of Homosassa Springs, Fla., describesa flight that, from its formal, regular character, was probably avariant of the usual courtship display, although there was no dip-ping?the bird progressing on a level line back and forth?andalthough Mrs. Melcher did not see a female bird in the vicinity.She writes to Mr. Bent: "Instead of the circular flight he flew in astraight line. Facing the north, he hovered, then moved eastwardabout 3 feet, then hovered, then moved eastward again for the samedistance, continuing thus until he had covered perhaps 25 feet. Then,still facing north, he moved toward the west in the same manner, backto his starting point. I saw him cover the distance four times, twiceeast and twice west. The fact that he seemed to move sideways makesthis a fantastic story, but I think that I have seen the birds that cometo our feeders move in almost every direction."My attention was first attracted to this flight by the regulaHtyof a humming sound out in the garden. There was a hum, then asecond's pause, then another hum, each humming and each pausebeing of equal length. The humming was made, of course, while hehovered, and lasted perhaps three or four seconds. The pause wasvery short, just the time it took him to move 3 or 4 feet. The soundsof humming and twittering were so different from usual that I wentto the door expecting to see some sort of flight that was out of theordinary.
"Another performance we witnessed lasted two or three minutes.A male and a female were flying up and down. They were facingeach other with tails spread, and there was much twittering. Theycovered a distance of 5 or 6 feet, and their flight was almost vertical.When he was at the top of his flight she was at the bottom of hers,and when she was at the top he was at the bottom. They were about2% feet apart. There was no thrusting at each other until, at thelast, they came together for an instant on the windowsill. I was toofar aAvay to see if the contact was friendly."Charles L. Wliittle (1937) presents a full account of the actions ofa male hummingbird during several weeks before egg-laying time
?
nine days of watching for a mate, weeks of courtship after shearrived, and after the culmination of his wooing, the almost imme-diate cessation of display. The bird came to his station in Peter-boro, N. H., on May 21 "and began a long vigil lasting until May30th, believed to be a search for a female." He continues
:
This vigil took place from three observation posts overlooking a circulargarden, one on an aerial, one on a dead branch of an elm, and a third on a deadtwig at the top of an apple tree, all these perches being from fifteen to twentyfeet from the ground. For the major portion of each day he occupied theseperches, moving from one to another, and while perching he continually movedhis head from side to side through an arc of 60-70 degrees. One cannot well
RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 337
escape the conclusion that he was searching for a female, since the habit wasimmediately discontinued upon the arrival of a female at the station on May80th. Now, for a period of about a month, his attention was devoted to thefemale and consisted of the usual zooming before her whenever she appeared.* * * On July 2nd a male and a female were seen facing each other in theair about eight or ten inches apart, ascending and descending vertically to aheight of about ten feet, and occasionally dropping to the ground for a moment.At other times their flights were more or less spiral in character, and suchexhibitions were frequent up to July 7th, when Mrs. Whittle observed a pairdrop to the ground beside our driveway, where copulation took place. Fromthis time on the males were seen zooming only occasionally, and vertical flightsceased entirely after the first week in July. * * *Mating, in the ordinary sense of the word, that is, pairing ofC well in advanceof nest-building and continuing during nidification and raising of the youngbirds, as far as any evidence observable at this station is concerned, appears notto take place. No preference for a male on the part of a female is indicateduntil just prior to egg-laying, a period seemingly of three or four days. I havefound no evidence that a male's interest in a female one day is manifestedtowards the same female the following day. All the pretty ways common amongmany species of mated pairs, often lasting two months at least, are entirelylacking among Hummingbirds. The male appears to be a free lance whoseintimate interest in the female is confined to the short period just before andduring egg-laying.Nesting.?The hummingbird's nest, "a model of artistic workman-ship," Torrey (1892) calls it, is a little compact mass about an inchdeep and an inch across, firm in texture, lined with soft plant down,and covered over on the outside with tiny bits of lichen. It is com-monly saddled on a limb, usually a small, down-sloping one, oftennear, and sometimes directly over, water. Wilson (1831) aptly de-scribes the nest when viewed from below as "a mere mossy knot, oraccidental protuberance."Aretas A. Saunders (1936), who made an extensive study of thehummingbird in New York State, describes the situation of the nestthus:In Allegany Park, the nesting site seems to be always along a brook valley,and in most cases the nest is on a limb that overhangs the brook. Eight neststhat I have seen in Allegany Park were on limbs less than an inch in diameter,and one was on a limb a little more than a quarter of an inch through. Thelimb, In my experience, always slants a little downward from the tree. It isnever so high in the tree that it is not sheltered above by other limbs or leafybranches. ? * *I do not suppose that the proximity of the brook has any particular signifi-cance in the Humming Bird's nesting except that its favorite fiowers grow alongthe brook and the stream affords an open space. * * *The [small] size of the limb and its downward slant seem to be aids in pro-tection against possible tree-climbing enemies * *The protection from above is possibly to screen the nest from flying enemies,but chiefly to protect it against heavy storms *Various kinds of trees are used for nesting, but in Allegany Park the ma-jority of nests found have been in Hornbeams. Of the 11 nests I have observed,178223?40 28
338 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMand one other reported to me, six were in Hornbeams, two in Yellow Birch,and one each in Sugar Maple, Red Maple and Beech. I have seen nests inHemlocks in other regions ? ?The nests found have ranged from five to 18 feet from the ground or water,all but two of them being actually over water.Saunders (1936) also points out that "the distribution of HummingBirds in Quaker Run valley is governed primarily by the occurrenceof Bee Balm, Monarda didyma, the flower upon which they dependchiefly for nectar at the beginning of their breeding season in thisregion."Bendire (1895) states that the height of the nest varies "from 6 to50 feet high, usually from 10 to 20 feet from the ground." Of thenest itself Saunders (1936) says:The nesting materials are of four kinds, bud scales, plant down, lichens andspider silk * * *. The bud scales make up the bulk of the nest, but by thetime it is finished they are entirely covered by the lichens and plantdown. * * ?Lichens * * * are put on the outside before the plant down is put in.The lining, in one case at least, was not put into the nest at all until somedays after the eggs were laid and incubation begun. The bird continues addinglining material to the nest after the young are hatched, in one case gatheringFireweed down and taking it to the nest when the young were two weeks old.The plants from which down is gathered in Allegany Park are Fireweed, CanadaThistle, Orange Hawkweed and Rattlesnake Root. Possibly others such asMilkweed and various Composites are used also, but the Fireweed seems to bethe most commonly used lining material. The bird gathers thistle dowTi thatis flying about in the air, but in the case of Fireweed gathers it directly fromthe plant * * *I have never seen the Hummingbird gathering or working with the spidersilk which holds the nest together and fastens it to its limb. The fastening ofthe nest to the limb is probably an early step in the nest building. But thespider silk is an important item, and in one nest I have seen, was run out andwrapped along two or three twigs that branched out from the point where thenest was fastened, to a distance of 15 inches.A. Dawes DuBois, in a letter to Mr. Bent, describing the behaviorof a female bird while weaving her nest, says: "I stationed myselfclose to the nest (which was 12 feet from the ground) and watchedthe bird come and go. She always flew off in the same direction andsometimes was away for five minutes or more. On returning witha tiny tuft of down in her bill, she alighted at once upon the nest andbegan to tuck the material into its walls on the inner side, using herdelicate bill like a needle; then she vigorously worked her body upand down, and round-about thereby enlarging and shaping the cavity.Afterward she tucked or adjusted more securely the lichens on theoutside. The male bird was not seen at any time."H. E. Wheeler (1922) says that "the behavior of the female willinvariably betray her home. It is easier still to locate the 'house'if the birds are building * * * for the birds keep their territory
BUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 339pretty well cleared of intruding visitors. On one occasion thefemale Ruby-throat left her nest repeatedly to torment a family ofCarolina Wrens, and to pay her respects to a Tufted Titmouse.Otherwise I think I should have never located the tiny nest situated50 feet above ground, and so thoroughly concealed from view."In the experience of almost all observers the female parent buildsthe nest and rears the young unaided by her mate. Bradford Torrey(1892) long ago called attention to this habit in two delightful essays,and Saunders (1936) states in corroboration that "male HummingBirds do not seem to stay in the Quaker Run valley through the nest-ing season. They are rarely if ever seen after the middle of August."It is very rare to find any deviation from this habit; hence thefollowing is a very exceptional observation, and it may be that themale's attendance at this nest was merely perfunctory. W. A. Welter(1935), speaking of a nest found in Kentucky, says
:
The entire nest, with the exception of bits of lichens that were added later,was built in one day. It is interesting to note that both birds, male and female,worked on this nest that first day. The male evidently was doing his shareof the work. This seems to be an unusual circumstance, as ordinarily the maleis supposed to scorn such menial duties. * * *It would seem that the time consumed in nest building diminishes as theseason progresses. Perhaps haste is necessary in order that the potential youngmay be completely developed by the time of fall migration. This need forhaste may also have been the stimulant which caused the male in the last caseto assist in nidiflcation.Bendire (1895) says: "I believe two broods are frequently raisedin a season, occasionally three perhaps, as fresh eggs have been foundas late as August 7. An old nest is sometimes occupied for severalseasons and remodeled each year; and should the nest and eggs betaken or destroyed, a second and occasionally even a third and fourthattempt at nesting is made within about a week, and sometimes thesesubsequent nests are built in the same tree again, or in others closeby."Eggs.?[Author's note : Like other hummingbirds, the rubythroatregailarly lays two eggs ; I have no record of more or fewer. An in-terval of one day is said by Bendire (1895) to occur between the lay-ing of the two eggs ; he says also that the eggs are often laid beforethe nest is completed. The eggs are pure dead white without glossand usually elliptical-oval in shape, though occasionally approachingelliptical-ovate, with one end slightly more pointed than the other.The measurements of 52 eggs average 12.9 by 8.5 millimeters; theeggs showing the four extremes measure 14.5 by 9.1, 11.5 by 8.2, and12.7 by 7.8 millimeters.]Young.?Bradford Torrey (1892) describing the young humming-birds newly hatched from eggs no bigger than a pea, says : "Two life-less-looking things lay in the bottom of the nest, their heads tucked
340 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
out of sight, and their bodies ahnost or quite naked, except for a lineof grayish down along the middle of the back." Isabella McC. Lem-mon (1901) speaks of the young birds as "dark slate-color, with alittle yellowish fuzz on the bodies, exceedingly thin necks, three-cornered heads and short yellow bills," and of birds slightly older,Brewster (1890) says: "Their bills were perhaps a quarter of aninch long, wide at the base, and in general shape not unlike the billof a Dendroica^ but more depressed."Bendire (1895) states that the young "are born blind, and do notopen their eyes until they are about a week old." These minute,naked, helpless bits of life grow, as Bendire (1895) says, "amazinglyfast, and when about ten days old they are about as large as theirparents." Torrey (1892), however, speaks of the brood which hewatched closely until after they left the nest, as developing moreslowly. He says: "Though at least eleven days old, the tiny birds* * * were still far from filling the cup." He describes thus thebehavior of the parent as she brooded her young a few days afterthey had hatched: "It was noticeable that, while sitting upon theyoung, she kept up an almost incessant motion, as if seeking to warmthem, or perhaps to develop their muscles by a kind of massage treat-ment. A measure of such hitchings and fidgetings might have meantnothing more than an attempt to secure for herself a comfortableseat; but when they were persisted in for fifteen minutes together, itwas difficult not to believe that she had some different end in view.Possibly, as human infants get exercise by dandling on the mother'sknee, the baby humming-bird gets his by this parental kneadingprocess."Torrey's birds were hatched on June 30. "On the 12th [of July],"he writes, "just after the little ones had been fed, one of them gothis wings for the first time above the wall of the nest, and flutteredthem with much spirit." On July 19 the first young bird left thenest. Mr. Torrey continues
:
I was standing on the wall with my glass leveled upon the nest, when Isaw him exercising his wings. The action was little more pronounced thanhad been noticed at intervals during the last three or four days, except thathe was more decidedly on his feet. Suddenly, without making use of therim of the nest, as I should have expected him to do, he was in the air, hover-ing in the prettiest fashion, and in a moment more had alighted on a leaflesstwig slightly above the level of the nest, and perhaps a yard from it * * *[Soon] the youngster was again on the wing. It was wonderful how much athome he seemed?poising, backing, soaring, and alighting with aU the ease andgrace of an old hand.Illustrating the activity which precedes the flight from the nest,Mr. Torrey says of the other young bird : "He grew more and morerestless ; as my companion?a learned man?expressed it, he began to
BUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 341
'ramp around.' Once he actually mounted the rim of the nest, athing which his more precocious brother had never been seen to do,* * * exercising his wings till they made a cloud about him."C. J. Pennock, in a letter to Mr. Bent, describes a young bird
"standing erect on the rim of the nest moving his wings sloioly?soslowly that I could see the wings distinctly?then rapidly again."Of the length of time the young birds remain in the nest Forbush(1927) says that it "has been given by different writers as from 6to 18 days. It may be possible that in the south or during a hot wavein the north, when the female can safely leave her young withoutdanger of chilling them, that she may procure enough food for themto develop wings to the flight stage in a short time; but my NewEngland records of this period run from 14 to 28 days."During this long period of time the young are fed by regurgita-tion. Torrey (1892) gives a vivid description of the operation,viewed from close at hand : "The feeding process, which I had beenso desirous to see, was of a sort to make the spectator shiver. Themother, standing on the edge of the nest, with her tail braced againstits side, like a woodpecker or a creeper, took a rigidly erect position,and craned her neck until her bill was in a perpendicular line abovethe short, wide-open, upraised beak of the little one, who, it must beremembered, was at this time hardly bigger than a humble-bee. Thenshe thrust her bill for its full length down into his throat, a frightful-looking act, followed by a series of murderous gesticulations, whichfairly made one observer's blood run cold."When the young bird grew larger, and its beak longer, the parent'sbeak, Mr. Torrey says, "was thrust into his mouth at right angles,"and later, after the young had left the nest, she sometimes passedfood directly from her beak to the young bird. "If she found a choicecollection of spiders, for instance, she brought them in her throat (ascedar-birds carry cherries), to save trips; if she had only one or two,she retained them between her mandibles."Carl W. Schlag (1930) saj's: "In cleaning the nest the humming-bird placed the droppings of the young in a line on the samebranch, just above the nest."Dr. Arthur A. Allen (1930) states that during the first few daysafter hatching the female feeds the young by merely inserting hertongue into the nestlings' throats and squirting them full of nectarand tiny insects.Burns (1915) gives the period of incubation as 14 days. Wilbur F.Smith (1920), however, says of a closely watched nest: "On June2 * * * the first Q,gg was laid, and, after an interval of a day,the second was laid * * *. Xhe young hatched on June 15, aftereleven days' incubation, during which time the nest was built higher."
342 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMPlumages.?[Author's note: The young hummingbird is hatchednaked, but pinfeathers soon appear, and the young bird is practicallyfully grown and fully feathered in the juvenal plumage before itleaves the nest. The sexes are unlike in the juvenal plumage. Theyoung male closely resembles the adult female, with the white tipson the three outer tail feathers; but the feathers of the upper partsare narrowly edged with grayish .buflf, the throat is marked withnarrow dusky streaks, and the sides and flanks are strongly tingedwith brownish buff. The young female is like the young male butlacks the dusky streaks on the throat. Young males begin to acquireone or more ruby feathers on the throat in August and September,but no great progress in this direction is made before they leave forthe south, and the adult plumage is assumed before they return inthe spring. Dickey and van Rossem (1938) say: "In February andMarch both adults and young go through a complete molt, and at thistime the young males acquire the red throat of maturity. Most indi-viduals have completed this molt by the first week in March."]Food.?The hummingbird is popularly regarded solely as a sipperof nectar, as it buzzes from flower to flower; as one who might saywith Ariel, "Where the bee sucks, there suck I"; but when it comesdown to the examination of stomach contents, it is proved that aconsiderable part of the bird's food consists of insects, chiefly thosethat come to the flowers the hummingbird visits. Frederic A. Lucas(1893), after examining the contents of 29 stomachs of several speciesof hummingbirds, comes to the following conclusion
:
It would seem to be safe to assume that the main food of Hummingbirds issmall insects, mainly diptera and hymenoptera. Homoptera are usually present,and small spiders form an important article of food, while hemiptera andcoleoptera are now and then found. The small size of the insects may beinferred from the fact that one stomach contained remains of not less thanfifty individuals, probably more.Most of the insects found occur in or about flowers, and my own views agreewith those of Mr. Clute, that it is usually insects, and not honey, that attractHummingbirds to flowers * * *.In view, however, of the testimony cited at the beginning of this paper, itwould seem unquestionable that Hummingbirds do to some extent feed on thenectar of flowers and the sap of trees * * .I am much inclined to believe with Dr. Shufeldt that Hummingbirds firstvisited flowers for insects and that the taste for sweets has been incidentallyacquired.This taste for sweets is very well known to the many observerswho have supplied hummingbirds with sugar and water placed abouttheir gardens in artificial flowers. Miss Althea R. Sherman (1913),for example, who has experimented in feeding hummingbirds duringseven summers, estimated that a single bird consumed "two tea-spoonfuls of sugar daily."
RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 343Hummingbirds also avail themselves of the sap flowing from holesdrilled by sapsuckers. In the article quoted under the yellow-belliedsapsucker, Frank Bolles (1894) speaks of the hummingbirds as con-stant and numerous visitors to the sapsucker's "orchards."In order to attract hummingbirds to our gardens Dr. Arthur A.Allen (1930) suggests planting "caragana, pelargonium, tritoma;* * * tiger lilies, painted cups, bee-balms, scarlet salvias, azaleas,and gladiolus; * * * scarlet runners and trumpet vines; * * *horse-chestnuts and buckeyes."Prof. O. A. Stevens writes to Mr. Bent from Fargo, N. Dak., asfollows : "About the earliest flower that the hummingbirds visit hereis Ribes odoratum^ cultivated from the Missouri River region. Thenext one, and the one where I always watch for them about May20-25, is Caragana arhoreacens^ an introduced shrub that is muchplanted here. A little later the native Aquilegia canadensis andLonicera dioica are available. On a specimen of the latter some ofthe flowers drooped to the ground, and, as I watched the bird atthem, he rested on the ground for a few moments while he probedseveral flowers. Early in fall the cannas and gladioli are, of course,their favorites. The most natural summer flower seems to be thenative Impatiens^ and I believe that the hummingbirds' nestinggrounds are closely associated with these plants."Caroline G. Soule (1900) speaks of the activities of a male hum-mingbird about a bed of nasturtiums. She writes: "Most of histime was spent in slashing off the spurs of the nasturtiums to getat their nectar. We had hardly one perfect nasturtium flower allsummer long, owing to his attacks."Wilson (1831) charmingly notes his experience with the humming-bird as a flycatcher thus: "I have seen the humming bird, for halfan hour at a time, darting at those little groups of insects that dancein the air in a fine summer evening, retiring to an adjoining twigto rest, and renewing the attack with a dexterity that sets all ourother flycatchers at defiance."Behavior.?The ruby-throated hummingbird gives the impressionof being a nervous, high-strung, irritable little bird. It often resentsthe presence of other species of birds, however innocent their designmay be. It is intolerant also to members of its own species to sucha degree that, as a rule, the more hummingbirds there are together,the more excited and hostile they become.I once saw a hummingbird attack a chimney swift?a strange birdto arouse the hummer's venom. My notes say : "August 2, 1909. Thisevening I saw Greek meet Greek?a hummingbird chasing a swift.The birds flew overhead rapidly, well above the treetops, the hum-mingbird a little behind and above. I saw it make a dive at the
344 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
swift, who avoided the attack by a spurt that carried him well inadvance. The hummingbird soon overtook his enemy and made asecond swoop down toward him. By this time the birds were so faraway that I lost sight of them."Toward man, however, hummingbirds are usually complaisant, al-most to the point of tameness. There are many instances recorded oftheir being attracted, sometimes in large numbers, to gardens wheretubes of sugar and water are put out for their entertainment.One of the most successful of these feeding stations is the gardenof the late Mrs. Laurence J. Webster in Holderness, N. H. Here, formany years, Mrs. Webster studied the birds and provided them withsuch a bountiful supply of food that, apparently, all the humming-birds in the vicinity resorted to her garden throughout the summer.She told me that she came to recognize some of the individual birdsand, in a few instances, noticed that certain birds would take a longflight, always in the same direction, when they left her garden, andwould not return for a long time?evidently visitors from a consid-erable distance?whereas other birds were in and out of the gardenall day. She accustomed the birds to associate the sound of her voicewith the presence of food and often called them to a vial she held inher hand by whistling the "phoebe" note of the cliickadee.Her garden on August 5, 1937, when Mr. Bent and I visited her,was whirring with hummingbirds?at least 40, we thought. Mrs.Webster covered the scattered feeding tubes and, seated at an openwindow beside Mr. Bent, who held a filled tube in his hand, gave thechickadee call. A bird came up out of the garden, poised a moment,then alighted on Mr. Bent's finger.All day a deep hum sounds through her garden, rising or fallingin intensity as birds come together or feed from the vials undisturbed,alone. At dusk, as one by one the birds leave the garden, the pitchof the whirring wings lowers, gradually dying down to a dull, tranquilsound, until "at twilight's hush" the last bird has gone.It was in this garden that the motion pictures, described below,were taken.The remarkable flight of the hummingbird, during which the wingsmove so rapidly that they are practically invisible, has attracted agreat deal of interest and conjecture. Some observers maintained thatthe birds sometimes fly backward when leaving a flower?BradfordTorrey, for example, seemed to have had no doubt on the subject (seeabove) ; other observers, however, objected on mechanical groundsthat no bird can fly backward. It remained for motion photogi-aphyto settle the question.That the hummingbird does fly backward has been definitely proved,and the manner in which backward flight is accomplished has been
RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 345demonstrated by means of motion pictures taken in 1936 by a newapplication of photography. Dr. Harold E, Edgerton took advantageof the intermittent flashes in a low-pressure tube in which the flashesoccur for 1/100,000 of a second with a period of darkness betweenthem lasting 1/500 of a second. He used a constantly moving film,geared so that a new bit of film came opposite the lens of the cameraat each flash, and thus secured about 540 pictures a second. Picturesof hummingbirds in flight taken in this way, when thrown on a screen,apparently reduce the speed of the birds' wing beats to that of aleisurely flying gull and make it possible to study the flight of the birdin detail.Dr. Charles H. Blake examined with great care the films taken ofhummingbirds in flight and found that the birds beat their wings 55times (completed strokes) a second when hovering, 61 a second whenbacking, and as rapidly as 75 a second when progressing straightaway.Probably this last figure would be found to increase as the birdgained speed, if the camera could keep the bird in focus. Dr. Blakecalculated that, during hovering, the wing tips moved at the rate of20 miles an hour, and he also learned that the bird is in flight beforeit leaves its perch (the takeoff took 0.07 second) and pulls the perchafter it a little way, a phenomenon that Mrs. Webster had suspectedfrom feeling the birds leave her hand.Dr. Blake kindly explained to me the mechanism of backward fly-ing thus: In backing away from a flower or feeding tube the hum-mingbird stands almost vertically in the air with its tail pointingdownward and a little forward. In this pose its wings beat hori-zontally, and what would be the downward half of each completewing stroke if the bird's long axis were parallel to the ground forcesthe air forward, away from the bird's breast in its upright position,and drives the hird hackward. Then, on the return half-stroke, thewhole wing is rotated at the shoulder joint so that its upper surfacestrikes the air, and, driving it downward, balances the pull of gravity.Dr. Blake also points out that the distribution of weight in the hum-mingbird's wing is evidently favorable to a very low inertia uponwhich the quick reversal of motion depends, the weight being concen-trated close to the body by reason of the short, heavy humerus.The following quotation shows the high rate of speed the humming-bird may attain by the lightninglike strokes of its wings. H. A.Allard (1934), who was making a fast trip by auto out of Washing-ton, D. C, says : "Not far out of Warrenton we had settled down to aspeed of fifty miles per hour on highway 211, when a Ruby-throatedHummingbird (Archilochus colubris) suddenly paralleled our coursealong the side of the roadway as if deliberately racing with us. Itactually passed us for a short distance keeping straight with our
346 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
course, then swerved away. Its speed appeared to be somewherebetween 55-60 miles per hour."Hummingbirds have been seen so frequently hovering before thebrilliant red flowers in our gardens?trumpet vines clambering overthe porch, salvias gleaming scarlet in the flower beds?that it has beenassumed the birds have a preference for the color red. However, theextensive investigations of Andrew L. Pickens (1930) bring out thefact that it is the brightness of color?its conspicuousness against thebackground?that draws the hummingbird to a flower. He says:It is easy to perceive that Hummingbirds prefer tlie intensity of color shadesrather than the paleness of color hues * * *[But] the question is one that cannot be decided by mere rule of spectrum orpigments. There is so to speak a relativity of colors. * *Red being the complement of green is the most conspicuous color that a flowercan show. * * *Orange, while not so brilliant, is more showy in deeply shaded swamps andwoods than is red * ? *.Green flowers are too inconspicuous among foliage. In certain contrastingdesert backgrounds, or on the sere dry-season prairies it should have value.Thus, while no green Hummingbird flowers are known in the East, Nicotianapaniculata one of the greenest large flowers I know, is much frequented in thewest during the dry season at least * * *.Complete lists [of flowers] would probably show red, the sharpest contrastto green, a favorite everywhere, with orange in some favor in tree-shadedregions and a neglected color like green rising in sun-browned territory.Experiments made by Miss Althea R. Sherman (1913) to test the
"supposedly erroneous theory which had been published to the effectthat Hummingbirds show a preference for red flowers" indicated con-clusively that hummingbirds visited the bottles she placed about hergarden if they contained syrup, whether or not they simulated aflower in shape or color. The birds associated even an untrimmedbottle with food, just as they soon came to recognize Miss Shermanherself as a supplier of food.Speaking of pollination Saunders (1936) says that the bee balm
"is the most important Humming Bird flower in Allegany Park.The anthers and stigma brush the crown of the Humming Bird's headas the bird probes the flower. The pollen is bright yellow, so thatmost summer Humming Birds appear to have yellow crowns."Pickens (1927) points out in detail an interesting adaptation, in-suring cross fertilization by the hummingbird, in the flower of Ma-cranthera lecontei. He says: "Of all the forms that I have studiedthis is the most exclusively Hummingbird flower, and I recall seeingno other honey-gatherers in its vicinity."Voice.?The notes that come from the hummingbird's tiny throatare high pitched and have a petulant quality, reflecting the bird's ir-ritable nature. Sometimes the notes are angry-sounding, mouselike
EUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 347
squeals; sometimes they are run into a nervous, fretful chattering,always very sharp and clear, though by no means loud, and deliveredin a jerky, excited manner.A lone hummingbird is usually silent, except for the buzzing of itswings, but when several birds are together they often become veryvoluble and quarrelsome and jerk out their notes, now arranged inemphatic phrases, squealing and chattering back and forth as ifthey were carrying on an animated controversy in a jabbering lan-guage.Sometimes a single bird approaches another one poised before aflower and disputes its right to the place. Both then express theirmutual hostility by beginning to jabber, and after a dart at eachother and a fight, or at least a whirling about in the air, the winnerof the encounter returns quietly to the flower. Thus when we standclose to a company of hummingbirds we hear the sound of theirvoices rising and falling in irregular waves?anger or resentmentmounting up again and again and, in between, a short truce, markedby the peace of humming wings.The pitch of the notes is invariably high, but it varies a good deal.Sometimes a note rises almost to a piercing whistle, and often thetone suggests the steely voice of the chimney swift.In the phrases the notes are arranged in many ways; usually bothsqueals and short chips are combined, but either may be given alone,and the pitch of either one may run upward or downward. The shortnotes, when uttered alone are generally in series, repeated withoutchange over and over, coming in twos, threes, or more again andagain, the last note of each series commonly accented sharply. Whenthe squeals and chattering are interspersed they often fall into a verypleasing rhytlmi. For example, a form often given when one birdjoins another is a single sharp note followed by a long, descendingchatter.The chief characteristics of the hummingbird's voice are the sharplycut, emphatic enunciation and the attenuated quality.Mary Pierson Allen (1908), speaking of a fledgling hummingbirdthat she fed with sweetened water, says: "He had his mother's zip-zip^ which meant flowers or happiness, and a plaintive baby peet^peet, when he wanted food."Field marks.?Audubon (1842) states: "If comparison might en-able you, kind reader, to form some tolerably accurate idea of theirpeculiar mode of flight, and their appearance when on wing, I wouldsay, that were both objects of the same colour, a large sphinx ormoth, when moving from one flower to another, and in a direct line,comes nearer the Humming-bird in aspect than any other objectwith which I am acquainted."
348 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMIt is true that the ruby-throated hummingbird bears not the slight-est resemblance to any other bird occurring in the Eastern and Mid-dle United States. It is sometimes mistaken, however, for thehawk moths, which hover about flowers in the manner of a humming-bird.The adult male differs from the female and the immature birdin possessing a highly colored throat, which gleams in the sunlightlike a glowing coal, oftentimes nearer coppery brass than true ruby.The male's tail is plainly forked and is not marked by the whitespots that distinguish the rounded tail of the female and the youngbird.Eneinies.?In addition to the dangers of migration, notably theoccurrence of frost when the hummingbird overruns the advance ofspring, there are other hazards, chiefly of an accidental nature, im-periling the life of the bird.Kalph E. Danforth (1921) speaks of a bird caught in "a pendulousmass of cobweb" from which he freed it with some difficulty, andBradford Torrey (1903) relates what he calls "a pretty story" toldto him by an observer whom he describes as "a seeing man." Theman, hearing "the familiar, squeaking notes of a hummer, and think-ing that their persistency must be occasioned by some unusual trou-ble, went out to investigate. Sure enough, there hung the bird in aspider's web attached to a rosebush, while the owner of the web, abig yellow^-and-brown, pot-bellied, bloodthirsty rascal, was turningits victim over and over, winding the web about it. Wings and legswere already fast, so that all the bird could do was to cry for help.And help had come. The man at once killed the spider, and then,little by little, for it was an operation of no small delicacy, unwoundthe mesh in which the bird was entangled."Joseph Janiec sends the following story to Mr. Bent : "Wliile I waswandering through a large hollow one June afternoon, my attentionwas attracted to the unusual waving of a pasture thistle. No air wasstirring, and my curiosity prompted me to ascertain the cause of themovements. As I approached the thistle I noticed what I at firstsupposed to be a large dragonfly impaled on the prickly purpleflower; closer examination, however, revealed a male ruby-throatedhummingbird stuck to the flower, his wings not being involved in thecontact but his stomach feathers adhering to the prickly, pointedstamens. Cutting off the flower, I carried it and the bird home andcarefully removed the bird. Although it lost a few feathers in theoperation, the little bird flew away unharmed."There is a surprising record from California telling of the cap-ture of an unidentified species of hummingbird by a fish. Mary E.Lockwood (1922) says, quoting from a letter: "We were seated by
RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 349the lotus-pool when a hummingbird flew and hovered over the pool.Suddenly a bass jumped from the water and swallowed thehummingbird."George H. Lowery, Jr. (1938), reports the following apparentlyunique record:I shot a female Eastern Pig?on Hawk (Falco eolumtarius columbarius) onApril 16, 1937, at Grand Isle, off the coast of Jefferson Parish, Louisiana.Upon examination of its stomach contents, I was surprised to find the identi-fiable remains of a Ruby-throated Hummingbird { Archilochus coluhris).Later, on a visit to Wasbiugton, D. C, I discussed the matter with Mr.Clarence Cottam, Director of the Food Habits Division of the Bureau ofBiological Survey. With his permission and the assistance of Mr. RobertMcClanahan of the Food Habits offices, I went through the extensive recordsof that division and found that no species of hummingbird had ever heretoforebeen recorded from any bird stomach.L. T. S. Norris-Elye writes to Mr. Bent: "During the summer of1934, James Ashdown, Jr., and his mother were walking in the woodsat Kenora, Ontario, and heard a continuous rattling. Investigationshowed it to be a male ruby-throated hummingbird on the ground,with a huge dragonfly on the bird's back ; it had seized the bird by theneck. They drove the dragonfly away, picked up the bird, and held itin the palm of the hand for several minutes, after which it flew away."We have had instances of frogs capturing and swallowing ruby-throats, one at Gull Harbor and one at Gimli, Lake Winnipeg. TheGimli case was observed by my friend Hugh Moncrieff, who capturedthe frog (leopard) and had some boys cut it open and recover the bird,while he took some good motion pictures of the operation."Fall.?Taverner and Swales (1907) describe vividly a great con-course of migrating hunamingbirds on Point Pelee, Ontario, Canada
:
The first three days of September in 1906 were notable for the vast numbersof Hummers present. In certain low slashings in the open woods wereluxuriant growths of Jewel Weed {Impatiens sp.?) standing nearly shoulderhigh and so dense that to enter it one had to force his way through. It wassimply spangled with blossoms, and all about and over it hovered and dartedhundreds of Hummingbirds. From some little distance, as we approachedsuch clumps, we were aware of innumerable little twitterings that followedeach other so rapidly as to scarce be separable, one from another, and so fine,sharp, and high in pitch that it took a little effort to realize that it was realsound and not imagination or a ringing in the ears. Underlying this was alow hum that arose from the vibrations of many little wings. Approachingcloser, the pugnacious little mites were all about us, chasing each other overthe smooth rounded surface of the jewel weed or darting angrily at us fromthis side or that, with furious chatterings that made one instinctively coverthe eyes, or involuntarily flinch at the expected impact of tlieir sharp, rapier-like, little bills. * * * All these birds were juveniles. * * *Keays noted that in 1901 the Hummingbird was the only species that did notturn back when, in migrating out the Point, it reached the end. We verifiedthis many times. The final end of tiie Point stretches out for a couple of
350 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMhundred rods, in the form of a long, low, more or less winding and attenuatedsand spit. Stationed about half way out on this, it was most amusing to watchthe little mites come buzzing over the last half of the red-cedar bushes and thendrop down towards the ground and, without pause or hesitation, follow everywinding of the ever-changing sand to its extreme end, and then, with a suddenand resolute turn, square away for Pelee Island, just visible on the horizon.Dr. Jones was stationed on the opposite islands from August 26 to September2. 1905, and makes the following statement as to the movements of the speciesover the waters of the lake : "Hummingbirds were passing during the daylight,and all those noted were flying very low. In fact they dropped down betweenthe waves for protection from the wind, which was quartering, or at right anglesto their line of flight and seemed to disturb them. I noticed that in the strongwesterly wind, all birds headed southwest, but always drifted south."I remember seeing, in Lexington, Mass., on two or three occasions inSeptember, a single hummingbird, a dozen feet from the ground,bounding past me through open country, undulating in long, lowwaves as it held a rapid course toward the southwest?the line ofmigration in autumn through eastern Massachusetts. And again inMay I once saw a lone bird steering due north, or a little east of north,flying, straight as an arrow, not 2 feet above the grass blades.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Eastern North America and Central America.Breeding range.?The ruby-throated hummingbird breeds northto rarely southern Alberta (Camrose) ; southern Saskatchewan (In-dian Head and Fish Lake) ; southern Manitoba (Aweme, Shoal Lake,and Big Island Lake) ; northeastern Minnesota (Rice Lake and IsleRoyal) ; southern Ontario (Goulais Bay, Algonquin Park, Cobden,nnd Ottawa) ; southern Quebec (Montreal, Quebec City, Kamouraska,and Godbout) ; New Brunswick (Chatham) ; Prince Edward Island(Malpeaque Bay) ; and Nova Scotia (Pictou). From this north-eastern point, the range extends southward along the Atlantic coastof the United States to Florida (St. Augustine, Daytona Beach, NewSmyrna, and Princeton). South to Florida (Princeton, Fort Myers,St. Marks, and Pensacola) ; southern Louisiana (Thibodaux and NewIberia) ; and southern Texas (Houston, Victoria, and San Antonio)
.
West to eastern Texas (San Antonio and Waco) ; Oklahoma (Nor-man, Oklahoma City, and Tulsa) ; Kansas (Clearwater, Wichita, andHays) ; South Dakota (Vermillion, Arlington, and Faulkton) ; east-ern North Dakota (Wahpeton, Fargo, and Argusville) ; and rarelyAlberta (Camrose).Winter range.?The normal winter range extends north to southernSinaloa (Escuinapa) ; probably rarely southeastern Texas (PortArthur) ; probably rarely southern Alabama (Fairhope) ; and Flor-ida (Pensacola, Tallahassee, and Jacksonville). East to Florida(Jacksonville, St. Lucie, Miami, Royal Palm Hammock and Key
RUBY-THROATED HUMMINGBIRD 351West) ; Quintana Eoo (Cozumel Island) ; Honduras (Tela andLancetilla) ; Nicaragua (Ometepe Island) ; Costa Eica (San Jose)
;
and Panama (Volcano de Chiriqui). South to Panama (Volcano deChiriqui) ; El Salvador (La Libertad) ; and Guatemala (San Lucas).West to Guatemala (San Lucas) ; Chiapas (Comitan) ; Oaxaca (SantaEfigenia, and Tonguia) ; Guerrero (Chilpancingo) ; western Jalisco(Volcano de Colima) ; and southern Sinaloa (Escuinapa).SpHng migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Alabama
?
Autaugaville, March 29; Long Island, April 13. Georgia?Savan-nah, March 15; Atlanta, April 3. North Carolina?Raleigh, April11 ; Weaverville, April 17. Virginia?^Variety Mills, April 10. Dis-trict of Columbia?Washington, April 16. Maryland?^MardolaSprings, April 20. Pennsylvania?Philadelphia, April 16. NewYork?Ballston Spa, April 20; Buffalo, May 2. Connecticut?Jew-ett City, May 5. Massachusetts?Pittsfield, May 6; Boston, May 8.Vermont?Wells River, April 24 ; St. Johnsbury, May 8. New Hamp-shire?Hanover, May 10. Maine?Portland, May 9. Nova ScotiaPictou, May 7 ; Wolfville,May 15. New Brunswick?St. John,May 17
;
Chatham, May 20. Quebec?Quebec City, April 25 ; Montreal, May 9.Mississippi?Biloxi, March 3. Louisiana?New Orleans, March 7.Arkansas?Helena, March 24; Delight, April 4. Tennessee?Chat-tanooga, April 5. Kentucky?Eubank, April 13. Missouri?St.Louis, April 5. Illinois?Odin, April 27 ; Chicago, May 7. IndianaFort Wayne, April 14. Ohio?Oberlin, April 12 ; Youngstown, May6. Michigan?Detroit, April 28; Sault Ste. Marie, May 21. On-tario?Toronto, April 12 ; Ottawa, May 5. Iowa?National, May 7
;
Sioux Gty, May 17. Wisconsin?Madison, May 4. MinnesotaMinneapolis, May 1 ; Lanesboro, May 9. Texas?Brownsville, March18; Gainesville, April 5. Kansas?Onaga, May 15. North DakotaFargo, May 16. Manitoba?Pilot Mound, May 16 ; Aweme, May 17.Saskatchewan?Indian Head, May 24.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are: ManitobaAweme, September 12. Minnesota?^Minneapolis, September 24;Lanesboro, October 8. Wisconsin?Madison, September 20. IowaNational, October 4; Keokuk, October 23. Missouri?Concordia,October 12 ; St. Louis, October 25. Ontario?Toronto, September 29Ottawa, October 16. Michigan?Detroit, October 7. Ohio?Youngs-town, September 24 ; Oberlin, September 29. Indiana?Fort Wayne,October 9. Illinois?Rantoul, October 6 ; Chicago, October 13. Ken-tucky?Eubank, October 1. Tennessee?Athens, October 28. Ar-kansas?Helena, October 8; Delight, October 15. Louisiana?NewOrleans, November 1. Texas?Bonham, October 18; Brownsville,November 5. Quebec?Montreal, September 17. Prince EdwardIsland?North River, September 5. New Brunswick?St. John, Sep-tember 17. Maine?Phillips, September 16 ; Portland, September 24.
352 BULLETIN 17 6, TTNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMNew Hampshire?Durham, September 25. Vermont, Wells River,September 16; St. Johnsbury, September 30. Massachusetts?Am-herst, September 16; Boston, September 21. Connecticut?^Hartford,September 27. New York?New York City, September 26; Roches-ter, October 1. New Jersey?Morristown, September 29. Pennsyl-vania?Philadelphia, October 12. Renovo, October 15. District ofColumbia?Washington, October 20. North Carolina?Raleigh, Oc-tober 7; Weaverville, October 15. Georgia?^Atlanta, October 18.Although the Biological Survey does not advocate the banding ofhummingbirds, several have been successfully marked and a few havebeen recaptured at banding stations in Maine and Massachusetts insubsequent seasons.Gasiial records.?^Among the records of occurrence of the ruby-throated hummingbird outside its normal range, the following maybe cited: A male was obtained at Casa Blanca, near Habana, Cuba,on April 4, 1937, and it is probable the species occurs in the westernpart of this island with fair regularity. To the north it was recordedon August 15, 1901, at Ellis Bay and on July 18, 1898, at EnglishBay, Anticosti Island; it was reported as seen at Grande Greve onJuly 6, 1919, and at Gaspe Basin, Quebec, on August 21, 1924; aspecimen was obtained at Davis Inlet, Labrador, on July 17, 1882;one was seen at Red Deer River, Manitoba, on August 16, 1881; theHudson's Bay agent at Lac La Ronge, Saskatchewan, has reportedthe species as of casual occurrence in his flower garden; and theUnited States National Museum has a mummified specimen pickedup by a native on the beach at Klukatauck, near St, Michael, Alaska,probably during 1925.Egg ^^65.?Florida : 23 records, March 25 to June 15 ; 12 records,May 10 to 20, indicating the height of the season.Michigan : 8 records, June 1 to July 17.New York : 30 records, May 23 to July 4 ; 15 records, June 13 to 26.North Carolina: 25 records. May 2 to June 20; 13 seconds. May 11to June 4. ARCHILOCHUS ALEXANDRI (Bourcicr and Mulsant)BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRDPlATB 58Plate 58This active little hummer is accredited with a rather wide breed-ing range, from southern British Columbia and western Montana tonorthern Mexico and western Texas, but it is comparatively rare overmuch of this range. It is most abundant in the southern portions ofthe range, especially in southern California, southern Utah, Arizona,
BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD 353and portions of New Mexico. In the di\v foothills and canyons ofthe Upper Austral Zone in this general region, it is one of the com-monest of the hummingbirds. Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1898) says thatin Los Angeles County it is a "summer resident from the lowlandsto the summit of the mountains, but most abundant in the foothillregions, where it breeds in the caiions in some years by the thousands.* * * By the first of July, when the vegetation of the foothillsbecomes dry, and floATers cease to bloom, the Hummingbirds arefound in countless thousands at higher elevations (6000 to 8500 feet)where summer is just dawning."He says elsewhere (1914), referring to the Colorado Valley: "AtEhrenberg the last week of March and opposite Cibola the first weekin April, the species was abundant in the desert washes, feedingabout the profusely blossoming palo verdes. * * *
"The males were more seldom seen, and the females became closelyrestricted to the willow strip along the river, in which associationwe were convinced that this was the only species of hummingbirdbreeding. The males were not seen in the willows, but only in themesquite association and up the desert washes. The females foragedeverywhere except on the desert mesa, but nested exclusively in thewillows."In southern Arizona we found the black-chinned hummingbirdto be the most abundant species of the family; its favorite hauntsseemed to be about the mouths of the canyons, where a line of syca-mores followed the underground course of a mountain stream outonto the plains; it was also commonly found in the small patchesof willows along the dry washes, where water had formerly flowed,or where, probably, an underground supply still kept the trees andshrubs alive. It was not seen in the mountains above 6,000 feet.Courtship.?The courtship flight of the black-chinned humming-bird is much like that of the closely related eastern rubj^-throatedhummer, consisting mainly of the long, swinging, pendulumlikeswoops, with some variations. Laurence M. Huey (1924) describesit very well as follows:The female was perched on a dead, horizontal limb about five feet from theground and the male took fliglit from a position approximately twenty feetabove her on the twig of a cottonwood, against the trunk of which I wasquietly resting. With a bold sweep and a whizzing noise made by flight, whichresembled that of the Costa Hummer except that the tone was not so intense,he passed very close to her and headed up to a point about fifteen feet above.There, while the upward motion died until a complete stop was reached, heseemed to pat his wings together underneath him, causing a sound much likethat of a bathing bird floppiiig its wings in the water after they have becomethoroughly saturated. After a second downward swing, with the whizzingnoise, he rose to another point about fifteen feet up, where again the wingflopping pei-formance '.v'as repeated. This U-shaped figure was repeated five17S22."]? in 29
354 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMdifferent times, and, at each stop at the apex, the flopping of wings wasindulged in, after which the bird again sought his perch on the cottonwoodabove his mate. I was close enough almost to hear his wing beats as he spedto and fro, and I watched the p'air for three minutes, when they both flewoff of their own will, without being disturbed. At no time during the minuteand a half duration of the nuptial flight was there any vocal demonstration,though both birds were rather vociferous when perched.Mrs. Bailey (1923) saw some "giving their aerial courtship dancefrom among the mesquites. One that I watched varied the usualtriangiilation by first flying back and forth horizontally across theface of a bush, then making narrow Vs with the point at the bush,followed by wide-sweeping swings out over the mesquites as if frompure spirits.-'Eobert S. Woods (1927b) writes:The shuttling of the Black-chinned Hummingbird, which follows a pathlike a narrow figure 8 lying on one side, has often been mentioned in accountsof the species. Its other form of nuptial flight most closely resembles that ofthe Rufous Hummingbird, just described [a swooping dive, punctuated at thebottom of its course by what might be described as a tremulant squeak or arapid sucession of about four thin, vibrant notes], but the vocalization is moreprolonged and of rather different character?a long-drawn, pulsating, plaintive,liquid note, probably the most pleasing utterance of any of our Hummingbirds.The heavy droning sound of its flight, so noticeable in the shuttling movement,is heard in this case only while momentum is first being gained on the down-ward swing. The shuttling flight, it may be noted, is practiced almost solelyby those species in which the wings of the male are specially modified fornoise-making purposes.Nesting.?Major Bendire (1895) gives a rather comprehensiveaccount of the nesting of black-chinned hummingbirds, and I cannotdo better than to quote his remarks. He says
:
Throughout the greater part of their range, it rarely begins laying beforeMay 1, and the season is at its Tieight through this month, while second orpossibly third sets are found up to the latter part of July, and occasionallystill later. The nest is readily distinguishable from that of the Ruby-throatedHummingbird by not being covered on the outside with lichens. It is com-posed of plant down, varying in color from white to buff ; the latter is obtainedfrom the under side of the young leaves of the sycamore, the former probablyfrom willows, milkweed, or thistles. These materials are well worked together,and the outside of the nest is thickly coated with spider web. In an occasionalspecimen a small leaf or two, or a few flower blossoms of the oak are workedin the outer walls. In a specimen from Marfa, Texas, the outside is wellcovered with small flower spikes, the male aments of a species of oak, hidingthe inner lining completely.He mentions a beautiful nest that "is mainly composed of whitewillow down, mixed on the outside with a few small leaves and thescales from the willow buds."These are firmly held in place by an abundance of spider web, with whichit is also securely attached to the little fork in which it is saddled. The
BLACK-CHIJSTNED HUMMINGBIRD 355
outer diameter of this nest is about 1% inches by 1 inch in depth; the innercup is 1 inch in diameter by five eighths of an inch deep ; and while some speci-mens before me are a trifle larger, others are considerably smaller. Neststalcen in the Sequoia National Park, in Tulare County, California, have per-ceptibly thicker walls than those from the warmer lowlands, and are also cor-respondingly larger. The nests are either saddled on a small, drooping branchor on a fork, one or two of the smaller twigs composing this usually being in-corporated in the walls and holding it securely in place. Many of the nestsresemble small, fine sponges, and are equally elastic, readily regaining theirshape after being squeezed together. They are generally placed from 4 to8 feet from the ground, mostly in the shrubbery found near small creeks orsprings, and frequently their nests overhang the water or the dry creek bed.Alders, cottonwoods, oak, sycamore, laurel, and willows are most often selectedfor nesting sites, as well as young orchards, especially apple and orange trees,where they are available.Frank Stephens wrote to Bendire that he "found a set of eggs ofthis species * * * laid in a nest of the House Finch, Carpoda-ciMS mexicamos fi'ontalis. No lining had been added, or any otherchanges made; the bird evidently was in haste to lay, her nest, per-haps, having been suddenly destroyed."Nests have also been found in a pear tree in an orchard, in a wildgrape vine, in a tree-rose in a garden, and even on the stalks ofvarious weeds; Dr. Grinnell (1914) mentions one that "was four feetabove the ground on a slanting dead stalk of arrowweed beneath alarge spreading willow." John McB. Kobertson (1933) reports anest in a most unusual location. It was built in the loop of a smallrope that hung from a board in his garage. The nest rested on aknot at the bottom of the loop and was supported on opposite sidesby the rope, to which it was securely tied with spider web; it wasmade of plant down and covered on the outside with stamens ofeucalyptus blossoms. "Other objects to be seen in it are several tinybits of eucalyptus bark, a scrap of dry leaf, several long humanhairs, a small feather that is probably from a Linnet, a pair ofbracts from a plant that furnished down, and a seed of alfilaria."The nest of the black-chinned hummingbird is an exquisite struc-ture, semiglobular in shape, or little more than half of a sphere, asif less than the upper half of the globe had been removed; it isdeeply hollowed, and the rim is curved inward at the top, a wiseprovision of the builder to prevent the eggs or small young from fall-ing out, as the supporting twig or weed stalk is swayed by the wind.It is firmly felted with plant down of various colors, mainly in dif-ferent shades of buff, from "cartridge buff" to "pale pinkish buff" or
"cinnamon-buff'"; an occasional nest, in some 40 that I have exam-ined, is made of the buffy-white or pure white down of the willow.The elastic, spongy structure is well reinforced and firmly bound tothe supporting twigs with spider web, giving it much greater strengththan it appears to have. Its durability is remarkable for such a
356 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMfrail-] ooking nest, as frequently a now nest is built on the well-pre-served remains of a nest of the previous season.The nest seems hardly large enough at first to contain even thesmall young, but, as the young increase in size, the elastic top ex-pands, as Bayard H. Christy (1932) so gracefully portrays it: "Asthe young continue to grow a beautiful contrivance comes into play
;
the surrounding wall of the nest becomes as it were a living integu-ment about the chicks; it expands with their growth; its rim yieldsto their little strugglings ; its spliere opens like a flower-bud ; until thelittle birds, all but ready to take flight, remain resting upon the full-blown corolla."Mrs. Bailey (1896) gives the follownng account of the nest build-ing : "The peculiar feature of the building was the quivering motionof the bird in moulding. When the material was placed she mouldedthe nest like a potter, twirling tremulously around against the sides,sometimes pressing so hard she ruffled up the feathers of her breast.She shaped the cup as if it were a piece of clay. To round the out-side she would sit on the rim and lean over, smoothing the sides withher bill, often with the same tremulous motion. When she wantedto turn around in the nest she lifted herself by whirring her wings."In southern Texas this hummingbird sometimes builds its nest atgreater heights above the ground than mentioned above; Van Tyneand Sutton (1937) report two such nests found in Brewster County;one was "about twenty feet from the gi-ound on a slender willowbranch," and the other was "fully thirty feet from the ground ina gigantic cottonwood."James B. Dixon writes to me from Escondido, Calif. : "Like most ofthe hummingbirds tliey are sometimes found nesting in very unex-pected locations, such as on a porch where doors were swingingopen at all hours of the day or night, on a steel rod poked intothe roof of a blacksmith shop where men were busy at an anvil,and on an old piece of haywire stuck into a chink in the wall of abarn. Two locations seem to be preferred in the wilder places, themost popular being a long, meandering canyon filled with scrawnysycamores in the bottom and located where the surrounding hill-sides are covered with flowering sage; the other location is in thedense willow thickets, locally known as willow montes, which borderrunning streams or lakes. Here the black-cWnned hummingbirdis found breeding in large numbers, and it is not unusual to finda nest on the average of every hundred feet in such locations.I have found as high as three-storied nests of his bird, where appar-ently the bird had returned to the same nest for three successiveseasons and built a new nest on the foundations of the previousyear's home."
BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD 357The nest shown on plate 58 illustrates the durability of the ap-parently fragile material used in its construction; it was composedexclusively of plant down firmly bound with cobwebs, and had servedfor the rearing of two young, meanwhile experiencing three 11-houroverhead irrigations.Eoy W. Quillin writes to me from Bexar County, Tex. : "All thenests I have seen were made of plant down of various colors andplastered on the outside with tiny lichens, very much like the nestof the rubythroat. They are totally different from nests of thissi3ecies that I have examined from California. The fact that thenest of the blackchin, in this locality, is much like that of therubythroat and the fact that the latter species is in migration herewhen the blackchin is nesting have caused records of the nestingof the rubythroat to be printed for Bexar County. I do not thinkit nests here."Eggs.?^The black-chinned hummingbird lays ordinarily two eggs,but several sets of three have been found, and occasionally a single
'ig'g is incubated. The eggs are much like those of the ruby-throatedhummingbird but average a trifle smaller; they are about elliptical-oval, pure white, and without gloss. Often two and sometimes threebroods are raised in a season. The measurements of 52 eggs average12.51 by 8.30 millimeters ; the eggs showing the four extremes measure13.72 by 8.64, 13.21 by 8.89, 11.68 by 8.13, and 12.19 by 7.87 millimeters.Young.?The period of incubation, performed by the female only,is said to be about 13 days. Mary Beal (1933) writes of the young:At feeding-time they looked like pale yellow-brown caterpillars with widelygaping mouths, stretching up hungrily. Mother Hummer left the nest everyfifteen minutes, and each alternate time on her return she fed the babies,thrusting her long bill down their throats until I held my breath lest she'dpunch a hole through them, and every time I breathed a sigh of relief when itwas safely over.They grew amazingly fast. In a week they made quite a respectable aj)-pearance, and at the end of two weeks they were beautiful, shapely birdlings,completely filling the nest. * * *On the nineteenth day, the babies perched on the edge of the nest andtried their wings with a quick humming motion just like Mother's, but theymade no attempt to lift themselves into the air. They were still fed asregularly as clockwork, every half hour.The day they were three weeks old, they left the nest, flying about with asmart little air of importance, giving thin squeaks of excitement.The care and feeding of the young seem to depend entirely onthe female, as well as the building of the nest. The male is seldomseen even in the vicinity of the nest.Plumages.?The naked young soon begin to acquire a nestling, orJuvenal, plumage and are fully fledged before the}^ leave the nest atthe age of about three wrecks. The nestling has a much shorter billthan the adult; the crown is a mixture of graj'ish buff and dusky;
358 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthe back shows a mixture of dusky and glossy green, the latterfeathers tipped with buffy ; the throat and abdomen are dull white
;
the flanks are light drab; and the remiges, except the middle pair,are tipped with dull white. This plumage, which is much like thatof the adult female, is apparently worn through most of or all thesummer ; I have seen it in its purity as late as August 24 ; but I haveseen young males that were beginning to acquire a few violet feathersin the gorget as early as July 20. Progress toward maturity israther slow and is prolonged through the winter ; I have seen youngmales with imperfect gorgets in February and as late as May 15.As the ruby-throated hummingbird is said to have a complete moltin spring, this may also be the case with the black-chinned, which isso closely related; if this is so, the fully adult plumage must beacquired at this molt. Ridgway (1911) says that the young male is
"similar to the adult female, but feathers of upper parts marginedterminally with pale grayish buffy, under parts more or less stronglytinged or suffused with pale buffy brownish, and throat always ( ?
)
streaked or spotted with dusky"; and that the young female is
"similar to the young male, but throat usually immaculate or with thedusky spots or streaks smaller and less distinct."Adult females are considerably larger than adult males, the wingaveraging nearly 10 percent longer. This seems to be more or lesstrue of all the species of Archilochiis and Selasphorus.Food.-?Tlie black-chinned, like other hummingbirds, feeds oninsects and sweets, mostly obtained from various flowers. It does notseem to be very particular in its choice of flowers in which to forage,though I was greatly impressed in California with the popularityof the "tree tobacco" {Nicotiana glauca) as a feeding ground for thisand other hummingbirds. This is a small tree or large shrub thatgrows from 12 to 20 feet high and bears numerous clusters of slender,yellow, tubular flowers. The hummers frequent these little trees inlarge numbers; Major Bendire (1895) says that R. H. Lawrence sawsome 70 or 80 hummingbirds in a patch of wild tobacco in less thantwo hours. The same observer noted that this and Anna's and Costa'shummingbirds "were attracted by a bright red flower {Delphiniumcardinalis) growing on a clean, slender, juicy stalk, from 2 to 6 feethigh."In the Santa Rita Mountains, Arizona, Mrs. Bailey (1923) took one
"feeding from the orange-colored tubes of honeysuckle {Anisocanthicsthurberiy \ its throat was full of nectar; others were seen about thered terminal blossoms of ocotillo. In the Colorado Valley, Dr.Grimiell (1914) found it feeding about the flowering bushes ofLyciwfYi andersoni.^ about the profusely blossoming palo verdes, andabout the lavender flowers of ironwoods. George Finlay Simmons(1925) says that, in Texas, it "hovers and feeds about the laterally-
BLACK-CHINNED HUMMINGBIRD 359
clustered pink flowers of the Texas buckeye, the pink flowers of theTexas redbud, and the rich purple and overpoweringly-perfumedflowers of the Texas mountain laurel on slopes and flattened valleysin the hills, largely on minute insects but also on nectar, pollen, anddew." Kobert S. Woods (1927), at a time of unprecedented droughtin southern Arizona, noted that "aside from a very few scatteredmescals, there was an entire lack of flowers, in lieu of which thehummingbirds were systematically probing the clusters of leaves atthe ends of the live oak twigs." The black-chinned hummingbird,like its eastern relative, has been known to feed on syrup made ofsugar or honey and placed in artificial containers.This hummer also poses as a flycatcher, as noted by several ob-servers. Milton P. Skinner writes to me : "I saw one perched on abush, 12 feet above ground on the edge of an open space. It waswatching for insects. When one came within reach the humming-bird darted after it, sometimes going as much as 40 feet. It perchedquietly and was quite hump-backed, but its head turned constantlyfrom side to side. Generally its prey was not high up, but once thebird shot up into the air at least 50 feet. After watching it for halfan hour I left it still looking for insects as at first. Later anotherone was seen buzzing about the bases of some willows. This onecaught its insects as it came to them, but it did not perch and watchfor them."Behavior.?The flight of the black-chinned hummingbird whentraveling from one place to another is swift and direct. While hov-ering about its feeding stations it has perfect control of its move-ments; it can remain stationary in the air, rise or fall at will, andeven move backward with a downward thrust of its broad tail. Thelittle wings vibrate with astonishing rapidity, as described more fullyunder the ruby-throated hummingbird; no ordinary camera shutteris quick enough to stop the motion. Mr. Skinner says in his notes
:
"Early in the morning these birds are rather quiet, but by 9 o'clockthey become livelier and are really quite nervous. About 9 a. m.one was seen to fly to a small creek and have a good splatter bath ina shallow pool ; then it flew up on a 12-foot willow to sun itself andpreen. When they perch on willows and small limbs they alightboth crosswise and lengthwise of the perch. As a rule they seembold and unafraid of people."W. L. Dawson (1923) relates the following:Once, a hummer, finding itself entrapped in a porch by a wall of "chicken-wire" netting with meshes only an inch and a half in diameter, first passedslowly before the face of the screen, searching whether there might be anyexception in his favor. Finding none, he made up his mind and dartedthrough. So swiftly was the passage effected that the eye could detect nochange in the position of the bird's wings. Only the ear noted an infinitesimalpause in their rhythm. Yet to accomplish this, the bird had been obliged to
3G0 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
suspend the propeller motion of its winds, to furl them, to halve their normnl
.spread, and to resume again upon the other side of the screen.Voice.?Mr. Simmons (1925) tersely describes the vocal efforts ofthis bird as follows : "Song, by male, a sweet and low, though veryhigh-pitched warble, like the sound produced as a result of whistlingthrough thQ teeth ; on still air, can be heard for 25 or 30 feet. Chasenote, similar to song, but louder and chippering, like a light and rapidsmacking of the lips together, uttered as one bird rapidly chasesanother hither and thither."Mr. Woods (1927b) describes a courtship note as "a long-drawn,pulsating, plaintive, liquid note, probably the most pleasing utteranceof any four Hummingbirds."Field marks.?The male black-chinned hummingbird is easily rec-ognized by the black chin and sides of the head and by the conspicu-ous white collar separating the square-cut gorget from the rather darkimder parts ; the violet gorget, just below the black chin, is not easilyseen unless the light happens to strike it just right; there is a whitespot behind the eye, which can be seen at short range. The female isnot so easily recognized ; it is much like the female Anna's humming-bird and is often seen with it, but it is decidedly smaller; the femaleCosta's and female black-chinned are so much alike that they can bedistinguished only by a close view of the tail. In Costa's, accordingto Ridgway (1911), the middle pair of rectrices are bronze-green, thenext pair similar, but with terminal portion black; third pair tippedwith dull white or pale brownish gray, extensively black subter-minally and dull brownish gray basally, the gray and black separated(at least on outer web) by more or less of metallic bronze-green;fourth and outermost pairs with whitish tip broader, basal grayishmore extended, and with little if any metallic greenish between thegray and black. In the black-chinned, the three outer rectrices oneach side are broadly tipped with white, the subterminal portion ex-tensively black, the basal half (more or less) metallic bronze-green(sometimes grayish basally). Thus, the comparative amount ofgreen on the two outer pairs of tail feathers determines the species.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Western North America.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the black-chinned hum-mingbird extends north to southwestern British Columbia (probablyBrentwood, Chilliwack, probably Vaseaux Lake, and probably Edge-wood) ; and probably northwestern Montana (Columbia Falls). Eastto probably western Montana (Columbia Falls, Flathead Lalvc, Mis-soula, and Stevensville) ; south-central Idaho (Blue Lake) ; westernColorado (Glenwood Springs, Grand Junction, and Paradox) ; NewMexico (Espanola, Roswell, and Carlsbad) ; and western Texas (San
COSTA'S HUMMINGBIRD 361Angelo, Kerrville, San Antonio, and Losoj'a Crossing). South tosouthern Texas (Losoya Crossing, Somerset, and Cliisos Mountains) ;southern Chihuahua (Rio Sestin) ; southern Sonora (San Javier andGuaymas) ; northeastern Baja California (Cerro Prieto) ; and south-ern California (Palo Verde and San Diego). West to California(San Diego, Escondido, Santa Barbara, Gilroy, Marysville, andDales) ; Oregon (Prospect and Eugene) ; Washington (Prescott andYakima) ; and southwestern British Columbia (probably Brentwood).Winter range.?During the winter season this species is apparentlyconcentrated in the region from extreme southern California (PalmSprings and San Diego) ; south to Guerrero (Venta de Zopilote andChilpancingo) ; and the Federal District of Mexico (Mexico City).One was seen at Marysville, Calif., on December 23, 1910, whileanother was noted at Fresno on January 8 and again on January 18,1937.Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Texas
?
Kerrville, March 11; San Antonio, March 27. New Mexico?Rodeo,April 9. Colorado?Ouray, May 10; Fort Lewis, May 12; GrandJunction, May 20. Montana?Columbia Falls, May 17; Cornwallis,May 29. Arizona?Phoenix, February 10 ; Paradise, April 1 ; Tomb-stone, April 21. California?Santa Barbara, March 27 ; Los Angeles,April 3. Oregon?Prospect, April 10 ; Corvallis, April 15 ; Portland,April 22. Washington?Yakima, May 13 ; Pullman, May 28. BritishColumbia?Victoria, May 4 ; Agassiz, May 13.Fall migration.?^Very little information is available concerningthe fall movement, but late dates of departure are: WashingtonYakima, September 18. Oregon?Coos Bay, August 10. CaliforniaLos Angeles, September 3. Texas?Somerset, November 4.Casual records.?A specimen was collected at Kearney, Nebr., inAugust 1903.Egg dates.?California: 105 records, April 3 to September 3; 53records. May 8 to June 6, indicating the height of the season.Texas : 20 records, April 4 to June 12 ; 10 records, April 12 to 21.CALYPTE COSTAE (Bourcier)COSTA'S HUMMINGBIRDPlates 5^61HABITSThis little feathered gem is, to my mind, the prettiest of all theNorth American hummingbirds. The gorgeous, glowing colors ofits brilliant helmet adorn, in the male, the top of the head, the throat,and the elongated feathers on the sides of the gorget; the burnishedmetallic violet of these feathers changes in certain lights to royal
362 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMpurple, magenta, blue, or even green, a beautiful display of colorsat various angles.Its breeding range in the United States is in the Lower AustralZone in southern California, southwestern Utah, Arizona, and south-ern New Mexico ; and it extends southward throughout the whole ofBaja California. It winters mainly in southern Baja California andnorthwestern Mexico but has been seen casuall}^ in southern Californiain winter.It is less dependent on the presence of water than some other hum-mers and seems to prefer the more arid regions in the deserts, thechaparral, the sagebrush plains, and the desert washes. Ralph Hoff-mann (1927) describes these Avashes very well, as follows: "In thefoothills of southern California the dark green belt of orangeorchards is here and there interrupted by wide tongues of stones andgravel poured out by the canyon streams. These stony plains areovergrown by cactus, sumach, and occasional junipers, but in Mayand June are gay with scarlet larkspur, tall white yuccas and otherhumbler bloom. If one stands for a moment in the midst of this beeparadise, the tiny figure of a Hummingbird shoots past or stops toprobe the tall spikes of the white ball-sage. After feeding, the littlecreature perches perhaps on a dead twig, and, protruding its longneedle-like tongue, wipes off the last bit of honey against its slenderbill."Spring.?Costa's hummingbird is a summer resident in the UnitedStates, arriving during the latter half of March or early in Apriland making a rather short stay. Robert S. Woods, who has hadconsiderable experience with this and other hummingbirds, says(1924a) that "the males arrive about the last of March, or later, ac-cording to the season, and leave early in June, females or youngbeing seen for some time thereafter." He says elsewhere (1927b)that these hummingbirds, when they first arrive, "are almost con-stantly in a state of activity, so that it is often difficult to obtainmore than a fleeting glimpse of them as they chase one another about.At these times there appears to be a great preponderance of males,which is partly accounted for, no doubt, by the quieter and moreretiring habits of the females." Again (1922), he writes:
"In no case have I seen a male hunnningbird in the vicinity of thenest or in any way showing interest in the matter. In fact, all themales had apparently started on their southward migration by themiddle of June, 1922, or soon after the eggs had been laid in the lastnest and while the young in the second nest were no more than halfgrown. None was seen earlier than May, probably on account of thelateness of the season, so their stay was very short this year. ByJuly 1 the females and young were also noticeably scarcer. If theowner of the third nest had remained to hatch out and rear her
COSTA'S HUMMINGBIRD 363young she would probably have been detained beyond the usual timefor migrating."Courtship).?The courtship performance of Costa's hummingbirdfollows the same general pattern of that of other hummingbirds, con-sisting of spectacular swoops, dives, and loops in the vicinity of itsobserving mate. James B. Dixon (1912) says that for a short timeprior to the nesting season "they are quite noisy, chasing each otherup, down and around through the surrounding bushes and trees."He continues:Their note consists of a few sharp squeaks, given out more often when in veryrapid flight than otherwise. During the breeding season the male has avery peculiar way of disporting himself before the female. "When he locateshis mate sitting on a tree, or more often on a low bush, he will ascend to anelevation of about one hundred feet and to one side of the female and will thenturn and swoop down at a fearful speed, passing perhaps within a few inches ofthe watching female and ascending in the air to complete a half circle. Thishe keeps up until the female becomes impatient and endeavors to escape; thenperhaps all that one will see is a streak, and a shai'p squeak or two is heardas they flash up the hillside. The noise that the male makes in doing hisfancy dive is easily heard at some distance and quite often heard when thebird himself is not visible on account of the extreme speed at which he travelson his downward plunge.Mr. Woods (1927b), in comparing the performance of this hummerwith that of the Anna's hummingbird, says : "The Costa's Humming-bird, instead of making a more or less abrupt turn, sweeps througha great arc to describe an immense letter U, then passes overhead toshoot downward again, either from the same direction or at a newangle. A continuous shrill whistle or miniature shriek accompaniesmost of the downward course and part of the upward?in otherwords, that part of the circuit in which the velocity is highest. ThisHummingbird often ends his series of loops by darting away at highspeed in an erratic, zigzagging flight."W. L. Dawson (1923) says that the sound made by the male hummerin this flight is, he believes, "the very shrillest in the bird world,and one which is fairly terrifying in its intensity. This sound isgenerically like that produced by the Anna Hummer, but it is muchmore prolonged and more dramatic, more, in fact, like the shriek ofa glancing bullet, or a bit of shrapnel."Nesting.?Dr. T. S. Palmer (1918) has published an interestingpaper on the early history of Costa's hummingbird, in which he makesthe rather surprising statement, with the supporting facts, that "thefirst specimen, the first eggs, and the earliest nest of the season wereall found in the southern part of Lower California at localities onlya few miles apart. Twenty years elapsed after the species was firstdiscovered before it was actually collected in California and nearlyfifty years intervened before the eggs were found in the state."
364 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCosta's biinuningbird builds its nest in a great variety of situa-tions and in many different kinds of trees, shrubs, and weedy plants.Among the trees recorded are various oaks, alders, bays, walnuts,willows, gums, sumacs, cypress, sycamore, hollyberry, hackberry,orange, lemon, olive, avocado, and Paraguay guava {Feijoa sellow-iana). It has also been found nesting in sage and various otherbushes, in dead yuccas, in Opuntia eGhinocarpa^ O. ramoshsima^ andother branching cacti, and in various weeds, as well as in a hammockhook and a wire loop under a porch,James B. Dixon writes to me : "Its range is in the more arid regionsand the nesting locations are often a long way from known water.They often nest close by water also, and in favored locations are proneto colonize. I have found as many as six pairs nesting within a 100-foot radius in a dead cocklebur thicket near the edge of open water.One of their favorite nesting locations is the dead yucca stalks, Avherethe nest is placed in the hard, dead framework of the last year's deadstalk, and usually some 4 or 5 feet from the ground. I have notednest locations in dead trees, on top of thistle leaves, on clinging vineson cliff' faces, and in citrus trees in open orchards, but not near houses.It does not seek nesting sites near habitations and seems to like thewild isolated areas the best."Major Bendire (1895) says that "in the desert regions of south-eastern California various cacti, the different species of sage {^Arte-imsia) and greasewood bushes {Larrea)^ while in the canyons ash,sjT^camore, scrub oak, palo verde, cottonwoods, and willows, furnishtheir favorite nesting sites."In the Thayer collection in Cambridge, there are 24 nests of thishummingbird, all of which I have examined. One of these was lo-cated in a sage over a stream, another in a weed over a road, andanother over a stream in a white-alder bush, as well as many othersin more usual locations. One nest was built on the top of an oldnest of the previous season, the buffy color of the new nest contrast-ing with the dull, faded gray of the old one. The nests in this seriesshow great variation in size and shape and in the material used intheir construction. Most of them are rather shallow. The nests arenot handsome or even neat in appearance, being rather loosely made,as a rule, of a great variety of materials, plant down of differentcolors giving a mottled appearance, shredded material from the sage,bits of gray lichens, scales of bud-s or flowers, thistledown, vegetablefibers, thin strips of bark, willow or yucca down, the whole tightlybound together with cobwebs or fine plant fibers. Many nests aremore or less profusely lined with small, soft feathers of differentcolors, and some are decorated with these on the outside. Some nestsare almost as simple as those of the black-chinned hummer, but even
COSTA'S HUMMINGBIRD 365these show some mixture of some of the above materials. The outsidediameter of the nests varies from I14 to nearly 2 inches, the averagebeing about li/^; the height varies from about 1^/4 to about II/2inches.Mr. Dixon says in his notes sent to me : "The nest of the Costa isvery distinctive as to structure and material used, and I find this istrue with all of the hummingbirds, it being easier to tell the nestsapart than the female birds. The Costa uses dead weed leaves andcobwebs in building the outside of the nest and soft plant down andother soft materials for the lining. The general structure is of agrayish tone and very distinctive in this respect." This grayish toneof the nest helps to conceal it wdien it is built on a dead branch, adead yucca stalk, a gray-toned cactus, or, especially, in a sagebushwhere the shreds of sage leaves with which it is decorated blendperfectly with its surroundings.Griffing Bancroft (1930) says that in Baja California "they nestin the immediate proximity of surface water, sometimes snuggledinto grapevine leaves, sometimes near the tips of fig branches, butmost often on the leaf stems of the date palm. The birds obviouslyseek and usually obtain the protection of living foilage. The sitesselected average, in height above the ground, at least twice that ofnorthern breeders ; roughly eight feet against three."Mr. Woods (1927b) says : "x\t Azusa, California, the nests have beenfound at heights ranging from two to nine feet, but most commonlyin the neighborhood of four feet. When a bush or small tree is se-lected, as is frequently the case, the nest is almost invariably locatedat a height of approximately one-half of the total height of the tree,but near the outside rather than the center, and in a position fromwhich a reasonably clear outlook may be obtained. On this accounttrees of dense, leafy growth, such as an orange tree in thrifty condi-tion, are not favored. * * * If in a large tree, the nest is usuallyon a small twig near the end of a projecting lower limb."Major Bendire (1895) says: "They are usually placed in low situa-tions, from 1 to 6 feet from the ground, rarely higher, although Mr.W. E. D. Scott records one taken on May 5, 1882, near Eiversicle, insouthern Arizona, from the extremity of a cottonwood branch 35feet from the ground."Mr. Woods (1922) writes:On June 2, 1922, I found another Costa Hummingbird building a nest nearthe end of a long horizontal limb of a good-sized avocado tree, at a height ofabout five feet from the ground. Her method was first to alight in the nest,then place the material under her and compact it by treading with the feet andturning about. Material for the outside of the nest was placed while hoveringor while perched on a branch. On one occasion after leaving the nest thebird flew up to a twig a few feet above, whereupon I was surprised to see
366 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
another hummer alight in the nest and rearrange some of the material, after-wards sitting there for some time until the presumably rightful owner presentlydarted at the intruder and drove her away. The nest was composed largelyof small achenes bearing soft pappus. Other items noticed were fibers, minuteleaves, feathers and a short piece of string, the whole bound securely to thebranch with cobwebs.Eggs.?Costa's hummingbird lays almost invariably two eggs. Sid-ney B. Peyton has a set of three eggs, taken in Ventura County,Calif.; a third egg was laid to complete a set of two, now in theThayer collection, after one ^^^ had fallen from the nest. I haveno record of a complete set of one. The eggs are like other humming-birds' eggs, dead white, without gloss, and elliptical-oval with anoccasional tendency toward elliptical-ovate. The measurements of51 eggs average 12.4 by 8.2 millimeters; the eggs showing the fourextremes measure 14.0 by 7.8, 12.7 by 9.4, 11.4 by 7.8, and 11.6 by 7.6millimeters.Young.?There seems to be considerable difference of opinion asto the period of incubation, which is performed by the female alone.Mr. Woods (1927b) writes:An interval of about two days separates the laying of the eggs. Incubation,in every case that I have observed, has begun with the laying of the first egg,and the young are usually hatched out a day or more apart. If we are toaccept the widely differing periods reported?from nine to eighteen days?thetime of incubation must be regarded as extremely variable. On account of ab-sences I have not succeeded in collecting as full information on this subjectas could be desired, but data of varying accuracy obtained during five successiveyears indicate that the normal incubation period for Costa's Hummingbird inthe San Gabriel Valley is about sixteen days, lengthening in certain instancesto as much as eighteen days, but never falling below fifteen days. * * *The growing period of the young is even more markedly prolonged than isthe incubation. Some eight broods for which the time was determined withfair accuracy remained in the nest from twenty to twenty-three days afterhatching, with all but two approximating the higher figure. * * *Even more pronounced than in most other altricial birds is the contrast be-tween the newly hatched Hummingbird and its parents. The minute grub-likecreature is black above and brownish below, with the body entirely bare exceptfor a row of yellowish filaments along each side of the median line of the back.The bill is yellow and triangular, its length being but slightly greater than itswidth at the base. The eye sockets project beyond the base of the bill. Untilabout the sixth day, when the pin-feathers begin to appear, the most notablechange, aside from the increase in size, is the gradual lengthening and darkeningof the bill. The first part of the young Hummingbirds' lives is spent stretchedout on the bottom of the nest, but after a time they become longer than theinterior of the nest, so that they are gradually forced to raise their headsagainst its sides until at one stage of their growth their bills are pointingdirectly upward. After this their development is more rapid, and when theybegin habitually to hold up their heads and assume an alert appearance, theyare nearly ready to fiy. The last few days before leaving the nest, the youngbirds frequently exercise their wings, sometimes perching on the edge of thenest for freer action. Finally a time is reached when, contrary to their former
COSTA'S HUMMINGBIRD 367indifference, they are likely to leave on very slight provocation. A person maybe quietly standing and watching them when as with one impulse both springfrom the nest and fly in different directions. It sometimes so happens thatthe younger of the two is thus induced to venture forth before its wings arecapable of sustained flight or of enabling it to obtain a foothold in a tree. Ontwo such occasions I found that the bird might readily be picked up and whenrestored to its nest gladly settled itself to await more adequate strength.The young Hummingbirds are fed by regurgitation, of necessity, at intervalsof about half an hour. The feeding requires perhaps half a minute in all andis accomplished by a violent pumping process, with the bill thrust deep into theopen mouth of the young bird. One would not judge that the slow growth ofthe Hummingbird was due to inability to supply sufficient food, since the mother,though bearing the entire care of her offspring, does not seem overworked, buthas plenty of time to rest, preen her plumage and engage in skirmishes withother Hummers. Her care of the young continues for some time after theyhave left the nest. Then their call for food may be heard at intervals, a shrillcheep resembling the cries of other young birds rather than fhe voice of theadult Hummingbird. After the young have attained their full growth in otherrespects, they may still be recognized by the comparative shortness and straight,subulate form of the bill.Major Bendire (1895) quotes K. H. Lawrence, regarding the feed-ing of the young, as follows
:
She fed the young by touching the point of her bill to the tips and sides ofthe bills of her youngsters, as if to urge or invite them to stir and open theirmouths, not inserting her bill over one-fifth or one-fourth of its length. Onceshe thrust it down half its length into the throat of one nestling, who thenclung to it to the very last moment of its withdrawal, apparently reluctant tolet the very smallest particle of the regurgitated food miss its way or remain onthe parent's bill. The performance was rather ludicrous, as both old and young,especially the youngsters, went through many wriggling and squirming mo-tions. * * * Once, upon her return, settling down to brood the youngsters,she kept up for some moments a kind of paddling motion, as if she were givingthem a little massage treatment. Her respiration was very rapid after thisexertion. Life with these atoms of sensitiveness must be at a white heatalways. The young were lying side by side, but headed in opposite directions.Both had voided excrement in one case, but the parent did not remove eitherdeposit while I was there. Except for this and a piece of eggshell, the nestappeared clean.Plumages.?The young Costa's hummingbird is hatched blind andnearly naked; at first there is only a narrow line of pale, yellowishdown along each side of the back; this spreads within a few days tocover the back, wings, and top of the head, through which the juvenalplumage later appears ; and at the end of twelve days, they are fairlywell feathered (Wheelock, 1904).In full juvenal plumage, the young male is much like the adultfemale, but the feathers of the upper parts are more or less marginedwith grayish buff; the tail is double rounded, instead of whollyrounded ; the throat is spotted with dusky, most heavily on the sides
;
and there are usually some, often many, violet-purple feathers on
368 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthe throat ; in a considerable series of young males that I have exam-ined, I have not seen any that did not have at least a few of these violetfeathers on the throat; one had a little bunch of them in the elon-gated lateral extension of the gorget only. Later in the season thesemetallic feathers appear in the crown, but there is not very muchprogress toward the fully adult plumage until the complete pre-nuptial molt takes place late in winter or early in spring, when youngbirds become indistinguishable from adults.The young female is similar to the adult female, except for thebuffy margins on the feathers of the upper parts. Young femalescan be distinguished from young males by having immaculate, in-stead of spotted, throats. I have seen young females, probably veryyoung birds, that were strongly washed with pinkish buff on theflanks, and more faintly tinged with buff on the throat; the feathersof the head and back in these birds were broadly tipped with grayishbuff ; probably the buff soon fades and the tips wear away.Both adults and young apparently have a complete molt late in falland early in winter ; I have detected it in February.Food.?The usual hummingbird food nourishes this species; prob-ably it consists mainly of small Diptera, Hymenoptera, and otherminute insects, sweetened with nectar or honey from various flowers;the amount of the latter is difficult to determine, as it is not easilydetected in the stomach, where it is so soon digested. As to theflowers from which the food is obtained, Bendire (1895) says that
"in Inyo County, California, Costa's Hummer seems to be very com-monly found about the flowers of the squaw cabbage, a species ofStanleya., also about wild rose, plum, or cherry bushes {Prmius)growing in the canyons, as well as about other shrubs and plantsfound in these desert regions."Mr. Woods (1927b) says: "During the nesting season it has seemedto me that the female Costa's Hummingbird visits the flowers muchless than does the male. At such times the female may often be seenbuzzing about inside non-flowering trees and shrubs. While thesearch may be primarily for cobwebs or other nesting material, nu-merous minute insects and spiders might incidentally be obtained.
:i= * * Costa's Hummingbird, for some reason, seems less partialto the Tree Tobacco than do the larger species."Dr. Grinnell (1914) says that, in the Colorado Valley, "they werefeeding about the spiny bushes of Lycimn andersoni which were atthis time profusely laden Avith flowers. A tall-stalked milkweed(Asclepias suhulata) grovv'ing high among the precipitous peaks wasalso an attraction; so, too, a sage (Hyptis emoryi).''''In probing into the flowers in search of food this and other hum-mingbirds serve a useful purpose for the plants in pollination, as do
COSTA'S HUMMINGBIRD 3G9the bees, by helping to transfer the pollen from stamens to pistil;the bills and heads of hummingbii'ds are often smeared with pollen.Behavior.?Quoting Mr. Woods (1924a) again:As the male Hummingbird takes no part or interest in the nest-building orthe rearing of the young, and a brief visit to any convenient flowers serves tosatisfy his appetite, he has considerable spare time at his disposal. Most ofthis he spends on certain favorite observation posts, one of which is shownin the photograph, whence he sallies forth occasionally in pursuit of a tres-passing Hummer or bird of some other sort. Even the Cliff Swallow is notimmune from his attacks and seems quite unable to avoid his onslaughts. TheHun)nungbird frequently mounts vertically into the air until almost out ofsight, then descends like a bullet directly at the object of his attention. If theother bird flies, the Hummingbird follows ; if not, he passes within a few inches,swet'ping through an arc which carries him upward again to repeat the processuntil tired. The dowViWard swoop is accompanied by a long shrill whistlewhich is characteristic of the species and is often the first indication of itsarrival in the spring.Elsewhere (1927b) he writes: "There is a remarkable difference inthe shyness of the various individuals when on the nest. Some willleave as soon as a person comes into sight, perhaps forty feet away;others will permit one to reach within a few inches, or possibly, withcare, even to touch them, without leaving the nest. The shyer ones,however, are inclined to hold to the nest more closely as the incuba-tion advances, and especially around the time of hatching. Most ofthem, though easily frightened from the nest, will soon return if onestands quietly a few feet away, a decided reversal of the tendenciesof the majority of nesting birds."A case of tameness, or curiosity, is reported by F. C. Lincoln(1917) : "Mr. Figgins had an interesting experience with one of thesebirds while sketching under his umbrella. The bird, a female, wasfearlessly curious and repeatedly came under the umbrella andperched on the ribs, or the canvas, once flying so close to his face thathe (Mr. F.) forgetting the protection afforded by his glasses, shuthis eyes for fear the bird would strike at them."Hummingbirds seem to have few enemies. Perhaps they are toosmall to attract birds of prey, or too active to be easily caught. Butaccidents will happen occasionally. Mr. Woods (1934) reports find-ing a bird of this species hopelessly entangled in a coarse, heavyspider's w^eb; it was released with some difficulty and was at firstunable to fly away, but it finally recovered.Voiee.?Mr. Woods (1927b) remarks that "the presence of a Costa'sHummingbird is frequently announced by the two-or-three-syllabledwhistling call with which he greets passing members of the tribefrom his perch or salutes his mate as he hovers before her. Theyoung males begin practicing on these whistling notes, which aredoubtless among the highest-pitched sounds audible to the human178223?40 30
370 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
ear, before they have yet attained their brilliant gorgets, with resultsthat sometimes rather resemble the song of the Anna's Hummingbird,though much fainter and less sustained."Field marks.?^With the exception of the calliope, Costa's hum-mingbird is the smallest of the common North American species. Theadult male should be easily recognized by its full helmet, crown,gorget, and elongated sides of the gorget, of brilliant amethyst,purple-violet, though these colors appear black in certain lights. Theyoung male is like the female but usually shows some violet feathersabout the head. The adult female is almost impossible to distingviishfrom the female black-chinned in the field; for the characters thatdistinguish these two females the reader is referred to the field marksof the black-chinned hummingbird.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southwestern United States and Mexico; only slightlymigratory.Breeding range.?Costa's hummingbird breeds north to southernCalifornia (Fresno and Owens Valley) ; southern Nevada (CaveSpring and Bitter Springs) ; and probably southwestern Utah (Bea-verdam Mountains). East to probably southwestern Utah (Beaver-dam Mountains) ; east-central Arizona (Salt River Reservation) ; andrarely southwestern New Mexico (Cliff). South to rarely southwest-ern New Mexico (Cliil) ; southeastern Arizona (Tombstone and Hua-chuca Mountains), and southern Baja California (La Paz and SantaMargarita Island). West to Baja California (Margarita Island,Magdalena Bay, Cerros Island, San Benito Island, Todos SantosIsland, and Los Coronados Islands) ; and California (El Cajon,Escondido, Santa Barbara Island, Glendale, and Fresno).Winter range.?In the winter season this species is found north tosouthern California (Azusa, Riverside, Palm Springs, and rarelyAmboy) ; and southwestern Arizona (Camp 117, Phoenix, and Tina-ches) . East to southern Arizona (Tinaches and Tucson) ; Sonora(Tiburon Island and Tesia) ; and southeastern Baja California (LaPaz). South to southern Baja California (La Paz and Santa Mar-garita Island). West to Baja California (Santa Margarita Island,Magdalena Bay, Cerros Island, and Rosarito) ; and southwesternCalifornia (San Diego and Azusa).Migration.?The only data available are applicable to the springmigration. The following are early dates of arrival: Arizona
?
Tombstone, March 5. California?Los Angeles, March 21.Casual records.?A specimen was taken at Oakland, Calif., on May8, 1890, well north of the normal range.
ANNA'S HUMMINGBIRD 371Egg dates.?California: 100 records, March 11 to June 29; 50records, May 12 to June 10, indicating the height of the season.Baja California : 14 records, February 24 to June 5 ; 7 records, May26 to 30. CALYPTE ANNA (Lesson)ANNA'S HUMMINGBIRDPlATBJ 62HABITSContributed bt Robebt S. WoodsIn two respects Anna's hummingbird occupies a unique place amongour hummingbirds. It is the only species the greater part of whosegeneral range is included within a single State of the Union, andthe only one that winters mainly within the United States. It isalso the species most familiar to residents of California, since itsterritory includes all the more populous districts of the State, whereit is a constant and by no means shy visitor to city parks and gardens.Anna's hummingbird seems to be in some degree nomadic in its habits,and it probably shifts slightly southward during the colder months,but it performs no true migration, thereby differing from all ourother species except that portion or race of Allen's hummingbirdresident on the Channel Islands of southern California.Courtship.?In April, in the blooming orange groves of southernCalifornia, at least five of the six species of hummingbirds regularlyoccurring in that region may sometimes be seen together, in consid-erable numbers and feverish activity. No small part of that activityconsists in the practicing of higlily specialized forms of courtshipflight. While the males of all California hummingbirds can easilybe recognized when clearly seen, identification is more difficult whenthe bird persists in manifesting itself as a vague streak rather than adefinite object. Under these circumstances a knowledge of the specificdistinctions in "nuptial flight," and particularly of the peculiar andentirely characteristic utterances accompanying such flight, is oftenof great assistance in determining species.The most elaborate of these nuptial flights is that of Anna's hummingbird, in which the bird mounts upward until almost lost to sightthen shoots vertically downward at tremendous speed, finally alter-ing his course to describe an arc of a vertical circle, which carries himas closely as possible past the object of his attention as she sitsquietly in some bush or tree. At the lowest point of the circuit hegives utterance to a loud, explosive chirp, which so nearly resemblesthe "bark" of a California ground squirrel {Gitellus heecheyi) that
372 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMone who is familiar with that sound may easily be deceived. Fromthis point he continues along the arc until he arrives at a point di-rectly above his mate, where he hovers for a few seconds with bodyhorizontal and bill directed downward, rendering his squeaky "song."Then, without change of attitude, he begins to rise rapidly andvertically, repeating the entire maneuver luitil he tires or the otherbird departs, with himself in hot pursuit.Presumably this practice originated strictly as a courtship display,but it now has a much broader application, frequently being directedat other species or at birds of wholly different kinds. Young malesbegin performing the flight as early as September of their first year,and it is continued through at least the greater part of the year.Anna's hummingbird is not addicted to the shuttling flight so muchused by those species in which the wings of the males are modifiedin such a way as to produce a metallic rattling sound. The actualmating, which is not often witnessed, has been described by LeroyW. Arnold (1930) : "When first observed, the birds were playfullychasing each other about and suddenly swooped down to wdthinabout eighteen inches of the ground where the leading bird, wdiichproved to be the female, stopped and faced about. The male ap-proached and the mating was consummated in the air, the birdsbreast to breast and with the male somewhat under the female. Themale then settled down to the ground for a few moments, fanningout his tail and pointing his beak upward, while the female flew to anearby perch. After a short rest, the male rose and flew after thefemale who returned to her former position and mating again tookplace as before."Nesting.?^With reference to the nesting habits of hummingbirds,few distinctions can be drawn between the various species even underquite different ecological conditions, except in the matters of season,locale, type of site, and nest materials. The nesting of Rieffer'shummingbird {AmapJlia tzacatl tzacatl) in Central America has beencarefully observed by Alexander F. Skutch (1931), and the agree-ment in procedure between this species of the humid Tropics and thoseof the semiarid Temperate Zone is most striking. The principalspecific variations in this connection among North American hum-mingbirds concern the selection of materials for the nest, but thereis also considerable individual latitude that tends to bridge the gaps.Although Anna's hummingbird is generally distributed west of theSierra Nevada and the Colorado Desert, it is rather definitely classi-fied as a breeder in the Upper Sonoran Zone and is less partial to aridlocalities than is Costa's hummingbird. The nesting season beginsbefore the arrival of any of the migrants, sets of eggs having beenfound by various persons as early as December. The nesting prob-
ANNA'S HUMMINGBIRD 373
ably continues normally through late winter and spring and sporadi-cally throughout summer, with some evidence of its extending eveninto the fall. With the breeding season so greatly prolonged, it is ofcourse difficult to determine exactly how many broods are raised eachyear, but it may be inferred that two is the usual number, as in thecases of the black-chinned and Allen's hummingbirds. During oneseason throughout which I was able to follow^ the activities of onepair separately, by the aid of artificial feeding, the movements of thefemale indicated?though the nest was not found?that the first in-cubation period began late in Januar}^, the second just two monthslater. Incidentally, it is hard to explain satisfactorily why thesespecies, which quite certainly raise two broods yearly, do not gain innumbers relatively to the Costa's, rufous, and calliope hummingbirds,which usually do not remain on their breeding grounds long enoughto permit more than one.Nests of Anna's hummingbirds have been described or photo-graphed on almost every kind of site to which it would be possibleto attach the structure, except on the ground or any extensive hori-zontal surface. It is usually, without doubt, birds of this species thatnow and then achieve newspaper publicity by nesting in some unex-pected spot in the business district of Los Angeles. The distancefrom the ground at which the nests are placed is also extremely vari-able. Of 52 nests found by W. Lee Chambers (1903) between Jan-uary 1 and February 18, 1903, the heights ranged from 17 inches to30 feet. James B. Dixon, of Escondido, Calif., writes (MS.) concern-ing nests and their sites : "The female seems to select the nesting site andso far as I have ever observed did all of the nest building. The nestlocation may be in a wide variety of locations, as I have seen nests inthe following locations: On insulated electric-light wires under thecrossarm of a service pole 30 feet from the ground; on a climbingvine on a granite cliff face within a few feet of an occupied nest ofthe golden eagle; in citrus trees, both oranges and lemons; in brushfar removed from any wooded areas; and in dense oak groves innarrow wooded canyons. The last-mentioned place is by far themost favored as to nest location and I should say was typical of thisarea. The nests are large and well made and are usually devoid ofcamouflage when first built but are decorated with lichens during theincubation period and by the time the young are hatched are verybeautiful structures and in my estimation are the most beautiful ofall the hummingbird nests. The nests are made of plant down puttogether with cobwebs and are often lined wdth fine bird feathersand plant down. Often eggs are laid in the nest when it is a mereplatform and the remaining part of the nest is built up around theeggs and the finishing touches of lichens and plant seed put on last.
374 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMTwo eggs are usually laid, although I have seen nests with one andthree eggs, which I feel sure were sets. The female is usually verytame after brooding a short time and is very curious if disturbed andwill fly right into your face to look you over and try to scare youaway from the nest. I have never seen the male bird feed the youngor help build the nests. Anna's hummingbird does not colonize likesome of the others and seems to prefer an area to itself."W. Leon Dawson (1923) states that "nests of the Anna Hummervary in construction perhaps more widely than those of any otherlocal species. Some are massive and as heavily adorned with lichensas those of the eastern Ruby-throat." According to all available data,however, they can probably be regarded as essentially similar tothose of Costa's hummingbird except for their slightly larger size;fibers and stemmy materials usually being used in the walls, andornamentation on the exterior, while feathers are frequent in thelining. An interesting account of the nesting activities has beengiven by A. W. Anthony (1897) :Sometime about April 1, an Anna's Hummingbird began her nest in a cypressin front of my residence in San Diego. I could not be sure as to the exact dateof beginning, but on the 6th, when I first noticed the bird at work, there wasnothing but a little platform the size of a silver twenty-five cent piece, fastenedto the upper side of a twig which nearly overhung the front walk, and wasbut just high enough to escape being struck by anyone passing below.From an upper window I could look down upon the growth of the downy cup,and watch the diminutive builder from a distance of but a few feet, as shebrought almost imperceptible quantities of cotton and tucked them into thesides and rim of the prospective nest. In working the material into the struc-ture she always used her body as a form around which to build, tucking thecottony substance into the side and pushing it with her breast, frequentlyturning about to see if it were the right size all around.On April 12, when the nest was apparently but half finished, and little betterthan a platform with a raised rim, I was surprised to see an egg, which themother carefully guarded as she buzzed about, still bringing nesting material.The following morning the second egg was added, and on one or two occasionsthe male made his appearance, and tried, seemingly, to coax the female toleave the nest, even making several attempts to push her from the eggs whenother means failed. He soon became discouraged, however, and departed forparts unknown, leaving his demure little spouse to care for the eggs and com-plete the half finished nest.For several days incubation progressed just about two minutes at a time.The Hummer, after arriving with material and building it into the slowly risingrim, would incubate for two minutes, seldom more than a few seconds more orless, before leaving for another consignment.Her periods of absence were of almost exactly the same duration. It wasnot until incubation was more than half complete that the nest was finallyfinished, but unadorned by the usual bits of lichen. These were added fromday to day until May 1, when the first egg hatched, either eighteen or nineteendays after incubation began. Owing to the unsettled actions of the bird onthe 12th and 13th of April I could not satisfy myself as to when incubationreally began.
ANIs^A'S HUMMINGBIRD 375The second egg never hatched, and after the nest was abandoned the brokenshell was found buried in the bottom of the nest.Eggs.?[Author's note : The usual two eggs of Anna's humming-bird are indistinguishable from the eggs of other hummingbirds ofsimilar size. The measurements of 50 eggs average 13.31 by 8.65 mil-limeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 14.3 by 9.0,12.7 by 9.4, and 11.3 by 7.7 millimeters.]Young.?It will be noted from Mr. Anthony's account that the in-cubation period is considerably longer than that of most commonpasserine birds, despite the smaller size of the eggs. This is con-firmed in the following description by J. H. Bowles (1910) of thenesting of an Anna's hummingbird at Santa Barbara
:
The first egg was laid January 3, but during the following night a heavyfrost left ice more than a quarter of an inch in thickness on the puddles. * * *I think the icy weather must have been too severe for the first egg, for,whatever the cause, only one egg hatched. This took place on January 22,showing the period of incubation to be just seventeen days. It may be interest-ing to note here that I have found thirteen days to be the period of incubationfor eggs of the Black-chinned Hummer {Archilochus alexandri). This greatdifference I think may be attributed in part to the consistency of the albumen,which in eggs of C. anna is thick and almost gummy, while in A. alexandri it isthin as in eggs of other small birds.In spite of the very cold, rainy weather my young hummer grew very rapidly
;
but it was not until he was thirteen days old that his eyes opened. * * *On February 13, when he was just three weeks old, the young bird left thenest.I believe, however, that the difference in incubating time betweenAnna's hummingbird and other species cannot be so great as assumedby Mr. Bowles, as I have found the period for both black-chinnedand Costa's to be about 16 days, while, on the other hand, Donald R.Dickey (1915) gives an even shorter time for Anna's hummingbird,as observed in the Ojai Valley of Ventura County
:
Finally, on the fourteenth day of incubation?a long period for so small abird?the young hatched into black, grubby caterpillars, with smoky fuzz intwo lines down the back, and squat, yellowish mouths that gave no hint of thefuture awl-like bills. Now the mother's care was redoubled, and on the fifthday their eyes opened. Two days later respectable pin feathers transformedthem from loathsome black worms into tiny porcupines.Now we saw more and more often the grewsome-seemiug spectacle of theirfeeding. The female's foraged burden of small insect life, culled from theflowers' corollas, and doubtless nectar-sweetened, is transferred to the youngby regurgitation, and to avoid waste the mother's needle bill is driven to itshilt down the hungry youngster's throat. It suggests, as someone has said,a "major surgical operation," but the young so obviously enjoy and thrive uponit that we outsiders slowly lost our fear for them. At last the feathers broketheir sheaths and the wee mites took on the semblance of real hummers. Andthen one night the worst happened?a prowling cat found the nest and exactednature's price of death
!
376 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe disagreement in the figures of Bowles and Dickey as to theage at which the eyes are opened is probably due to the fact thatthe eyes are habitually kept closed for a good while after they arecapable of being opened. Despite the great number of nests describedor recorded, there seem to be few published figures on the length oftime the young Anna's hummingbird remains in the nest. The singleoccupant of the nest watched by Mr. Anthony left after 18 days,undoubtedly a shorter than average time, since the period of threeweeks recorded by Mr. Bowles corresponds very closely with mydeterminations for Costa's and the black-chinned, which range from20 to 23 days for each species. This period in the case of the hum-mingbirds is more uniform than it is with most species of passerinebirds and averages at least 50 percent longer.Plumages.?The molting of the body plumage, as indicated by aslightly unkempt appearance, seems to take place in July and August.The luminous feathers of the crown and gorget are not replaced at thattime, however, but begin to be shed in October, the ruff being com-pletely lost and the throat and head becoming decidedly ragged, theformer showing streaks of gray. The entire process to the completionof the new gorget requires perhaps a month. During this time the re-mainder of the plumage shows no sign of molting. The practice ofthe "nuptial flight," in so far as I have observed, seems to be discon-tinued during this period.The outline of the gorget becomes visible on the throat of theyoung male soon after it has left the nest. The area gradually be-comes sooty black, with glints of red, and slowly grows redder, thethroat feathers lengthening into a ruff. Even in fall, however, whenthis first gorget is apparently complete, it still is lacking somethingin brilliancy and form; but it is almost immediately shed, to bereplaced by the full perfection of the adult.In the male Anna's and Costa's hummingbirds, alone among thespecies occurring in the United States, the crown is like the throatin color, but the two differ from each other not only in the colorof the gorget but in its shape. As viewed from the front, that ofAnna's is deeper and its lower border forms nearly a straight line,while the lower outline of the Costa's gorget is decidedly concave andits ruff is narrower and more prolonged. In both, the area of thecrown is separated from that of the throat by a light streak runningbackward and downward from the eye, but in the Anna's only a verynarrow gray line divides the luminous area behind the eye from thatof the crown.Among hummingbirds, and especially in the present species, indi-vidual variations seem more pronounced than among most birds.The color of the back ranges from slightly bluish metallic green todecidedly bronzy green in different individuals; the rose-red of the
ANNA'S HUMMINGBIRD 377crown and gorget changes to purple as a secondary color in someinstances, while in others gold and greenish lights are frequentlyseen. Ridgway (1892) refers to this as "perhaps the most beautifulof North American Humming Birds" and quotes Gould's Monographof the Trochilidae as follows:When studying the diversified forms and coloring of tlie Trochilidae, I havefrequently heen struck with the fact that those districts or countries having ametalliferous character are tenanted by species of Humming Birds which aremore than ordinarily brilliant and glittering. This is especially the case withthe species inhabiting Mexico and California : in illustration of this assertion,I may cite the three California species, Selasphorus rufus, Calypte costae, andthe present bii-d, C. annae, all of which are unequaled for the rich metallicbrilliancy of certain parts of their plumage, by any other members of thefamily. The two latter, C. costae and C. annae, have not only the throat, but theentire head as glitteringly resplendent as if they had been dipped in moltenmetal.Food.?The food of the hummingbird is divided quite definitelyinto two classes: Carbohydrates, consisting of the nectar of flowersand more rarely of fruit juices and the sap of trees; and proteins, asfurnished by the minute insects and spiders obtained either in con-junction with the other food or as the product of separate huntingactivities. In late afternoon or on a cloudy day a hummingbird mayfrequently be seen perched upon some exposed twig or wire, fromwhich it sallies forth at intervals to engage in strange aerial evolu-tions that might well mystify a stranger, since the flying insects itpursues are too small to be discerned at any distance. A specificinstance of this sort is thus described by Frank F. Gander (1927) :"On the morning of Thanksgiving Day, November 25, 1926, in BalboaPark, San Diego, California, I watched three male Anna Humming-birds {Calypte a7ina) catching insects on the wing. A rain the nightbefore had cleared the air and I could easily see the sun glistening onthe gossamer wings of a host of tiny midges flying all about me inthe air. The male hummers would hang on rapidly vibrating wingsfor a second and then dart suddenly a short distance and one of theglistening insects would disappear. This was repeated time and timeagain, and the birds seldom missed ; on the rare occasions when theydid miss they relentlessly pursued their chosen prey until it wascaptured."Many observers have mentioned the hummingbirds' habit of search-ing the trunks and branches of trees for animal food and of extractingfrom spiders' webs small entangled insects or even the proprietorsthemselves. In their account of Anna's hummingbird in the YosemiteValley, Grinnell and Storer (1924) have described some of its lesser-known feeding habits
:
During November and December of 1914 we saw individuals almost daily atEl Portal. At this time of the year there were no flowers of any sort to be
378 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMfoimd in the vicinity, but the Anna Hummingbirds seemed to find enough goodforage on the foliage of the golden oaks, about which they were seen almostexclusively. The minute insects which live on the leaves of the golden oakprobably afforded sufficient forage of one sort, but the hummingbirds had anothersource of food supply.It was noted that one or more Anna Hummingbirds were to be found regivlarly nbout a certain golden oak, but the reason for their attraction to thisparticular tree was not discerned for several days. Then, on December 11, oneof these birds was seen hovering before, and drinking from, some puncturesmade by a Red-breasted Sapsucker in the bark of the oak tree. The hummervisited puncture after puncture just as it would the individual blossoms in aspike of flowers, and evidently partook of both the sap and the smaller of theinsects which had been attracted by the sap.It is rather contrary to the traditional conception of hummingbirdsthat they should deliberately frequent the higher altitudes devoid offlowers, but there are undoubtedly times, following especially severefrosts, when members of this species in many parts of Californiamust be compelled to obtain their living in other than the usual way.Mr. Dawson (1923) also mentions the use of sap: "Anna's Hummeris fond of the sap of our common willows {Salix laevigata and S.lasiolepis). It will also follow the Ked-breasted Sapsucker {Sphy-rapicus ruber) into the orchards and glean eagerly from its desertedborings. A catalogue of Anna's favorite flowers would be nearlyequivalent to a botany of southern California. But if one had tochoose the favorite it would probably be Ri2>es speciosum, our hand-some red flowering gooseberry, for it is upon the abundance of thisflower that Anna relies for her early nesting."Naturalists in the eastern and northern parts of the countr\^ havefound that hummingbirds are more attracted to red flowers than tothose of any other color. The early-flowering gooseberry above men-tioned and the paintbrush growing along a creek, which M. P.Skinner, in his notes, tells of seeing an Anna's hummingbird visitto the exclusion of other flowers, are both red ; but in all these casesthe flowers are probably seen against a green background, and sincered is the complementary color of green, the greater visibility of thatcolor may be more of a factor than any preference which the birdsmight feel. At any rate, there seems to be no such favoritism in themore arid parts of the Southwest, where the backgrounds are oftengrayish or tawny. Bits of red and blue cloth seemed to attract equalattention, though green was ignored.Like most young animals, immature hummingbirds are filled withcuriosity and are quick to investigate any brightly colored object; abunch of carrots will attract them as readily as a flower. Throughthis process of trial they presently learn to discriminate among theflowers and often to choose those of inconspicuous appearance overthe more brilliant kinds. As experience thus supplants curiosity, they
ANNA'S HUMINIINGBIRD 379
cease to show mucli interest in unfamiliar brightly colored objects,unless it may be in times of food shortage, or when invading newterritory where exploration must be carried on to locate its floralresources. Among familiar surroundings, memory for location un-doubtedly guides the hummingbird to a large degree in its feeding.As a general rule, hummingbirds prefer flowers of tubular formand are comparatively indifferent to composites and double flowers,such as roses. Within certain limits, size seems to be of little moment.One of the most valuable plants to Anna's hummingbird, especially,is a naturalized introduction from South America, the tree tobacco{Nicotiana glauca). This tall, sparse-foliaged, drought-resistantshrub bears a profusion of narrowly tubular blossoms practicallythroughout the year. Somewhat sensitive to cold, it is found onlyin the warmer parts of California, As an example of the humming-birds' frequent disregard of bright coloring, they will probe thegreenish-yellow newly opened flowers of this plant in preference tothe purer yellow mature blossoms, which evidently contain less nectar.The greatest concentration of hummingbirds is seen about the tall,treelike flower stalks that culminate the life cycle of the common
"century plant" {Agave americana) , abundantly grown in California.The numerous greenish-yellow blossoms are dull-colored, but evi-dently they offer a rich store of nectar. Various species of eucalyptus,some of which bloom in winter, also attract large numbers of hum-mingbirds. The State of California must now be capable of sup-porting a much larger population of these birds than would havebeen possible under primitive conditions.At times when their natural food is scarce, hummingbirds willgladly avail themselves of offerings of saturated sugar solution, whichseems to be preferred to commercial honey. When flowers are plenti-ful and hummingbirds not too numerous they pay less attention tothe artificial food than do the orioles and house finches, which areequally fond of sweets and not so well fitted to extract them fromthe flowers. It is during the latter half of the year that the hum-mingbirds will make most frequent use of sugar syrup in order tocompensate for the comparative scarcity of flowers, though when thehabit is once formed it may be continued even through spring. Visitsare made at intervals during the day, perhaps only half-hourly whenthe temperature is high, but with increasing frequency toward even-ing, the height of this activity occurring between sunset and tenminutes after, when feeding ceases for the day. The use of clearglass vials affords an opportunity to observe the hummingbird'smanner of drinking. When the liquid is out of reach of the bill, itis lapped up by rapid movements of the tongue, which can be ex-tended an additional distance equal to the length of the bill. Should
380 BULLETIN 17G, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthe vessel be filled nearly to the top, the syrup is either sipped withthe end of the bill svibmerged or lapped with the tip of the bill heldjust at the surface and the tongue protruded only slightly. AnAnna's hummingbird ordinarily consumes about two teaspoonfuls ofsaturated solution daily, only a few drops being taken at a time.Various means may be used for the artificial feeding of the hum-mingbirds, ranging from small vials tied to the branches of trees tolarge and elaborate self-feeding devices, with provisions for dis-couraging the visits of ants, bees, and larger birds. Syrup in ordi-nary small brown bottles is often discovered by the birds without anykind of lure, but in more complex arrangements it is usually neces-sary to first guide them by inserting a flower in the opening. Achange in the design of the container will cause much confusion anduncertainty for a time. Of other liquids than sugar solution, maplesyrup and strained honey are acceptable, though the latter sometimesseemed to cause inconvenience because of its viscosity. Milk was nottaken, and preserved fruit juicep., though heavy with sugar, were ap-parently not palatable.Naturally the proportion of liquid food in the ordinary diet of thehummingbird cannot be determined by an examination of stomachs,but Junius Henderson (1927) lists the identified contents of a largenumber of stomachs, as reported by Beal and McAtee in Farmers'Bulletin 506 (1912), as follows: Anna hummingbird {Calypteanna), 111 stomachs?vegetable matter, only a trace of fruit pulp;Diptera (gnats and small flies, largely neutral), 45.23 percent;Hymenoptera, mostly useful, 35.03 percent; Hemiptera, 17.30 per-cent ; spiders, 2 percen.t.F. C. Clark (1902) found that one stomach examined contained 32treehoppers, 1 spider, 1 fly, and other insect remains. Fruit juicesdoubtless form only an inconsiderable part of the hummingbird'sdiet, but occasionally in fall an Anna's hummingbird may be seensipping the juice of a persimmon that has been pecked by other birdsand has softened on the tree, or the juice of a partially eaten tuna orpricklypear (Op/mfm).That the females in the nesting season require some additionalmineral constituents in their diet was made clear to me upon seeinga female Anna's hummingbird upon several occasions visit a spotwhere particles of mortar were scattered. Hovering close to theground, she appeared to be picking up the small grains and at othertimes would repeatedly plunge her bill into the loose sandy soil nearby. Mr. Arnold (1930) tells of seeing Anna's hummingbirds alighton patches of ground where sand and plaster were strewn and seemto be picking up something, which he did not identify.The changing seasons of the flowers have made expedient for the
ANNA'S HUMMINGBIRD 381hummingbirds a somewhat nomadic existence, aside from true migra-tions. Perhaps this instinct for change has become so strong in thenonmigratory Anna's hummingbirds that they are unable to remainin one locality permanently. The sugar syrup containers maintainedfor their use have been visited by a constantly changing successionof individuals, some remaining only a few days, a few for a periodof months, but all have eventually felt some urge more potent thanthe desire for a sui'e and easy living.Behavior.?The flight of the hummingbird resembles that of noother bird, but rather that of certain insects, such as dragonflies orhawk moths, though stronger and swifter. Some of the earlier orni-thologists expressed doubt of any bird's ability actually to fly back-ward, suggesting that the hummingbird's withdrawal from thedepths of a tubular flower was accomplished by a forward flirt ofthe tail. A little careful observation would soon remove any skep-ticism as to its ability to easily fly backward, sidewise or in any otherdirection. While the tail is rhythmically vibrated forward and back-ward as the bird probes the flowers, it can be seen that its movementsare not at all related to the backward flight, and that it is, in fact,seldom widely opened.A hummingbird's wings are in almost uninterrupted motion whileit is in the air; occasionally it will glide for an instant while in rapidflight. The amplitude of the wing beat is variable, but it often de-scribes an arc of nearly 180? when the bird poises in the air. Some-times the wings seem not to rise above the level of the back, butwhen the bird hovers over a cluster of upturned blossoms they maytravel through the upper portion only of the complete arc. The con-fidence and sureness with which a hummingbird threads its waythrough a maze of twigs without injury while apparently devotingall its attention to the flowers cause one to admire, but its instantcoordination of perception and movement can perhaps best be appre-ciated by noting the ease and certainty wath which it thrusts its billinto a small tubular flower blown by a gusty wind.That the flight of the hummingbird is by no means effortless, how-ever, may be realized on a hot day, when one of them, returning toits shaded perch after an extended sortie, will sit for a minute ortwo with wade-open bill, panting with a violence that shakes itsentire body. Though an immense amount of unnecessary flying isdone, apparently in sport, the obtaining of food is evidently listedunder the heading of work, and a hummingbird will seldom overlookan opportunity to perch, even to the extent of hanging almost upsidedown while reaching into a flower. The only sound produced bythe normal flight of either sex of Anna's hummingbird is a low hum,which rises in volume and pitch when the speed is accelerated and
382 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMhas a slight suggestion of the rustling of silk. In wet weather, how-ever, one may often hear from a flying hummingbird a sort of clap-ping noise of short duration, as if it were striking its wings to-gether to rid them of moisture.The sense of hearing, like that of sight, is keen, and a slightcrunching of fallen leaves will evoke an attitude of alert apprehen-sion, just as it does in many other wild creatures. The reactionto a sharp noise, though, is likely to be merely a nervous start,instead of the immediate flight, which is precipitated by any abruptvisible movement. This latter response is so invariable that it maywell be regarded as a reflex rather than a volitional action. Thereseems to be no convincing evidence that the sense of smell playsany part in the discovery of food. A perfumed green-wrapped vialof sugar syrup attracted no attention, though a nearby unperfumedred-wrapped vial was quickly investigated. Some of the most heav-ily scented flowers, such as the jasmine and the large white blossomof the cactus Trlchocereus spachiamis^ are comparatively neglected.Sense of location is very well developed, and when a bottle of syrupthat has been regularly visited by a hummingbird is moved with itssupport to a different part of the grounds, the bird upon returningwill hover in the exact spot from which the bottle was removed, oftenmaking several trips before finally becoming convinced.Most writers have credited hummingbirds with extreme quarrel-someness among themselves and a tyrannical disposition towardother birds. Careful observation has convinced me that their pug-nacity has been greatly exaggerated, especially with reference tobirds of other kinds. I believe that a hummingbird pursues otherbirds for exactly the same reason that a small dog will run after anypassing vehicle, but immediately lose interest in it when it stops.Even the smallest passerine birds show no fear of the hummingbirds,nor are they molested if they fail to enter into the spirit of thegame. Furthermore, I have often seen Anna's hummingbirds forcedaway from their sugar syrup by house finches or Audubon's warblerswithout the slightest show of resentment. Of course, a humming-bird that has preempted a certain territory resents any trespassingby other hummingbirds, who usually seem to recognize his rightsand seldom dispute them; it is when an interloper resists evictionthat the most earnest hostilities occur. Among the migrants inspring and among the immature birds late in summer, however, theconstant chases and skirmishes appear to be carried on in a spirit ofsport much more than of spite.Probably because of their constant association among the flowers,hummingbirds show little fear of bees. I have sometimes seen anAnna's hummingbird, in order to reach a supply of sugar syrup,thrust its bill through a struggling mass of the insects. In contrast
ANNA'S HUMMINGBIRD 383to this, a few small ants walking around tlie mouth of the bottlewill often keep the bird away entirely. Wliether this fear is aninstinct founded on the occasional destruction of nestlings by antsis, of course, merely a matter of conjecture. Although the humming-birds ordinarily treat the bees with indifference, I have watched oneattack bees flying around an agave stalk, darting at one after anotherwith open bill as if trying to bite them.When a male hummingbird preempts a certain territory, hechooses one or more elevated exposed perches from which he cansurvey his domain and quickly detect trespassers. Sometimes hewill use the same perch almost constantly through a whole season,seeking a more sheltered place only in very hot or windy weather;other individuals will alternate between two or more favoriteperches, or select new ones at intervals without apparent reason.Acknowledging no family responsibilities, the males spend a largeproportion of their daylight hours on these perches; but even thefemales who are caring for the young unaided seem to have anabundance of leisure in which to rest, preen their plumage, andengage in skirmishes.Hummingbirds are fond of bathing, especially during the coolerpart of the year. Often they seem afraid to enter w^ater of anyappreciable depth, but they enjoy bathing in a thin film of waterflowing over a flat rock. Most of their bathing is done on dew-covered foliage in the early morning and, when available, in the finespray of a lawn sprinkler. They revel in misty or drizzly rain andare particularly active under such conditions. Carroll DewiltonScott, of Pacific Beach, Calif., writes (MS.) : "Anna's hummingbirdshave a strong attraction for moving water. They will hover over irri-gation ditches, evidently fascinated by the running water. I havenever seen one drink anywhere or take a bath in still water. But thespray of a hose or a fountain is irresistible for a shower bath, even inJanuary. Whenever I spray the garden a hummer is sure toappear." Unusual actions of a bathing hummingbird are described byF. N. Bassett (1924):On August 17, 1924, while watering my lawn in Alameda, California, I placedthe sprinkler in position and had just turned on the water when an adult maleAnna Hummingbird {Calypte anna) flew into and poised in the dense spray.After glancing about for a moment he gradually assumed a vertical positionand spreading his tail, then slowly settled to the ground, meanwhile drawingthe tail back until it nearly reached the horizontal plane, when he actually
"sat" on the grass, the body erect and the tail spread out fanwise behind him.The wings continued to vibrate while in this position, but the strokes weremuch less frequent than when flying, being just sufficient to maintain a verticalbalance. In a few seconds he began increasing the wing strokes and slowlyascended about a foot above the ground where he poised a moment and thenrepeated the entire performance several times, after which he flew to a wireoverhead.
384 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMSun-bathing is less frequent and appears to be an individual ratherthan a general custom. Shortly after noon on a hot July day I sawan immature male Anna's hummingbird alight on a bare patch ofground arid, heading directly away from the sun, stretch out flat onthe soil with wings fully extended a7id the feathers of the backerected. Again, about two months later, at about the same time ofday, the identical action was repeated on the lawn by the same indi-vidual. In both instances he remained on the ground less than aminute.As to the intelligence of hummingbirds, I find no evidence to sup-port W. H. Hudson's contention that they resemble insects more thanbirds in their mental processes. Their tameness cannot reasonablybe attributed to mere stupidity, but rather to justified confidence intheir own agility and swiftness, and perhaps also in human good will,since their power of discrimination is shown by their noticeable war-iness toward cats. In their disposition and temperament humming-birds are hardly comparable to any other birds but remind one moststrongly of chipmunks.Voice.?Of the seven species of hummingbirds found in the State ofCalifornia, Anna's is the only one that may be said to possess a song.The "song" can hardly be called melodious, being a thin, "squeakywarble suggestive of filing a saw. Nevertheless, it is delivered withfervor and remarkable persistence, with little regard for season. Thissong, which in addition to its use in courtship seems to serve the pur-pose of a genera] greeting or challenge, or sometimes merely a formof self-amusement, is peculiar to the males, who begin practicing italmost before their gorgets have started to develop. During therendition, which often lasts for a rather long time, the bird leans for-ward on his perch, extends his neck, and holds his bill tightly closed,as far as can be detected at a distance of several feet. The clear,high-pitched, 2- or 3-syllabled whistling call of the male Costa'shummingbird, though less persistently used, appears to be entirelyanalogous to the Anna's song.The ordinary notes common to both sexes are similar to those ofother species. They consist of the feeding note, a mechanical "tick"or a more liquid chirp uttered at measured intervals as the bird goesfrom flower to flower ; a similar note repeated more rapidly and ani-matedly while perching and often accompanied by a wagging of thehead from side to side, expressing excitement or warning to tres-passers; and the shrill twittering, which indicates a chase or skirmish.The begging call of the newly fledged young is much like that ofother young birds.Field marks.?Anna's hummingbird is the largest species foundwithin its ordinary range, but there is integradation in measurementswith all but the calliope hummingbird, whose small size is usually
ANNA'S HUMMINGBIRD 385
sufficient to distinguish it from Anna's at any time. Both sexes ofAnna's can be separated from the rufous, Allen's, and broad-tailedhummingbirds by the entire absence of rufous or brownish coloringin the plumage. The male differs from the black-chinned and Costa'sin the color of its throat and crown and in the fact that the gorget isbordered below by gray, instead of white. The adult female usuallyhas a central patch or scattered spots of luminous red on the throat;otherwise it can generally be distinguished from Costa's by its largersize and darker underparts, and from the black-chinned by its stouterform. In size and general appearance, including the color of thethroat, Anna's is probably most like the broad-tailed, but the normalranges of the two species are entirely separate.Enemies.?The hummingbird is one of the most notable exceptionsto the rule that smaller animals must be more prolific than larger onesin order to compensate for an inherently higher mortality rate. Nev-ertheless, the eggs and young of hummingbirds seem to be subject tomore than ordinary vicissitudes. The small size and fragility of thenest, together with its usually exposed situation, make it liable todestruction by storms or accidents, w^hile the long period between thelaying of the eggs and the fledging of the young increases the pos-sibility of loss. The eggs are said to be often taken by the Californiajay {Aphelocoma californica)^ and quite possibly they may be eatenby the banded racer {Bascanion laterale) and the alligator lizard{Gerrhonotus scincicauda), as these reptiles are frequently seenclimbing through the foliage of shrubs and trees. In some cases,also, one of the eggs will fail to hatch, even though not disturbed.In their earlier stages, the young are probably threatened by thesame enemies previously mentioned, while the spotted skunk {Spilo-gale phenax) is always a definite peril if the nest is within its reach.Another source of danger to the young birds is mentioned by Mr.Anthony (1923) :The ornithologist visiting San Diego is usually impressed with the surprisingscarcity of nesting birds in Balboa Park, though the surroundings seem to beideal. It was not until I had been at the San Diego Museum of Natural Historya year, that the possible explanation was presented. A swarm of bees that badbeen installed as an exhibit in the museum was destroyed in a few days by aninsignificant ant. This ant, I was told, had in all probability reached ourshores with some of the trees or shrubs brought in from South America. Itwas known as the Argentine Ant. * * *If bees were killed by ants, why not young birds? Several nests of the AnnaHummingbird {Calypte anna) were located and kept under observation and inevery case the young were killed and eaten within two or three days of thetime they hatched.Dependence upon one parent alone w^ould also theoretically increasethe chances of failure. All in all, it would seem that the number ofyoung fledged could not represent a very large proportion of the eggs178223?40 31
386 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMlaid. Once the young bird is able to fly, however, the situation iswholly changed, and the fledgling may look forward to the ex-pectancy of a long life. If this were not true, the members of thisfamily could not have maintained their present abundance with theirsmall annual increase. The adult hummingbird seems to have noenemies of importance; certainly no predatory bird could capture itexcept by accident. On rare occasions a cat will catch one, in allprobability an immature individual that has not yet learned caution,as seems to be generally the case among other birds. There are a fewaccounts of disaster through the agency of an unintentional enemy,such as the following from the manuscript notes of Carroll DewiltonScott: "On one occasion I rescued a female Amia from impendingdeath. A giant black spider had hung an enormous orb web amongpendant eucalyptus limbs about 8 feet from the ground. One springmorning after a foggy night I noticed a female Anna fluttering onthe edge of the web. The spider was nowhere to be seen and had notherself entangled the bird who had been snared, possibly, while gath-ering webs for binding her nest. But she was hopelessly caught byboth wings in the tough, elastic, wet, sticky strands of the spider.After I pulled the webs from her wings she flew to an adjoiningtree and sat quite still for several minutes."That these incidents happen so seldom is a tribute to the humming-bird's alertness and quick perception, since the opportunities for suchmishaps are very numerous, and the webs of these large orb-weavingspiders have been proved capable of holding considerably larger birds.Mr. Scott also mentions finding a dead Anna's hummingbird at thebase of a window, presumably killed by striking the glass. Eric C.Kinsey states, however, that hummingbirds kept in glass-sided cagessoon become accustomed to the glass and do not injure themselvesby flying against it.Of Anna's hummingbird, specifically, it would appear that the mostdestructive enemy is the exceptional period of cold weather that comesonce in a cycle of years and, with native plants and animals alike,may overcome the powers of resistance built up to withstand ordinarywinters. In this connection Mr. Dawson (1923) says:Hummingbirds, one sees, even though they be so frail, possess an amazingvitality or recuperative power. But it is not too rare an experience to find onestranded, or numbed with the cold; and, to cite the extreme instance, the bigfreeze of January 2nd, 1913, undoubtedly cut down the resident hummer popu-lation of southern California (all Annas) one-half. It is quite worth whileupon finding such a waif to try various methods of first-aid. The first expedientis, of course, heat?that of the closed hand may suffice. Or, it may be that thelittle engine only lacks "gas". Sweetened water, of a pretty strong solution,offered in a pipette, or medicine dropper (pressed upon attention, or floodingthe bill until the tongue gets the flavor), will sometimes resuscitate a fallenhummer like a magic potion.
BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD 387Nevertheless, the hardiness of Anna's hummingbird is greater thanmight be expected of so small a bird, belonging to a family predomi-nantly tropical. In January 1937, during the most prolonged periodof freezing weather in the history of southern California, when thetemperature repeatedly fell to 24? F. at my home in the San GabrielValley, when ice remained on pools and birdbaths throughout thedays and the sky was dark with soot from orchard heaters, half adozen or more hummingbirds buzzed and twittered about a tallblooming eucalyptus tree and seemed not in the least distressed.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Chiefly California and Baja California; east casually inwinter to Arizona and the mainland of Mexico ; apparently not reg-ularly migratory.The breeding range extends north to northern California (Yrekaand Mount Shasta. East in this State to Mount Shasta, PyramidPeak, Big Creek, and the San Bernardino Mountains ; and Baja Cali-fornia (San Pedro Martir Mountains). South to northern BajaCalifornia (San Pedro Martir Mountains, San Quintin, and SanTelmo). The western boundary of the breeding range extends northfrom this point along the coast of Baja California and California toRed Bluff and Yreka.During the winter season there is only a slight withdrawal from thenorthern parts of the summer range, as the species has been recordedat this time north in California to Ferndale and Red Bluff. The mostsoutherly record at this season is Cerros Island, Baja California, about200 miles south of known breeding areas. During the winter thespecies also is sometimes common in the southern part of Arizona(Roosevelt Lake and probably Salt River Reservation).Casual records.?This species has been reported from the followingother localities in Arizona : Camp Grant (September), Santa CatalinaMountains (October), and the Huachuca Mountains (October). Aspecimen was taken on February 21, 1934, at Punta Penascosa, Sonora.Egg dates.?California : 86 records, December 21 to August 17 ; 43records, February 22 to May 18, indicating the height of the season.SELASPHORUS PLATYCERCUS PLATYCERCUS (Swainson)BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRDPlates 63, 64HABITSThe broad-tailed hummingbird is the hummingbird of the Rocky^Mountain region, ranging from southern Idaho, Montana, and Wyo-ming to the Valley of Mexico, and it is essentially a mountain bird.
388 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMIt has been recorded from extreme eastern California, Inyo Moun-tains, and eastward as far as western Nebraska and western Texas.M. P. Skinner says, in his notes from Yellowstone National Park:
"I have seen this little bird at all altitudes from the lowest up to8,000 feet above sea level. I have seen it in the open, in lodge-polepine forest, and in alder thickets." Mr. Kidgway (1892) says: "Inthe Rocky Mountain district proper, as in Colorado, for example, itbreeds at an elevation of from 4,000 to 11,000 feet, and I found ithaving about the same vertical range in the East Humboldt Moun-tains." Dr. Jean M. Linsdale (1938) found that "the broad-tailed]unnmingbird made up almost the entire hummingbird populationof the Toyabe Mountains," in Nevada, where "observations indicatedthat the normal habitat for this species is close to mountain streams."We found it in the Huachuca Mountains, Ariz., mainly along theswift mountain streams, at altitudes of from about 5,000 to 7,000 feet.Mr. Swai-th (1904) says: "It is possible that this species remains inthe Huachucas through the winter as I saw a male bird near thebase of the mountains on February 28, 1903; and though not at allcommon, I saw and heard them a number of times through the monthof March. It was the middle of April before they began to appearin any numbers, and from then on they became more and moreabundant. At this time they were seen at a low altitude and alongthe canyons; but after the summer rains began and the grass andflowers sprung up, I found them mostly in the highest parts of therange. * * * They breed in the highest parts of the mountains,often in the pines and at a considerable distance from the ground."Dr. Mearns (1890) writes: "This beautiful hummingbird is aninhabitant of the highest land of Arizona, being rarely encountereduntil one is well within the spruce belt, when it suddenly becomesextremely plentiful. About springs and willow-edged water-coursesswarms of these gay birds congregate. * * * jt ranges to thevery summit of San Francisco Mountain, being abundant in the high-est timber." And Mrs. Bailey (1928) says:The Broad-tailod Hummingbird, witli tlie deep rose gorget and green crown,is one of the most abundant birds of the New Mexico mountain region. Itscharacteristic machine-like clicking, suggestive of the buzz of the cicada, made,Mr. Henshaw explains, by the "attenuation of the outer primaries," was heardby us at all levels from the foot of the Sangre de Cristo Mountains at 7,400feet up to 12,700 feet at the highest terrace on the side of Wheeler Peak wherethere was water ; for during the season it follows the successively bloomingflowers up the mountain sides. * * *The Broad-tails are seen not only in the uninhabited mountains but occa-sionally in towns. On the campus of the Santa Fe Indian School Mr. Jensenfound two pairs nesting in 1921 and 1922; and in front of a hotel in Rincon in1920 Mr. Ligon saw one playing in the spray of a lawn sprinkler.
BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD 389Major Bendire (1895) writes: "On the first arrival of this speciesin the spring it is comparatively common in the lower foothills andvalleys, and unquestionably breeds here. By the time the young arelarge enough to leave the nest the majority of the flowers have ceasedblooming, and as the country begins to dry up more and more theseHummingbirds retire to higher altitudes in the mountain parks,where everything is now as green and bright looking as it was in thelower valleys two or three months earlier. Here they raise theirsecond broods under nearly similar conditions as the first ; the formerare by this time well able to take care of themselves and can be seenfrolicking about everywhere."GourtsMi).?Dr. Linsdale (1938) watched two hummers of thisspecies on June 5, 1932, "that were definitely distinguished as a maleand female which were going through mating antics. At first bothwere in flight together. Then the male flew up into the air about 30feet and made a U-shaped dive. Next, both birds flew up in the airfor about 90 feet, one lower than the other by 4 or 5 feet, and theycame down at the same time. One flew off to the side but returnedimmediately. Both flew up and repeated the dive. Then the malehovered for half a minute, over birches and cottonwoods along thestream, until the female disappeared. No noise was made by themale bird while hovering."Alexander F. Skutch sends me the following note on the courtshipof the Guatemalan race of this species: "It was during the brightest,warmest hours of the day that I saw the broad-tailed hummingbirdsrising and falling above the brushy growth on the sunny mountain-side where the salvias bloomed. One morning I watched a female asshe perched within 2 feet of the ground in a little thicket where therewas an abundance of flowers. Presently a male of her kind ap-peared; and she rose a few inches into the air and hovered with herbill pointed toward him, while he poised motionless on beating wingsin front of and a little above her, displaying his brilliant red gorgetbefore her eyes. Then of a sudden he rose almost vertically 30 or40 feet into the air, whence he dropped straight downward and shotthrough the edge of the thicket directly in front of the female, whomeanwhile had resumed her perch. Once past her, he inclined hiscourse slightly upward and darted away over the mountainside."Nesting.?Major Bendire (1895) makes the following generalstatement about the nests of the broad-tailed hummingbird
:
Nests from different localities vary considerably in make-up as well as insize. Nests saddled on good-sized limbs, like those found in the mountains ofColorado, are occasionally almost as large again as others placed on smalltwigs. One now before mo, from the Ralph collection, taken by Mr. WilliamG. Smith, at Pinewood, Colorado, on June 23, 1892, measures 2 inches in outer
390 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMdiameter by 1% inches in depth, while one taken by Mr. Ridgway, in Parley'sPark, Utah, on July 23, 1869, measures only 1% by 1 inch outside measure-ment. The difference in size of the inner cups of these two nests is evenmore noticeable, the former measuring 1 inch by three-fourths of an inch, thelatter three-fourths by one-half of an inch. While the walls of both of thesenests are mainly composed of willow or cottonwood down, their outer coveringis entirely dissimilar. The outside of the larger one is profusely covered withsmall bits of lichens, like the nest of the Ruby-throat; the smaller one isdecorated with shreds of bark, fine leaves, and dry plant fibers, resemblingmore the nests of Costa's Hummingbird in this respect. * * * The innerlining appears to be composed entirely of willow or cottonwood down, and noneof the specimens before me contain even a single feather. The outer coveringor thatching is firmly secured to the walls of the nest with spider webs or silkfrom cocoons. The majority of the nests of the Broad-tailed Hummingbirdare placed on low, horizontal branches of willows, alders, cottonwoods, etc., atno great heights from the ground, or overhanging small mountain streams,while others are saddled on boughs or limbs of pine, fir, spruce, or aspens,from 4 to 15 feet from the ground, rarely higher. Occasionally a nest may beplaced on a curled-up piece of bark or on a splinter of a broken limb.Robert B, Rockwell tells me that "the broad-tailed hummingbirdseems to be the only really common species about Colorado Springs.I have seen it as late as September 18, 1911. In 1923 one built anest on a small branch of an elm tree overhanging a porch outside ofour dining room. The nest was about 7 feet above the porch," Hetells in his notes of another nest in a yellow pine tree, 8 feet aboveground, and of another that was saddled on a dead limb of a smallcottonwood, about 5 feet from the ground. He says (1908), in hispaper on the bh-ds of Mesa County, Colo., that it "frequents thetimber along the streams from 6000 feet up and raises two broodsin a season and possibly three. I found them breeding abundantlyon Buzzard Creek at about 8000 and found nests containing fresheggs, freshly hatched young and fledglings just ready to leave thenest on the same day and within a radius of half a mile. * * *One nest found was built on a root protruding from a bank directlyover and within 2 feet of the swift running water of Buzzard Creek."Aiken and Warren (1914) say that "one confiding bird built its neston the electric light fixture directly before the front door of a house,on a porch where people were continually going and coming, andraised two young."R. C. Tate (1926) says that Oklahoma nests that he has examinedwere made of "rock-moss, lint from cottonwoods and willows, finewillows, fine shreds of thin inner bark from cottonwoods, and finerootlets of blue-stem and gama grass."Frank C. Willard's notes contain the records of six nests in themountains of southern Arizona, at altitudes ranging from 4,900 to6,000 feet. One nest was 8 feet up in a scrub oak, three were in
BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD 391sycamores 3 to 20 feet above ground, and two were in pines 20 and30 feet from the ground.The six nests of the broad-tailed hummingbird in the Thayercollection in Cambridge show about the same range of variation insize, shape, and make-up as those described by Bendire above. Onenest, however, is decidedly smaller, measuring only ll^ inches indiameter and 1 inch in height externally ; the walls are very thin andthe cup is very shallow; it is made of the usual materials, mixedwith the winged seeds of milkweed or thistle. Another nest igworthy of mention, as illustrating camouflage to match its surround-ings; it was built on a sycamore branch, composed of sycamore orwillow cotton, and was decorated on the outside, almost completelycovered, with pale gray and buff lichens, producing a soft, buffyeffect to harmonize with the branch that held it.Eggs.?The broad-tailed hummingbird lays almost invariably twoeggs ; I have no record of more or fewer. These are like those of otherhummingbirds, pure white, without gloss, and about elliptical-ovalin shape. The measurements of 62 eggs average 13 by 8.8 millimeters
;
the eggs showing the four extremes measure 14.5 by 9.9, 13.8 by 10.0,11.9 by 8.4, and 12.2 by 7.9 millimeters.Yoimg.?The period of incubation is probably about 14 days, aswith other related species. Incubation is performed wholly by thefemale, and she takes full care of the young; she is a brave anddevoted mother. The young are fed at first on regurgitated, semi-digested food, but as they grow older they are given an increasingamount of minute insects; they are fed at more or less irregularintervals. Dr. Linsdale (1938) says of a nest that he watched: "At10 o'clock I saw the female go to the nest and feed 5 times, the lastfor only a short period, and then brood. The first thrust was deepdown the gullet of the young, and then the bill was withdrawn grad-ually. At 10 : 12 the female was off the nest. At 10 : 19 it returnedand fed 4 times and brooded. Each feeding required between 5 and10 seconds. It was not more than a minute from the time of arrivalto time of settling on the nest. The bird faced at least 3 directionswhile brooding but always stood on the north rim to feed. Wlien itleft at 10 : 27, there were clouds and a cold wind. At 10 : 31 it re-turned directly to the nest and began to brood."Plumages.?I have no data on the development of the juvenalplumage in the nestling broad-tailed hummingbird, but it probablydoes not differ materially from that of the rufous hummingbird,described under that species.Ridgway (1911) describes the young male, in juvenal plumage,as "similar to the adult female but feathers of upper parts (espe-cially rump and upper tail-coverts) indistinctly margined terminally
392 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
with pale brownisli buff or cinnamon, and lateral rectrices with mucliless of cinnamomeous on basal portion." The yonng female, he says,is "similar to the yonng male but rectrices as in adult female."Young males begin to acquire some red in the throat before theend of July and assume the fully adult plumage late in the follow-ing winter, or early in the spring, at the complete annual molt.Food.?Mrs. Bailey (1928) gives, as the food of the broad-tailedhummingbird in New Mexico, "insects found in flowers, as pentste-mon, larkspur, agave, gilia, gooseberry, and on willow catkins." Else-where (1904), she says that "the throat of one shot was full of honeyand long-tailed, wasp-like insects." Bendire (1895) mentions theflowers of Scrophular'm and Ocotilla as favorite feeding places. Mr.Eockwell says in his notes: "August 3, 1902, at some willows on aranch near Crested Butte, I saw four hummingbirds. They seemedto be interested with something in the willows, and I found manyperforations in the bark made by sapsuckers; vi\2iny ants and otherinsects were about these perforations ; whether it was the sap or theinsects that attracted the birds I could not tell,"Dr. Linsdale (1938) writes: "On June 18, 1930, at 7,000 feet onKingston Creek, a female broad-tailed hummingbird was watchedwhich apparently was feeding upon flying insects caught in the air.It was in a small clearing near the creek. After a poise the birdwould dart 3 feet after an insect, then poise and go after another.This was repeated half a dozen times, the bird being about 10 feetabove the ground."Apparently this, like other hummingbirds, lives to a large extenton small spiders and minute insects of the orders Diptera, Hymenop-tera, Hemiptera, Coleoptera, etc., which it finds in the flowers; nec-tar, honej^, or sap may not be what at first attracted the birds, butthey have proved to be very acceptable foods, just as the easternrubythroat has learned to feed freely from glass containers filledwith syrup. Sugar is a very nourishing and strengthening food.Behavior.?Robert Ridgway (1877) writes thus attractively of thebehavior of the broad-tailed hummingbird:The flight of this Hiimming-bii'd is unusually rapid, and that of the male isaccompanied by a curious screeching buzz, while it is followed through anundulating course. Long before the author of this curious sound was detectedits source was a mystery to us. This shrill screeching note is beard only whenthe bird is passing rapidly through the air, for when hovering among theflowers its flight is accompanied by only the usual muffled hum common to allthe species of the family. During the nesting-season the male is of an exceed-ingly quarrelsome disposition, and intrepid, probably beyond any other bird,the Flycatchers not excepted. All birds that apprt^ach the vicinity of his nest,whether they be his own species or of the size of hawks, are immediatelyassaulted with great force and pertinacity by this seemingly insignificant littlecreature, the vigor of whose attacks, accompanied as they are by the shrill
BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD 393piercing noise we have mentioned, invariably puts to fliglit any bird assaulted.We have thus seen the Western Kingbird {Tyruunus vcrticalis), the Black-headed Grosbeak (Hedymeles nielanocephalus) , and the Sharp-shinned Hawk(Nisus fuscus) beat a hasty retreat before the persevering assaults ofthis Humming-bird. When thus teasing an intruder the little champion ascendsalmost perpendicularly to a considerable height, and then descends with thequickness of a flash at the object he would annoy, which is probably morefrightened by the accompanying noise than by the mere attack itself. As wechanced, while hunting on the mountains, to pass through the haunts of thisHummer, it frequently happened that one of the little creatures, prompted ap-parently by curiosity, would approach close to us and remain poised in onespot, its wings vibrating so rapidly as to appear as a mere haze around thebody ; now and then it would shift from one side to another, its little blackeyes sparkling as it eyed us intently. So close would it finally approach thatto strike it with a hat or a stick seemed to be quite an easy matter, but uponthe slightest motion on our part the little thing would vanish so quickly thatits direction could scarcely be traced.Mr. Swarth (1904) testifies on the swiftness of the flight of thisbird, as follows: "The shrill buzz of its wings, that is of the malebird, is frequently heard; and time and again as the sound ap-proached, passed, and died a"way in the distance, I watched, but invain, to catch sight of the author of it. Several times I have seenone leave its perch on a twig and dart off in pursuit of another of thesame species, and even then was unable to follow him with my eye
;
and though presently the sound of wings announced his return, Iwas seldom able to see the bird before he dropped onto his perch.* * * The fliglit of the female is not accompanied by the buzzingnoise made by the male bird, and from their habits they are moreinconspicuous and less frequently seen than their mates."Curiosity is shown in various ways, beside the case cited above.Mr. Rockwell tells, in his notes, of one that flew against the windowof a laboratory where he was sitting; another "hovered before amirror that was hanging to a tent pole outside" of his camp, but "itmade no attempt to fight its image"; again it, or another, alighted
"on a guy rope, then hovered before the tent, and finally flew overto the car, and in front of every window, apparently attracted by itsimage." Dr. Mearns (1890) writes: "Its boldness is without paral-lel; it knows no fear. A member of our party on San FranciscoMountain wore a scarlet cap, but he found these audacious birds sotroublesome from their constant attacks upon it that he was glad topocket it in order to be rid of the irate little furies."All hummingbirds are fond of bathing, and this species is no ex-ception. On May 15, 1922, while climbing to the summit in theHuachuca Mountains, and following the course of a little mountainstream that flowed swiftly over its stony bed, we stopped to watch apair of broad-tailed hummingbirds that were bathing in the brook.They chose a spot where the water barely covered a flat stone, settled
394 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMdown in the shallow water, which barely covered their little bodies,and fluttered their wings as they faced upstream; after a few secondsin the cold water, they flew off to a nearby branch to shake them-selves and preen their plumage. Dr. Merriam (1890) says that, onSan Francisco Mountain
?
They wake up very early in the morning and go to water at daylight nomatter how cold the weather is. During the month of August, and particularlythe first half of the month, when the mornings were often quite frosty, hun-dreds of them came to the spring to drink and bathe at break of day. Theywere like a swarm of bees, buzzing about one's head and darting to and fro mevery direction. The air was full of them. They would drop down to thewater dip their feet and bellies, and rise and shoot away as if propelled byan unseen power. They would often dart at the face of an intruder as if benton piercing the eye with their needle-like bill, and then poise for a momentalmost within reach before turning, when they were again lost m the busythrong.Yoice?ThQ loud, screeching sound, referred to by several ob-servers, is probably mechanical, made by the rushing of the airthrough the flight feathers. Mrs. Bailey (1928) says that "besidestheir squeaky little song they gave some small staccato notes." AndRobert S. Woods (1927b) says: "A rather faint, muffled staccato noteis uttered twice in quick succession at the lowest point of its verticallydiving nuptial flight."Field marks.?The broad-tailed hummingbird suggests the ruby-throated in general appearance, but the rufous edgings in the tailwill mark the former, and the ranges of the two hardly come to-gether. Mr. Woods (1927b) writes:The appearance of the Broad-tailed Hummingbird is not especially distinctivein any way. The color of the gorget, aside from its somewhat inferior bril-liancy, is very similar to that of Anna's Hummingbird, though showing at someangles a more purplish cast. A convenient recognition mark of the male isthe rufous edging of certain of the tail feathers, in conjunction with thesolid green color of the back and upper tail-coverts. It may be safely saidthat the Broad-tailed Hummingbird is much more readily identified by earthan by eye. The loud metallic noise produced by the flight of the male isan agreeable, almost musical sound, clearer in tone than that made by theRufous, Allen's or Black-chinned Hummingbirds, while the notes of the femaleseem more liquid than those of other species.The rose-pink gorget and the green crown distinguish the broad-tailed from the males of other western hummers. But the femalesare not so easily recognized ; the female broadtail has less rufous inthe tail than the rufous or calliope, only the three outer tail feathersbeing basally rufous; the calliope is considerably smaller; the femalebroadtail may be distinguished from the female black-chinned by thepresence of some rufous in the flanks of the former.Fall?Mr. Henshaw (1886) found the broad-tailed humming-birds "extremely numerous" late in summer in the mountains of NewMexico. He says:
BROAD-TAILED HUMMINGBIRD 395Young birds were noticed August 1, and by the 10th they became common.By August 1 the males of this species began to get less numerous, and by the10th there were none; in fact, I saw very few after that date. * * *In this locality at least there is an evident reason for this. Just about thisdate the Scrophnlaria, which is the favorite food plant of the Hummers, beginsto lose its blossoms, and in a comparatively short time the flowers give placeto the seed pods. Though there are other flowers which are resorted to bythe Hummers, particularly several species of Penfstemon, they by no meansafford the luxurious living the former plant does. It seems evident therefore,that the moment its progeny is on the wing, and its home ties severed, warnedof the approach of fall alike by the frosty nights and the decreasing supply offood, off go the males to their inviting winter haunts, to be followed not longafter by the females and youug. The latter?probably because they haveless strength?linger last, and may be seen even after every adult bird hasdeparted. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Western United States and Central America.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the broad-tailed humming-bird extends north to central Nevada (White Mountains, ToquimaMountains, Monitor Mountains, and the Snake Mountains) ; northernUtah (Brighton, Salt Lake City, and Parleys Park) ; and northernWyoming ( Yellowstone National Park and Midwest) . East to easternWyoming (Midwest, Douglas, Wheatland, and Laramie) ; easternColorado (Greeley, Denver, Colorado Springs, and Beulah) ; NewMexico (Culebra Mountains, Pecos, and the Sacramento Mountains)
;
and southwestern Texas (Chisos Mountains). South to southwesternTexas (Chisos Mountains) ; northeastern Sonora (Oposura) ; south-ern Arizona (Huachuca Mountains and Santa Eita Mountains)southern Nevada (Charleston ]\Iountains) ; and east-central California(Inyo Mountains). West to eastern California (Inyo Mountains andCottonwood Creek) ; and western Nevada (Davis Creek, Chiato-vich Creek, and White Mountains). It has been stated that thisspecies breeds south to the "Valley of Mexico," but the evidence isunconvincing, particularly in view of the absence of breeding datathrough the mountainous regions of northern Mexico. A closely re-lated subspecies is found in the highlands of Guatemala.IVinter range.?During the winter season the broad-tailed hum-mingbirds appear to be concentrated in west-central Mexico, as inthe States of Zacatecas (Bolanos), Jalisco (Volcano de Colima),Mexico (Eslava), and Guerrero (Taxco).Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are: Arizona
?
Tucson, March 25 ; Tombstone, April 4. New Mexico?Apache, April9 ; Chloride, April 13. Colorado?Beulah, April 23 ; Durango, April26; Boulder, May 4. Wyoming?Laramie, May 20. Utah?SaltLake City, May 3.Fall migration.?lunte dates of fall departure as : Wyoming?FortSanders, September 3; Laramie, September 16. Colorado?Durango,
396 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMSeptember 12; Colorado Springs, September 21. New Mexico
?
Apache, October 5.Casual records.?A specimen was collected at Mount Vernon, Oreg.,on June 30, 1915, and another was seen at Enterprise on July 27,1921; one was taken at Big Butte, Idaho, on July 19, 1890, and onewas seen at Spencer on July 9, 1916 ; in Montana one was obtained atChico in 1902, M'hile two have been taken in Glacier National Park,one on May 23 and the other on June 17, 1895 ; a pair were reportedas seen daily between August 18 and 22, 1906, at Glen, Nebr., and onewas collected at Kearney on July 22, 1914.Egg dates.?Arizona: 20 records, May 8 to July 30; 10 records,June 11 to July 16, indicating the height of the season.Colorado : 18 records. May 22 to July 17 ; 9 records, June 13 to 26.Utah : 10 records, June 6 to July 23.SELASPHORUS RUFUS (Gmelin)RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRDPlates 6.5-67HABITSAlthough I have always considered Costa's hummingbird to be themost beautiful of our North American hummingbirds, on account ofthe charming colors reflected in its crown and gorget, it must yieldthe palm for brilliancy to the rufous hummingbird and its nearrelative, Allen's. The brilliant scarlet of the rufous hummer's gorget,which often glows like burnished gold, puts it in the front rankas a gleaming gem, a feathered ball of fire. It is not only fieryin appearance, but it has a fiery temper and makes things lively forany rivals near its feeding stations ot its nest.It ranges farther north than any of our other hummingbirds,breeding from about latitude 61? N. in Alaska and southern Yukonsouthward to Oregon and southwestern Montana. It is exceed-ingly abundant from the Rocky Mountains westward on its migra-tions to and from its wdnter home in southern Mexico. And itmay yet be found breeding at high elevations in some of the moun-tain ranges south of its present known breeding range. Henshaw(1886) was perhaps mistaken in assuming that this hummer wasbreeding in the region of the upper Pecos Eiver in New Mexico,though he states that it was abundant at altitudes of from 8,000 to9,000 feet "during the entire summer"; but he found only one nest,"and this after it was deserted." Mrs. Bailey (1928) says: "Thereseems to be no known instance of the Rufous Hummingbird nestingin Arizona, Colorado, or New Mexico, though the species has beenincluded in the breeding lists of these States for the last thirty
RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD 397years." Mr. Kidgway (1911) includes these States, as well as somemountains in California, in the breeding range. The fact that earlymigrants appear in these regions in July may have led to the as-sumption that the species was breeding in the vicinity, but no occu-pied nest seems to have been reported.Sprinfj.?The rufous hummingbird apparently makes its north-ward migration in spring mainly to the westward of the KockyMountains; according to Mrs. Bailey (1928) "it is unknown in springin both New Mexico and Colorado"; and Mr. Swarth (1904) didnot see it in the Huachuca Mountains at any time in the springand considers it of comparatively rare occurrence in Arizona at thisseason. In southern California, and probably throughout the State,it is a very common spring migrant, especially through the valleysand foothills of the Pacific slope. Keferring to Los Angeles County,Robert S. Woods (1927b) says that, after the arrival of Anna'shummingbird, "the Rufous Hummingbird is the next of the mi-grants to appear, usually arriving early in March and leaving latein April. During part of this time it is the commonest species.My earliest record for the Rufous is February 17 (1926) and thelatest for the spring migration May 1 (1924)."Leslie L. Haskin writes to me from Oregon: "In the WillametteValley the rufous hummingbird is the first of the family to arrive.It appears normally about the first of March, although an occasionalearlier individual may often be seen. The males precede the femalesby a considerable time. My observation is that, while the malesare very abundant throughout March, few females will be seenbefore the last week of that month. The main body of the rufoushummingbird migration arrives just as the crimson-flowered cur-rant (Rihes sanc/umeum) is bursting into bloom, and of the flowersof this shrub the hummingbirds are especially fond. At that timeevery bush is alive with the darting hummers, and it is one of themost brilliant bird and flower spectacles of the West. The glittering,coppery sheen of the birds and the crimson flowers, borne in profusedrooping panicles, make a brilliant combination."Courtship.?A very good account of this bird's courtship is givenby G. D. Sprot (1927) as follows:In the displays I have witnessed, which have been many, a careful survey ofthe ground beneath the performer invariably revealed the female sitting mo-tionless on some twig of the low-growing underbrush, and as the aerial acrobatreached the limit of his upward flight she was seen to turn her head slightlyand glance admiringly aloft. The male ascended usually with his back to-wards his mate, then turning, faced her, and with gorget fully expandeddescended swiftly until within an inch or two of her, when spreading bothwings and tail he checked himself and soared aloft again to repeat the per-formance, or else settled on some near-by bush. As he so checked his flightthe whining note was produced, undoubtedly by the rush of air through theoutspread feathers.
398 BULLETIISr 176, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMOn two occasions, in May, 1925, and May, 1926, I witnessed in connectionwith the above performance what I believe to be the actual mating of thebirds. After one or two towering flights by the male, the female rose fromher perch and the male immediately closed with her. Then over a distance ofsome ten or twelve feet, and horizontally, they swung together backwards andforwards through the air, just as one often sees insects so doing. The regularswinging hum of the wings is hard to describe but is just what one mightexpect. So fast is this swinging flight, and so close was I, not over four orfive feet away in one instance, that I was totally unable to see the birds exceptas a blurred streak of color. As the flight ceased I saw them separate, andin one instance the female was seen to fall to the ground, but later to regainher perch, while the male continued his towering flights.Mr. Haskin says in his notes : "Besides the diving act it has anothermodified performance. In this act the male 'teeters' in the air abovethe female who is hidden in the grass below. It is like the dive, butthe arc is much shorter and flatter?a shallow curve of only 6 or 8inches. The male in this stunt shoots forward with the tail spreadand much elevated, followed by a quick backward dart, tail lowered,and twittering and buzzing to his utmost. This is repeated againand again."Nesting.?A. Dawes DuBois has sent me some very elaborate noteson the nesting habits and home life of the rufous hummingbird inthe vicinity of Belton, Mont, subsequently published by him (1938).The nest that he studied "was five feet from the ground, in a smallbalsam fir, among the branches of a close-standing birch. It wassituated at the bottom of the slope of a foothill. The foothills werewooded chiefly with larch, spruce, hemlock, fir and cedar, and on thisparticular slope was a growth of birch. It was constructed of soft,cottony, plant materials felted together and thickly covered exte-riorly with lichens held in place by cob-webs." He gives the dimen-sions of the nest as diameter at the rim 1 inch, diameter at the bulge1%5 inside depth %? ^-nd outside depth I14 inches.D. E. Brown has sent me the following notes: "The rufous hum-mingbird returns to western Washington by the middle of March andcommences nest building a month later. They colonize to a certainextent in favorable localities, and I have seen as many as 10 nestsin a small patch of gorse. The nest is near the ground as a rule, butsometimes it is placed higher up in either conifers or deciduous trees.The drooping branches of conifers are favorite sites, the nest oftenbeing j^laced on the lowest branch; and a branch that has a sharpdownward bend is so well liked that the bird often returns to thesame place the next year, and even the third year. A nest built onsuch a branch is fastened to it from the bottom to the very top, whichis built out to level things up. The next year's nest is placed on theold one but securely tied to the stem, and the third nest is built thesame way. Double nests are not at all uncommon, and I have seenthree where the third nest had been added."
RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD 399
J. H. Bowles (Dawson and Bowles, 1909) writes:There is scarcely a conceivable situation, except directly on the ground, thatthese birds will not select for a nesting site. Such odd places have beenchosen as a knot in a large rope that hung from the rafters of woodshed ; andagain, amongst the wires of an electric light globe that was suspended in thefront porch of a city residence. It may be found fifty feet up in some hugefir in the depths of the forest, or on the stem of some blackberry bush grow-ing in a city lot.Very often they form colonies during the nesting season, as many as twentynests being built in a small area. Some large fir grove is generally chosenfor the colony, but a most interesting one was located on a tiny island inPuget Sound. This island has had most of its large timber cut away, andis heavily overgrown with huckleberry, blackberry, and small alders. In thecenter is the colony, the nests placed only a few yards apart on any vine orbush that will serve the purpose. Huckleberry bushes seem the favorites,but many nests are built in the alders and on the blackberry vines.A. W. Aiithony wrote to Major Bendire (1895) : "I found theRufous Hummingbird very abundant at Beaverton, Oregon. Herethey nested in oaks, blackberry vines, and on dry roots projectingfrom upturned trees. One nest himg from the end of a tall fern,while others, drooping over it from above, hid the beautiful struc-ture from all but accidental discovery. Tlieir favorite sites, how-ever, seemed to be the long, trailing vines overhanging embankmentsand upturned trees. A number were found in railroad cuts; fre-quently several nests were situated within a few feet of each other,a slight preference being shown for embankments having a southernexposure."Wliat few nests of the rufous hummingbird I have seen are ratherlarge, well made, and handsome structures; the body of the nest,including the lining, is made up mainly of pale buff cottony sub-stances, apparently from willow blossoms; but this is mixed withand profusely covered externally with bright-green moss, so thatthe nest appears to be made largely of this moss ; it is often more orless decorated on the outside with leaf or bud scales, shreds of innerbark, lichens, and various other plant fibres, all of which are se-curely bound on with spider web, making a firm compact structure.Bendire (1895) says that "an average nest measures 1% inches inouter diameter by 1^ inches in depth; the inner cup is about seven-eighths of an inch in width by one-half inch deep." One that Imeasured was 1% inches in outside diameter. The favorite nestingtrees seem to be firs, spruces, and other conifers, but nests havealso been found in willows, cypresses, ashes, apple trees, variousoaks, and probably other trees, as well as numerous bushes, such aswild currant, salmonberry, hazel, etc. The nests are usually artfullydecorated to match their surroundings. Dawson and Bowles (1909)say that "the nesting season is greatly protracted, for fresh eggsmay be found from April till July, This makes it seem probable
400 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMthat each pair raises at least two broods during the spring andsummer."Eggs.?Two eggs almost invariably make up the full set for therufous hummer, but Major Bendire (1895) records a set of three,taken by Clyde L. Kellar, of Salem, Oreg. D, E. Brown tells methat often there is only one, and he has "seen one nest that containedfour, evidently contributed by two females." The eggs are like otherhummingbirds' eggs, dead pure white and varying from oval to ellip-tical-oval in shape. The measurements of 53 eggs average 13.1 by8.8 millimeters ; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 14.0 by8.7, 13.1 by 10.0, 11.4 by 8.9, and 13.0 by 7.7 millimeters.Young.?The period of incubation is said to be 12 days (Burns,1921), but probably it is nearer 13 or 14 days, as with some otherhummingbirds. This duty and the care of the young are performedentirely by the female; the male seldom, if ever, comes near the nestafter the eggs are laid. William L. Finley (1905) writes:As soon as the cottony cup was finished and the mother had cradled hertwin white eggs, the father disappeared. He merely dropped out of existence,as Bradford Torrey says, leaving a widow with twins on her hands. Thisgenerally seems to be the case, for at the different nests where I have watched,I never but once saw a male hummer near the nest after the young werehatched. I was lying in the shade of the bushes a few feet from the nest oneafternoon. For two whole days, I had been watching and photographing andno other hummer had been near. Suddenly a male darted up the canyon andlit on a dead twig opposite the nest. He hadn't settled before the motherhurtled at him. I jumped up to watch. They shot up and down the hillsidelike winged bullets, through trees and over stumps, the mother, with tailspread and all the while squeaking like mad. It looked like the chase of twometeors, that were likely to disappear in a shower of sparks, had they struckanything. If it was the father, he didn't get a squint at the bantlings. If itwas a bachelor a-wooing, he got a hot reception.On the other hand, Alfred M. Bailey (1927) saw, in southeasternAlaska, an adult male incubating on a set of eggs nearly ready tohatch, of which he says: "I was walking along the base of a pre-cipitous cliff when I noticed the handsome little male hovering overmy head, about twenty feet up, and v/as then surprised to see himclimb into a nest, in the terminal branches of a drooping spruce.
^Vlien incubating, the little male squatted far down in the nest, withtail and beak pointed almost vertically, and he proved so tame that1 believe I could have touched him."The following statements are based on, and the quotations aretaken from, some elaborate notes sent to me by A. Dawes DuBois,who made an intensive study of a nest of the rufous hummingbirdnear Belton, Mont. In order to be able to study the parent and thesingle young bird at close range, he concealed himself in a "balsamcloak," which was "prepared by sewing balsam boughs all over the
EUrOUS HUMMINGBIRD 401
outside of an old brown bathrobe. An old felt hat was covered withboughs, whicli hung down all around to hide the observer's head andface while permitting observation through the interstices of thefoliage." Under this disguise, he could stand, motionless as a tree,with his eyes within 10 or 12 inches of the nest and slightly above it.Before the eggs hatched the female incubated almost constantlywith absences of only a few minutes; one day, while the sun wasshining on the nest most of the time, she was gone for more than anhour; during two hours of watching, on the day before the one egghatched, the bird left the nest five times, for intervals varying from5 to 19 minutes. One of the two eggs did not hatch, and, us the birddid not remove the remnants, Mr. DuBois did so.After the one young bird hatched the female brooded it with fre-quent intervals of absence, much like those taken during incubation,up to the time that it was seven days old; from that time on, she
"was absent much of the time during the mornings. In the after-noons she had to shelter the nestling from the sun."When the nestling was two days old, it was fed only three timesbetween 8 : 45 a. m. and 6 p. m., but the observer was absent from12 m. to 1 : 33 p. m. and from 3 : 30 to 3 : 45 p. m. "Wlien four daysold, the average of seven known intervals was about 44 minutes.When six days old, the average of 11 known intervals was 32 minutes.The frequency of feeding increased in the latter portion of the day."The number of regurgitations for each feeding varied from two tolive ; the total time occupied for five pumpings and subsequent exam-ination and tidying of the nest was somewhat less than one minute.On July 20, when the nestling was two days old, "at 10 : 30, there wasno pushing up and down ; the parent seemed to pump the fluid by theslightest visible motion of her own throat. At 5 : 35 the same dayshe poked rather vigorously while regurgitating; and two days later,the poking was extremely vigorous. As observed on the 24th, theyoung bird's head moved up and down v/ith the mother's bill. Dur-ing one of the feedings, as I stood close to the nest with my headcovered, I could see the liquid w^elling up in the young bird's mouth.At the age of 51/2 days, the young one responded very vigorously andtook the whole length of the parent's bill into his throat.
"The alvine discharges of the young hummingbird were forciblyejected in a manner to render nest cleaning unnecessary. Very closeobservation from the balsam cloak, on July 22, indicated that thel^arent did not take excrement from the young or nest; nor did theyoung emit excrement after being fed. On the 23d, while the parentwas absent, I observed the method employed by the nestling, thenfive days old. Following a slight shaking of the nest, it struggledto reach the top of the high nest wall. The great depth of the nest178223?40 32
402 BULLETIN 17C, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMmade this very difficult, but the young bird accomplished it, standingliterally on its head, braced against the wall of the nest. The dis-charge was projected to a distance of several inches beyond the nest."Mr. DuBois could not mention in his notes the length of time thathis young bird remained in the nest, as it died prematurely, but GladysHammersley (1928) observed that the altricial period is about 20days ; she writes
:
As the young hummers grew bigger they gradually tramped the nest out ofshape, so that when they flew away on June 23rd it was no longer a daintylittle cup, but an almost shapeless platform in comparison. There were no fly-ing lessons ; the little hummers buzzed fearlessly out into the world as thoughthey had been accustomed to flying every day of their lives. They were not soexpert with their feet, however, maliing several ineffectual attempts beforesecuring a safe landing. I never found any young return to the nest havingonce left it, but they will return regularly to a chosen perch day after day,even when disturbed several times during the day, generally returning toprecisely the same spot on the same twig each time.Plumages.?Mr. DuBois says that the young rufous hummingbird,when first hatched, is about as large as a honey bee, nearly black andquite naked, except for two slight tracts of grayish natal down ex-tending longitudinally along the back. It is blind at first, but whensix days old a slit begins to show in the membrane covering the eye,and by the twelfth day the eyes are well opened. The natal downgrows longer day by day, and pinfeathers begin to show on the sixthand seventh days. From that time on the juvenal plumage continuesto grow.When fully fledged in fresh juvenal plumage the young male issimilar to the adult female, the back largely green, but the upper tailcoverts are "cinnamon-rufous" with terminal spots of metallic bronze-green; the throat is dull white, spotted with dark bronzy; the chestis dull white, and the sides and flanks are heavily washed with "cinna-mon-rufous." Usually in August, but sometimes as early as the mid-dle of July, some metallic red feathers begin to appear in the throat,increasing more or less during fall and winter; but I have seen oneyoung male, taken as late as March 17, that still shows no red in thethroat, though the back and rump are practically all rufous. Thejuvenal tail, with terminal white spots on the three outer rectricessomewhat smaller than those of the female, is worn all through falland winter, until the complete annual molt, late in winter and earlyin spring, produces the adult plumage ; I have seen one young male,taken on April 15, that was just completing this molt. Young fe-males are like young males but have more green on the back. Adultsapparently molt at the same time as young birds, late in winter andearly in spring.
RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD 403Food.?The rufous liummingbird finds its nectar and probably itsinsect food in a great variety of flowers and in the blossoms of treesand shrubs, showing a decided preference for red flowers. Mr.Hasldn, writing from Oregon, tells me that "early in spring thecrimson-flowered currant is their favorite flower, next to that theyresort in great numbers to another red flower, the columbine. Ofwhite flowers, their favorite is the blossom of the madrona tree{Arhiitus mensiesii), whose flowers are perfect honey pots. A treeof the madrona in full bloom attracts them literally by the hundreds."Frank L. Farley writes to me that in Alberta in July and August
"its favorite flower appears to be the bright-colored nasturtium."M. P. Skinner says, in his notes from California, that it feeds onred columbine and "paint brush." Of its insect hunting, he says:
"Another individual alighted on some willow twigs beside a riverand watched for the insects that flew by at frequent intervals. Twiceit rose 5 or 6 feet for one and then dropped back to its perch. Twiceit caught an insect 40 feet above its perch, showing what keen eyesit had. Then it made a dizzying swift dart down among the willows.After that this bird came back at intervals all through the morningto do the same kind of insect hunting over the willows and over theriver waters."Mrs. Bailey (1902) writes:On the birds' breeding ground the flowers they feed on, as far as I haveobserved, are mainly red, as the hummer's coloration might suggest. OnSan Francisco Mountain, Arizona, they were especially fond of the scarletpentstemons. On Mount Shasta they fed from the painted-cups, tiger lilies, andcolumbines. Any spot of red would attract them as it does other hummers,and they investigated it fearlessly even when it adorned the person of acollector.One of the birds actually crossed a wide meadow of green brakes straightto a single columbine standing most inconspicuously near the woods. But thepainted cups were their especial delight on Shasta, and a meadow full ofthe flowers was fairly alive with them.William H. Kobbe (1900) says that, in Washington, about CapeDisappointment, "they are particularly abundant about the floweringsalmon-berry bushes and also the thimble-berry, but they seemed tobe fonder of the honeysuckle blossoms than of either of the others."Dr. A. M. Woodbury (1938) saw a rufous hummingbird feeding atthe working of a red-naped sapsucker on some willows; they wereapparently eating the sap that exuded, but may have been obtainingsome of the insects that were attracted to the workings.Harry S. Swarth (1922) relates the following story: "For ahummingbird to appear as a menace to a farm crop was a new rolefor a member of that family, but we heard of one such complaint of
404 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMdamage done. Mr. W. E. Parrott, of Sergief Island, had a largestrawberry patcli, the fruit of which he marketed in the nearby townof Wrangell. Time and again, so he told us, he had seen a humming-bird dash at one of the bright red berries, apparently under theimpression that it was a flower, and the bird's bill would be thrustthrough the fruit, which, of course, was ruined. He had found anumber of berries pierced in this way, and was puzzled to accountfor the damage until he saw a hummingbird in the act."Mr. DuBois saj^s, in his notes, that the bird he was watchingpaid no attention to a red-clover blossom that he dipped in dilutedhoney and hung on a branch near the nest. He saw one "feedingin a novel manner over the small garden in the clearing. The birdwas about 30 feet in the air, now poised on vibrating wings, nowdarting here and there like a dragonfly, apparently catching smallinsects on the wing. One day (July 22) I saw her drinking at thespring. She hovered above the pool, as she would above a flower,dipping her bill into the water several times. On the 27th, I againsaw her getting water at the spring, but in a different manner. Shestood, for a second or two at a time, in the film of water that flowedover a board, and dipped her bill into it several times."Behavior.?All observers seem to agree that jealous courage andpugnacity are among the chief attributes of the rufous hummingbird
;
it seems to be the dominant species in the vicinity of its nest andabout its feeding places, driving away, not only other hummingbirds,but other species of larger birds and animals ; it seems to love to fightand often appears to provoke a quarrel unnecessarily. Mr. DuBoishas sent me the following note: "Once during the afternoon of July17, while the hummingbird was incubating, an olive-backed thrushinadvertently came too close to the nest. The little bird darted afterhim so suddenly and violently that she made him squawk as he hur-ried away. Another intruder was a chipmunk. He was searchingfor huckleberries?running on the ground and climbing in the smallbushes?and at length his occupation brought him almost beneaththe hummer's nest. She darted after him; and the sudden onslaughtevidently filled him with terror. He beat a hasty retreat, squealinglustily as he ran. It is not surprising that the sudden movements ofthe hummingbird and the ominous sound of her wings, at close quar-ters, are terrorizing to any trespasser. On another occasion shechased a good sized bird away from the neighborhood."Mrs. Wheelock (1904) saw a male rufous hummer attack and driveaway a Brewer's blackbird that had chanced to alight in the bushcontaining the hummer's nest. "This blackbird was nesting in ahollow post which stood in four feet of water fifty feet from the
RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD 405bush. His usual course in leaving his nest was over the hummer'sbush, and the male seldom failed to dart out at him from his watchtower near by."Mr. Kobbe (1900) writes:The pugnacity of these birds is the most prominent characteristic of thespecies and when they are not fighting among themselves they make war uponother birds. The males are nearly always the participants and seem to takegreat delight in fighting each other with their utmost strength. It is a verycommon sight to see a male Hummer perched upon a telegraph wire or exposedtwig watching for others of his own sex with which to do battle. Although theysometimes fall over and over toward the ground like two huge bees, they seldomdisable one another, since their bills are very weak. The greatest efforts onthe part of one of the Hummers only succeed in pulling out a few feathers ofhis adversary, who is finally driven away in a rather bedraggled condi-tion. * * On several occasions I have seen male Hummers fight and driveof? Swallows from the vicinity of their nest, particularly when it containedeggs. During the nesting season the males frequently, but not always, sit nearthe tree in which their home is placed and attempt to drive all birds fi'om thevicinity of the nest. They pay great attention to their duty and seldom fail todart after other Hummers, even if they are simply passing the tree in which thenest is placed. I have good reasons to believe that they do this more from alove of fighting than from parental instinct or devotion, since the male birdsrarely appear upon the scene when their nest is being taken.Henshaw (1886) writes of behavior on their feeding grounds inNew Mexico:Males and females all flock to the common feeding ground, and as the Hum-mers, especially of the Rufous-backed species, are pugnacious and hot temperedin the extreme, the field becomes a constant battle-ground whereon favoriteflowers and favorite perching grounds are contested for with all the ardor thatattaches to moi-e important conquests. The fiery red throat of the Rufous-backed Hummer is an index of its impetuous, aggressive disposition, and whenbrought into conflict with the other species it invariably asserts its supremacyand drives its rival in utter rout from the fields. Nor do the males of thisspecies confine their warfare to their own sex. Gallantry has no place appar-ently in their breasts, and when conquest has put them in possession of a perchnear a clump of flowers they wage war on all comers, females as well asmales. * * *When the attack is urged against the males of the Broad-tailed species thecontest is less fierce, the latter species usually abandoning the ground in hothaste. The latter result always follows the assault of a male upon the fe-males who, if less valiant in battle, are scarcely less backward when it comesto the assertion of their rights against intruders of their own sex. The rivalrythe females display is not less marked if the battles it prompts are less fiercethan when the males are engaged; occasionally the females will fight with allthe ardor displayed by the males.The elaborate notes that ISIr. DuBois has sent me on his intensivestudy of the home life of this species well illustrate its tameness, itsdevotion to its young, and its lack of fear after it had learned to trust
406 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMhim. He was able to approach cautiously, without any concealment,to within about 18 inches of the nest and to take numerous photo-graphs at short range, without causing the bird much concern. Onthe second day the camera was placed on the tripod close to the nest
;
she examined it thoroughly several times and from all sides but didnot seem much afraid of it; and on the following day she sat withher tail toward the instrument, thus showing her indifference to it.For a close study of the care of the young, he disguised himself asa balsam tree, being well covered with balsam boughs and twigs;the bird paid almost no attention to him with this disguise, and hewas able to watch proceedings for long periods with his face withinabout a foot of the nest. At first she was suspicious and would not goto the nest but buzzed all around him, chirping and examining hismake-up very minutely, and when she came within an inch or twoof his ear, he found the boom of her wings a formidable sound ; sherepeated this examination twice more before she settled on the nestfor any length of time.It is a well-known fact that hummingbirds are attracted to investi-gate any red object that might suggest a flower. Dr. Grinnell (1909)records that, on Admiralty Island, Alaska, a brilliant male rufoushummer "buzzed about some bright red tomato cans that had beenthrown out. Stephens records that at the same place. May 2, a malecame around camp investigating everything that was red, such as ared-bordered towel, the red places on the end of a fruit box, anempty salmon can, and particularly a red bandana handkerchief hang-ing on a bush ; this the bird went to three times."Voice.?During the courtship performance a twittering note isheard from the male, as well as a whining sound, which is probablycaused by the rush of air through the wings. Ralph C. Tate (1928)heard "a peculiar sound, somewhere between a buzz and a grunt,"from a male that was feeding at the flowers of a trumpetvine on hisporch. Dr. Wetmore (1921) says that "in flying their wings made asubdued humming and the birds called chewp chewp in a low tone."G. Hammersley (1928) writes from Crofton, British Columbia:When the fruit trees came into blossom, Mr. Hummer was in the orchardevery day. One does not have to see him in order to know that he is there,as he has his own peculiar song or "drumming." It is uttered as he swoopspast one or shoots swiftly overhead and might be written cli-cli-ch, clmt-cliurrror tut-ut-ut-ut-turrre. Immediately after making this sound he darts straightupwards until reaching the desired height when he comes to a sudden andcomplete full stop, remaining stationary in the air like a glittering ruby set inthe blue sky. Whilst in this position he will repeat the ordinary call note oftchik which is common to both the sexes, then dropping suddenly he flies backto his "watch-tower". I think that the drumming soimd is probably producedby the tail feathers. The male hummer has the monopoly of another and quite
RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD 407different sound also. This sound is produced continually as long as the bird ison the wing, and only varies by increasing in volume each time the bird movesfrom its position in the air. The sound is difficult to describe, but might belikened to tiny beads vibrating regularly in a thin metal bos. Although, as faras my own observations go, the male rufous never flies without making thisvibrating sound, the female never at any time produces it.Mr. DiiBois says in his notes : "Usually the mother bird was silent
;
but when the nestling was two days old I once heard the motherchirping for a moment, from among the branches of a fallen tree,before she came to settle in the nest." When agitated she chirpedwhile on the nest.Field marhs.?The male rufous hummingbird can be easily recog-nized by the large amount of rufous on the upper parts, includingthe posterior portion of the crown, the back, and most of the tail;the brilliant metallic scarlet gorget is very conspicuous and shineslike burnished gold in some lights; the chest is white, but otherwisethe underparts are pale rufous. The only species that closelyresembles it is Allen's hummingbird, which has a green back.The female can hardly be distinguished in the field from the femaleof Allen's, as both have much light rufous on the underparts, andtheir tails are largely rufous basally, the three outer rectrices beingbroadly tipped with white. A close inspection of the tails will showslight differences between the two species. The outer tail feathersof the rufous are broader at the black space, about 0.15, as againstabout 0.10 of an inch in Allen's. Ridgway (1911) says that in therufous "middle pair of rectrices metallic bronze-green (usually moredusky terminally), both webs broadly edged basally with cinnamon-rufous (sometimes with whole basal half or more of this color) ; nextpair with more than basal half cinnamon-rufous, then metallicbronze-green, the terminal portion purplish black." And, of Allen's,he says: "Middle pair of rectrices with basal half (laterally, at least)cinnamon-rufous, the terminal half (more or less) metallic bronze-green; next pair similar, but terminal portion (extensively) black,the tip of inner web sometimes with a small spot of white."Enemies.?Mr. Sprot (1927) tells of a male rufous hummer thattried its towering flight once too often, "when he staged a drop ona Black Pigeon Hawk, and got caught." Probably other hawks,and perhaps owls, have taken their toll. Mr. Skinner says in hisnotes: "One was seen resting on a willow twig in the sun until anirascible Audubon's warbler made a dive at it and drove it away,but in a moment the hummer was back again. After its return, itseemed very nervous, as if the rowdy Audubon had ruffled its feel-ings. Another one was chased away by a lutescent warbler."Mr. DuBois (1938) saw a large black and yellow fly attack the
408 BULLETIN 17G, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMyoung hummer that he was watching and slightly wound it ; it mighthave killed it, if he had not driven it away. The mother of this youngbird disappeared mysteriously, and he suspected a weasel might havebeen the cause.Fall.?The fall migration from its breeding grounds in Alaskastarts early, and sometimes these hummers wander out over the ocean.S. F. Kathbun tells me that on July 20, 1914, while he was crossingthe Gulf of Alaska and was just within sight of land, off NespinaGlacier, a male rufous hummingbird came aboard and alighted onone of the stays of the ship's stack. It showed no alarm, and afterabout 15 minutes it flew off toward the land.After the breeding season the summer wanderings of this hum-mingbird extend well up into the mountains, even in Washington.On Mount Rainier, on August 6, Taylor and Shaw (1927) saw in-dividuals flying over the glaciers at 6,000 and at 9,000 feet altitude."We were now hung, as it were, between earth and heaven, 2,500 feetabove timber line. The water supply froze shortly after 5 o'clockp. m., and the midsummer breeze w^as cold and cheerless. What wasour surprise to find the hummers still with us. One whizzed pastus as we were making camp, and two more were observed the follow-ing morning."On the southward migration through the Rocky Mountain region,the rufous hummingbird is sometimes very abundant at high alti-tudes, wherever it can find flowers in bloom ; it has been seen as highas 12,600 feet on Truchas Peak in the Upper Pecos region, N. Mex.,according to Mrs. Bailey (1904). Henshaw (1886), writing of thissame region, says
:
The number of representatives of this and the preceding species that malcetheir summer homes in tliese moinitains is simply beyond calculation. No onewhose experience is limited to the Eastern United States can form any ade-quate idea of their abundance. They occur from an altitude of about 7,500 feetfar up on the mountain sides, as high up, in fact, as suitable flowers affordthem the means of subsistence. They are most numerous at an altitude offrom 8,000 to 9,000 feet. During the entire summer they frequent almostexclusively a species of Scrophnlaria which grows in clumps in the sunnier spotsin the valleys. From early dawn till dusk the Hummingbirds throng aroundthese plants intent in surfeiting themselves on honey and the minute insects thatthe honey attracts. The scene presented in one of these flowering areas is amost attractive one. * * *Some idea of the number of Hummingbirds in this locality?and in thisrespect this whole moiintain area is alike?may be gained from the statementthat in a single clump of the ScropJiularia I have counted eighteen Hummers,all within reach of an ordinary fishing rod. There was scarcely a moment in theday when upwards of fifty could not be counted within an area of a few yardsin any of the patches of this common plant.Mr. Swarth (1904) says of its appearance in the Huachuca Moun-tains, Arizona : "I have not seen this species at any time in the spring,
RUFOUS HUMMINGBIRD 409but about the middle of July they begin to make their appearance;and throughout the month of August I found them very abundant,but frequenting the highest parts of the mountains, principally ; morebeing seen between 8000 and 9000 feet than elsewhere.
"The flowering mescal stalks are a great attraction to them, andthey seem to frequent them in preference to anything else. I haveseen as many as twenty Rufous Hummingbirds around a single stalk,mostly immature birds, but with a fair sprinlding of adult males.No adult females were taken at any time."Grinnell and Storer (1924) say of the migration in the Yosemiteregion, in California
:
Most of the northbound movement probably takes place at low altitudes andin any event occurs too early in the spring to be observed by most visitorsin the Yosemite section. Ihit the migration initiated in late June or eai'ly Julycontinues until the middle of September, and especially at the higher altitudesis much in evidence. * * *The first representatives of the species to be seen in the southbound migrationare males. Thus the bird seen near Yosemite Point on July 1 was a fullyadult male, as it showed an all-rufous back. But later in the same month thefemales and their young began to pass through. Of the birds seen in LyellCanon on July 23 at least one was a female (immature). The southboundmigration was evidently in full swing by that date as no less than 5 separateindividuals were seen during two or three hours spent on the meadows andMdjacent slopes.A visit to Parsons Peak on September 6, 1915, showed that the migrationwas still in progress, and further, that the liufous Hummingbirds wereevidently using the crest of the Sierra Nevada as a fly-way. During the shorttime spent at the top of the peak, 12,120 feet, two of these dimunutive travelerswere seen flying southward, laboring against the strong southerly breeze ; bothtook advantage of the same gap in the rocks to gain a slight respite from thebuffeting of the wind. Other observers have told us of similar incidents notedby them while visiting i^eaks elsewhere along the backbone of the SierraNevada.Mr. Woods (1927) says of Los Angeles County lowlands: "Theadult male is only an occasional visitant on the southward migrationin late summer, though the females, or more probably immature birdsof both sexes, are seen more freciuently." The inference from all theforegoing observations is that the northward migration in springis mainly through the lower levels and chiefly to the westward ofthe main mountain chains and that the southward migration in fallfollows mainly the crests of the Rocky Mountains and the SierraNevada. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?^Western North America.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the rufous hummingbirdextends north to southeastern Alaska (Montague Island, probablyCordova, and Carcross) . East to eastern Alaska (Carcross) ; British
410 BULIETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMColumbia (Telegraph Creek and Fort St. James) ; southwestern Al-berta (Banff) ; and western Montana (Belton, Anaconda, and RedLodge). South to southern Montana (Red Lodge) ; southern Idaho(Blue Lake); and east-central California (Silver Creek). West toCalifornia (Silver Creek and Mount Shasta) ; Oregon (Newportand Netarts) ; Washington (Gig Harbor, Lake Crescent, and TatooshIsland) ; western British Columbia (Courtenay and Graham Island)
;
and southeastern Alaska (Ketchikan, Sitka, Point Couverden, andMontague Island).Winter range.?During the winter months this species is more orless concentrated in the Mexican States of Zacatecas (La Parada),Jalisco (Volcano de Colima), Mexico (Tlalpam), and Michoacan(Lake Patzcuaro).Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are : California
?
Haywards, February 11 ; Berkeley, February 12. Oregon?Newport,March 4; Corvallis, March 11. Washington?Tacoma, February 26;Ilwaco, March 9; North Yakima, March 12. British ColumbiaMassett, April 2; Chilliwack, April 11. Idaho?Rathdrum, May 5.Montana?Missoula, April 30. Alaska?Ketchikan, April 10;Juneau, April 18.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are : Alaska?Craig,September 9 ; St. Lazaria Island, September 30. British ColumbiaArrow Lakes, September 22; Courtnay, October 4. WashingtonSeattle, September 26; Clallam Bay, October 7. Oregon?Newport,October 18; Coos Bay, October 28. Montana?Fortine, September13 ; Belton, September 14.Casual records.?The rufous hummingbird has been detected out-side its normal range on several occasions, some cases being notablerecords. It was reported as observed at Camrose, Alberta, on August24, 1930, and there are at least two and probably three specimenrecords for the vicinity of Eastend, Saskatchewan, the dates beingAugust 11, 1939, August 18, 1932, and July 31, 1933. The species wasreported from Kenton, Okla., under date of August 10, 1927, and aspecimen was collected at Brownsville, Tex., on January 19, 1892.One was found dead at Pensacola, Fla., on November 29, 1934, twoothers being seen in the same area until December 13, while it wasagain recorded from this point on December 8, 12, 14, and 17, 1935. Aspecimen was taken in Charleston, S. C, on December 18, 1909.Egg dates.?British Columbia: 7 records, May 6 to July 6.Oregon : 11 records, April 27 to June 29.Washington: 12 records, April 22 to June 7; 6 records, May 3 to30, indicating the height of the season.
AliLEN'S HUMMINGBIRD 411SELASPHORUS ALLEN! HenshawALLEN'S HUMMINGBIRDPlates 68, 69HABITSThis is another very brilliant hummingbird, which is closely re-lated to the rufous hummingbird, and much like it in appearanceand behavior. It seems to be confined, in the breeding season atleast, to the coastal district of California, from Humboldt County toVentura County and the Santa Barbara Islands. It may possibly befound breeding in Oregon, and there are two authentic records of itsoccurrence in Washington. There was formerly a specimen in theUnited States National Museum, which has since been destroyed, thatwas collected at Fort Steilacoom, on April 26, 1856, and was identi-fied by both Henshaw and Ridgway. S. F. Rathbun collected anadult male near Seattle on May 27, 1894, which is apparently theonly Washington specimen in existence ; he tells me that this specimenis now in the State Museum, at the University of Washington, inSeattle. Dr. Tracy I. Storer (1921) has made a careful study of allother records north of California and reports that no others areauthentic.Courtship.?Robert S. Woods (1927b) says on this subject : "Allen'sHummingbird flies rather slowly back and forth along a path suchas would be described by a giant pendulum, with a sort of lateralwrithing movement of the body and extended tail and a vibratorymetallic noise, but without vocal sound. Again it will poise itselfclose in front of another bird and rapidly shuttle to and fro sidewisethrough a space of perhaps a foot or two."Frank N. Bassett (1921) gives a somewhat different and moreelaborate account of it, as follows
:
On the afternoon of April 16, 1920, I was walking through the hUls back ofthe Claremont Club golf links when I was brought to a halt by a rather pro-longed buzzing sound, very penetrating and metallic in quality, somewhat similarto the sound produced by drawing a fine-grained file over the edge of a piece ofsheet steel with a sudden jerk. Looking in the direction of the sound I sawpoised in the air about twenty feet from tlie ground, a male Allen Hummingbird{Selasphorus alleni), uttering his commonly heard mouse-like squeaks. Thenfollowed the performance of the nuptial flight, similar to that of the AnnaHummingbird, though the path described in the air was somewhat different. He
"rocked" back and forth over the female, vrhich was perched on a twig of alow poison oak (Rliiis diversilo'ba) , describing a semi-circle about twenty-five feetin. diameter. There was a pause at each end of the arc, and before the pause hespread his tail and shook his whole body so violently that I wondered how hisfeathers remained fast. During this time he continued uttering the character-istic squeaks. After several of these semi-circles were described he began his
412 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATION.VL MUSEUM
climb tu a height of about seventj'-five feet; and then came the "high dive."He swooped down with the speed of a comet, and on passing over the femalegave the low-pitched but resonant buzzing sound which had first attracted myattention ; then he curved upward and came to a pause about twenty-five feet inthe air, where I had first seen him. The sound emitted on passing over thefemale was of a second or more in duration, and differed greatly from theinstantaneous, metallic clink of the Anna Hummingbird.Nesting.?Charles A, Allen, of Nicasio, Calif., who discovered thisspecies, and for whom it was named, wrote to Major Bendire (1895)as follows:Allen's Hummingbird arrives in the vicinity of Nicasio, California, about themiddle of February, and commences to nest soon after arrival. The earliestdate on which I found one was February 27, 1S79 ; this was then about halffinished, when a heavy storm set in which lasted about five days, and I didnot visit the locality again until March 8, when the nest was completed andcontained two fresh eggs. I have taken their uests as late as July 3, and amwell convinced that two broods are raised in a season, at least by all of theearlier breeding birds. They select all sorts of situations and various kindsof trees and bushes to nest in. I have found their nests as low as 10 inches andagain as high as 90 feet from the ground.All the nests and eggs of this species [continues Bendire] in the United StatesNational Museum were taken by Mr. Allen near Nicasio, California; one ofthese, now before me, is attached to the side of a small oak limb which turnsabruptly at an angle of about 45? directly over the cup of the nest, protectingit above ; another is likewise attached to the side of a small pendant oak twig,its base being supported by a bunch of moss. Some are securely saddled onsmall twigs of raspberry bushes, and several of these are usually incorporatedin the walls of the nest. Occasionally they nest in hedges, ou weed stalks, or onbushes overhanging water.The nests are well and compactly built, the inside being lined with vegetabledown, while the outer walls are composed of green tree mosses, and a few bitsof lichens, securely fastened in place with a spider web. Nests built on treesseem to be generally somewhat larger than those found in bushes. Tlieaverage measurements of one of the former is I'/j inches outer diameter andthe same in depth ; the inner cup is seven-eighths of an inch in width by three-fourths of an inch in depth. On the whole they resemble the nests of Anna'sHummingbird more than those of the Rufous, and appear to me to be betterand more neatly built than either.James B. Dixon has sent me the following note : "The only placewhere I have contacted this hummingbird in the breeding seasonwas in San Luis Obispo County, in the dense willow montes wherethey were nesting in large numbers and were as common as the black-chinned hummingbirds are farther south. Here the nests wereoften found within 50 feet of each other. As with all the other hum-mingbirds, there seemed to be a wide variation in the breeding season,as nests with young half grown would be found close to nests withfresh eggs. The nests are larger and better built than those of mostother hummingbirds. They have a habit of saddling the nests on asmall limb growing away from the butt or main stem of a willow
ALLEN'S HUMMINGBIRD 413
sapling, in miicli the same manner as the wood pewee; I have neverfound the other hummingbirds doing this. Nests are made of driedweed stems, weed seed, and plant down, bound together with cob-webs, and decorated outwardly with lichens; they do more towarddecorating the outside with lichens as incubation advances."Dr. Harold C. Bryant (1925) gives an interesting account of thecolonial nesting habits of this species
:
Heretofore I had believed along with others * * * that the favoritenesting place of the Allen Hummingbird {Selasplwi-us allcni) is the tangle ofberry vines along a stream. But a recent experience in Golden Gate Park, SanFrancisco, has led me to alter my view. * * *On April 19, a trip through a growth of cypress and Monterey pines nettedeleven hummingbirds' nests, all, with the possible exception of one, being thoseof the Allen Hummingbird. Three of the nests found were in pine trees; allthe rest of them were in Monterey cypress. The lowest one was about 5'/^feet above the ground, the highest 15 feet. Measurement of the inside diametei'of two nests showed them to be 1^4 to IY2 inches. Most of the nests containedeggs, but in one instance young birds ready to fly were found. In fact, oneof the young birds launched out of the nest and had to be replaced. At leasttwo nests were incomplete. One of these a week later was found to containeggs.In most instances the incubating female, frightened from the nest, helped indetermining the location. On one area of less than an acre in extent, anunsystematic search disclosed five nests. In one instance nests were hardly 15feet apart. Another casual search on April 26 disclosed three more nests onthis same limited area, and undoubtedly several more nests could have beenfound bad each tree been searched systematically. * * *When we stop to think that the Rufous Hummingbird, a close relative, breedscommonly in coniferous forests of northwestern North America, it does not seemunreasonable that the Allen should chose a similar habitat in the humid coastbelt of California. And evidently it was choice in this instance, for extensivetangles of berry vines near water were close at hand but were not chosen fornesting places.Grinnell and Linsdale (1936) report two nests found in the PointLobos Reserve, Monterey County, Calif. ; one "found on April 18, w^asfour and one-half feet up on a twig one-eighth inch in diameter, atthe lower, outer end of a limb of live oak. * * * Another nest,found on May 18, was at least seventy feet above the ground on a smallstub beneath a slender limb of pine in the woods."Ernest D. Clabaugh (1936) tells of an Allen's hummingbird thatbuilt its nest on an ivy vine hanging down about 6 inches from theceiling of a covered entrance to his house; one young was success-fully raised and left the nest on May 11 ; "the old nest was removed,and on June 4, another nest was built in the same spot." JosephMailliard (1913) records three nests built "inside of buildings moreor less in use"; two of these were under the rafters of a wagonshed, one on a hanging pulley, and the other on the loop of a ropesling; the third was in a carriage house, on an iron hook that was
414 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
used in cleaning harnesses, and about 5 feet from the ground ; broodswere raised in the first two, but the third was abandoned.W. L. Dawson (1923) writes: "As for the Allen Hammer the black-berry tangles are her home, and all such other situations as assure ameasure of protection from above. Thus, drooping vines falling overboulders offer ideal sites ; for alleni is also fond of a swing. The mostremarkable nest of our experience, a five-story one, was saddled uponthe hook of a broken root, which was, in turn, caught upon a sprangleof roots above, unearthed by the under-cutting of the stream. Thisroot could be lifted clear and replaced without injury; and its mis-tress added, in one season, stories No. 4 and No. 5, to our knowledge."Two of the four nests of Allen's hummingbird in the Thayer col-lection in Cambridge are large handsome nests, suggesting the besttypes of nests of the rufous hummingbird. One of these was 8 feetfrom the ground and 20 feet out from the trunk on a branch of aspruce; it is composed of fine green moss, decorated with flakes ofpale-gray lichens, bound on with spider web, and lined with willowcotton; it measures approximately 2 inches wide and 1 inch highexternally ; the inner cup is about 1 inch in diameter by five-eighthsof an inch deep. The other large nest was built on a branch of ayoung live oak between upright twigs; it measures about 2 inchesin diameter and 1% inches in height externally; it appears to bemade almost entirely, including all the rim, of the pale buff cot-tony down from willow blossoms ; only the lower and external part olthe nest is composed of green mosses and various brown fibers; it isa very pretty nest. The smallest nest in the lot was 2 feet from theground in a shallow bend of a horizontal branch of a sagebrush; itmeasures 1% by 1^4 inches in external diameter, and is only three-quarters of an inch high, the inner cavity being very shallow; thisis a very drab-looking nest, with no green moss in its composition;it is made of various gray and brown fibers and similar material, withvery little cotton and a few small feathers in the lining ; apparently itmatched its surroundings in the gray sage.Since the above was written Ernest I. Dyer (1939) has publisheda detailed account of the nesting of Allen's hummingbird, to whichthe reader is referred.Eggs.?Allen's hummingbird lays almost invariably two eggs; Ihave no record of more or fewer. They are like other hummers' eggs,varying in shape from oval to elliptical-oval, and are pure whitewithout gloss. The measurements of 55 eggs average 12.7 by 8.6 mil-limeters ; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 14.0 by 8.9, 13.8by 10.0, and 11.7 by 7.6 millimeters.Toung.?The incubation period of this hummingbird is said to be14: or 15 days, as is the case with several other hummingbirds. The
ALLEN'S HUMMINGBIRD 415female doubtless does all the incubating and assumes full care of the3^oung. After describing so fully the home life of the precedingspecies, to which the present specjes is so closely related, it hardlyseems necessary to enlarge here on the activities of the mother at thenest or on the development of the young. The rufous hummingbirdand Allen's are much alike in appearance and behavior; their nest-ing habits are similar; and probably, although I have no notes onthe subject, the en re and development of the young follow along thesame lines.Since the above was written, Robert T. Orr (1939) has published avery full account of the incubation behavior and the care and devel-opment of the young, to which the reader is referred.Plumages.?So far as I can learn from the literature and fromthe examination of specimens, the development of the juvenalplumage of Allen's hummingbird and its subsequent molts andplumages are the same as in the rufous hummingbird. The twospecies are almost exactly alike, except for the specific differencesexplained under the field marks of the two, the very narrow lateralrectrices and the greater amount of green in Allen's being the prin-cipal differences. Young male Allen's hummers begin to show redin the throat early in July. I have seen a young male, taken onJune 1, that was molting into the adult plumage, some red comingin on the throat, and some of the outer rectrices still white-tipped,as in the juvenal tail, probably a belated molt.Food.?I cannot find much in print about the food of Allen's hum-mingbird, which probably does not differ materially from that ofother California hummers. Whatever brightly colored flowers hap-pen to be in bloom are resorted to for honey and minute insects andspiders. That they are of service to the plants in cross fertilizationis evident from the amount of pollen so often seen on their heads.The tree tobacco is popular with this hummingbird, as are theblossoms of Ceanothus^ madrona, and the flowering stalks of thecentury plant; the scarlet sage, brightly colored mints, and variousother flowers are attractive. Dr. Grinnell (1905b) says that, onMount Pinos, in July, "masses of monkeyflowers {Mimulus langs-dorfl and cardinaUs), columbines {Aquilegia sp. ?), and other plants{Stachys alhens, GastiUeia grinneUi, etc.) began to burst into bloomduring the first week in July about the wet places in the canonbottoms. And these flower masses were the scenes of many noisyrevels among the Allen Hummers, sometimes as many as five of thebirds taking part in what looked like a free-for-all fight."Mr. Woods (1927) says that, on Santa Catalina Island, "towardsevening, like other species, they make short sallies in Flycatcherfashion after passing insects too minute to be discerned by thehuman eye."
416 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMBehavior.?Henshaw (1877), with his original description ofAllen's hummingbird, makes the following comparison of this specieswith the rufous hMmmingbird
:
I am in possession of but few notes bearing upon the habits of this Hummer.Mr. Allen remarks incidentally in a letter th'at the Green-backs are much thelivelier and more active of the two, keeping constantly in the open, and alwaysperching upon the most prominent dead twigs they can find. Their extremeshyness, as contrasted with the unsuspicious nature of the Rufous-backed, isquite remarkable. They seem to possess a larger share th'an usual of thecourage and pugnacity which is so constantly displayed in birds of thisfamily. Not only do they always come off the victors when chance encounterstake place between them and the Rufous-backs, but Mr. Allen has seen a pairattack and piit to rout a Red-tailed Hawk; while, as he remarks, "Sparrow-Hawks have no chance at all with them." He has often seen the little fellowsin hot chase after these latter birds, and their only care seemed to be to getout of the way as soon as possible of foes so determined.Each male seems to claim a particular range, which he occupies for feedingand breeding purposes, and every other bird seen by him encroaching on hispreserve is at once so determinedly set upon and harassed that he is only tooglad to beat a hasty retreat. During their quarrels these birds keep up anincessant, sharp chirping, and a harsh, rasping buzzing with their wings, whichsounds very different from the low, soft humming they make with these whilefeeding. Every action and motion at such times indicates that they are as madas can be ; tlie poor Anna Hummers have to get out of their way pretty quicklyat any time, but especially when they encroach on their breeding grounds. Themales very often have quarrels among themselves, and are then very noisy,while the females are more orderly and quiet; but even they have occasionallittle misunderstandings with each other, especially when a pair meet whilefeeding on the same bush; one generally vacates the premises very quickly, andas soon as she does all becomes quiet again.Field marks.?The male Allen's hummingbird looks very muchlike the male rufous, but can be distinguished from it by the largeamount of green in the back. Both sexes can be distinguished fromother California hummingbirds, except migrating rufous, by the largeamount of rufous in the plumage, especially in the tail. The femaleAllen's is practically indistinguishable, in the field, from the femalerufous hummingbird ; only a close comparison of the tails will distin-guish tjie two species. The difference in the color patterns of thetails of the two females is described, as quoted from Ridgway (1911),under the field marks of the rufous hummingbird ; but the differenceseems to be very slight. The best distinguishing character, whichmight under favorable circumstances be seen in the field, is theAvidth of the two outer tail feathers, as illustrated in Henshaw's cut(1877) ; in S. nifus the four lateral rectrices are "successively grad-uated in size, the outer the smallest"; and they are of normal hum-mingbird width ; whereas in 8. alleni the two outer feathers are "verynarrow, linear, the outer nearly acicular," a well-marked difference.
HELOISE'S HUMMINGBIRD 417DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Coastal regions of California and northwestern Mexico;casual in Washington, Oregon, and Arizona.Breeding range.?Allen's hummingbird is found during the nestingseason only in the narrow coastal district that extends nearly the fulllength of California from San Clemente and Santa Catalina Islandsnorthward to San Francisco, Berkeley, and Eureka. Four specimenstaken on July 10, 1905, in the San Pedro Martir Mountains, BajaCalifornia, may possibly indicate a more southern limit of the breed-ing range.Winter range.?In winter the species is found north to southernCalifornia (Santa Cruz Island) ; and south to central Baja California(San Quintin and Santo Domingo). It also has been detected atSanta Barbara, Chihuahua, in the latter part of September.Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival in Californiaare: Berkeley, February 13; Haywards, February 16; Escondido,February 22.Fall migration.?The species appears to retire from the northernparts of its range during August and September, late dates being:Palo Alto, August 24: Berkeley, September 29; Presidio of SanFrancisco, September 30.Casual records.?Two specimens were collected at the mouth ofthe Pistol River, Curry County, Oreg., on June 23, 1929; and onewas taken at Seattle, Wash., on May 27, 1894. In Arizona thereare several records as follows: One was secured in the Santa Cata-lina Mountains, July 23, 1884; specimens were taken near Bisbeeduring August and September 1892 ( ?) ; and in the Huachuca Moun-tains in July 1896, in July 1902, and on July 10 and August 1, 1929.Egg dates.?California: 100 records, February 2 to June 28; 50records, March 21 to May 22, indicating the height of the season.ATTHIS HELOISA HELOISA (De Lattre and Lesson)HELOISE'S HUMMINGBIRDHABITSOn July 2, 1896, two female hummingbirds were taken in RamsayCanyon, in the Huachuca Mountains, Ariz., by H. G. Rising. Thesetwo specimens were sent to Mr. Ridgway, who described and namedthem (1898) as a new species, Morcom's hummingbird {Atthis mor-comi), in honor of G. Frean Morcom. In his description he statesthat "the adult male of this species is unfortunately unknown. Theadult female differs from that of A. heloisa in being pure bronze-greenabove instead of almost coppery bronze inclining to greenish only178223?40 33
418 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMon upper tail-coverts and middle tail-feathers; in having the cin-namon-rufous on basal portion of the tail far more extensive, therebeing more on the middle rectrices in A. heloisa, while on the othersit occupies very much less than the basal half, and is entirely hiddenby the coverts; the sides and flanks are less deeply, and apparentlyless extensively, cinnamon-rufous, and the under tail-coverts are whiteor but very faintly buffy, instead of being deep cinnamon-buff."In his "Birds of North and Middle America" (1911), Eidgwaytreats Morcom's hummingbird as a subspecies of Atthis heloisa^ underthe name Atthis heloisa morcomi^ which he characterizes as "similarto A. h. heloisa^ but smaller (except bill) ; adult female paler below,with bronzy spots on chin and throat much smaller, sides less exten-sively cinnamon-rufous, and under tail-coverts pure white."According to our 1931 Check-list, morcomi is not accorded evensubspecific rank and is regarded as identical with A. h. heloisa^ towhich race our Arizona specimens are now understood to belong.This is the race that is found in central and southern Mexico, fromthe States of Tamaulipas, Guanajuato, and San Luis Potosi toGuerrero and Tepic.Nothing seems to be known about the habits of this subspecies and,so far as I know, the nest of the species has never been found. ButAlexander F. Skutch has sent me the following notes on a closelyrelated form, Elliot's hummingbird {Atthis heloisa ellioti), theGuatemalan race.
"Like so many of the Central American hummingbirds, the maleElliot's hummingbirds gather in definite assemblies to sing. Al-though I have found them in western Guatemala from 6,000 to 11,000feet above sea level, they appear to be nowhere common. Yet whereone finds a male singing persistently, day after day, from the sameperch, there will generally be one or more others within hearing.About the middle of October 1933, 1 found an assembly of four maleson a steep, bushy slope at an altitude of about 9,000 feet. Each birdhad chosen as his singing perch the bare, exposed twig of a bush orthe low branch of a tree. Their headquarters were separated fromeach other by 25 or 30 yards. They were stretched out in a line;and the birds in the middle could each hear two of their neighbors,but those in the end positions could hear only the one nearest tothem?unless their ears were sharper than mine, which is certainlynot improbable. These hummingbirds did not perch so close to-gether by chance, for I found none other of the kind within a mile ofthis assembly."The assembly was established in a spot not far from the highwaythat crossed the mountain ; and whenever I passed that way I wouldpause to listen, enchanted, to a song that amazed me, coming from so
HELOISE'S HUMMINGBIRD 419
small a bird. The voice, although weak, was not squeaky. In itsintensity, its variety of phrasing, and its rising and falling cadencesthe song reminded me not a little of the higher notes of a small finchand often suggested the impassioned conclusion of the lay of thelittle black-and-white Morellet's seedeater {Sporophila morelletii)of the lowlands. The hummingbird frequently sang without a pausefor thirty or forty seconds. Were his song only a little more force-ful, without any change of tune or phrasing, Elliot's hummingbirdwould be famous as a musician."As he poured forth his sweet, impassioned little lay, the hum-mingbird spread the stiff feathers of his gorget, which then ap-peared to form a scaly shield covering the throat, and turned hishead from side to side. The feathers at the sides of the shield, longerthan the rest, formed sharp points at the lower corners. When thebird faced directly toward me, the gorget reflected an intense magentalight; but as the head slowly turned away the color was graduallyextinguished, and the shield, seen from the side, appeared velvetyblack. At certain angles, it sent a metallic-gTeen reflection to myeye. At times the little singer vibrated his wings in his ecstasy, andeither floated slowly to another perch or suspended himself in mid-air on invisible pinions, all without interrupting his song. At timeshe made a long, looping flight, returning again to the perch fromwhich he started, and continued his singing during the entirejourney."Robert T, Moore found four species of hummingbirds feeding onthe flowering tree in southeastern Sinaloa, referred to in his notes onthe white-eared hummingbird. Among them was another race ofthis species, Margaret's hummingbird {Atthis heloisa margarethae),of which he says in his notes
:
"Much the smallest of the four and one of the tiniest members ofthe family, this near relative of the so-called Morcom's hummingbirdof Arizona flew into the tree at rare intervals. If the broad-tailedand Calliope hummers, of which there were always five or six, werefeeding from the tree, Atthis would be permitted to probe the leastattractive blooms. She experienced little difficulty in finding a fewof the forty thousand flowerets, which had not already been deprivedof their sweets. But when a single male white-ear blustered inamong the busy gleaners, he would invariably launch an assault onthe rare gem of the mountain and drive it away to the thicker growthof pines. For the time Atthis had to be content with a more frugalrepast on the scarce blooms of lahiatae, which starred the pine-needlefloor of the forest with spikes of maroon-colored flowers. Mar-garet's hummingbird probably feeds from several kinds of flowers,but we actually observed it doing so from only three. In addition
420 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMto the two mentioned, it sometimes prospected the exquisite tawnyflowers of the huge Opuntias near our camp site, but the bird seemedto prefer those of the purple-bracted shrub, referred to above."No larger than a huge orange-marked bee, which was intoxicatedby the same flowers, Atthis heloisa margarethae was not much largerthan its name on this sheet. Slower in its movements than the otherfour hummingbirds, the revolution of its wdngs created only aninfinitesimal murmur. As compared with the energetic nervouscourse of the white-ear, that of Atthis is slow and unwavering. Itresembles more closely that of the calliope than either of the othertwo hummers. It is not nearly so swift as that of the broadtail.
"In northwestern Mexico Margaret's hummingbird seems to beconfined to the Transition Zone, not descending very far below itslower margin, as all of our specimens have come from 5,700 feet to7,500 feet. Occasionally occurring elsew^here at lower levels, a femalewas taken by Chester Lamb near the city of Tepic, Nayarit, at analtitude of 3,000 feet.
"I have no doubt that Margaret's hummingbird breeds in thelower margin of the Transition Zone in Sinaloa, but we have neverfound the nest." DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Central Mexico south to Honduras; accidental in south-ern Arizona; not generally migratory.The range of this species extends north to San Luis Potosi (Al-varez) ; and central Veracruz (Jalapa) . East to Veracruz (Jalapaand Cordoba) ; and Honduras (San Juancito). South to Honduras(San Jauncito) ; Guatemala (Fuego Volcano and Atitlan) ; andGuerrero (Omilteme). West to Guerrero (Omilteme), Mexico (SantaLucia) ; and southwestern San Luis Potosi (Alvarez).Casual records.?The only records for the United States are fortwo specimens collected in Ramsay Canyon, in the Huachuca Moun-tains, Ariz., on July 2, 1896.STELLULA CALLIOPE (Gould)CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRDPlate 70HABITSThis tiny mite is the smallest member of the group containing thesmallest North American birds. Grinnell and Storer (1924) statethat "its average weight is only about 3 grams (one-tenth of anounce) which is about half that of an Anna Hummingbird, or of akinglet or bush-tit." The length of the male is about 2% inches and
CAI.LIOPE HUMMINGBIRD 421that of the female is less than 3 inches. But it is a hardy littlemidget and a long-distance traveler, migrating from northern Brit-ish Columbia to Mexico City ; it spends its summers in the Canadianzones at high altitudes in the mountains and at lower levels farthernorth.Its generic name was well chosen, SteTkda^ little star, for the long,narrow, metallic purple feathers rise and spread, under excitement,above the snow-white background of the gorget, like a scintillatingstar. The choice of the specific name, calliope^ was not so fortunate
;
Calliope was the muse of eloquence, and this is a very silent bird.At least throughout the southern portion of its breeding range, andto some extent farther north, the calliope hummingbird is essentiallya mountain species, though it breeds in the lower valleys and near sealevel in some of the more northern portions of its range. Dawson(1923) says that in California
?
it is essentially a mountain-loving species, and is, so far as we have been ableto prove, the only breeding Hummer of the higher Sierran slopes. There isa 3000 foot record, by Stephens, of a nest in the San Beruardinos; but 4000 isthe usual minimum, and 8000 a better average. In the Canadian zone, there-fore, the bird knows no restrictions, save that it does not favor the denselytimbered sections. In the Sierras it nests nearly up to timber line, 10,000 to11,500 feet, and follows the advancing season to the limit of flowers. * * *A bit of heather on a northern peali, where we camped at an elevation of8,000 feet, yielded thirty-two species of plants in conspicuous bloom within astone's throw of the breakfast table.Elsewhere (Dawson and Bowles, 1909) he says: "We have found itcommonly in the northern and eastern portions of Washington atmuch lower altitudes, and have taken its nest in the Burning Gorgeof the Columbia at an altitude of only six hundred feet."James B. Dixon writes to me : "In the San Bernardino country itwas a rare breeder at elevations from 6,000 to 8,500 feet above sealevel, and there it nested along the stream beds where water ran allsummer. In the Mono Basin they were found along rumiing streams,generally in the aspen thickets, but sometimes out in the open forestshigh on the mountain sides and some distance from running water;they were much more common, however, in the aspen groves."Ealph Hoffmaim (1927) writes: "The flowering shrubs and vinesabout dwellings attract nearly all the different hummingbirds of thecoast. One species, however, still keeps to the natural gardens onmountain slopes, where Indian paint-brush, mountain heather andcolumbine splotch the springy slopes with red, or wild currant formsextensive thickets. Here the little Calliope Hummer, the smallestand most delicately adorned of them all, flashes the lavender streakson its gorget as it chases off some rival or pursues a female."J. A. Munro (1919) says that in the Okanagan Valley, British Co-
422 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMlumbia, "a birch and maple draw is the favorite home of Stellulacalliope, and one can often see six or eight, buzzing around a birchtree, which a Ked-naped Sapsucker has girdled." Winton Weyde-meyer (1927), writing of its haunts in northwestern Montana, whereit is a common breeder, says
:
In Lincoln County the Calliope Hummingbird (Stellnla calliope) nests alongstreams throughout most of the Canadian zone and downward into the upperborders of the Transition zone. During the nesting season and late summer italso frequents open mountains, ranging into the Hudsonian zone, and duringMay and August is commonly seen in the breeding areas of lower Transitionzone species. Tree associations evidently have greater influence on its rangethan does elevation. In the eastern part of the country I have found the speciesto be common during the nesting season at 7,000 feet, although I have neverchanced actually to see a nest above 4,800 feet. In the Kootenai Valley, nearLibby, I have found it nesting abundantly at an elevation of less than 2,100 feet,and I have no doubt that it breeds below 1,900 feet a few miles distant, in thelower end of the valley, the only place in Montana where so low an elevationoccurs.Courtship.?The courtship performances of the hummingbirds allfollow the same general pattern, with only slight variations, and thisspecies is no exception to the rule. Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale(1930) describe it very well as follows:An exhibition of courting flight that seemed fairly typical for this species wasobserved on May 16, 1924. A female was down in a blossoming currant (Ribescereum) bush. A male started towering from her vicinity, slowly at flrst and withan audible buzz, then faster until he reached a height of fully twenty-two meters.Then he shot down in a broadly U-shaped course, passing the bush closely(barely missing it) and ascended to an equal height on the opposite tip of the
"U." At the moment of passing the bush, within which the female was perched,he gave out a droll, flatted sound hzt?short, not loud, like a bee held down.After making three complete sky-dives, the male, on coming down the last time,l>erched six meters away at the tip of a stem of budding service-berry bush.The female began at once to feed at the currant flowers within the abundantlywhite-flowering bush.The following variation in the antics was observed by L. E. Wyman(1920)
:
On one occasion an angry buzzing, almost terrifying in volume, resolveditself into a pair of these birds holding to each other's beaks and revolving likea horizontal pinwheel, less than four feet from my eyes. Around they went, ahalf-dozen times, then parted, the female perching and preening on a twig ofthe oak-scrub just beyond arm's reach, with the male two feet farther awayand giving vent at three-second intervals to an explosive metallic tffinff. Thiswas, of course, made with the wings, but the bird was sufficiently screened sothat I could not see it clearly.On another occasion a female sat preening on a horizontal dead weed, whena male shot up the hill-side close to the ground, passed the female, mountedabout twenty-five feet and darted down again in a long, narrow, vertical ellipsethat flattened where it touched the hill-side. As he passed the female she
CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRD 423fluttered and swung head downward on her perch. The male alighted aboveher, with vibrating wings, and coition tooli place in this position.Nesting.?Major Bendire (1895) gives an interesting account of thenesting of the calliope hummingbird near Fort Klamath, Oreg.,where he said that this species outnumbered the common rufous hum-mingbird about three to one. His first nest was found by the actionsof the bird ; he writes
:
I had taken quite a long walk along the banks of Fort Creek on June 10, and,the day being a hot one, sat down with my back resting against the trunk of abushy black pine whose lower limbs had been killed by fire ; while resting thusone of these Hummers buzzed repeatedly about my head for a few seconds at atime, and then rose perpendicularly in the air, only to repeat the performanceagain. I had no idea then that this species nested in pines, but in order togive me an opportunity to watch its performance better I moved out from underthe tree, and a few minutes later saw the bird settle on what I at first supposedto be an old clump of pine cones. On looking closer, however, I noticed its nest,which was ingeniously saddled on two small cones, and its outward appearanceresembled a cone very closely. * * * Knowing now where to look for them,I had no further difficulty in finding their nests, and all of those observed byme were built in exactly similar situations. * * * They were usually placedon or against a dry cone on small dead limbs of Pinus contorta, from 8 to 15feet from the ground, and on account of the brittle nature of these limbs theywere rather hard to secure. The nests, while outwardly not as handsome asthose of the majority of our Hummers, are nevertheless marvels of ingenuity, allthose I have seen mimicking a small dead pine cone so perfectly as to almostdefy detection unless one sees the bird fly on or off the nest. The majorityfound were saddled on one or two such cones, or on a small limb and restingagainst the sides of a cone. The outer walls are composed of bits of bark andsmall shreds of cone, and the inner cup is softly lined with willow down. Anaverage nest measures about 1^4 inches in outer diameter by the same in depth;the inner cup being three-quarters of an inch in width by one-half inch indepth. The nests were generally so placed that the contents were protected bylarger limbs or green boughs above.He says of another nest : "This is composed interiorly of fine mossand willow down, and the outer walls are decorated with tiny shredsof bark, fine flakes of wood, and flakes of whitewash, fastened securelywith cobwebs; it was placed on a knot in a rope hanging from theroof of a woodshed and within 5 feet of an occupied dwelling house.The materials out of which the nest is composed closely assimilate therope and knot on which it is placed."It seems to be the prevailing custom of this hummingbird to buildits nest on a small branch or twig directly under a larger branch, orunder a canopy of foliage, which serves to protect or conceal the nestfrom overhead ; many observers have noticed this, and numerous pho-tographs illustrate this type of location. This hummer has also de-veloped to a high degree its skill in so placing its nest and so artfullycamouflaging it that it fades into the picture as a natural part of itsenvironment. James B. Dixon says in his notes that in the shaded
424 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMportions of the aspen groves there are numerous dead, black or graymistletoe knots, about the size of hummingbirds' nests, and the birdsseeta to realize the value of the protection thus offered ; most of thenests that he found there were built either upon one of these knotsor in such a position that the nest would look exactly like one of them
;
and he had diiRculty in recognizing a nest until he could see a birdalight upon it.Nine nests that Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1908) recorded in the SanBernardino Mountains of southern California "varied in height abovethe ground from twenty-two inches (measured) to seventy feet (esti-mated) ; I should judge the average height to have been about thirty-five feet, as the majority were above that height. The nests were allin caHons, though none were directly over or very near the water,as with some other species of hummingbirds. One was located in analder, two in silver firs, and six in yellow and Jeffrey pines."The first nest mentioned above, as 22 inches above the ground, is inthe Thayer collection in Cambridge ; it was near the end of a droop-ing bough of a young silver fir growing on a canyon side and only15 inches from the face of a huge overhanging boulder; its generalappearance is dark gray, being made of various gray and brownfibers, bark scales, and bits of inner bark ; the bottom of the cavityonly is lined with grayish-white down; it measures II/2 by 1% inchesin outside diameter and V/g inches by seven-eighths of an inch ininner diameter; it is only seven-eighths of an inch high outside andfive-eighths of an inch deep inside.Mr. Weydemeyer (1927) says of its nesting habits in northwesternMontana
:
The nest of this Hnminingbird is placed in a coniferous tree. Within thislimit, the choice of an individual tree appears to depend more upon thelocation than upon the species. In the higher elevations of Lincoln County,nests are placed in alpine firs. Along the streams of the Transition zone, thetrees most commonly used are the Engelmann spruce, western hemlock, andarborvitae. I have found one nest in a Douglas fir, but have seen none inpines. Near Libby I have observed nests in three species of trees within afew yards of each other along a stream. Evidently, to suit the requirementsof the birds, the tree must be a conifer standing on the bank of a creek, orbeside a road or other opening in the forest, with one of its lowermost branchesswinging free from all other foliage and commanding a clear view in prac-tically all directions.The word "lowermost" is used with a purpose. All the nests of this speciesthat I have seen have been placed on the lowermost living branch on its sideof the tree. This habit determines the height of the nest above the groundor water. In the region considered here the distance generally ranges fromfour to ten feet. * * *But little variation occurs in the general types of materials used in con-structing the nests. In comparative bulk the average nest is composed ap-proximately as follows: plant down, 60 per cent; tree lichens, 20 per cent;
CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRD 425ground and rock mosses, 10 per cent; tree mosses, 5 per cent; spider websand i3bers of insect cocoons, 1 per cent ; miscellaneous material, 4 per cent.The "shell" of the nest is formed principally of ground and rock mossesmixed with more or less plant down, strongly bound together with cocoonfibers, especially at the rim. Many species of moss are utilized, but generallyonly one kind is used in an individual nest. In many cases black fibrous treemoss also is used. This part of the nest contains the "miscellaneous material."In the fourteen nests examined this included conifer needles, grass, aspen bark,rotted wood, feathers (from the birds themselves), small leaves, and piecesof spider and insect skeletons (Diptera, Coleoptera, and Hymenoptera )
.
The exterior of this framework is thickly covered with gray or greenishlichens of the kind occurring on the tree in which the nest is placed. Thepieces are bound to the moss by shreds of insect webs and cocoons, or byfibrous tree moss. The main body of the nest, within the sustaining framework,is composed of a thick, soft layer of various kinds of plant down, firmly com-pacted to form the interior cup. This down retains its shape without beingbound with any other material.Second year additions to a nest are composed mainly of down. Often theonly added material is a thick layer of down in the bottom of the cup, anda thinner one on its sides. This method of addition decreases the depth ofthe cup about a quarter of an inch. In other cases, the rim of the nest isheightened also. If this is done, a new layer of lichen is added to the out-side of the nest, making it impossible to determine, from the appearance of theexterior, how many years the nest has been used.The foregoing paragraph indicates the methods employed by hum-mingbirds in repairmg, or adding to, a last year's nest, a commonpractice among some species. But often, with this and other species,an entirely new nest is attached to or built upon the remains of alast year's nest; in this case the old nest can be easily recognized byits faded appearance. A series of two, tliree, or even four such nests,perhaps built during successive seasons, may occasionally be seen.Ridgway (1892, pi. 1) shows a cut of a 4-story nest of a calliopehummingbird.Eggs.?The calliope hummingbird lays the usual set of two eggs.These are like other hummingbirds' eggs, pure v/hite, without gloss,and varying in shape from oval to elliptical-oval. The measurementsof 45 eggs average 12.1 by 8.3 millimeters; the eggs showing the fourextremes measure 13.0 by 9.6 and 10.7 by 7.4 millimeters.Plumages.?No information seems to be available about the devel-opment of the Juvenal plumage, or about the early nest life of theyoung calliope hummingbird. In the full juvenal plumage, just afterleaving the nest, the young male is practically indistinguishable fromthe adult female, as it still has the throat more or less streaked orspotted with bronzy brownish or dusky and with no sign of anypurple in the gorget; I have seen birds in this plumage up to thefirst of Jnly ; some, but not all, young males have rather more rufousin the tail than the adult female has. Specimens taken in August
426 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL. MUSEUMbegin to show more or fewer metallic-purple feathers in the gorget;slight advance toward maturity seems to continue during fall andwinter, until the prenuptial molt, late in winter or early in spring,produces the fully adult plumage. The young female is like the adultfemale, but the upper parts are more bronzy and the feathers areindistinctly margined with dull brownish.Pood.?The calliope, like other hummingbirds, feeds on nectarfrom flowers and on the minute insects and small spiders that fre-quent the flowers. The sweet nectar in the flowers undoubtedlyattracted the insects, but whether it was the nectar or the insects thatfirst attracted the hummingbird is an open question ; the insects mayhave been the original objects of their search, and the nectar devel-oped a taste for sweets. Any brightly colored flowers are likely toattract these birds, but they seem to show a preference for red flow-ers, such as the scarlet paintbrush and the red columbine. The 3'ellowflowers of Mimulus implexiis also furnish a food supply for them.And Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) write: "In early May inthe vicinity of Mineral this species appeared to have just one plant, aspecies of lousewort {Pediculai^is seiniharhata) , which it frequented.The flowers grew on long spikes from leaf rosettes under snow-brush.The hummers had to fly down among close-set twiggage of the bushesto get at these flowers. Often they alighted almost on the groundto get at the horizontal tubes. By May 28 they were very active ina tract of blossoming manzanita at 6000 feet, even among snow banks.A female was seen at a snow-plant {Sarcodcs) where these plantswere first coming up, on June 26, beneath red firs."The calliope hummingbird also hawks for insects on the wing,much after the manner of flycatchers ; probably any small insect thatbecomes available is acceptable, but small species of Diptera, Hyme-noptera, or Coleoptera seem to be most often taken. Milton P.Skinner tells me that he has seen one perched on a willow, turningits head and upper body from side to side with an almost clocklikemotion, while watching for insects. Others have noticed its salliesinto' the air for passing insects, which its keen eyes have detected.Behavior?Several observers have written of the territorial rela-tions of this hummingbird and of its aggressiveness in defending itsnesting territory and its foraging range. Grinnell, Dixon, and Lins-dale (1930) write:On a six-acre plot of ground where the activities of individual birds wereobserved closely through several nesting seasons four separate males keptdistinct "stands" each for itself. As nearly as could be determined all thefemales that were seen on this plot were visitors whose nests were off in a beltof lodgepole pines on Battle Creek Meadows. Females came onto the plot toforage about flowers (Castilleia) that were plentiful there, and were thenshown attention by the males.
CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRD 427The stand of one male was on a telephone wire directly above quantities offlowers to which a female frequently came. Another male divided his timeamong the growing tips of three closely adjacent young yellow pines slightlyovertopping a sea of snow-brush. Another perched chiefly on one of the highesttwigs of a service-berry thicket in an opening among firs. One male wasestablished on the tallest, scrub black oak tip, driving away from the vicinityany approaching forager.Grinnell and Storer (1924) write:The males of all our hummingbirds are accustomed to harass birds manytimes their own size. A Calliope at Mono Meadow was seen to put a WrightFlycatcher to rout, the latter seeking seclusion in a ceanothus thicket. InYosemite Valley another was seen driving at a Western Robin that was on theground. The hummer would mount as much as 30 feet into the air and thendash down at the robin. Even Red-tailed Hawks are sometimes "attacked" bythese pugnacious midgets. * * *Like other hummingbirds the Calliope is often attracted by red objects.Whether this is a voluntary action based on esthetic appeal, or a reflex basedon food-getting instinct, is problematic. At Chinquapin, on June 14, a female ofthis species darted into the front of our open tent and poised with seeminginterest before a red-labeled baking powder can on the table. Then the birdwent out into the sunshine, but it returned again twice before finally goingaway. Two of our three August records of this species were of individualswhich were attracted in the same manner, the object being a red handkerchiefin one case, and a sweater of the same color in the other.Apparently the calliope is not always so aggressive or so pugna-cious as are some other hummingbirds, for Henshaw (1886) says thatit is "much less obtrusive, and in the contests of its larger neighborsit takes no part. When assailed, as it promptly is by the other kinds,it at once darts away to another spot where it can feed without moles-tation. It appears to be timid in every way, so much so that it is notan easy bird to collect."Mr. Wyman (1920) says: "Ordinarily the Black-chins, of which afew haunted the same locality, would drive the Calliopes unmerci-fully. Once, however, a male Calliope shot close beside me up thehillside, just grazing the grass-tips, driving at a Black-chin thatwas quietly feeding. Within two feet of the latter he mounted verti-cally about thirty feet, then dropped like a plummet on the feedingbird, and both flashed down the hill-side with Calliope doing thechasing."Aretas A. Saunders (1915) observed a bird of this species that
"was very belligerent in protecting her home from all birds andother animals that approached too closely. A pine squirrel hadventured into the tree and the mother hummer chased it away imme-diately, following it a long way through the trees and darting at itfirst from one side and then from the other. The nest containedhalf-grown young when first found."
428 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMField, marks.?The small size of the calliope hummingbird willhelp to distinguish it from others, when the opportunity for com-parison is favorable. The male is, of course, easy to recognize bythe long, spreading, metallic-purple feathers against the snow-whitebackground of its gorget. Aside from its small size, the female canbe distinguished from the three species with which it is most likelyto be associated by the amount of rufous in the tail; in the femalecalliope all but the central pair of rectrices have some rufous at thebase; in the rufous female all the rectrices are more or less basallyrufous; in the female broad-tailed only the three outer feathers areso marked; and in the female black-chinned there is no rufous inthe tail.Fall.?The males start on the southward migration rather early inthe summer, or at least desert the females and move away from thebreeding grounds. The females and young follow later. In theTosemite region Grinnell and Storer (1924) saw no males after theend of June. Henshaw (1886), referring to New Mexico, says: "Anutterly unaccountable fact noticed in connection with this specieswas the apparent rarity of females. Up to August 10 I had seenperhaps half a dozen, though constantly on the watch for them, whileI had certainly seen not less than ten times that number of males.Subsequently to that date I saw a few more, but nothing like thenumber of males. By September the young were numerous in cer-tain localities, notably in a large sunflower patch."Of the migration in the Huachuca Mountains, Arizona, Harry S.Swarth (1904) writes: "After the summer rains the mountains pre-sent an exceedingly inviting appearance, particularly so in the higherparts, along the ridges and on various pine covered 'flats,' where,with the green grass, a multitude of brilliantly colored wild flowerssprings up, often waist high, and in many places in solid banks ofbright colors. In such places, in the late summer of 1902, I foundthe Calliope Hummingbird quite abundant, feeding close to theground, and when alighting usually choosing a low bush. * * *The first one was shot August 14, and from then up to the time weleft the mountains, September 5, they remained abundant in certainlocalities ; none being seen below 9000 feet."DISTRIBUTIONRange.?^Western North America and Mexico.Breeding range.?The breeding range of the calliope hummingbirdextents north to southern British Columbia (150-mile House, Okana-gan Landing, and Deer Park); and southwestern Alberta (Banff).East to southwestern Alberta (Banff) ; Montana (Fortine, Poison,
CALLIOPE HUMMINGBIRD 429
rarely Sheep Creek, and Red Lodge) ; northwestern Wyoming (Yel-lowstone National Park) ; Utah (Escalante Mountains) ; and northernBaja California (Vallecitos). South to northern Baja California(Vallecitos) ; and southern California (Grant Creek, Mount Water-man and Mount Pinos). West to western California (Mount Pinos,Glenbrook, Battle Creek, and Steward Springs) ; Oregon (Gold Plill,Fort Klamath, and Weston) ; Washington (Yakima, Bumping Lake,and Lake Chelan) ; and British Columbia (probably Chilliwackand 150-mile House)
.
Winter range.?During the winter season the species appears tobe concentrated in the southern Mexican States of Michoacan (LakePatzcuaro) ; Mexico (Ajusco) ; and Guerrero (Taxco and Amula)./Spring migration.?Early dates of spring arrival are : California
?
Yosemite Valley, March 2; Azusa, March 6; Whittier, March 20Grass Valley, April 23. Oregon?Weston, May 3 ; Anthony, May 6Fort Klamath, May 16. Washington?Grays Harbor, April 22Tacoma, May 10; Pullman, May 12, British Columbia?OkanaganLanding, April 25; Burrard Liiet, May 7. Arizona?SuperstitionMountain, March 22; Santa Catalina Mountains, April 14. IdahoCoeur d'Alene, May 20. Montana?Missoula, May 9; Fortine, May11 ; Bozeman, May 25.Fall migration.?Late dates of fall departure are: MontanaCorvallis, September 7 ; Fortine, September 14. Idaho?Priest Eiver,August 24. New Mexico?Albuquerque, September 16. ArizonaFort Verde, August 27 ; Apache, August 28 ; San Bernardino Ranch,September 11. British Columbia?Okanagan Landing, August 25.Washington?Ahtanum, August 12; Mount Adams, August 14.Nevada?East Humboldt Mountains, September 7. CaliforniaYosemite Valley, September 4; Santa Barbara, September 11; SanBernardino Mountains, September 16.Casual records.?A specimen was taken at El Paso, Tex., in 1851.Colorado has several records, as follows : One was collected at Breck-enridge on June 30, 1882 ; one was found dead in Cheyemie Canyon,near Colorado Springs, on July 25, 1897; specimens also were re-ported from this general vicinity on July 18, 1915, and in August1915; while several were seen on August 27, 1904, at Antonito. Onewas found dead near Shaunavon, Saskatchewan, on August 22, 1935.The species has been reported as occasional at Wrangell, Alaska,but the evidence is not considered satisfactory.Egg dates.?California: 46 records. May 27 to July 30; 23 records,June 10 to 28, indicating the height of the season.Utah: 7 records, July 3 to 23.
430 BULLETIIT 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCALOTHORAX LUCIFER (Swainson)LUCIFER HUMMINGBIRDHABITSThis brilliant little hummer, with its deeply forked p^orfjet of avivid violet-purple, chanj^no; to reddish purple or blue in differentlights, is only rarely found across our southwestern border in Ari-zona and western Texas. Its main range is on the tablelands ofMexico as far south as the City of Mexico, Puebla, and Chiapas. Itwas first added to our fauna by Henry W. Henshaw (1875), whotook a female near Camp Bowie, Ariz., on August 8, 1874, and doubt-fully recorded it as Doricha eniciira; it was later determined to be alucifer hummingbird. Some years later, in 1901, it was taken inthe Chisos Mountains in western Texas by a Biological Survey party.It is apparently fairly common in these mountains, for Mrs. Bailey(1902) says that Mr. Bailey found it "with several other specie.scommon in June about the big agaves, which were then in fullflower." Still later. Van Tyne and Sutton (1937) report the captureof two specimens in this region but say that the nest has not yetbeen found there. The lucifer hummingbird may be commoner alongour southwestern border than is generally known, for it somewhatresembles Costa's hummingbird in size and color and might easily beoverlooked.Nesting.?Comparatively few nests of the lucifer hummingbirdhave been found. Wm. Bullock ( 1825) , in his "Six Months in Mexico,"gives us the first account of it : "They breed in Mexico in June andJuly ; and the nest is a beautiful specimen of the architectural talen ofthese birds: it is neatly constructed with cotton, or the down ofthistles, to which is fastened on the outside, by some glutinous sub-stance, a white flat lichen resembling ours."W. W. Brown collected four nests of this species in Tamaulipas,Mexico, between June 15 and July 4, 1924. Three of these are nowin the Thayer collection in Cambridge, and one is in the Doe col-lection in Gainesville, Fla. All the nests were built in shrubs andonly a few feet above ground; one was recorded as 4 and one 6feet up. The nests were made of soft vegetable fibers and down,mixed with the scales of buds, blossoms or seeds, and bits of lichen,all completely covered and held in place with cobwebs or very finefibers.Eggs.?The lucifer hummingbird lays the usual hummingbird setof two eggs, which are indistinguishable from the eggs of other hum-mingbirds of similar size. The measurements of 6 eggs average 12.7by 9.7 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 13.8by 10.0, 12.4 by 10.1, and 12.0 by 9.2 millimeters.
LUCIFER HUMMINGBIRD 431Plumages.?Not much seems to be known about the immatureplumages of this species, but the sexes are apparently alike inJuvenal plumages and resemble the adult female, though a littlegrayer on the under parts. One young male, collected September15, has one violet-purple feather on its throat, indicating an ap-proach to the adult plumage during the fall and winter. I haveseen adults of both sexes molting from September to December,during which time the complete annual molt probably occurs.Food.?^We have no definite data on the food of this species, whichprobably does not differ materially from that of other humming-birds. It is said to be devoted to the flower clusters of the tallflowering agave, where it finds a bountiful supply of nectar, as wellas numerous small insects and spiders.Mr. Bullock (1825) gives the following interesting account of itsspider hunting
:
The house I resided in at Xalapa for several weelis was only one story high,enclosing, like most of the Spanish houses, a small garden in the centre, the roofprojecting six or seven feet from the walls, covering a walk all round, and leaving asmall space only between the tiles, and the trees which grew in the centre.From the edges of these tiles to the branches of the trees in the garden, thespiders had spread their innumerable webs so closely and compactly that theyresembled a net. I have frequently watched with much amusement the cau-tious peregrination of the humming bird, who, advancing beneath the web,entered the various labyrinths and cells in search of entangled flies, but as thelarger spiders did not tamely surrender their booty, the invader was often com-pelled to retreat ; being within a few feet, I could observe all their evolutionswith great precision. The active little bird generally passed once or twiceround the court, as if to reconnoitre his ground, and commenced his attack bygoing carefully under the nets of the wily insect, and seizing by surprise thesmallest entangled flies, or those that were most feeble. In ascending theangular traps of the spider great care and skill was required ; sometimes hehad scarcely room for his little wings to perform their office, and the leastdeviation would have entangled him in the complex machinery of the web, andinvolved him in ruin. It was only the works of the smaller spider that hedurst attack, as the larger sort rose to the defence of their citadels, when thebesieger would shoot off like a sunbeam, and could only be traced by the lumi-nous glow of his refulgent colors. The bird generally spent about ten minutesin this predatory excursion, and then alighted on a branch of the Avocata torest and refresh himself, placing his crimson star-like breast to the sun, whichthen presented all the glowing fire of the ruby and surpassing in lustre thediadem of monarchs.BehavioT.?The same observer writes:When attending their young, they attack any bird indiscriminately that ap-proaches the nest. Their motions, when under the influence of anger or fear,are very violent, and their flight rapid as an arrow; the eye cannot followthem, but the shrill, piercing shriek which they utter on the wing may be heardwhen the bird is invisible. They attack the eyes of the larger birds, and theirsharp, needle-like bill is a truly formidable weapon in this kind of warfare.Nothing can exceed their fierceness when one of their own species invades their
432 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMterritory during the breeding season. Under the influence of jealousy they be-come perfect furies; their throats swell, their crests, tails, and wings expand;they fight in the air (uttering a shrill noise) till one falls exhausted to theground. I witnessed a combat of this kind near Otumba, during a heavy fall ofrain, every separate drop of which I supposed sufiieient to have beaten the punywarriors to the earth.Field marks.?The lucifer liummiiigbird might be mistaken, bythe casual observer, for Costa's hummingbird, as the two are some-what alike in size and in the shape and color of the gorget, but thereare decided differences in shape and color pattern. In Costa's theentire top of the head is of the same brilliant violet-purple as thegorget, whereas in the lucifer hummer only the throat gorget, withits elongated lateral extension is of this brilliant color. Furthermore,the male lucifer has a deeply forked tail, with very narrow lateralfeathers. The female lucifer has a rounded, or double rounded, tailand buffy under parts. But the best field mark for both sexes is thelong, decidedly decurved bill; no other North American humming-bird has such a curved bill. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southern Mexico ; accidental in Arizona and Texas.The normal range of the lucifer hummingbird is from Jalisco(Bolanos) south to Guerrero (Taxco and Chilpancingo) and east toPuebla (Chalchicomula).Casual records.?A specimen was collected in the Chisos Moun-tains, Texas, on June 7, 1901 ; and an adult female was taken at FortBowie, Ariz., on August 8, 1874.Egg dates.?Mexico : 6' records, June 15 to July 4.AMAZILIA TZACATL TZACATL (de la Llave)RIEFFER'S HUMMINGBIRDPlates 71, 72HABITSContributed by Alexander Frank SkutchThis glittering green hummingbird, with a bright chestnut tail,abundant and familiar over a wide range in the warm.er portions ofboth Americas, is merely a wandering straggler within the territoryof the United States, where it has been recorded only twice, bothtimes in the neighborhood of Brownsville, Tex., just north of theMexican border. Its breeding range extends from the Mexican Stateof Tamaulipas to eastern Ecuador. In the Central American portionof this range it is, from Panama to Guatemala, the member of the
RIEFFER'S HUMMINGBIRD 433family most numerous in the cultivated areas of the humid Carib-bean lowlands. Thus Charles W. Riclimond (quoted by Bendire,1895) wrote that it "is extremely abundant in the lowlands of easternNicaragua. It outnumbers in individuals all the other (five) speciesof Hummingbirds found in the same region. On the EscondidoRiver this species is confined to the banana plantations and the shrub-ber}'^ around the houses, where it finds an abundance of food and goodnesting sites. It is the plantation Hummer, only two other speciesoccasionally wandering into the plantations from the forest, wliich isthe home of the other species." Similarly George K. Cherrie (1892)affirms that in Costa Rica it is "the most abundant species about SanJose, and indeed the most abundant species found on eithercoast." This is certainly true, in my own experience, of the Carib-bean coastlands of Costa Rica; but on the Pacific side of thecountry Rieffer's hummingbird is abundant only in the morehumid regions from the Gulf of Nicoya southward. About the shoresof the Gulf it mingles with the related cinnamomeous hummingbird{Ainazilia cinnmnomea) ^ and along the Pacific side of CentralAmerica to the northward, where the dry season is long and severe,it is entirely replaced by the latter species, which here is almost asfamiliar and abundant on the plantations, in the flower gardens, andin the light, open woodlands as its green-breasted relative on theopposite coast.A bird of the clearings, Rieffer's hummingbird is found in the forestonly in the more open glades and seldom far from its edge. Whilemost abundant in the lowlands, it extends upward into the highlandsto an altitude (in Costa Rica) of about 5,000 feet and (on the author-ity of Mr. Cherrie) is found occasionally as high as 6,000 feet.Courtship.?No hummingbirds, so far as we know, actually assoc-iate in pairs; and the male never joins a female in the duties ofa nest. The purpose of the male's courtship, then, is to effect tem-porary union with the female, resulting in the fecundation of theeggs, not to attach unto himself a mate. Two strikingly differentmodes of courtship are found in this great family, and may becharacterized as "dynamic" and "static." In the former, well ex-emplified by the broad-tailed hummingbird {Selasphorus platycercus) ^the male gives a thrilling aerial display, which centers around thefemale, rising high into the air and swooping down in front of heras she perches, swinging back and forth in a great, open U, the armsof which may be 50 or 60 feet high. In the "static" courtship themale establishes his headquarters in one particular spot, where he isto be found day after day during the breeding season. Usually hehas a favorite perch, where he rests to deliver untiringly the calls,frequently weak and unmelodious, which draw the females' atten-178223?40 34
434 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMtion to himself. Among many species, the males group themselvesinto assemblies made up of two to many individuals, but frequentlythey are found "singing" alone. This "static" form of courtshipis far more prevalent among the Central American hummingbirdsthan the set aerial display. So far as we know, the same speciesdoes not practice both types of courtship.The courtship of Rieffer's hummingbird is neither persistent norlikely to draw the bird-watcher's attention. In a number of yearspast, in districts where the species is abundant, I liave not oncewitnessed an aerial display of definite form comparable to that ofthe broad-tailed hummingbird. So far as it has any particular modeof courtship, this appears to be of the "static" type; but even inthe less arduous occupation of sitting and calling, Rieffer's humming-bird is far less assiduous than many others of the Central Americanspecies. The scanty information I have on this subject is sum-marized in an entry made in my notebook on October 17, 1936,while I lived at Rivas de El General, in southwestern Costa Rica:
"These m.ornings, when I stand in the old cornfield at dawn towatch the golden-naped woodpeckers arise, I hear the quaint littlesongs of the Rieffer's hummingbirds. This morning I distinctlyheard three of them, apparently situated at different points along theedge of the forest, at the head of the clearing. The one I watchedwas perching on a twig in the top of a fallen tree, 6 feet aboveground, just outside the edge of the forest. The 'song' is quitedistinct from that of any other hummingbird that I know, and easyto recognize once it has been heard ; but as usual with hummingbirds'songs, I find it difficult to paraphrase in human words, or to describeit in such a fashion as to give anyone who has not heard it a notionof its quaint pleasantness. Tse-we ts' toe is as near as I can cometo it in alphabetical notation ; but I am not well satisfied with whatI have written. Sometimes the phrase is repeated several times con-tinuously ; sometimes the bird sings Tse-we ts' we tse-xoe. These hum-mingbirds sing most actively in the dawn, and less and less as theday grows older.
"I first heard Rieffer's hummingbirds singing here last December,when I watched a bird that perched very near the position of theone I watched this morning. Probably he was the same individual.During the greater part of the dry season I failed to notice the oddlittle song; but now it has been a month or so since it was resumed.The males seem to have a singing assembly here at the edge of theforest, where they are to be found every morning; but they performless constantly than many other kinds of hummingbirds."Nesting.?In the Caribbean lowlands of Central America Rieffer'shummingbird has been found nesting at all seasons, and there are
RIEFFER'S HUMMINGBIRD 435
records of nests, from one part or the other of this region, for eachof the 12 months. In the Province of Bocas del Toro in westernPanama the majority of the nests were discovered during the drierweather from January until May. Although in the lowlands thenesting period, for the species as a whole, is unusually long, even fortropical birds, and is peculiar in including both the dry and rainyseasons, we do not know how many broods each female may raisein a year, or what period the breeding activities of a single individualmay cover.At Rivas, on the Pacific slope of southern Costa Rica, the hum-mingbirds of several species, including Rieffer's, behave in theirchoice of a breeding season essentially as the members of the familythat dwell in the higher mountains, although here the altitude isonly 3,000 feet and the avifauna in general is that of the humidlowlands, with a slight admixture of species representative of thesubtropical zone. In this region there is, in most years, a pronounceddry season of four months, from December to March, inclusive,while the remaining eight months are very wet. The great majorityof birds of all kinds breed between the vernal equinox and the Junesolstice; but there is a scattering of nests of birds belonging to themost diverse families at all periods of the year. The hummingbirds,however, breed chiefly during October, November, December, andJanuary, the very months when nests belonging to birds of otherfamilies are fewest.During a residence of a year and a half at Rivas, I recorded sixnests of Rieffer's hummingbirds during November, December, andJanuary but not a single one during the other nine months, whennests were just as assiduously sought by myself and the boys I hadreporting them to me. Flowers, although many are to be foundthroughout the year, reach their maximum profusion in the clearingsduring December and January, and their minimum abundance at theend of the dry season in March.The highest point at which I have seen a nest of Rieffer's humming-bird is the Hacienda Las Concavas, near Cartago, Costa Rica, where,at an altitude of 4,500 feet, I found a nest with two well-featherednestlings on November 3, 1935. The bird was nesting in the wettestand least agreeable season of the year, at a time when scarcely anyof the Central American bii-ds of other families breed at so high anelevation.The nests of Amazilia are placed in trees or bushes in the clearingswhere the birds reside, without any distinct preference for any par-ticular type. Frequently a thorny lime or orange tree is chosen, ora bougainvillea vine ; but as often a thornless kind is selected for thenesting site. Sometimes even a low herbaceous plant is favored. I
436 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMhave found their elevation to vary from 2 to 20 feet from the ground.The open cup is constructed in a variety of situations but ahnost in-variably on some slender support. If some variety of citrus tree hasbeen chosen, it may rest in the angle between an upright branch andone of its large thorns attached to both by cobwebs; or in anotherkind of plant it may be placed in the axil of a slender leaf stalk orin the angle between a thin horizontal branch and a vertical stem.Sometimes a leaf alone suffices for its foundation. One of the mostattractively situated I ever found was attached near the drooping tipof a large frond of the thorny pejibaye palm {Guilielma utilis) ; an-other was fastened to the palmately compound leaf of the Brazilianrubber tree; a third straddled the slender rhachis of the pinnatelycompound leaf of an akee {Blighia sapida)^ supported on each sideby the opposite leaflets. At times the bird selects a very inadequatefoundation. I once found a nest attached to a frail and decayingtwig, which in its descent from somewhere higher in the tree hadcaught on a horizontal branch and hung loosely beneath it, drapedabout with the fronds of a slender, creeping species of polypodyfern, which covered the bough and dropped in festoons below it. Theone requirement of a nesting site is a horizontal support sufficientlyslender to be grasped by the bird's feet?for from such a perch thebuilding operations are always begun?close to some vertical or ob-lique support to which the side of the nest may be anchored. Fre-quently the nest is situated above or close beside a path along whichpeople are constantly passing.The nest is an open cup, formed exteriorly of weathered strips ofgrass, leaves, bits of weed, fibers, and the like, and abundantly linedwith soft, felted plant down, the whole bound together by cobwebsliberally supplied. The outer surface is tastefully decorated withgray lichens and green mosses, which sometimes are allowed tohang in long, waving festoons beneath it. Rarely, as in the nest Ifound on Barro Colorado Island, this ornamentation is very sparinglyapplied, so that the prevailing color of the exterior is grayish ortawny, from the fibers and down employed in its construction. Some-times an otherwise beautiful nest is marred by a long piece of with-ered grass leaf, used in building the foundation, and carelessly al-lowed to hang beneath it. The dimensions of a typical nest are:External diameter 1% inches, height 1% inches; internal diameter114 inches, depth % inch.The moss- and lichen-covered nests blend so well with the greenfoliage among which they are usually placed that it would be ex-tremely difficult to find them, especially when the white eggs arehidden by the emerald bird, if the female sat more closely. The lo-cations of several nests, which otherwise I should probably never have
KIEFFER'S HUMMINGBIRD 437found, were betrayed by the birds' darting off as I passed within afew yards of them. The instinct that leads the birds to build a nestto blend so well with its setting lacks fulfillment in a correspondinginstinct to utilize this advantage by remaining motionless. Perhapsat the approach of really formidable enemies other than man the fe-male does remain motionless on her nest; but when most smallcreatures, lizards or birds even many times her size, venture too near,she merely darts at them and usually puts them promptly to flight.Individual birds, however, differ greatly in the closeness with whichthey cover their eggs and young. One female, the closest sitter ofall I found, whose nest was built in a young lime tree in a nurserywhere men were frequently at work, would allow me to approachwithin arm's length before deserting, to return within a few minutesand settle down on her eggs directly before me if I waited quietly atthis distance.I could scarcely have desired a nest located more conveniently forstudy than the first of this species I ever found. I was at the timeengaged chiefly in work with the microscope in a little frame build-ing that served as office and laboratory at the now abandoned ex-periment station of the United Fruit Co. beside the great Chan-giiinola Lagoon, 20 miles from Almirante, Panama. On the after-noon of December 19, I raised my head from my work and noticed ahiunmingbird, of a kind still unknown to me, perched on the petioleof a ramie plant {BoehmeHa nivea) just outside the window, scarcely3 yards from where I sat and separated from me only by a screen.An oddness in her manner of perching attracted my attention, and,looking more intently, I perceived something light colored almosthidden beneath her. When she flew off, I went out to examine herperch and found there a little tuft of plant down, fastened in theangle between the hairy petiole and the stem with cobweb, a piece ofwhite thread, and several hairs from cattle, which grazed all aboutthe small enclosure. During the succeeding days, as I sat ^t mywork table poring over bits of banana tissue, Amazilia labored stead-ily at her growing nest. The rite of adding a new bit of materialfollowed an invariable routine. Eeturning with a tuft of down inher slender bill, she would alight softly on the incipient nest, pushin the stuff where it was needed, and then proceed with the shapingof the structure. She bent down her head and, moving around andaround, with her long bill shaped the substance to the contour ofher body. As she pressed the yielding down more closely to herbreast, she erected the bronze-green feathers of her crown, and herfolded wings vibrated as if she thrilled in anticipation of the com-pleted nest and the nestlings it was intended to cradle. Then shesat facing in a set direction; and from the way her body bounced
438 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMup and down I concluded she must be kneading the material to-gether with her toes, although, as they were hidden beneath her, I wasunable to see them in action. Sometimes she would dart away andthen, as if the kneading and shaping had not been done to her satis-faction, return wdth empty bill to continue the moulding operations.So, as the nest grew, it became just large enough to fit snugly aboutthe central portion of her body, leaving neck and head and rump andtail protruding beyond its rim.Hummingbirds of this species do not seem to have any prescribedorder for the addition of the various elements of which the nest iscomposed. This particular bird began with a wad of down, thenbound around it strips of fibrous vegetable material, such as grassblades softened by partial decay, and fastened them there with cob-web. Others begin with strips of grass and banana-leaf epidermis,adding the down later when they can get it. It seems to be merelya matter of convenience or luck in finding the proper materials.I once found a nest built entirely of fine grass and pieces of w^eedsbut so devoid of lining that the eggs touched the branch on whichit rested. This was doubtless because down for the lining was notavailable ; and under favorable conditions the downy lining is addedsimultaneously with the fibrous materials, which impart rigidity tothe structure. Although the lichens and mosses appear to be merelyan ornament of the nest, and do not constitute an essential part ofthe structure, they are often added before the foundation portions 6ithe walls are completed.Because of torrential rains that interrupted her work, this hum-mingbird required 12 days for the completion of her nest; butothers, building during more favorable weather, may finish theirtask in a week.The attachment of Rieffer's hummingbird to a nest site once chosenis very strong. Soon after the eggs had hatched in the nest whoseconstruction has been described, the nestlings were attacked andkilled by ants. The deserted nest was then used as a quarry by an-other hummingbird, who removed most of the down to her own newstructure on the opposite side of the building. Six weeks after thedestruction of the nestlings, all that remained of their nest was itsbasal portion, a shallow cup of grass and fibers with hardly anylining, darkened and discolored by the elements. The originalbuilder now reclaimed it, added fresh bits of grass to the walls, in-creasing their height, and attached new lichens to the exterior.With the nest in this condition, she laid her two eggs upon the hard,impacted bottom; but afterward, in the intervals of incubation, shecontinued to build up and line the old structure, until at length itwas as comfortable, and appeared as solid, as when new. In Guate-
RIEFFER'S HUMMINGBIRD 439mala I once found a nest containing eggs, built upon an older nestof the same kind that had turned sideways.Eggs.?As with the great majority of hummingbirds, Rieffer's laystwo eggs. The interval between the laying of the first and second istwo days (about 48 hours). The eggs are pure white and oblong oroblong-ovate, often with little difference between the two ends. Themeasurements of six eggs removed temporarily from their nests inHonduras average 14 by 8.7 millimeters; the eggs showing the fourextremes measure 14.2 by 8.6, 14 by 9.1, and 13.5 by 8.6 millimeters.Young.?As she builds, so the female hummingbird incubates quitealone ; and no male of her kind takes an interest in her labors. Dur-ing her recesses she continues to seek fresh downy material and cob-web to add to her nest, even when it is already well padded. Theperiod of incubation is normally 16 days. I have never enjoyed abetter opportunity to watch the care and development of the youngthan was offered by the nest in the ramie plant, just outside thewindow before my work table in Panama.The newly emerged nestlings were like ugly grubs, blind, black-skinned, and naked except for two lines of short, tawny down ex-tending the length of the back, one on each side of the middle line.The slender bill of the adult was represented by a mere bump, hardlylonger than that of a newly hatched pauraque {Nyctidroirms alhi-collis). At intervals one of the graceless creatures reared up spas-modically, opening wide its yellow-lined mouth in a voiceless call fornourishment, to sink again exhausted, w'ith drooping head, into thenest. The mother's time for the first week was divided betweenbrooding and feeding her offspring, which she did in the customarymanner of the family, by regurgitation. Sitting upright on the rimof the nest, she thrust the rapierlike bill into the nearest gapingmouth, pushing it down until it seemed that it must pierce the en-trails of the nestling. Then with a convulsive jerking of the bodyshe regurgitated a portion of the contents of her crop into that ofher infant. Both nestlings were as a rule fed at each return to thenest, and often each was given food twice, alternately. When thenestlings are older, sometimes each is fed four times at a single visitof their mother. After feeding, she usually returned to brooding,repeatedly thrusting out her long, white tongue as she sat on thenest. Although during the day she flew off, twittering her complaint,at my too near approach, at night she would permit me to advanceand touch her on the nest, in the beam of a flashlight.With these constant ministrations the youngsters grew amazingly,and at the age of six days, when the beady black eyes first began topeep out of the still-naked head, and the bill had lengthened consid-erably, they quite filled the bottom of their downy cup. The next
440 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMday the eyes were fully/ open, and the tawny tips of the feathers beganto protrude from their sheaths. But at this stage the nest was in-vaded by fire ants, and my observations temporarily interrupted.Six weeks later the mother returned, repaired the old nest, laid twomore eggs, and hatched from them two nestlings, which lived totake wing. They passed through a most eventful infancy, attendedby many mishaps and tribulations. First the renovated nest becameloose on the supporting stem ; and I was obliged to fasten it up withpins to save the occupants from spilling out. The leaves that hadoriginally shaded it died and fell away with age, exposing the stillunfeathered nestlings to the full glare of the afternoon sun. They satwith necks stretched upward, mouths widely gaping, and glassy,staring eyes. Once I saw the mother perch on the rim of the nestwith wings partly spread, attempting to shield them from the sun'srays ; but her position was not well chosen and her shadow fell to oneside of them, and they continued to pant. Later she covered themon the nest ; but one nestling, pushing its head out between her wingand body, continued to gasp. Fearing they might succumb, I at-tempted to arrange a sunshade ; but I had not yet learned the tough-ness of young hummingbirds.Their vitality was amazing. Exposure to the sun, a 4-foot fallwhen the old nest finally broke to pieces, and repeated handling byfingers many times larger than themselves had not killed them. Nowa still more severe ordeal awaited them?24 hours of rain with hardlya let-up, and some beating tropical downpours in the interval. Themother had definitely ceased to cover them, and the scant foliage ofthe ramie, which remained above the nest I had improvised forthem, afforded slight protection. After a night of this severe pun-ishment, I watched them through much of the dreary day. Wlien theheavy downpours came, and the big drops beat ceaselessly upon them,the 2-week-old birds sat in the improvised nest with eyes closed andbills pointing straight to heaven, shaking their heads from side toside when struck by a particularly large drop. Their budding plum-age gave little comfort; and the cool rain soaked them to the skin.Amazilia attended them faithfully the whole day. At intervals be-tween the heavy showers she came, her black bill dusted with thewhite pollen of the banana flowers in which she had been probing,perched on the rim of the paper cup, and fed her wet offspring.Often one or the other or sometimes both of the nestlings refusedto accept nourishment, when she gently touched its bill once ortwice with hers as if to coax it to take food; but often it was toowet and miserable to be tempted. At each visit she ran over theplumage of the nestlings, or a part of the nest, with her tongue, anact I never witnessed in dry weather; and from the way her throat
RIEFFER'S HUMMINGBIRD 441
worked, I concluded she was sucking up some of the excess water.And with these unfailing maternal ministrations, the unfledged birdspulled through the ordeal. Then I began to understand somethingof the secret of the wide distribution and great abundance of thespecies. Their nesting habits appear very imperfect, for the nestseems to sacrifice utility to beauty, and in a region where a largeproportion of the birds build some sort of covered nest to protect itsoccupants from burning sun and beating rain, theirs is open to thesky, and moreover is too small to accommodate the two nestlingsuntil they are ready to leave it. Their success as a species residesrather in the inherent toughness of fiber of the nestlings, coupledwith the indefatigable attentions of the devoted mother.Before leaving the nest, the fledglings acquired the plumage ofthe adults, although the colors were not so bright, and tufts ofbrown down still adhere to the tips of the green feathers, givingthem a rather rough appearance. Two days before their departurefrom the nest, when I attempted to touch them they would ruffleup their feathers and attack a finger with their bills, which werestill considerably shorter than the adult's. The first bird flew offas I was examining the nest, at an age of 21 days. The foldedwings spread and began to whir, in a moment it rose into the air,and, uttering a low twitter as it went, flew away until it was lostfrom sight among the bananas. The maiden flight showed powerand control. The second bird left two days later, aged 22 days.The mother continued to feed them by regurgitation for a numberof days after their departure; but I am unable to state just howlong.The nestling period of these birds was perhaps a few days longerthan normal because of the untoward circumstances attending it.In the case of another nest I watched in Panama, the nestlings tookflight at the ages of 19 and 20 days, respectively. From a nest nearTela, Honduras, the nestlings departed at ages of 18 to 19 days,respectively, while from a second nest both departed at the age of19 days.Eieffer's hummingbird sits lightly on her nest, and a greater por-tion of her body protudes above it than is the case with most otherbirds. This is the outcome of the closeness with which she moldsit to the central portion of her body and then often continues to adddown to the interior after the eggs have been laid, further decreasingthe size of the cavity. The nestling, at the time of its departure, isalmost as large as the adult, and naturally the two are very muchcrowded in the small nest. Before they depart the wall is alwaysmore or less flared outward by the pressure of their bodies, whileone or the other is forced to an uncomfortable position on the rim.Especially when the nest is softened by water during rainy periods,
442 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
it is sometimes literally burst asunder by the pressure of the growingbodies it contains. In one case that came under my observation thenest split down the side, then turned almost inside out and dropped itstwo helpless occupants on the ground, I found them next morning,after a showery night, in the grass beneath the ruined structure,among wandering fire ants, which probably would eventually havedevoured them had I not replaced them on the remains of their nest,where they sat a week more before they were able to fly away.Phimages.?Dr. Frank M. Chapman (1925) states that "there isbut little variation with sex, age, or season in this species. The maleusually has the throat more solid green and the abdomen darker thanthe female, from which young males are not distinguishable."Behavior.?About the habitations of men, where these humming-birds seem most at home, they spend their time probing for insectsor nectar in the great red blossoms of Hibiscus sinensis, which iseverywhere a favorite shrub for hedges, dooryards, and the townplaza, or else in the blue trumpets of the Thunbergia, which scram-bles over fences and up the sides of houses; or they hover before thecoral vine, the blue flowers of CUtoria, or the blossoms of some fruittree. At other times they enter the banana groves and poise besidethe long, pendent inflorescences, where they probe the white blossomsclustered beneath their heavy red bracts, swarming with the little,black, stingless bees, which gather their pollen and rich nectar.Early in the morning one may see them bathing on the dewy surfaceof the broad banana leaves, over which they glide with vibrantAvings, gathering up the heavy dew drops in their plumage. They areno more sociable than other kinds of hummingbirds and dart fiercelyat another of the same or a different species if he ventures too near;but the bird attacked almost invariably retreats at the first dashingonslaught, closely followed by the pursuer; and I have never wit-nessed two birds engage in an encounter face to face, or one inflictinjury on another.A surprising aspect of the behavior of the Rieffer's hummingbirds,as I watched them near Almirante, Panama, during the early part of1929, was the frequency with which they pilfered material from oneanother's nests. About our house at the research station larcenyof this kind was shockingly prevalent ; and I believe that about halfof the failures to rear a brood that came to my attention were to beattributed to this unsocial practice. The condition was probablylocal and possibly even seasonal; I have never noticed it elsewhere;but then never elsewhere have I seen so great a concentration ofhummingbirds' nests. It was induced to a large extent, I think, bythe inadequate supply of down for lining the nests, added to theclose proximity in which they were placed, sometimes 100 feet orless from each other, which made robbery easier than a long expedi-
EIEFFER'S HUMMINGBIRD 443lion afield to gather soft materials. To this may be added the hmn-mingbird's passion for bringing more down to a nest in which incu-bation is already in progress and which is already quite adequatelylined. The presence of eggs did not render a nest sacred to otherhummingbirds, which sometimes continued to tear away materialuntil they fell to the ground.One unfortunate Rieffer's hummingbird, which tried to establisha nest in a cashew tree growing in a corner of our yard, was sounpeded in her efforts to build by the thievery of her neighbors thatat the end of a month of fairly continuous effort she had nothing toshow for her labor. With the usual attachment of her kind to oneparticular location, she tried to build only in the cashew tree andan avocado tree standing close beside it. A removal to a moredistant site might have brought her better fortune. In these twotrees she made at least 12 fresh beginnings of her nest, each of whichwas in a short time more or less completely obliterated. The be-havior of this bird is recorded in detail in my article in The Auk(Skutch, 1931) ; and to this the reader must be referred.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Eastern Mexico, Central America, and northwestern SouthAmerica ; casual in southern Texas ; nonmigratory.Rieffer's hummingbird ranges north to northern Veracruz (Tam-pico) ; and British Honduras (Orange Walk and Corosal). East toBritish Honduras (Corosal and Belize) ; Honduras (Tela and LaCeiba) ; Nicaragua (Matagalpa, La Libertad, and Bluefields) ; Pan-ama (Gatun and Barro Colorado Island) ; western Venezuela(Chama) ; central Colombia (Puerto Berrio, Bogota, and Fusu-gasugo) ; and western Ecuador (Perucho, Babohoyo, and Chimbo).South to Ecuador (Chimbo) ; Costa Rica (Boruca, Puntarenas, andBarranca) ; and southwestern Guatemala (Santa Lucia). West toGuatemala (Santa Lucia) ; western Tabasco (Teapa) ; eastern Oaxaca(Choapan, Playa Vincente, and Tuxtepec) ; and Veracruz (Orizaba,Cordoba, and Tampico).The birds found in Ecuador have been described as a geographicrace or subspecies.The claim of this species to a place in the list of birds of the UnitedStates rests upon two specimens captured at Fort Brown, Tex., inJune and July 1876.Egg dates.?Central America, Caribbean lowlands from Panama toGuatemala : 24 records, January to December, covering every month.Costa Rica, Pacific slope, 3,000 feet: 6 records, November 7 toJanuary 9. Caribbean slope, 4,500 feet : 1 record (nestlings) , Novem-ber 3.
444 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMAMAZILIA YUCATANENSIS CHALCONOTA OberholserBUFF-BELLIED HUMMINGBIRDHABITSThis is another Mexican species that extends its range northwardinto the valley of the lower Rio Grande in Texas. It is the northernform of a species inhabiting eastern Mexico and Yucatan, from theRio Grande to extreme southeastern Mexico, which has been dividedinto three subspecies. This race is described by Ridgway (1911) as
"similar to A. y. cerviniventris^ but under parts of body much paler(light cinnamon buff to pale pinkish buff) and green of upper partsaveraging more bronzy."The buff-bellied hummingbird was added to our fauna by Dr.James C. Merrill (1878), who took the first specimen within ourborders on the military reservation of Fort Brown, Tex., on August17, 1876. He found it to be an "abundant summer visitor" and saysthat "it seems perfectly at home among the dense, tangled thickets,darting rapidly among the bushes and creeping vines, and is withdifficulty obtained. A rather noisy bird, its shrill cries usually firstattract one's attention to its presence."While George F. Simmons and I were collecting with R. D. Camp,near Brownsville, Tex., in 1923, Captain Camp told us that thishummingbird had become very rare in that vicinity, but we saw twoor three in the tangled thickets along a resaca near town ; they triedunsuccessfully to shoot one, but I could plainly see the long, rufoustail and the buff underparts, which served to identify the species.As many nests have been taken in Cameron County, Tex., this hum-mingbird is probably still rather common in the open woodlands andchaparral thickets in that vicinity, coming out occasionally into theopen gardens and about the plantations, though much of its originalhabitat has been destroj^ed to make room for citrus orchards andvegetable farms.Nesting.?The first nest found within the United States is thusdescribed by Dr. Merrill (1878) : "A Hummer's nest, undoubtedlymade by this species, was found in September, 1877, within the fort.It was placed on the fork of a dead, drooping twig of a small treeon the edge of a path through a thicket ; it was about seven feet fromthe ground, and contained the shrivelled body of a young bird. Thenest is made of the downy blossoms of the tree on which it is placed,bound on the outside with cobwebs, and rather sparingly coveredwith lichens."Major Bendire (1895) writes:I have eight of these nests before me, all taken in Cameron County, Texas,which are readily distinguishable from those of other species breeding in theUnited States whose nests are known. They are composed of shreds of vege-
BUFF-BELLIED HUMMINGBIRD 445table fiber, thistle down, and an occasional specimen is lined with a vegetablesubstance resembling brown cattle hair ; but the majority are lined with thistledown. The outside is covered with bits of dry flower blossoms, shreds of bark,and small pieces of light-colored lichens, securely fastened in place by spiderwebs. The nests are neatly built, and are usually saddled on a small, droopinglimb, or placed on a fork of a horizontal twig, at distances of from 3 to 8feet from the ground. Small trees or bushes of the Anachuita {Cordia hoissieri)ebony and hackberry seem to furnish tlieir favorite nesting sites, though occa-sionally a nest is found in a willow. An average-sized nest measures 1% inchesin outer diameter by 1^/4 inches in height ; the inner cup is seven-eighths of aninch in width by five-eights of an inch in depth. Open woods and the edges ofchaparral thickets near roads or paths seem to be preferred for purposes ofuidification. Probably two broods are raised in a season. The earliest nestingrecord I have is April 23 ; the latest June 16.There are three nests of the buff-bellied hummingbird in theThayer collection in Cambridge, one collected in Tamaulipas, Mexico,and two in Cameron County, Tex. The latter two compare very wellwith the nests described above, in location, in size, and in materialsused in construction. But the Tamaulipas nest, collected on April 15,1908, is quite different; it is a very tall structure, apparently a seriesof three nests built upon the top of one another, perhaps the work ofthree seasons or the home of three broods; it measures 2i/2 inches inoverall height and 1^ inches in external diameter; the imier cavityis 1 inch in diameter and is hollowed to the depth of 1 inch, thishollow being nearly twice as deep as in the other nests. The nest ismade of thistledown, some with the seeds attached, and other woollysubstances, reinforced with very fine twigs, weed stems, small dryleaves, strips of inner bark and lichens, all bound together with spiderwebs; and it is lined with pale buff down.Eggs.?So far as I know, the buff-bellied hummingbird always laystwo eggs. These are oval or elliptical-oval and pure white. Themeasurements of 50 eggs average 13.24 by 8.65 millimeters; the eggsshowing the four extremes measure 15.3 by 8.9, 14.0 by 9.4, and 11.8 by7.7 millimeters.Plumages.?The sexes are alike in all plumages, and young birdsare much like their parents, although the green of the throat is moremixed with grayish buff. DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Coastal regions of southern Texas and eastern Mexico.The buff-bellied hummingbird breeds north to the lower Rio GrandeValley in Texas (Brownsville). From this point the range extendssouthward through eastern Tamaulipas (Matamoros and Altamira)
;
eastern San Luis Potosi (Valles) ; Veracruz (Tampico, Cordoba, andTlacotalapan) ; Yucatan (Merida) ; Quintana Roo (Palmul andAcomal) ; to Chiapas (Ocozucuantla).
446 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe race of this species that is found in Texas and northeasternMexico is known as Amazilia y. chalconota. Other races occur insouthern Mexico and in Yucatan.While apparently not regularly migratory, nevertheless it appearsthat those birds breeding in the Rio Grande Valley leave in Octoberfor winter quarters in southern Tamaulipas and Veracruz, returningin April.Egg dates.?Texas: 30 records, March 24 to July 16; 15 records,May 9 to June 9, indicating the height of the season.AMAZILIA SALVINI (Brewster)SALVIN'S HUMMINGBIRDHABITSThis seems to be a doubtful species, and evidently is only a hybrid.Only two specimens are known. The type, an adult male, was takenat Nacosari, Sonora, Mexico, by John C. Gaboon, on March 31, 1887,for William Brewster (1893) ; this specimen is now in the collectionof the Museum of Comparative Zoology at Gambridge. The otherspecimen, now in the collection of Dr. Louis B. Bishop (1906), wastaken for him by H. W. Marsden at Paymerlee, Gochise Gounty.Ariz., on July 4, 1905 ; this is a young female.The best authorities seem to agree that salvini is a hybrid betweenone of the races of AtnaBilia violiceps and one of the races ofGynanthus latirostris, but which race of each is involved seems opento discussion. Ludlow Griscom (1934) writes:A careful study of the color and structural characters of the type convincesme that Cyanomyia salvini Brewster is a hybrid between Amazilia violicepsconjuncta and Cynantlvus latirostris Swainson. These closely related genera dif-fer in (1) Amazilia has the frontal feathering extending forward to andpartially concealing the nasal operculum; (2) the tail is slightly forked inCynanthus, truncate in the section of Amazilia with which we are hereconcerned. In these respects salvini is an Amazilia as to the frontal feathering,but the tail is slightly forked as in Cynanthus. In size salvini resemblesthe Cynanthus, a considerably smaller bird than A. violiceps. The colorcharacters combine the two supposed parents perfectly. The glittering violetcrown plaque of violiceps combined with the plain green of Cynanthus pro-duces a glittering bluish green plaque. The green upper back fading todusky green is a perfect combination of the dusky versus dark green upper-parts of the supposed parents. The tail is dark green instead of steel blueversus dull dusky bronzy green, and the feathers have the gray tips ofCynanthus. The underparts are white medially as in the Amazilia, but thesides of the neck and chest are glittering bluish green, passing to green onthe sides and flanks, just as in Cynanthus.The nest of the hybrid form has, apparently, never been found, butRobert T. Moore has sent me the following note on a nest of Amaziliavioliceps ellioH, which very likely is one of the parent forms
:
XANTUS'S HUMMINGBIRD 447
"This was found by Chester Lamb on a 'thorny bush overhanginga creek' in a wooded arroyo at Copalito, northeastern Sinaloa, July29, 1936. The situ was the crotch of a dead twig 3 feet up fromthe ground at the extremity of a branch of the bush. The bulk ofthe nest is composed of the whitish cotton from the pod of the palo-blanco tree. The body of the structure is completely and tightlybound together on the entire external portion with very fine webbing,which may have been obtained from a spiderweb but looks sur-prisingly like the fine threads of the cotton itself. If so, they havebeen very carefully pulled out and each one worked separately intothe nest. Three small dead twigs are attached to the external part,but the chief decoration is a very beautiful 'pale glaucous-green'lichen. I have not seen this particular lichen used elsewhere, andI am sure it is not the oak lichen, commonly used by the white-earedhummingbird. The interior of the nest has no lining other than thecotton itself, but there are four lichens well inside of the margin ofthe nest. The characteristic feature of the structure, which differ-entiates it from the nest of most other species I have seen in north-western Mexico, is the use of the fine tendrils of cotton or cobwebsto swathe the external part of it."HYLOCHARIS XANTUSI (Lawrence)XANTUS'S HUMMINGBIRDHABITSThe type specimen of this hummingbird, a female now in theUnited States National Museum, was taken in 1859 near Cape SanLucas, Baja California, by John Xantus and was named in his honor.Its center of abundance is in the vicinity of the Cape, but it rangesnorthward to about the twenty-ninth parallel of latitude, where itbecomes rare.William Brewster (1902) says:This Hummingbird is peculiar to Lower California, but it is not strictly con-lined to the Cape Region, for Mr. Frazar found it common at a point aboutone hundred and fifty miles north of La Paz among the mountains oppositeCarmen Island in latitude 26?, and Mr. Bryant has traced its extension stillfarther northward to about latitude 29?. It seems to be most abundant, how-ever, in the mountains south of La Paz, especially on the Sierra de la Laguna,where it ranges from the highest elevations down to the lower limits of theoaks among the foothills. It also occurs?at least sparingly and locally atcertain seasons?in the low arid country near the coast, for Mr. Frazar tooka male at La Paz on February 11, and saw upward of a dozen at San Jos^ delCabo in September. At the latter place, Mr. Belding found it "common inorchards" about the last of April, 1882. Among the mountains it shows amarked preference for canons, especially such as have pools or small streamsof water. Mr. Belding says that "in winter" it is "found only in mountaincanons," but Mr. Frazar's experience was exactly the reverse of this, for dur-
448 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMing his winter visit to the Sierra de la Laguna (November 27-December 2),the "whole top of the cold, sleety mountain was alive with Xantus's Hummers,which seemed to be attracted there by an abundant shrub covered with dryyellow blossoms, whereas in May and June they were confined quite closely tothe canons." The truth of the matter probably is that their movements, likethose of most other members of this family, are dependent largely on thepresence or absence, at any given locality or season, of the flowers on whichthey feed.Chester C. Lamb (1925) evidently agrees with Mr. Brewster as tothe center of abundance of this hnmmingbird, which he says is "inLaguna Valley, in the heart of the Sierra de la Laguna, situated southof La Paz." He continues:These mountains are difficult of access, and it takes two days on mule back,over tortuous trails, to reach Laguna Valley, a small, uninhabited valley at anelevation of about 5500 feet. The Xantus Hummingbirds radiate out from thisvalley in all directions, and are very common in all the mountain canyons,right down to the open deserts. One may get into some of the favorable hum-mingbird localities of California and believe he has seen a great concourse ofhummingbirds, but half an hour's walk across Laguna Valley and around thelower rim will astound one at the numbers seen. One day I endeavored in thecourse of a short morning's walk to count the number of Xantus Hummingbirds,but, going up to two hundred before the first hour, I gave up the actual countand started to estimate. One cannot see this large number of hummingbirdsat any hour of the day, however. The very early morning hours are whenthey appear in the greatest abundance. At this time they come out of theoak and pine forests around the rim of the valley and seek a place to bathe,and also to feed and play around a red flowering shrub that grows along thestream on the floor of the valley.Nesting.?Mr. Lamb (1925) was at "Comondu from March 30 toApril 11, 1924, and during that interval twelve nests were dis-covered." He says:At this altitude, 800 feet, the birds must start nesting early in February, asall but three nests contained large young or eggs about to hatch. I wouldnot be surprised if they raised two broods annually at Comondu, though I didnot stay long enough to prove the fact or to learn the period of incubation.In their courting, the male Xantus Hummingbird does not fly up in the airand make the parabolic dive that the Costa Hummingbird does, but there isconsiderable chasing by individuals of one another around through the trees.The nesting birds of Comondu, where there are no oaks, have an entirelydifferent style of nest building from those of the oak regions of the Sierra de laLaguna. The Comondu birds are not particular as to what kind of a treethey select in which to build their nests. The nests are usually placed lowabove the ground, and they are always very close to running water. * * *At Comondu I noted two exceptions to the usual method of suspending neststo twigs. In one case a nest was found saddled to the dry spike of a datepalm tree, and another was saddled on a dead limb of a fig tree. Othertrees in which nests were found at Comondu were avocado, olive, lemon,orange, w'ater willow and cottonwood. * * *In the Sierra de la Laguna (Laguna Valley), nests are always in live oaktrees, not necessarily near water. I made diligent searches in the pines and
XANTUS'S HUMMINGBIRD 449
wbite oak trees, which, especially the latter, are much more abundant thanthe live oaks, but discovered no nests. Nearly all the nests found were hungat the ends of small twigs, from four to six feet from the ground, in verysmall live oaks. Two exceptions were nests found twelve feet up in largeoaks. * * *The nesting material of the Comondu birds and the Laguna birds was aboutthe same, the nests being composed of fine plant down, dried flower heads,plant fibers and small feathers, all bound together with spider webbing. Anest from Comondu is covered on the outside with strips of bark of the waterwillow. Without exception all the nests of the Sierra birds are beautifullydecorated with lichens from the oaks. The Comondu birds do not decoratetheir nests with lichens, these not being available, but sometimes they doattempt ii little decoration with bits of bark or leaves.The nesting dates of the Laguna birds are also different from those atComondu. We arrived in the Sierra de la Laguna on June 16 and remaineduntil July 7, and in that time no nests were found, though I am not sure thatthe birds were not nesting. August 3 I re-visited the mountains and remainedin Laguna Valley and vicinity until September 3, and in this month discoveredtwenty-five nests. On September 1 I found a nest just ready for eggs. Ofthose found, the greater number contained young or heavily incubated eggs,so it might be said that the nesting season in Laguna Valley started about themiddle of July and continued to the middle of September.Mr. Brewster (1902) gives the following detailed description of anest, found by Mr. Frazar:A nest found at San Jose del Rancho, on July 28, was placed at the extremityof a slender, drooping oak twig, about eight feet above the ground. One sideis built against and around the main stem (here only .12 inches in diameter),and the bottom rests securely on a terminal fork, from the ends of whichhang a number of dry, bleached oak leaves, apparently of the previous year'sgrowth. The chief, if not only, material composing the walls of this nestconsists of small, woolly leaves of a pale sage-green color, inteimixed withreddish-brown, catkin-shaped objects, which appear to be made up of numerousminute seed vessels attached in double, triple, or quadruple rows or clustersto stems an inch or more in length. The entire outer surface of the nest iswrapped with a net-work of spider-web silk so fine as to be well-nigh invisiblebut suflBciently strong and taughtly drawn to give the walls a firm, smoothoutline. The interior is not lined save at the bottom, which is furnished with asoft bed of whitish down, evidently that of some bird. This nest measuresexternally 1.60 inches in diameter by 1.65 in depth ; internally, .73 inches indiameter by .50 in depth.Eggs.?The two eggs laid by Xantus's hummingbird are prac-ticalljr indistinguishable from those of other hummingbirds of sim-ilar size. They are pure dull white and vary in shape from oval toelliptical-oval. The measurements of 26 eggs average 12.3 by 8.4millimeters ; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 13.5 by 9.9,11.4 by 7.8, 1.9 by 7.5 millimeters.Plumages.?I have no information on the early plumages of thenestling, but in the juvenal plumage, which is probably fully ac-quired before the young bird leaves the nest, the sexes are apparently178223?40 35
450 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
alike and closely resemble the adult female. The adult female is likethe adult male, but she has no black on the head, no green on thethroat, and the postocular stripe is buffy instead of white. Mr.Eidgway (1911) says that the young male has the "throat spottedwith metallic emerald green or yellowish green." And the youngfemale, he says, is "similar to the young male but without green onthe throat."Mr. Brewster (1902), who had a large series of these birds, takenevery month in the year except October and January, makes thefollowing general remarks on the seasonal variations in plumages
:
The summer and autumn birds ai'e by far the brightost colored, having thegreen of the back quite pure ; the black of the forehead, sides of head and chin,deep velvety often glossed vpith violet or blue ; the metallic green of the throat,clear and brilliant ; the cinnamon rufous of the under parts, rich and pure.The spring birds (March, April, and May) are uniformly much duller andpaler, the green of the back being much tinged with ashy or rusty, and theblack of the head with brown, while the green of the throat is muddy in toneand but slightly iridescent.One bird (No. 17,031, Triunfo. April 11, 1887) has the black of the headconfined to the auriculars, and the green of the throat to a few central spots,the rest of the under parts being dull cinnamon rufous, and the entire upperparts dull green with most of the feathers tipped with rusty cinnamon.This specimen is evidently a young mnle that is beginning to as-sume the adult plumage at its annual complete molt. Judged fromwhat is available in the literature and what can be learned from thestudy of specimens, it seems that the young of both sexes are, at first,like the adult female with no green on the throat ; and that the youngmale soon begins to acquire some metallic green feathers on thethroat, but does not assume the fully adult plumage until the nextspring; I have seen young males acquiring the green throat in Apriland in July, and in full molt in July. I have seen adults molting inJuly.Food.?Not much is definitely known about the food of Xantus'shummingbird, which probably does not differ essentially from that ofother hummingbirds, with due allowance for the species of insectsand feeding plants to be found in its habitat. Dr. Frederic A. Lucas(1893) lists: '^Cecidomym., Phora., three specimens of Solenopsisgeminatus., elytra of beetle, Psylhi.s, parts of spiders."Behavior.?Mr. Lamb (1925) has this to say about the habits ofthis hummer:At one place the hummingbirds' bath was discovered, where a trickle of waterflowed over a flat rock a short distance and then dropped in a tiny waterfall.At one time I counted nine birds at once taking a bath. They would sit in thewater and give themselves a thorough shower with their wings; then, to finishoff, they would fly against the falls, breast first, and then they would back up
XANTUS'3 HUMMINGBIRD 451
to the falling water. Besides tbe birds busily batliing, there were as manymore sitting around on the bushes, drying themselves.Towards dark, in the winter time, the adult males have a habit of perchingon some dead twig, and there, remaining motionless for a considerable period,give themselves up to song, uttering at regular short intervals their quitepleasing little tune. During the heavy tropical rains of that region the hum-mingbirds would disappear, but the minute the rain ceased they would be outagain. These birds love the pines and live oaks of the high mountain regions,and are to be seen at all hours of the day hunting around those trees for theminute insects that constitute their food.They seem to be of gentle disposition, though they do not permit the tooclose proximity of another species while feeding or at their nests. They aretame, but not so much so that the brooding female will ever allow a personto touch her. At most any time, a little squeak will bring one or two birdsbuzzing around one's head. When I had my work table out under the oaks thehummingbirds seemed much interested in my work, buzzing around the tableand inspecting my instrument box. I had a fluff of cotton hanging nearby,which they soon learned made excellent nest building material.Enemies.?Mr. Lamb (1925) says that ravens are very common inthe Cape region of Baja California and are very destructive; one wascaught in the very act of destroying a hummingbird's nest that hehad just examined.Field marks.?The only hummingbird with which Xantus's ishkelj^ to be confused is the Avhite-eared, as both have the whitepostocular stripe ; but, fortunately, their ranges do not overlap. Theadult male xantusi is easily recognized by its blue-black face, whitepostocular stripe, bright metallic-green throat, cinnamon-rufousunder parts, largely chestnut tail, and reddish bill. The female issimilar but with no black on the head, no green on the throat, andhas a black bill and a buffy postocular stripe. The yomig are similarto the adult female, though the young male may have the throatflecked with green. DISTKIBUnONRange.?The southern half of the peninsula of Baja California;noiunigratory. This species is normally found from about the centralpart of this Mexico State (Purissima) south to the cape district(San Jose del Cabo). A specimen was collected at Todos Santos zIsland off the northern part of the west coast on November 14, 1923. fo^There are no records for the United States. ^ "VEgg dates.?Lower California (lowlands) : 12 records. April 5 to *J**^Lower California (mountains) : 14 records, July 19 to August 5.Mr. Lamb (1925) says that at Comodu they must start nesting inFebruary and that in the Laguna Valley they probably nest fromJuly 15 to September 15.
452 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMHYLOCHARIS LEUCOTIS LEUCOTIS (Vieillot)WHITE-EARED HUMMINGBIRDPlvte 73HABITSCONTEIBTJTED BY ALEXANDER F. SkUTCHThe white-eared hummingbird is a common and widespread speciesof northern Central America and Mexico, occurring in the UnitedStates only in southern Arizona, where it was first discovered in theChiricahua Mountains by Dr. A. K. Fisher (1894). Near the south-ern extremity of its range, in Guatemala, it is a bird of the highlandsfomid chiefly at elevations between 4,000 and 9,000 feet, although infavorable localities it may extend upward to 11,000 feet above sealevel. Here its favorite haunts are the more open woods of oak,pine, and alder and the clearings and bushy mountainsides wherethere is a profusion of flowering shrubs. Over much of the Guate-malan highlands, at the altitudes it prefers, it is one of the mostabundant and familiar hummingbirds of the cultivated areas and theflower gardens, but it is rarely seen in the darker and more humidforests and almost never in the heavy cypress forests of the mountain-tops. In the southern part of its range it is resident at all seasons,or at most performs short altitudinal migrations occasioned by thelocal abundance of flowers. But in Arizona, according to Oberholser(1925), the species is migratory, arriving probably in April and re-maining until August or possibly September, although definite datesof arrival and departure are lacking. It is said to winter as farnorth as the Valley of Mexico and the State of Colima.In El Salvador and Nicaragua the species is represented by therace -pygmaea, which in the former country, according to Dickeyand van Eossem (1938), ranges between 3,500 and 8,000 feet abovesea level, dwelling in the undergrowth of the oak forests and invarious sorts of scrubby growth.GourtsMp.?In the highlands of western Guatemala, the rainy sea-son normally extends from the middle of May to the middle ofOctober. In November and December, the first months of clear,sunny weather, there is a greater profusion of bright, conspicuousblossoms than at any other period of the year. Hummingbirds ofall kinds nest during this flowery season, despite frequent cold, bitingwinds, and the frosts that from November to the end of March formalmost nightly on open fields above 7,500 feet. By the end of Janu-ary blossoms have become far fewer as a result of continued drynessand frosts increasingly severe, and the nesting season of the hum-mingbirds is drawing to a close. During the period between the
WHITE-EARED HUMMINGBIRD 453
vernal equinox and the June solstice, when the vast majority ofbirds of all kinds raise their young, nests of the hummingbirds areunknown at higher elevations. During the season when the hum-mingbirds breed, the only other bird whose nests I have found, ataltitudes in excess of 7,000 feet, is Diglossa laritula^ an aberranthoneycreeper, which, like them, sucks the nectar of flowers.Just as many of the plants that blossom during the dry seasonanticipate the return of bright weather and open their earliestflowers during the gloomy days of the later part of the rainy season,so the male white-eared hummingbirds prepare for their courtshipwell in advance of the cessation of the rains. By the end of August1933, some of the male white-ears, on the mountains above Tecpanin west-central Guatemala, had chosen the positions they wouldoccupy during the following months, and from time to time soundedin a tentative fashion the clear little notes that advertise their pres-ence to the females. As September advanced with increasing mistand rain they lapsed into silence, but with the advent of Octoberthey became vocal again, and some tinlvled from the same busheswhere I had first heard them a month earlier.As I roamed the bushy mountainsides and the open oak woods, itsoon became clear to me that the male white-ears were not distributeduniformly or at random over the territory suitable to them but hadcongregated into definite groups which I came to call "singing assem-blies." The largest of these assemblies that I discovered was madeup of seven birds, whose perches were in the pine and oak trees sur-rounding an irregular open pasture. This group was very muchspread out, with the two most distant individuals about 600 feetapart and out of hearing of each other (unless the hummingbirds'ears are sharper than my own) ; but each member of the assemblycould certainl}^ hear the calls of two or more of his neighbors. An-other assembly consisted of five birds, scattered among tall raijonbushes that had taken possession of an abandoned pasture, the birdsso spaced that each was about 90 to 100 feet from his neighbors.Other assemblies contained three or only two white-ears. Sometimesthe birds perched as close as 60 feet from each other. Between thesegroups of hummingbirds were considerable stretches of similar ter-rain where one listened in vain for their reiterated notes.Scattered here and there, however, were lone males, which re-mained aloof from the assemblies. One of these made his head-quarters in a raijon bush beside the road, and here I frequently methim, perched on a dead twig and tinkling persistently. Another,with a weak, plaintive little voice, called from a low perch on a bushin an overgrown pasture, beyond hearing of all others of his kind.The male white-ears sometimes chose low perches in the midst of
454 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
a thicket, only 2 or 3 feet above ground, sometimes higlx, exposedones, such as the dead twig of a pine tree 40 feet in the air. Onebird, which engaged much of my attention, regularly alternated be-tween a perch less than a yard from the ground in a thicket ofraijon bushes, and an exposed dead twig in the top of an alder treegrowing beside the thicket, fully a dozen times as high. Sometimesa strong wind caused a wliite-ear whose favorite perch was lofty andexposed to descend to some lower, more protected position close athand. Whatever the nature of the station he had chosen, the birdwas to be found there day after day, week after week, throughoutthe months of October, November, and December. When I departedthe region at the end of the year, a number still sounded their littlecalls from the very spots where I first encountered them early inSeptember.Perhaps the most typical note of the male white-eared humming-bird in the singing assembly is a low, clear tink tink tink^ soundinglike the chiming of a small, sweet-toned silver bell. At least this isthe note that I first discovered, and the one that I like best to remem-ber. Some individuals toll their little bells very rapidly, others moreslowly and deliberately. But as I began to know more and morewhite-ears, scattered over miles of mountainside, I came to realizethat there was a surprising degree of variation in their voices. Manyindividuals persistently sounded notes so different from the usualclear tinkle that I did not recognize them as the utterances of white-ears until I had laboriously stalked the birds and actually watchedthem as they called. These notes were dull and flat, with no traceof the clear timbre characteristic of the majority of the species, orelse high and squeaky, or low and melancholy. One that I frequentlyvisited uttered rapidly and monotonously a single clicking note, akind of harsh metallic buzzing almost painful to hear.These individual differences in voice were surprising enough inthemselves, but even more remarkable was the fact that the sametype of voice was likely to be common to all the members of a singingassembly. If one bird of a group uttered a clear, silvery tinkle, hisneighbors would be found to sing in the same strain; if I happenedto be attracted to an assembly by a chirping note, I usually foundthat this note was common to all the members of the group. Therewere, of course, exceptions to this rule, but these were not sufficientlynumerous to make me doubt its validity. But what is the explana-tion of this phenomenon? Not impossibly it was the result of imi-tation, and all the members of an assembly merely copied the vocalpeculiarities of one bird that happened to be the first to begin tosing, or in some manner dominated his neighbors by his personality.But I suspect that the real cause was deeper. The individual varia-
WHITE-EARED HUMMINGBIRD 455tions in voice were so great that they seemed to me to result fromvariations in the structure of the vocal organs. I never heard thewhite-ear that produced the metallic rattle utter the clear, silverytinlcle, or vice versa. More than this, I find it difficult to believethat the same individual was physically capable of producing soundsso distinct. It is not impossible, although the point would be diffi-cult of actual proof, that these peculiarities of voice are inherited,and that the males of the same assembly are somehow related by tiesof blood.Whether a clear dawn revealed the pastures white with frost, orday broke sadly over a world drenched in gray, wind-blown cloudmist, dreary and penetratingly chill, the white-eared hummingbirdsalways began to sing in the dim light of early dawn. Once the seasonof song was at its height, neither wind nor rain or cold, drivingcloud mist could utterly quench the spirits or extinguish the voicesof these tiny hummers. They sang most vigorously early in themorning, and less and less as the day advanced. In the afternoontheir song was rather inconstant, for they were far less perseveringin their vocal exercises than the violet-ears {Golibri thalassinics)
,
one of which made almost as much volume of sound as a wholeassembly of white-ears, and continued his chant far more constantlythrough the day. As he sang the male white-ear tilted upwardhis coral-red, black-tipped bill and turned his head restlessly fromside to side. Sometimes he would interrupt his tinkling to uttera rapid twittering, which ran off into a very low buzz of a mostpeculiar tone. Perhaps this twittering and buzzing represented histrue song, but it was far less melodious than the tinkling of thoseindividuals with the clearest voices and would not bear comparisonwith the inspired little song of Elliot's hummingbird (Atthis hel-oisa) . At intervals he vibrated his wings in the midst of his tinkling,or paused and slowly stretched them. Finally, becoming hungry, heflew off to suck nectar from the flowers, the nearest of which wereoften at a considerable distance from the singing-perch.The territorial rights of each white-ear were respected by theothers, and as a rule each sounded his little tinkle without muchinterference from his neighbors. But occasionally one invaded thedomain of another, and a vigorous but inconsequential pursuit re-sulted. Sometimes one settled down close to the perch of a second,and the two sang face to face or side by side for a few moments,until one dashed at the other and both winged rapidly out of sight.Or else the two rose, spiring about each other, high into the air,only to separate without having come to grips or inflicted injuryon each other. Then, the momentary flareup over, each would re-turn peaceably to his own post and continue his tireless calling.
456 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThe purpose of so much vocal activity on the part of the malesis without much doubt to attract the opposite sex. Their seasonof song coincides roughly with the nesting period of the females.Yet, in spite of many hours of watching, I was not able to deter-mine the beliavior of the males when a female approached or towitness actual pairing. The white-ears are so small and withal soshy that they are difficult to keep in sight; on the wing their move-ments are so swift that it is impossible to distinguish male fromfemale, or even to follow them long with the eye. I saw three orfour of these hummingbirds flying together, pursuing and pursued,so frequently that I suspect that they do not honor the rights oftheir neighbors when a female approaches, as manakins, which formsimilar assemblies for courtship, almost invariably do.In January, when the blossoms become less abundant with increas-ing drought, the white-ears disperse and cease to call. Duringmost of the year they are silent; and one is not likely to notice themunless he watches before a stand of flowers, which they visit forthe purpose of sipping the nectar.Nesting.?In the middle of October 1933, six or seven weeks afterthe males had selected their posts and begun to sing in a tentativefashion, I found a female just beginning her nest. Later I found adozen more, which, together with four I had discovered in Novem-ber 1930, brought the total up to 17; but some were never com-pleted, all were well removed from the singing assemblies of themales, some far away, others just sufficiently distant to be out ofhearing of the nearest male?that is, of course, too far away for ine^to hear his voice. With a single exception, all these nests wereplaced among the slender twigs of the raijon {Baccharis vaccini-oides), a composite shrub common everywhere on the mountains, atheights varying from 5 to 20 feet above ground. The one nest notin a raijon bush had been built in the crotch of an ascending branchof a bushy Eupatorium. The nests were situated in bushy clear-ings or light, open woodland.The female white-ear built her nest alone, without the assistanceor even the encouragement of one of the males that sang so tire-lessly beyond sight and hearing. The raijon bush she chose as itssite was never far distant from the oak trees upon which she de-pended for the downy materials she needed. The leaves of sev-eral species, belonging to both the white and black oak groups, arecovered on the lower surface with a dense, woolly cloak composedof rather short, crinkled, tawny Imirs. This hairy covering is firmlyattached to the epidermis and difficult to remove, except in placeswhere a leaf-mining larva has devoured the underlying tissues. Byseeking out the spots where the larva has separated the epidermisfrom the body of the leaf, the hummingbirds materially diminish the
WHITE-EARED HUMMINGBIRD 457labor of gathering the down. But an even greater proportion ofthe material used in the nests is derived from the woolly insect gallsgrowing on the oak leaves. The color of these galls varies fromrusty brown or reddish brown to light buff. Although the dark-colored galls on the upper sides of the leaves are more abundant, thehummingbirds prefer the pale ones, which are found only on thelower sides of the foliage, and neglect, or use very sparingly, thosewith brownish hairs.Thus insects, either indirectly, by laying the eggs that stimulatethe leaves to produce hairy galls, or directly, by freeing the normalwoolly covering from the body of the leaf and making it easyto remove, supply the white-eared hummingbird with practicallyall the downy stuff for her nest. Spiders, in spinning their webs,furnish her the material necessary to bind the down together andto attach the nest to the supporting twigs. Green mosses and grayishlichens are attached to the exterior for decoration. Some nestsare very well covered with these plants, which give the prevailingcolor to the exterior, while others are so sparingly decorated thatmuch of the down shows through. In form, the nest is roughly ahollow sphere with the upper quarter cut away. The outside diam-eter of the open cup varies from 1% to 2 inches; the height from II/4to 2% inches. The interior of the cozy little nest is very nearlyas broad as deep and measures about an inch in both diameter anddepth. The rim is quite noticeably incurved, and this helps tohold the eggs inside when fierce November winds whip the slenderbranches of the raijon bushes and threaten to roll them out.Robert T. Moore contributes the following notes on nests of thewhite-eared hummingbird, found by Chester C. Lamb and himselfin Chihuahua and Sinaloa, Mexico : "In his journal Mr. Lamb statesthat the Laguna Juanota nest was found 'in a small oak, 6 inchesin diameter and 25 feet tall, growing in a grove of the same on thenorth hillside of a rocky butte at the lake.' It was saddled on atwig among the leafy extremities of a branch 2 feet from the trunk.The nest is composed almost entirely of a buff-colored plant down,the only exceptions consisting of one small oak twig woven looselyto the bottom of the nest and greenish gray lichens ornamentingthe exterior portion. Measuring 1 by li/g inches on the inside, it hasno other lining except the plant down. The outside measurementsare 1% by iy2 inches."He tells of a second nest, twice as large as the above, which re-sembles it closely, "except that two oak catkins have been woveninto the sides and the lichen decorations are more complete."Then, of a third nest, he says : "Its total bulk is nearly five timesthat of the first nest and four times that of the second, and yet the
458 BULLETIlSr 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMinternal dimensions are actually less than either, namely 1 by f^inch. The internal depth, however, is almost twice as great as thatof nest No. 1. The external measurements are length Si/g, width21/4, and depth 2i/s inches. Furthermore, the structure of the externalpart of the nest is almost totally different, being completely swathedwith a fine green moss, and having pine needles, dried twigs, and fouror five small leaves, as well as a few lichens, woven into the externalconstruction. There is no evidence whatever that this is a double nest.
"It is quite probable that the environment of the nest site had agreat deal to do with the type of construction. This moss-coveredabode was placed on a small shrub, growing out of rocks 4 feet upfrom the base of a cliff in a very dark and deep arroyo. In such aplace much moss is available, whereas lichens are difficult to find.Three nest sites so dissimilar could hardly have been chosen as thesethree structures?an oak tree on the very highest point of a wind-blown mountain range, a cliff jutting out on the shore of a wind-protected small lake, and the bottom of a deeply shaded gorge. Dis-similarity of nesting period is also indicated?March, May, andAugust."Eggs.?The number of eggs laid by the white-eared hummingbirdappears invariably to be two. They are pure white and narrowlyoblong. The measurements of six eggs, removed temporarily fromtheir nests in the highlands of Guatemala, average 12.5 by 8.0 milli-meters. The eggs showing the four extremes measure 12.7 by 7.9, 12.3by 8.3, and 11.9 by 7.9 millimeters.Young.?Incubation is carried on by the female alone, withoutever so much as a visit from on? of the males, which continue tosing as if oblivious of all the cares and labor of the other sex. Bothof the female white-ears I watched sat deeply in their nests. Whenperfectly at rest, the eyes were only a trifle above the rim, the sideswere entirely protected, the back was invisible to a person slightlybelow the level of the nest, while the tail and the tips of the longestwing plumes projected beyond the rim at the rear. They were farbetter protected than the Rieffer's hummingbirds of the warm low-lands, for the nests of these are comparatively broad and shallow,and much of the body of the sitting bird remains on the outside.The white-eared hummingbirds' mode of entering and leaving theirnests demonstrated clearly their lightness and skill upon the wing.Upon returning to their eggs after a recess, heavier birds alight uponthe rim of the nest, or even upon a branch at a little distance, andwalk or hop into the cup. The white-ears never alighted on the rimbut invariably flew directly into the nest and, as they settled neatlyover the eggs, folded their wings about them and were at once atrest. Most birds of other families, when they wish to leave the nest,
WHITE-EARED HUMMINGBIRD 459
step on the rim before taking flight, but the hummingbirds showedtheir mastery of the air by making their departure in a more directmanner. Still sitting on the eggs, they spread and vibrated theirwings and rose directly into the air, with as little apparent effort asif they were lighter than the atmosphere, and ascended because theirhidden moorings had been severed. Frequently they flew upwardand backward until they had cleared the nest, then quickly reversedand darted forward and away. When they wished to turn theireggs, they flew backward from the bowl onto the rim, alighted onthat portion that had been beneath the tail as they sat, bent downthe bill into the cup, and in an instant flew away. Of course, I couldnot see the eggs or what was done to them, for the nests were abovethe level of my eyes as I watched ; but this is the only significance Ican find in the oft-repeated act; and moreover, if the hummingbirdsdid not turn their eggs on these occasions, they never turned themat all. They never rose up while incubating to adjust their eggsbeneath them, as other birds do, doubtless because the length of thebill, coupled with the narrowness of the bowl, would have made thisan awkward and difficult performance.During the morning hours the white-ears devoted much time toseeking down and cobweb and bringing these materials to the nest.The down was deposited inside the cup, the cobweb wiped from thebill to the outer surface; and in addition an occasional lichen wasattached there. Since the nests had been completed before the eggswere laid, these additions to its bulk appeared to be made from forceof habit rather than from necessity; and it was interesting to findthat the new materials were brought chiefly at the time of day whenthe birds had built most actively. The daily application of freshcobweb was useful in that it served to prevent the binding of thenest, and its attachment to the supporting twigs, losing their strengthwith age. During the hours when the gathering of material claimedtheir attention, the birds spent very brief periods on the eggs, oftenonly a minute and sometimes less; but in the afternoon, when theybrought nothing back with them on returning from their recesses,they sometimes sat continuously for 20 or 30 minutes, rarely slightlylonger. During the course of an entire day the average period ofincubation of one white-ear was 9.7 minutes; her average recess wasfive minutes. Her separate sessions on the eggs during the forenoonranged from less than 1 minute to 15 minutes, with an average of7.4 minutes ; her recesses varied from 1 to 10 minutes, with an averageof 3.7 minutes. During the afternoon, when she sat more constantly,her sessions varied from 7 to 24 minutes, with an average of 15minutes, and her recesses were of 2 to 17 minutes' duration. Fromher first departure in the morning until her final return in the eve-
460 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
ning, she devoted 7 hours 47 minutes to warming her eggs, while3 hours 69 minutes were spent away from the nest.Wlien at length they are hatched, the new-born hummingbirdsappear more like black grubs than the nestlings of a feathered crea-ture. Their eyes are completely hidden by the tightly closed lids;the bill is represented by a mere bump; and the line of sparse brownfuzz along the center of the back does little to cover their bareness.They seem very small and very naked to survive the cold blusterydays that during November and December are frequent on the highermountains where they are raised. During the nights they are wellprotected from exposure, for their downy nests are thick-walled andwarm, and their mother fits into the space above them as snugly asa cork in the mouth of a bottle, maintaining the vital spark withinher children by means of her own marvelous capacity for heat pro-duction. It is during the day that the endurance of the nestlings isput to the most severe test, because they must be left uncovered atintervals while the mother forages for food. If ever nestlings seemto need the ministrations of a father, to help feed them and to warmthem while the mother takes her recesses and seeks her food, it isthese little hummingbirds; yet no male ever appears to aid in theircare, for this is not the custom among hummingbirds. On cruel dayswhen a wind that is half a gale drives the chilling cloud mist throughthe treetops and whips the limber branches that support the nests,one marvels that such minute creatures, smaller even than a honeybee, can maintain the temperature of their bodies above the deathpoint, even during the few minutes for which they are left exposedwliile the mother forages. Sometimes, indeed, a tiny hummer onlya few days old is found dead in its? nest, apparently having suc-cumbed to the inclement weather, in spite of the devoted attentionof the mother.Before the nestlings are large and strong enough to raise up andeject their droppings beyond the rim of the nest, these are removedfrom the interior by the mother, who, standing on the rim, graspsthe particles between the tips of her mandibles and throws them out bysideways jerks of her heard, or else swallows them, and by this meanskeeps the nest decently clean. When they are slightly older, theyoung hummers barely manage to deposit their excrement on therim, and then the parent, less careful than most passerine birds inthe sanitation of her nest, no longer takes the trouble to remove it.Finally, with increasing size and strength, the nestlings are able toeject their droppings beyond the rim of the nest and no longer soil it.When the young hummingbirds are seven or eight days old theirpinfeathers begin to sprout. At the age of nine or ten days the eye-lids begin to part, and the brown tips of the feathers to peep from
WHITE-EARED HUMMINGBIRD 461the ends of their sheaths. Four days later the green portions of thecontour feathers become visible; but still the black skin of the littlebirds is not entirely covered. They are 16 days old before the wingplumes begin to push from the ends of their sheaths, and 18 days ofage before the rectrices escape their horny covering. The nestlingsare brooded nightly by their mother until 17 or 18 days old, when theyare well clothed with feathers. If frightened, they may fly from thenest at the age of 23 days, but if unmolested they do not depart untiltheir twenty-sixth day. At the time of their departure they fly withstrength and ease and never again return to the shelter of the nest.The fledgling white-ears closely resemble their mothers, except thatthe white postocular line is slightly tinged with buff. It is perhapssignificant that these hummingbirds raised during cool and frostyweather in the highlands remain in the nest several days longer thanthe Rieffer's hummingbirds of the warm lowlands, which quit thenest at the age of 18 to 23 days.The white-eared hummingbirds may raise two broods in a season.One female, which succeeded in raising a single nestling in her firstnest, built a second structure, 40 feet from the first, during the weekafter her fledglmg took wing. She had a busy week, for she satisfiedthe hunger of the young hummingbird in the intervals of working onthe new nest. As a result of her divided attention, the second nestwas far less perfect than the first. It was shallower, thinner walled,and carelessly finished; in fact, it seemed scarcely completed whenthe first egg was laid in it, ten days after the fledgling departed hiscradle.From my tent I watched this hummingbird as she incubated hersecond set of eggs. Her fledgling, a young male, was now 40 days oldand had been out of the nest just two weeks. In size he was scarcelyto be distinguished from his mother. His bill seemed slightly shorter,and his back was not such a bright green, because many of thefeathers still bore the downy-brown tips which characterize thenestling plumage. He flew very well, and spent much time suckmgnectar from the red blossoms of the salvias, which I could watchthrough the right window of the tent. When not occupied withvisiting the flowers, he rested among the low branches of a littlebushy thicket about 30 feet from his mother's second nest. Here shecame to feed him during her absences from the eggs, in spite of thefact that he could now forage very well for himself. Once, indeed,he visited the flowers while his mother gathered food for him, thencame to supplement his meal by what she had to offer. Perching be-side him upon a low twig, she delivered the food, as always, byregurgitation, which she began with very violent convulsive move-ments of the body. He was a well-behaved youngster and never came
462 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMto pester his mother with demands for food while she warmed hereggs, but always waited patiently for her to come to him. As hewaited in his little thicket, he called slowly tink tink tink^ an utter-ance that somewhat resembled the calls of the adult males on theirsinging perches, but was much fainter and weaker.AVliile she incubated her first set of eggs, the mother found muchtime for bringing additional cobweb and down to the nest, whichwas so well finished that it did not appear to require further atten-tion. The hastily built second nest was in far greater need of addi-tional material; but now the hummingbird was too busy with otherthings to give time to this and brought nothing to the nest duringthe morning which I passed with her. She was now more atten-tive to her duties and incubated more steadily; she camxC to and leftthe nest only eight times in four hours, as compared with 23 timesduring the same period of a morning while she incubated her first setof eggs. Even during a seven minutes' recess from the nest, shefound time to satisfy her own himger and to gather food for herfledgling.It seems to be the unhappy fate of hummingbirds that their nestscome to disaster even more frequently than those of other kinds ofbirds, and the white-ears are no exception to this rule. The ninecompleted nests I found in Guatemala in 1933 contained two eggseach, making a total of 18. Three of these nests were destroyed insome unknown manner while they still contained eggs, and one wasdeserted. Only nine eggs hatched. Of the nine nestlings, one suc-cumbed to the cold, two were probably taken by the Indians, andthree met unknown ends. Only three lived to leave the nest.Plumages.?Dr. Frank M. Chapman (1925) writes: "Youngfemales have the crown and upper parts more rusty than the adult,the under-parts buffy white, the sides rusty rather than green.Young males resemble the adult female, but usually have a fewmetallic blue feathers on the throat or forehead."Dickey and van Rossem (1938) write of the closely allied racepygmaea in El Salvador, where apparently the species breeds in No-vember and December, just as in the neighboring Republic ofGuatemala: "A young male taken February 21 has nearly com-pleted the post] uvenal body molt, and the iridescent blue and greenfeathers are rapidly filling in the chin and throat."Food.?^Like other hummingbirds, the white-ears subsist largelyupon the nectar of flowers, which they supplement bj^ minute spidersplucked from their webs and small volitant insects deftly snatchedfrom the air. They seem to have no particular preferences as to thesource of their nectar but visit indifferently a great variety of blos-soms. At the beginninor of their nesting season in the Guatemalan
WHITE-EARED HUMMINGBIRD 463highlands, a bur-marigold {Bidens refracta), common in the openoak woods, is one of their principal food plants. With great pa-tience the hummingbird poises on vibrant wings before a yellowflowerhead and rapidly moves its bill from floret to floret, an instantin each, and usually probes many in each head, before flying on tothe next. Each tiny floret yields at best a minute quantity of nectar,but there are so many in a flowerhead that in aggregate they mustsupply a considerable amount. Later in the season, various speciesof Salvia, in particular the red Salviaf cinnaharina, yield an abun-dance of nectar, which is secreted as a single large drop at the baseof the corolla tube, and so is far more conveniently sipped than thesweet secretions of the bur-marigold heads, divided among a multi-tude of separate florets. Though usually the white-ear reaches thenectar through the throat of the corolla, once I watched an eccentricindividual puncture the side of the tube of the lovely blue flowers ofSalvia cacalioefolia, easily pushing his sharp bill through the delicatetissue of the corolla.Behavior.?In April 1938, in southeastern Sinaloa, Mr. Moore ob-served four species of hummingbirds "feeding from the flowers ofone large shrub at an altitude of about 6,000 feet. Approaching theproportions of a tree, this remarkable shrub, 20 feet in height andof the same width, was completely covered with globelike clusters ofgrayish-lavender blooms. At no time from sunrise to sunset werethere less than four hummingbirds in this tree. Often there were asmany as 20 of four different species, white-eared, broad-tailed, cal-liope, and Margaret's hummingbirds. The white-ears, like irascibleknights of the air, were always ready to thrust lance at an assumedaffront. It made no difference whether it was the tiny Margaret's orthe larger broad-tailed, some white-ear would dive viciously at anyintruder that dared to approach too close. The broad-tailed hum-mingbird, heavier and more powerful, would dart into the tree withdirect flight and pompous hum, but his assurance would be quicklydispelled. A male white-ear would immediately launch an assaultand drive the larger bird up the mountainside in ignominious retreat."The same dominance was exhibited on several afternoons in May1937, when I visited the mammoth paintbrush beds on the slopes ofMount Mohinora at the 10,000-foot level. Here the white-ears out-numbered all the broad-billed, blue-throated, and Rivoli's together.In one of these astounding fields of color, perhaps 100 yards longand 100 feet wide, a dozen white-ears were feeding at one time. Ifone of the other larger species dived into the flower masses, even if ata point far removed from the nearest white-ear, one of the latterwould immediately whirl to the attack and drive the Rivoli's andblue-throated hummingbirds, twice their size, into headlong flight.
464 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMDuring the drowsy hours of midday the white-ears would cease feed-ing and rest quietly at various points among the oak trees, generallychoosing some spot in the shade. Should a blue-throated or Rivoli'schoose this propitious moment to glide quietly into the flowerbeds, thenearest white-ear Avould come to life and volplane down in a sur-prise attack. Not once out of many hundred times did I observe anyof these three other species attempt to resist. It might seek someother point in the large mass of flowers, but the white-ear invariablypursued until the other bird'had left the food area.
"The wing action of the white-eared hummingbird I comparedwith that of the calliope and the other species at Rancho Batel in1936. Its wings beat more slowly, so that when poising in front of aflower they are not an indistinguishable blur, as in the case of thecalliope, but there is a slightly visible wing stroke. Possibly becauseof this slower wing stroke, as well as the heavier, longer body, therear end of the bird gradully drops as it continues to poise in frontof the flower. If it feeds continuously from one cluster of smallblooms, a curious rhythmic, but irregular motion of the tail up anddown is created. At first the tail is horizontal and in the same jDlanewith the body. Wlien the tail begins to drop, the bird, in order tocompensate for the increasing lack of balance, forcibly lifts it intothe air. Timing these vertical beats, I found they averaged three tothe second. At first I thought this downward and alternate upwardsweep of the tail was for the purpose of moving the bird from oneflow^er to another, but this was not the case. I never observed thecalliope or Margaret's hummingbird doing this."He says that, in spite of its pugnacious behavior, the white-earedhummingbird is the shiest of the four species mentioned above; andrefers to its voice as "exceedingly high-pitched and sharply staccato."DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Central America; casual in southeastern Arizona; notregularly migratory.The range of the white-eared hummingbird extends north to cen-tral Sonora (Oposura) ; northern Chihuahua (Carmen) ; and northernTamaulipas (Bravo). East to Tamaulipas (Bravo and Golindo) ;Veracruz (Jalapa and Orizaba) ; Honduras (San Juancito) ; andNicaragua (Jinotego). South to Nicaragua (Jinotego and Mata-galpa) ; Oaxaca (Totontepec and Villa Alta) ; and Guerrero (Amulaand Chilpancingo) . West to Guerrero (Chilpancingo and Taxco) ;State of Mexico (Coatepec and Jalapa) ; Durango (Durango) ; west-ern Chihuahua (Jesus Maria and Pinos Altos) ; and Sonora (Opos-ura).This range is occupied chiefly by the typical race, H. I. leucotis^but according to some systematists those in the north (which include
BROAD-BILLED HUMMINGBIRD 465the individuals noted casually in Arizona) are a distinct race to whichthe name H. I. horealis has been given. The birds found in Nicaraguaalso have been recognized as a distinct subspecies.Casual records.?The species has been recorded a number of timesfrom southeastern Arizona as follows: The first United States speci-men was collected on June 9, 1894, at Fly Park, in the ChiricahuaMountains; one was taken in the Santa Rita Mountains on June 24,1903 ; in 1915 a specimen was taken in the Santa Catalina Mountains
;
during the period from June 10 to December 31, 1919, 12 specimenswere obtained in the Huachuca Mountains ; and on August 11, 1933,an adult male was captured in Miller Canyon, of the Huachucas.Egg dates.?Chihuahua and Sinaloa: March 26, May 23 andAugust 12 (Moore).Guatemala: Sierra de Tecpan, Department of Chimaltenango,west-central Guatemala, 8,000-9,000 feet: 12 records, November andDecember. In 1933, nest building began about the middle of October.The earliest date of laying for which there is a record (computedfrom date of hatching) is about October 23 ; the latest, December 22(Skutch). CYNANTHUS LATIROSTRIS SwainsonBROAD-BILLED HUMMINGBIRDHABITSRobert T. Moore has kindly lent me a portion of his unpublishedmanuscript on the life habits of the birds of Sinaloa, and, with hispermission, I am quoting from it most of what follows in the accountof this species. As to the subspecific status of our form of the broad-billed hummingbird, he writes: "The comparison of our large seriesof 31 males and 24 females from northwestern Mexico, with 9 malesand 3 females in the Moore collection, as well as others, from east-central Mexico, has convinced me that the northwestern birds, orig-inally given the name of magica by Mulsant and Verreaux, should bedifferentiated on the basis of darker-green posterior underparts,whiter under tail coverts, and definitely smaller size. The Arizonaform resembles this northwestern Mexican bird, rather than theeastern."As to Ills personal experience with it in the field, he says: "Myfirst acquaintance with the broad-billed hummingbird was made atthe base of the great Butte, at Pefia Blanca Spring, southern Ari-zona. A large group of ocotillos fringed the eastern ledges belowthe cliff, their red pennants providing an irresistible attraction. Thebirds did not seem to be interested in any other flowers. My realknowledge of the habits of this hummingbird has been acquired inthe States of Sonora, Sinaloa, and Chihuahua, of northwesternMexico.178223?40 36
466 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
"Our four nests have been found at altitudes from 45 feet at Culia-can, Sinaloa, to 1,450 feet at Guirocoba, Sonora. Specimens havebeen collected at the highest elevations?Palo Verdes Mines, 4,900feet; on the Urique River, Chihuahua, taken by myself, 5,000 feet;and even on Mount Mohinora at nearly 10,000 feet?^but no nests havebeen secured at these altitudes. Although I observed both sexes re-peatedly during May on Mohinora, feeding within a few feet of meamong the flowers in extraordinary mammoth beds of paintbrush,they showed no indications of breeding."Courtship.?Mrs. Bailey (1928) refers to this briefly, as follows:
"The courtship 'pendulum swing back and forth in front of afemale,' when given by the Broad-bill, Mr. Willard says is 'higherpitched than that of any of the other small hummers,' having 'thezing of a rifle bullet' (MS.). It is of peculiar interest to hear fromMr. O. W. Howard that while in Arizona he saw several of the maleBroad-bills in the vicinity of their completed nests."Nesting.?Mr. Moore's (MS.) remarks on nesting follow: "Thefinding of my first nest at the Guirocoba Ranch, Sonora, was a wel-come goad to a brain completely fagged by the terrific heat. Thetropical sun was desiccating a tiny arroyo with relentless power.A female propelled its tiny atom of a body straight to a nest onthe branch of a small tree, overhanging the bank of the arroyo andnot 5 feet from the ground. It was an unusual demonstration ofcourage and confidence in human beings, for the nest on May 2, 1934,contained no eggs, being only half finished. I have known manyruby-throated hummingbirds to desert an unfinished home, if oneclimbed the nest tree, and never in my experience with some dozenof them has a single male or female protected an eggless nest, as thistiny parent did repeatedly during the next few days.
""When it came to the more arduous operation of nest building,involving the carrying of material and weaving instead of resting,she preferred the cooler hours of the day from 3 : 30 until dark, anddid a prodigious amount of work. A red letter day of accomplish-ment was May 2. At 5 : 30 p. m. the nest had attained one halfits final height, but at 9 o'clock the next morning the complete altitudeof the walls had been erected. As the nest, now before me, is approxi-mately 1 inch high on the outside, the above statement means thatthe bird built half an inch of wall material during the late afternoonand early morning hours. In addition, she added the lining andattached a considerable number of white cobweb strands, completelyswathing the bottom of the nest with them and supporting and con-necting its outer rim to the leaves and tiny branchlets in the vicinity.However, free access to the nest was not obstructed."The most interesting nest-building technique was displayed anumber of times when I was within a few feet of the nest. The bird
BROAD-BILLED HUMMINGBIRD 467molded the bottom of it with quivering, caressing motions of the body.Often in the process the wings revolved at almost full velocity, cer-tainly until they were blurred to sight, and yet the body of the birdappeared to be sitting in the nest throughout the action. I saw itperformed a number of times; sometimes it gave the impression ofa swaying motion, from one side to the other, without the body leav-ing the nest, or the wings ceasing to revolve. When the wings didnot revolve, the bill moved rapidly along the outside of the abode,tucking in protruding ends of grasses."The bulk of the nest is composed of exceedingly fine material,mostly tiny shreds of buff-colored or brownish bark, grasses, and bitsof dried leaves. The only larger pieces are three strips of barkplaced upright, parallel with the tiny twig on which the nest is placed.I imagine these came from the sabino, a cypress that grows to a greatheight along a small stream not far away. Part of the inside of thenest is lined with a white material, probably some kind of minuteplant down, but possibly cotton of fine texture. All these materialscould be obtained from the fields nearby, which are cultivated by theIndian's of the Guirocoba Plantation,
"Three other nests were secured by our expedition in Sinaloa, twoof them in March at Culiacan and one on January 16, 1936, at SanLorenzo, Sinaloa. Examination of the sex organs of our numerousspecimens proves that the birds are apt to breed at any time fromJanuary to August."As these last three nests contain two eggs each, it can be presumedthat they are finished creations, although some hummingbirds attachornamental bits of lichen to the exterior, even during the period ofincubation. Not the slightest indication of this appears in any ofthese four nests. The January nest was taken at San Lorenzo byChester C. Lamb, which differs somewhat from the other three. Likethe March 1 nest, it was attached to the stalk of a vine. Placed 4feet up in an espino tree, the body of the nest is composed almostentirely of cotton, but lined with a glossy-white plant down. Thebase is supported by a dried pod of the vine itself. On the outsideare attached pieces of dried leaves and, according to Mr. Lamb, some
'short fibers of the palo-blanco pods.' The entire exterior is boundtogether with spiderwebs. The March 1 and March 7 nests fromCuliacan display a lining of white plant down, covered on the periph-ery with bits of bark and leaves, but the bodies of the nests seem tobe made of grasses and exceedingly fine, threadlike stalks of driedplants. The March 1 nest was placed in a 'dry bush, covered withdry vines' and the March 7 in an espino tree.
"In spite of these minor differences, these abodes are so similar thatI think I could recognize them at random among a large number ofother hummingbird nests. They all have some grass stalks in the
468 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMbody, are lined with white plant down, are all adorned with bits ofleaves and bark on the outside, and not one of them has a singlelichen on any part of the nest. In addition, they are all very small,with an inside diameter of only about three-quarters of an inch, andall were placed within 5 feet of the ground. They differ markedlyfrom our nests of other hummingbirds of Sinaloa, such as the white-ear, azurecrown, and the violaceous, all these having lichen adorn-ments. The eggs are white, two in number, and at least in the case ofthe San Lorenzo nest, were laid two days apart."Roy W. Quillin (1935) records the finding of a nest of the broad-billed hummingbird in Texas, the only nest so far reported for thatState
:
"A nest of this species containing two eggs was found on May 17,1934, at Talley's (Johnson's) Ranch, on the Rio Grande, southwestof Mariscal Mountain, Brewster County, Texas. The nest was on thevery bank of the Rio Grande, on a drooping twig in a triple fork ofa small willow tree some ten or twelve feet above the ground on asteep bank of the river and almost overhung the water. The nestwas composed almost entirely of the down of the willows ornamentedon the outside with yellow blooms and tiny mesquite leaves and boundwith spider or insect webs. The materials of the nest lashed it firmlyto the twigs on which it rested in an upright fork."My acquaintance with the broad-billed hummingbird was a briefone in Sabino Canyon, at the southern end of the Santa CatalinaMomitains, Ariz. In the rough, rocky bed of the stream flowingthrough this rugged canyon, Frank Willard and I made a long andlaborious search for the nests of this hummingbird. It has beenfound nesting here in a species of shrub that grows profusely alongthe rough banks of the stream and among the rocks in its bed. Twoor three of the birds dashed by us at different times, in such rapidflight that it seemed as if a whistling bullet had whizzed past us;but we did not succeed in finding a nest ; it was in April, and we wereperhaps too early. Mr. Willard had previously found a nest here, 5feet up in a small willow over the water; he told me that O. W.Howard had also found it nesting here. There is a nest from thislocality in the P. B. Philipp collection, taken by H. H. Kimball onApril 20, 1923, that was placed "in a hackberry bush growing againsta small sycamore at the edge of a creek, 4 feet from the water."There are three nests in the Thayer collection, taken by W. W.Brown, Jr., near Opodepe, Sonora, Mexico, on May 3, 10, and 13,1905 ; one of these was in an apricot tree and the other two in mes-quites; the construction of these nests compares very closely withthe excellent description given above by Mr. Moore.
BROAD-BILLED HUMMINGBIRD 469Eggs.?Two eggs seem to be the usual, if not the invariable, rulewith the broad-billed hummingbird. These are pure white, withoutgloss, and otherwise indistinguishable from the eggs of other hum-mingbirds of similar size. The measurements of 27 eggs average 12.6by 8.5 millimeters ; the eggs showing the four extremes measure 13.5by 9.7, 13.4 by 9.8, and 11.5 by 7.5 millimeters.Plumages.?Mr. Moore says (MS.) : "The Moore collection containsno young, actually taken from a nest, but a young male, obviouslynot long out of the nest, was secured at the Guirocoba Ranch in ex-treme southeastern Sonora on March 26, 1931. The bill is only halfthe length of the adult, the tail the same, and the wings two-thirds,the postnatal molt being about four-fifths complete on wings, tail,entire upper parts, under tail coverts, and portions of the neck. Pos-sessing very loose margins, the remiges are recurved. Two nearlyparallel feather tracts on the throat are sharply defined, because thenew feathers are still in their sheaths, and areas on throat and breastare bare."As to coloration, it is significant that the tail plainly shows themale characteristics, being almost identically like the fully adultmale tail in miniature, revealing no white tips to the lateral rectricesas in the female and having the median pair blue, tipped with gray,instead of entirely bronzy green. The longest upper tail coverts showfull development and might easily be mistaken for the median pairof rectrices. Therefore, it is clear that the sexes can be differentiatedin this species, even in the juvenal plumage, when a few weeks old.Cinnamon-buff covers a large part of crown and occiput and revealsmuch wider margins on the back than in the May, June, and Septem-ber worn juvenal plumage. The lesser and middle wing coverts showirridescent green, instead of bronzy."On the under tail coverts, although the plumage is looser than inthe first winter plumage, the general appearance is immaculate white,as in practically all adult magicus, contrasting them sharply withCynanthus latirostris. So many spots on the underparts are not feath-ered that, except for the under tail coverts, they are blotched withblack and light buff."The most interesting peculiarity consists in a prominent whitepostocular streak. This is represented by a narrow streak, half thelength, in the adult female and juvenile male of first winter plumage,which is reduced to dot or is obsolete in the adult male. This streakconsists of nonpennaceous feathers, very loose in texture, as in thejuvenile male, and contrasts with the typical feathers of the adultfemale.
"Five representatives of juvenile males in their first winter plum-age form part of the Moore collection. They resemble the female
470 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM
coloration, except that the feathers of the upper parts are marginedwith bufFy, much more narrowly than in the juvenal plumage, andthe rectrices are exactly like the adult males. A female, from LosLeones, Sinaloa, March 22, 1934, which has acquired the completejuvenal plumage, has feathers of upper parts margined just asbroadly with cinnamon-buff, as the young male in partial juvenalplumage, but differs in having a fully developed tail, just like theadult females. Consequently, the differences of the sexes can bedetermined in every plumage."Young males begin to acquire some of the bluish-green feathers inthe throat patch early in their first year but, apparently, do notacquire the full bluish-green gorget and the metallic bronze-green ofthe breast and sides until the first annual molt the next summer, whenold and young become indistinguishable.Food.?The broad-billed hummingbird evidently lives on similarfood to that of other members of the family, the nectar of flowers andthe minute insects that the flowers attract. Mr. Moore (MS.) men-tions the red flowers of the ocotillo as attracting it and seeing itfeeding in the beds of the paint brush, but probably any brightlycolored blossoms would serve equally well as feeding places. Hesays : "A small shrub, the 'tavachin,' flaunts an extraordinary flower,resembling the royal poinciana, and fairly startles one with its scar-let glory. Belonging to the genus Caesalpinia or Poinciana., it pro-vides the favorite rendezvous for Cynanthus^ as well as many speciesof butterflies. The tiny homesteader made many excursions to obtainfood from this plant, whose vivid red and yellow fl'owers flamed inthe sunlit spaces across the sandy arroyo. She apportioned part ofher time to the yellow flowers of a huge opuntia, which hung outperilously over her side of the arroyo. During the hottest period ofthe day she drowsed on a branch of the nesting tree, within 10 feetof the nest, not usually making food rounds until 3 : 30 in the after-noon. Between each round she would spend several minutes restingin the nest tree. At the beginning of each circuit I timed the aver-age of inception, which was approximately 15 minutes, and each timeshe visited apparently every flower over again. A few less con-spicuous blooms were also probed."Cottam and Knappen (1939) examined four stomachs collected inArizona, which "show that the bird feeds primarily on small insectsand spiders." In their summary they mention fragments of plantlice, leafhoppers, jumping plant lice, miscellaneous bugs, root gnats,flower flies, miscellaneous flies including dance flies, ants, parasiticwasps, miscellaneous Hymenoptera, some undertermined insects, spi-ders, daddy-longlegs, and pollen grains.Behavior.?Referring to the behavior of the female in the defense
BROAD-BILLED HUMMINGBIRD 471
of her eggless nest, an unusual occurrence among hummingbirds,Mr. Moore (MS.) writes : "It is true that her little majesty was neverreal rude about it, for when I set up my camera without camouflagethis bit of animated lightning betrayed no resentment, flew straightto the nest, twirled about on it two or three times, and showed noirritation because of the huge eye of the graflex. Curiously enough,the only time she really attacked was when I photographed her withmoving picture camera 20 yards from the nest, as she fed from thescarlet flowers of the 'tavachin.' A formal visit to her home seemedperfectly proper, but an intrusion at the dinner hour was the epitomeof rudeness. Even then the attack was only half-hearted, andchronic good nature took possession immediately, as she whirledfrom one brilliant flower to another."A male broadbill was observed feeding from the 'tavachin' and,although he several times flew within 10 feet of the nest tree, henever landed on it, nor did the female appear to object to his feeding20 feet away across the sandy wash. The broadbill is a commonbird of the region and the male bird might not have been the 'mate'.Although the males of United States hummingbirds do not makea practice of assisting about the nest, southern species often do. InEcuador I have observed the male as well as the female violet-eartake turns incubating the same nest. Both individuals were col-lected to prove this habit.
"Such evidences of anger as the female exhibited were directednot so much at me as at the large blue swallowtail that insisted onappropriating the sweets from her flower garden. Several timesshe, as well as the male, chased it away, but they did not attempt topursue the smaller butterflies. The flight of this bird from flower toflower is so characteristic that it can be recognized at some distance.Instead of darting straight to its object, as many hummingbirds do,Cynanthus progresses with a somewhat jerky, irregular flight. Atleast its short flight has an exceedingly nervous kind of movement,the tail bobbing up and down, lacking the precision of the Rivoli'sundeviating course."Dr. Alexander Wetmore (1932) says: "The broad-bill seemsquieter and less active than some of the species that have beendescribed, and frequently, after aggressive flight in pursuit of someintruder, I have seen the two combatants perch four or five inchesfrom one another for a few seconds, while with raised wings theygave a low, chattering call." He also refers to the ordinary flightas "accompanied by a subdued humming sound." The sound pro-duced by this bird in flight, as I have heard it, is more like theshriek of a passing bullet, far from subdued.
472 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMField marks.?The most conspicuous and diagnostic field mark ofthe broad-billed hummingbird is the broad, purplish-red or carminebill; the bill of the adult male is wholly red, except for the duskytip; that of the 3'oung male and the female is basally red. Thecolor pattern of the adult male is distinctive, green upper parts andbreast, bluish-green throat, white posterior under parts, and glossyblue-black tail. The female, adult or young, has a grayish breastand some green in the tail. The young male has a tail like hisfather, and the young female one like her mother.DISTRIBUTIONRange.?Southern Arizona, south to central Mexico.Breeding range.?The broad-billed hummingbird breeds north tosoutheastern Arizona (Santa Catalina Mountains and Sabino Can-yon) ; probably rarely southwestern New Mexico (Cloverdale Range) ;and central Nuevo Leon (Monterey). East to western Xuevo Leon(Monterey) ; and the State of Mexico (Chimalcoyoc). South to theState of Mexico (Chimalcoyoc) ; Jalisco (Lake Chapala) ; and south-ern Sinaloa (Escuinapa). West to Sinaloa (Escuinapa) ; Sonora(Tesia, San Javier, Moctezuma, and Saric) ; and southeastern Ari-zona (Santa Edta Mountains, probably Fresnal Canyon, and SantaCatalina Mountains).
'Winter range.?The species appears to be resident throughout theMexican portion of the range, although at this season it has beenrecorded south to Taxco, State of Guerrero. It withdraws entirelyfrom the United States but winters north to central Sonora (Guay-mas and Oposura).Migration.?^Little information is available concerning the shortmigratory flights that are made but early dates of arrival in Arizonaare: Rillito Creek, near Tucson, March 13, and Santa Catalina Moun-tains, April 5. It leaves this region during the last of August andearly part of September.Egg dates.?Mexico : 16 records, Januaiy 16 to May 21 ; 8 records,March 25 to May 11, indicating the height of the season.Arizona : 5 records, April 14 to July 15.
LITERATURE CITEDAbbott, Clinton Gilbebt.1914. City nighthawks. Bird-Lore, vol. 16, pp. 10-13.Aiken, Chahles Edwabd Howabd, and Wabben, Edwabd Royal.1914. The birds of El Paso County, Colorado. II. Colorado Coll. Publ.,sei. ser., vol. 12, pp. 497-603.Aldrich, Elmeb C.1935. Nesting of the dusky poor-will. Condor, vol. 37, pp. 49-55.Allakd, Habey Abdeix.1934. Speed of the ruby-throated hummingbird's flight. Auk, vol. 51, p. 84.Allen, Aethub Augustus.1930. Rubythroat. Bird-Lore, vol. 32, pp. 223-231.1933. The nighthawk's story. Bird-Lore, vol. 35, pp. 171-179.Allen, Chaeles Andbew.1880. Habits of Vaux's swift. Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 5, pp. 55-56.Allen, Joel Asaph.1871. On the mammals and winter birds of east Florida, with an examina-tion of certain assumed specific characters in birds, and a sketchof the bird-faunae of eastern North America. Bull. Mus. Comp.Zool., vol. 2, pp. 161-426.Allen, Maby Pierson.1908. Hummingbird eccentricities. Bird-Lore, vol. 10, pp. 198-200.Allen, W. E.1932. Note on food of California roadrunner {Geococcyx californianus)
.
Bird-Lore, vol. 34, pp. 264-265.Amebican Obnithologists' Union.1910. Check-list of North American birds. Ed. 3.1931. Check-list of North American birds. Ed. 4.Anthony, Alfred Webster.1892. Birds of southwestern New Mexico. Auk, vol. 9, pp. 357-369.1896. The roadrunner as a rat-killer. Auk, vol. 13, pp. 257-258.1897. Habits of Anna's hummingbird. Nidologist, vol. 4, pp. 31-33.1923. Ants destructive to bird life. Condor, vol. 25, pp. 132-133."Abkansas Hoosiee."1890. The Caprimulgidae in Arkansas. Oologist, vol. 7, pp. 155-156.Aenold, Leboy W.1930. Observations upon hummingbirds. Condor, vol. 32, pp. 302-303.Attvvatee, Henby Philemon.1892. List of birds observed in the vicinity of San Antonio, Bexar County,Texas. Auk, vol. 9, pp. 229-238.Audubon, John James.1840. The birds of America, vol. 1.1S42. The birds of America, vol. 4. 473
474 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMBailey, Alfred Mabshaix.1927. Notes on the birds of southeastern Alaska. Auk, vol. 44, pp. 351-367.Baeley, Florence Augusta Merriam.1896. Notes on some of the birds of southern California. Auk, vol. 13, pp.115-124.1902. Handbook of birds of the Western United States.1904. Additional notes on the birds of the Upper Pecos. Auk, vol. 21, pp.349-363.1907. White-throated swifts at Capistrano. Condor, vol. 9, pp. 169-172.1922. Koo. Bird-Lore, vol. 24, pp. 260-265.1923. Birds recorded from the Santa Rita Mountains in southern Arizona.Pacific Coast Avifauna, No. 15.1928. Birds of New Mexico.Bailey, Guy Andrew.1905. The chimney swift. Bird-Lore, vol. 7, pp. 130-132.Bailey, Harold Harris.1907. Mortality among kingfishers. Auk, vol. 24, p. 439.1913. The birds of Virginia.Bailey, Harry Balch.1883. Memoranda of a collection of egsjs from Georgia. Bull. Nuttall Orn.Club, vol. 8, pp. 37-43.Bailey, William Lloyd.1900. The kingfishers' home life. Bird-Lore, vol. 2, pp. 76-80.Batrd, Spencer Fullerton.1858. Reports of explorations and surveys to ascertain the most practicableand economical route for a railroad from the Mississippi River tothe Pacific Ocean, part 2. Birds. Vol. 9.Bancroft, Griffing.1930. The breeding birds of central Lower California. Condor, vol. 32, pp.20^9.Bangs, Outram.1913. An unnamed race of the Carolina paroquet. Proc. New EnglandZool. Club, vol. 4, pp. 93-94.Bangs, Outram, and Penard, Thomas Edward.1921. Notes on some American birds, chiefly neotropical. Bull. Mus. Comp.Zool., vol. 64, pp. 365-397.Bangs, Outram, and Peters, James Lee.1928. Birds collected by Dr. Joseph F. Rock in western Kausu and easternTibet. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., vol. 68, pp. 313-381.Babboub, Thomas.192a The birds of Cuba.Baerows, Walter Bradford.1912. Michigan bird life.Bartbam, Benjamin Smith.1799. Fragments of the natural history of Pennsylvania.Bassett, Frank Newton.1921. The nuptial flight of the Allen hummingbird. Condor, vol. 23, p. 37.1924. The Anna hummingbird takes a shower bath. Condor, vol. 26, p. 227.Batcheldeb, Charles Foster.1882. Notes on the summer birds of the upper St. John. Bull. NuttallOrn. Club, vol. 7, pp. 147-152.Baynes, Ernest Harold.1915. Wild bird guests.
LITERATURE CITED 475Beal, Foster Ellenbobough Lascelles.1897. Some common birds in their relation to agriculture. U. S. Dept.Agr. Farmers' Bull. 54.1915. Some commou birds useful to the farmer. U. S. Dept. Agr. Farmers'Bull. 630.Bkat., Foster Ellenborough Lascelles, and McAtee, Waldo Lee.1912. Food of some well-known birds of forest, farm, and garden. U. S.Dept. Agr. Farmers' Bull. 506.Beal, Foster Ellenborough Lascelles; McAtee, Waldo Lee; and Kalmbach,Edwin Richard.1916. Common birds of Southeastern United States in relation to agri-culture. U. S. Dept. Agr. Farmers' Bull. 755.Beal, Mary.1933. The black-chinned hummingbird. Bird-Lore, vol. 35, pp. 96-97.Beck, Rollo Howard.1897. Watching a poor-will. Nidologist, vol. 4, p. 105.Beebe, Charles William.1905. Two bird-lovers in Mexico.Belding, Lyman.1883. Catalogue of a collection of birds made near the southern extremityof the peninsula of Lower California. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,vol. 5, pp. 532-550.Bendire, Charles Emil.1895. Life histories of North American birds. U. S. Nat. Mus. Spec. Bull. 3.Bergtold, WilliajSI Harry.1906. Concerning the thick-billed parrot. Auk. vol. 23, pp. 425-428.Beyer, George Eugene; Allison, Andrew; and Kopman, Henry Hazlitt.1908. List of the birds of Louisiana, pt. 5. Auk. vol. 25, pp. 439-448.Bishop, Louis Bennett.1896. Description of a new horned lark and a new song sparrow, withremarks on Sennett's nighthawk. Auk, vol. 13, pp. 129-135.1906. Uranomitra salvini in Arizona. Auk, vol. 23, pp. 337-338.Blakiston, Thomas Wright, and Pryer, Henry James Stovin.1878. A catalogue of the birds of Japan. Ibis, 1878, pp. 209-250.Bolles, Frank.1894. From Blomidon to Smoky.1912. Notes on whip-poor-wills and owls. Auk, vol. 29, pp. 150-159.Bowles, John Hooper.1895. Further notes on Antrostomus vociferous whip-poor-will. The Mu-seum, vol. 1, pp. 152-153.1910. The Anna hummingbird. Condor, vol. 12, pp. 125-127.1921. Nesting habits of nighthawks at Tacoma, Wash. Auk, vol. 38,pp. 203-217.Bradbury, William Chase.1918. Notes on the nesting habits of the white-throated swift in Colorado.Condor, vol. 20, pp. 103-110.Bralt.tar, Floyd.1922. Knowing birds through stories.Brewer, Thomas Mayo.1874. A history of North American birds. Land birds. By Baird, Brewer,and Ridgway. Vol. 2.
476 BULLETIN" 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMBeewstee, William:,1879. On the habits and nesting of certain birds in Texas. Bull. NuttallOrn. Club, vol. 4, pp. 75-80.1881. Notes on some birds from Arizona and New Mexico, with a descrip-tion of a supposed new whip-poor-will. Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club,vol. 6, pp. 65-73.1882. On a collection of birds lately made by Mr. F. Stephens in Arizona.Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 7, pp. 193-212.1889. Nesting habits of the parrakeet {Conurus caroUnensis) . Auk, vol. 6,pp, 336-337.1890. Food of young hummingbirds. Auk, vol. 7, pp. 206-207.1893. Description of a new hummingbird from northern Mexico. Auk, vol.10, pp. 214-215.1895. The land-birds and game-birds of New England, by H. D. Minot.Ed. 2.1902. Birds of the Cape region of Lower California. Bull. Mus. Comp.Zool., vol. 41, pp. 1-241.1906. The birds of the Cambridge region of Massachusetts.1937a. The birds of the Lake Umbagog region of Maine, part 3.1937b. Concord River,Bbyant, Habold Child.1916. Habits and food of the roadrunner in California. Univ. CaliforniaPubl. Zool., vol. 17, pp. 21-58.1925. Nesting of the Allen hummingbird in Golden Gate Park. Condor,vol. 27, pp. 98-100.Btjllock, Wiltjam.1825. Six months residence and travels in Mexico . . ., ed. 2. Vol. 2.BUEMEISTEB, HEBMAN.1856. Thiere Brasiliens. Vol. 1.BUENS, Feanklin Lobenzo.1915. Comparative periods of deposition and incubation of some NorthAmerican birds. Wilson Bull., vol. 27, pp. 275-286.1921. Comparative periods of nestling life of some North American Nidi-colae. Wilson Bull., vol. 33, pp. 4-15.BuBEouGHs, Julian.1922. A chimney swift invasion. Bird-Lore, vol. 24, pp. 210-211.BuTLEE, Amos William.1892. Notes on the range and habits of the Carolina parrakeet. Auk, vol.9, pp. 49-56.1898. The birds of Indiana.Cameeon, Ewen Somebled.1907. The birds of Custer and Dawson Counties, Montana. Auk, vol. 24-pp. 289-406.Campbexl, Archibald James.1901. Nests and eggs of Australian birds,Campbell, E. K. and D.1926. Roosting swifts. Bird-Lore, vol. 28, pp. 395-396.Canfield, Joseph BtrcKiNGHAM.1902. A note on the night hawk. Amer. Orn., vol. 2, p. 217.Carey, Henry Reginald.1909. Remarks on the habits of the kingfisher on the New Hampshire sea-coast. Bird-Lore, vol. 11, pp. 161-161.
LITERATURE CITED 477CarPENTEE, FEBn)EEIO HOWABD.18S6. Some ornithological explorations in the Dead River region of Maine.Ornithologist and Oologist, vol. 11, pp. 161-163.Caetbib, Thomas Donald.1924. Nesting of chimney swifts. Bird-Lore, vol. 26, p. 330.Cassin, John.1862. Illustrations of the birds of California, Texas, Oregon, British andRussian America.CHAMBBajs, WnxiE Lee.1901. Curious nest of Anna's hummingbird. Condor, vol. 3, p. 105.1903. Early nesting of Calypte anna in the vicinity of Santa Monica, Cali-fornia. Condor, vol. 5, p. 133.Chance, Edgae.1922. The cuckoo's secret.Chaney, Ralph Works.1910. Summer and fall birds of the Hamlin Lake region. Mason County,Mich. Auk, vol. 27, pp. 271-279.Chapman, Fkank Michlee.1888. A list of birds observed at Gainesville, Florida. Auk, vol. 5, pp.267-277.1890. Notes on the Carolina paroquet (Conurus carolinensis) in Florida.Abstr. Proc. Linn. Soc. New York, year ending March 7, 1890, pp.4-6.1896. Notes on birds observed in Yucatan. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol.8, pp. 271-290.1912. Handbook of birds of eastern North America.1915. The Carolina paroquet in Florida. Bird-Lore, vol. 17, p. 453.1925. Notes on the plumages of North American birds. Bird-Lore, vol. 27,pp. 104, 327.1931. The winter range of the chimney swift (Chaciura pclagica). Auk,vol. 48, pp. 119-121.Cheney, Simeon Pease.1891. Some bird songs. Auk, vol. 8, pp. 32-37.CHEP.EIE, GeOEGE K^UCK.1892. A preliminary list of the birds of San Jos^, Costa Rica. Auk, vol.9, pp. 322-329.1896. An apparently new Cliordeiles from Costa Rica. Auk, vol. 13, pp.135-136.Childs, John Lewis.1905. Eggs of the Carolina paroquet. Warbler, vol. 1, pp. 97-98.1906a. Nest and eggs of the blue-throated hummingbird. Warbler, vol. 2,p. 65.1906b. Eggs of the Carolina paroquet. Warbler, vol. 2, p. 65.Cheisty, Bayaed Henderson.1932. A hummingbird nest. Condor, vol. 34, pp. 241-242.Clabatjgh, Ernest Dwight.1936. Nesting of the Allen hummingbird. Condor, vol. 38, pp. 176-177.Clakk, Frank Cuthbert.1902. Food of Anna hummingbird. Condor, vol. 5, p. 18.Clark, Josiah Huntoon.1900. Notes on the nesting of the blue-throated hummingbird. Auk, vol.17, p. 294.
478 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMClay, Makcia B.1929. The yellow-billed cuckoo. Bird-Lore, vol. 31, pp. 1S9--190.CoAju:, Henry Kelso.1020. Curious habits of the whip-poor-will. Auk, vol. 87, pp. 293-294.Cochrane, Henry Lane.1914. A note on the breeding of the white-rumped swift {Micropuspacificus). Ibis, 1914, pp. 5S6-5S8.Cooke, Weixs Woodbridge.1884. Bird nomenclature of the Chippewa Indians. Auk, vol. 1, pp. 242-250.CoRDiEK, Albert Hawes.1923. Birds, their photographs and home life.Cottam, Clarence.1932. Nocturnal habits of the chimney swift. Auk, vol. 49, pp. 479-481.CoTTAM, Clarence, and Knappen, Phoebe.1939. Food of some uncommon North American birds. Auk, vol. 56, pp.138-169.Coues, Elliott.1874. Birds of the Northwest.1878. Habits of the kingfisher (Ceryle alcijon). Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club,vol. 3, p. 92.1888. New forms of North American CJwrdiles. Auk, vol. 5, p. 37.1897. How the chimney swift secures twigs for its nest. Auk, vol. 14, pp.217-218.1900. The "cliurca" {Geococcyx califonunntis). Auk, vol. 17, p. 66.1903. Key to North American birds.Cotjper, William.1876. Naturalist for April. Forest and Stream, vol. 6, p. 132.Danforth, Ralph Emerson.1921. An unusual accident. Bird-lore, vol. 23, p. 246.Daniel, John Warwick, Jr.1902. Summer birds of the Great Dismal Swamp. Auk, vol. 19, pp. 15-18.Davis, William B.1937. A Vaux swift and its young. Condor, vol. 39, vol. 222-223.Davison, John Lester.1887. Birds laying their eggs in the nest of other birds. Auk, vol. 4, pp.263-264.Dawson, William Leon.1903. The birds of Ohio.1923. The birds of California. Vol. 2.Dawson, William Leon, and Bowles, John Hooper.1909. The birds of Washington. Vol. 1.Day, Mary F.1899. Home-life in a chimney. Bird-Lore, vol. 1, pp. 78-81.DeKay, James Ellsworth.1844. Zoology of New York, or the New-York fauna, part 2. Birds.De Laubenfels, Max Walker.1925. Unusual notes of Texas nighthawk. Condor, vol. 27, p. 210.Dickey, Donald Ryder.1915. The hummers in a foothill valley. Country Life in America, vol. 28,No. 2, pp. 35-39.1928. A new poor-will from the Colorado River Valley. Condor, vol. 30,pp. 152-153.
LITERATURE CITED 479Dickey, Donald Rtdex. nnd van Rossem, Adriaan Joseph.1938. The birds of El Salvador. Field Mus. Nat. Hist. Publ., zool. ser.,vol. 23."DiDYMUS" r=HEADE, MaKTIN JOHNSONI.1891. Florida hummingbirds. Forest and Stream, vol. 36, p. 455.DixoN, James Benjamin.1912. The Costa hummingbird. Condor, vol. 14, pp. 75-77.Dixon, Joseph Scatteegood.1935. Nesting of the black swift in Sequoia National Park. Condor, vol.37, pp. 265-267.Dkew, Frank MAYa1882. Notes on the plumage of Neplioecetes niger horealls. Bull. NuttallOrn. Club, vol. 7, pp. 182-183.Druky, Charles.1887. Migration of night havpks. Journ. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., vol.10, pp. 148-149.DuBois, Alexander Dawes.1911. A note on the nesting of the whip-poor-will. Auk, vol. 28, pp. 469-471.1938. Observations at a rufous hummingbird's nest. Auk, vol. 55, pp. 629-641.DuTCHEIS, WrLLIAM.1902. Results of special protection to gulls and terns obtained through theThayer fund. Auk, vol. 19, pp. 34-64.Dyer, Ernest I.1939. More observations on the nesting of the Allen hummingbird. Con-dor, vol. 41, pp. 62-67.Eaton, Elon Howard.1914. Birds of New York.Eaton, Warren Francis.1936. Former occurrence of Carolina paroquet in New Jersey. Auk, vol.53, p. 82.EiFRiG, Charles William Gustave.1919. Notes on birds of the Chicago area and its immediate vicinity. Auk,vol. 36, pp. 513-524.Elzey, M. G.1876. Game bag and gun. Forest and Stream, vol. 6, p. 122.Ea-erett, Constance and E. A.1927. The fun of banding chimney swifts. Wilson Bull., vol. 39, pp. 111-112.EvERMANN, Barton Warren.1889. Birds of Carroll County, Indiana. Auk, vol. 6, pp. 22-30.FiNLEY, WHLIAM LoVELL.1905. Hummingbird studies. Condor, vol. 7, pp. 59-62.Finley, William Lo^?ELL and Irene.1915. With the Arizona road-runners. Bird-Lore, vol. 17, pp. 159-165.1924. Changing habits of Vaux swift and western martin. Condor, vol. 26,pp. 6-9.Fisher, Albert Keneick.1894. The capture of Basilinna Icucotis in southern Arizona. Auk, vol. 11,pp. 325-326.Fisher, Walter Keneick.1904. Road-runners eat young mockingbirds. Condor, vol. 6, p. SO.
480 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMFloyd, Chakles Benton.1937. Ruby-throated hummingbirds (ArcMlochus colubris) in cold weather.Bird-Banding, vol. 8, p. 79.FORBUSH, EdWAED HOWE.1907. Useful birds and their protection.1927. Birds of Massachusetts and other New England States. Vol. 2.FOBEMAN, GkANT.1924. Cuckoos and jays. Bird-Lore, vol. 26, p. 182.Fowi^B, Fbedekick Hat.t..1903. Stray notes from southern Arizona. Condor, vol. 5, pp. 68-71, 106-107.Feiedmann, HiSRBERT, and Riley, Joseph Harvey.1931. The genus Cucnlus in North America. Auk, vol. 48, p. 269.Gander, Frank Forrest.1927. The fly-catching habits of the Anna hummingbird. Condor, vol 29,p. 171.Gentry, Thomas Geoege.1877. Life-histories of the birds of eastern Pennsylvania. Vol. 1.GiLMAN, Marshall French.1915. A forty acre bird census at Sacaton, Arizona. Condor, vol. 17, pp.86-90.GOFF, Mn,T0N.1932. Roof drama. Bird-Lore, vol. 34, p. 202.Goss, Nathaniel Sticknby.1S91. History of the birds of Kansas.GossE, Philip Heney.1847. The birds of Jamaica.Gbinnell, Joseph.1898. Birds of the Pacific slope of Los Angeles County. Pasadena Acad.Sci. Publ. 11.1905a. The Pacific nighthawk. Condor, vol. 7, p. 170.1905b. Summer birds of Mount Pinos, California. Auk, vol. 22, pp. 378-391.1908. The biota of the San Bernardino Mountains. Univ. California Publ.Zool., vol. 5, pp. 1-170.1909. Birds and mammals of the 1907 Alexander expedition to southeasternAlaska. Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 5, pp. 171-264.1910. Birds of the 1908 Alexander Alaska expedition, with a note on theavifaunal relationships of the Prince William Sound district. Univ.California Publ. Zool., vol. 5, pp. 361-428.1914. An account of the mammals and birds of the lower Colorado Valley,with especial reference to the distributional pi'oblems presented.Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 12, pp. 51-294.1928. Notes on the systematics of west American birds, II. Condor, vol. 30,pp. 153-156.Gbinnell, Joseph : Dixon, Joseph ; and Linsdai^, Je.\.n Myron.1930. Vertebrate natural history of a section of northern California throughthe Lassen Peak region. Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 35, pp.1-594.Gbinnexl, Joseph, and Linsdale, Jean Myron.1936. Vertebrate animals of Point Lobos Reserve, 1934-35.Gbinnell, Joseph, and Stoeer, Tracy Ibwin.1924. Animal life in the Yosemite.Geiscom, Ludlow.1934. The ornithology of Guerrero, Mexico. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., vol.75, pp. 367-422.
LITERATURE CITED 481Hammebsley, Gladys.1928. Observations on the rufous hummingbird (Selasphorus rufus), 1927.Can. Field-Nat., vol. 42, pp. 149-150.Hanna, Wilson Crkal.1909. The white-throated swifts on Slover Mountain. Condor, vol. 11,pp. 77-81.1917. Further notes on the white-throated swifts of Slover Mountain.Condor, vol. 19, pp. 3-8.1937. California cuckoo in the San Bernardino Valley, California. Condor,vol. 39, pp. 57-59.Haeris, Hajeiry.1919. Birds of the Kansas City region. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis, vol. 23,pp. 213-371.Hartert, Eknst.1912. Die Vcigel der palaarktischen Fauna. "Vol. 2.Hartert, Ernst, and Hall, Robert.1904. On the birds collected by Mr. Robert Hall, of Melbourne, on thebanks of the Lena River between Gigalowa and Its mouth. Ibis,1904, pp. 415-446.Haetman, Frakk Alexander.1914. The cause of the peculiar sound made by nighthawks when volplaning.Science, new ser., vol. 39, pp. 326-327.HASBROtJCK, EDVSaN MaEBLE.1891. The Carolina paroquet {Cwiurus carolinensis) . Auk, vol. 8, pp.389-379.Henderson, Junius.1927. The practical value of birds.HenSHAW, Henry Wetheebee.1875. Report upon the ornithological collections made in portions of Nevada,Utah, California, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona, during theyears 1871, 1872, 1873, and 1874. Wheeler's Rept. Expl. Surv. West100th Merid., vol. 5, pp. 131-507.1877. Description of a new species of humming-bird from California.Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 2, pp. 53-58.1886. List of birds observed in summer and fall on the upper Pecos River,New Mexico. Auk, vol. 3, pp. 73-80.Heeeick, Fbancis Hobart.1901. The home life of wild birds.1935. Wild birds at home.Hersey, Frank Seymour.1923. Observations on the habits of the whip-poor-will (Antrostomus v.vociferus). Auk, vol. 40, pp. 534-536.Hess, Isaac Elnoee.1910. One hundred breeding birds of an Illinois ten-mile radius. Auk,vol. 27, pp. 19-32.Hine, Jane L.1894. Observations on the ruby-throated hummingbird. Auk, vol. 11, pp.253-254.Hoffmann, Ralph.1927. Birds of the Pacific States.HoLLisTER, Ned.1908. Birds of the region about Needles, California. Auk, vol. 25, pp.455-462.
178223?40 37
482 BULLETIlSr 17 6,. UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMHopkins, H. C.1S92. Oyster vs. kingfisher. Ornithologist and Oologist, vol. 17, p. 109.Howell, AiFKED Brazieb.1916. Some results of a vfinter's observations in Arizona. Condor, vol. 18,pp. 209-214.1927. Poor-wills attracted by arc light. Condor, vol. 29, p. 76.Howell, Arthur Holmes.1932. Florida bird life.Howes, Paxil Griswold.1908. Notes on the black-billed cuckoo. Oologist, vol. 25, pp. 171-172.Hoxie, Walter [John].1887. The capacity of eggs. Ornithologist and Oologist, vol. 12, p. 207.HUEY, Laltbence Markham.1924. Nuptial flight of the black-chinned hummingbird. Condor, vol. 26,p. 229.Hunt, Richard [Montague].1920. How fast can a roadrunner run? Condor, vol. 22, pp. 186-187.Htde, Arthur SIdney.1924. Chimney swift nesting in a cistern. Auk, vol. 41, pp. 157-158.Ingersoll, Ernest.1920. The wit of the wild.Ingram, Collingwood.1908. Ornithological notes from Japan. Ibis, 1908, pp. 129-169.Jasper, Theodore.1878. The birds of North America.Jencks, Fred Tingley.1881. Kingbird and kingfisher. Ornithologist and Oologist, vol. 6, p. 64.Jensen, Jens Knudson.1923. Notes on the nesting birds of northern Santa Fe County, New Mexico.Auk, vol. 40, pp. 452-569.Jewell, H. W.1908. Nighthawks rear young in robin's nest. Journ. Maine Orn. Soc, vol.10, p. 25.Johnson, Charles Eugene.1920. Summer bird records from Lake County, Minnesota. Auk, vol. 37, pp.541-551.Jones. A. E.1937. A cuckoo (C. canorus Linn.) incident. Journ. Bombay Nat. Hist.Soc, vol. 39, pp. 175-177.Jones, Lynds.1909. The birds of Cedar Point and vicinity. Wilson Bull., vol. 21, pp.187-204.Judd, Sylvester Dwight.1902. Birds of a Maryland farm. Biol. Surv. Bull. 17.Kemkey, V. Max.1925. A nighthawk's unusual home ties. Bird-Lore, vol. 27, pp. 251-252.Kennard, Frederic Hedge.1895. Two unique nesting-sites in and about camp buildings in HamiltonCounty, New York, Auk, vol. 12, p. 314.Kennekly, Caleb Burwell Rowan.1857. Description of a new species of Ci/pselus [C. borealis], collected on theNorth Western Boundary Sni-vey, Archibald Campbell, Esq., Com-missioner. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, vol. 9, pp. 202-203.
LITERATURE CITED 483Keeshaw, J. G.1904. List of the birds of the Quangtung coast, China. Ibis, 1904, pp.235-248.King, Fbanklin Hibam.1883. Economic relations of Wisconsin birds. Geology of Wisconsin, vol. 1,pp. 441-610.Knappen, Phoebe.1934. Plecoptera as a bird food. Auk, vol. 51, pp. 103-104.Knight, Ora Willis.1908. The birds of Maine.Knowlton, Frank Hall.1896. Nighthawk catching insects by electric light. Osprey, vol. 1, p. 53.KoBBiE, WnxiAM Hoffman.1900. The rufous hummingbirds of Cape Disappointment. Auk, vol. 17, pp.8-15.KoPMAN, Henry Hazlitt.1915. List of the birds of Louisiana, pt. 6. Auk, vol. 32, pp. 15-29.Kozlova, E. V.1932. The birds of south-west Transkaikalia, northern Mongolia, and centralGobi. Ibis, 1932, pp. 567-596.Lacey, Howard [George].1911. The birds of Kerrville, Texas, and vicinity. Auk, vol. 28, pp. 200-219.Lamb, Chester Converse.1912. Birds of a Mohave Desert oasis. Condor, vol, 14, pp. 32?40.1925. Observations on the Xantus hummingbird. Condor, vol. 27, pp.89-92.Latham, Roy.1920. Unusual habits of chimney swift Auk, vol. 37, pp. 132-133.La Touche, John David Diques.1914. The spring migration at Chiawangtao in north-east Chihli. Ibis, 1914,pp. 560-586.1931. A handbook of the birds of eastern China. Vol. 2, pt. 1.Law, John Eugene.1923. A guilty road-runner: Circumstantial evidence. Condor, vol. 25, pp.133-134.Lawrence, George Newbold.1874. Birds of western and northwestern Mexico, based upon collectionsmade by Col. A, J, Grayson, Capt. J. Xantus and Ferd, Bischoff,now in the museum of the Smithsonian Institution, at Washington,D. C. Mem. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. 2, pp. 265-319,Lemmon, Isabella McC.1901. Two young hummingbirds. Bird-Lore, vol. 3, p. 108,Leopold, Aldo.1922. Road-runner caught in the act. Condor, vol. 24, p. 183.Lewis, John Babzillai.1927. Chimney swifts nesting in a well. Bird-Lore, vol. 29, p. 265.1929. Feeding habits of chimney swifts. Auk, vol, 46, pp. 546-547.Lincoln, Frederick Charles.1917. Some notes on the birds of Rock Canyon, Arizona. Wilson Bull.,vol. 29, pp. 65-73.1924. A "territory" note on the belted kingfisher, Wilson Bull., vol. 36,pp. 113-115.
484 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMLiNSDALE, Jean Myeon.1938. Environmental responses of vertebrates in the Great Basin. Amer.Midi. Nat., vol. 19, pp. 1-206.Linton, Edwin.1924. Chimney swifts at bedtime. Bird-Lore, vol. 26, pp. 252-253.LrvESEY, T. R.1936. Cuckoo problems. Journ. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc, vol. 38, pp. 735-758.LocKwooD, Mary E.1922. Hummingbird and bass. Bird-Lore, vol. 24, p. 94.Long, Wilbur S.1935. Spring notes from Lawrence, Kansas. Auk, vol. 52, pp. 466-467.LONGSTEEET, RUBEET JAMES.1930. Bird study in Florida.Lord, John Keast.1866. The naturalist in Vancouver Island and British Columbia. Vol. 2.LowEKY, George Hines, Jr.1938. Hummingbird in a pigeon hawk's stomach. Auk, vol. 55, p. 280.Lucas, Frederic Augustus.1893. The food of hummingbirds. Auk, vol. 10, pp. 311-315.LusK, Richard DeWitt.1900. Parrots in the United States. Condor, vol. 2, p. 129.MacFarlane, Roderick Ross.1891. Notes on and list of birds and eggs collected in Arctic America,1861-1866. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 14, pp. 413^46.Mailliaed, Joseph.1913. Some curious nesting places of the Allen hummingbird on the RanchoSan Geronimo. Condor, vol. 15, pp. 205-207.Mailliaed, Joseph, and Hanna, G. Dallas.1921. New bird records for North America with notes on the PribilofIsland list. Condor, vol. 23, pp. 93-95.jMayfield, George Radford.1921. Roof-nesting nighthawks. Wilson Bull., vol. 33, pp. 147-148.Maynaed, Charles Johnson.1896. The birds of eastern North America.McAtee, Waldo Lee.1908. The value of the nighthawk. Bird-Lore, vol. 10, pp. 150-151.1916. Common birds of Southeastern United States in relation to agricul-ture. U. S. Dept. Agr. Farmers' Bull. 755.1926. The relation of birds to woodlots in New York State. Roosevelt WildLife Bull., vol. 4, pp. 1-152.1931. A little essay on vermin. Bird-Lore, vol. 33, pp. 381-384.McBride, John M.1933. Unusual roosting of the chuck-will's-widow. Auk, vol. 50, p. 107.MoIlweaith, Thomas.1894. The birds of Ontario.Meaens, Edgae Alexandee.1890. Observations on the avifauna of portions of Arizona. Auk, vol. 7,pp. 251-264.Meeriam, Clinton Haet.1890. Results of a biological survey of the San Francisco Mountain regionand desert of the Little Colorado in Arizona. North Amer. Fauna,No. 3.
LITERATURE CITED 485Meeeiix, James Cttshing.1878. Notes on the ornithology of southern Texas, being a list of birds ob-served in the vicinity of Fort Brown, Texas, from February, 1876,to June, 1878. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 1, pp. 118-173.Michael, Charles Wllson.1927. Black swifts nesting in Yosemite National Park. Condor, vol. 29,pp. 8^97,Michael, Enid.1926. The habits of swifts in Yosemite "Valley. Condor, vol. 28, pp. 109-114.1933. A young black swift. Condor, vol. 35, p. 30.MiLLEE, AXDEN HOLMES.1925. The boom-flight of the Pacific nighthawk. Condor, vol. 27, pp. 141-143.1932. Observations on some breeding birds of El Salvador, Central America.Condor, vol. 34, pp. 8-17.1937. The nuptial flight of the Texas nighthawk. Condor, vol. 39, pp. 42-43.MiLLEB, Olive Thoene.1892. Little brothers of the air.MiNOT, Heney Davis.1877. The land-birds and game-birds of New England.Mooee, William Heney.1902a. Notes on some Canadian birds. Ottawa Nat., vol. 16, pp. 130-134.1902b. Nesting habits of the chimney swift. Bird-Lore, vol. 4, p. 162.Mousley, William Heney.1938. A study of the home life of the eastern belted kingfisher. WilsonBull., vol. 50, pp. 3-12.MUNEO, James Alexandee.1918. Notes on some British Columbia birds. Auk, vol. 35, pp. 234-235.1919. Notes on some birds of the Okanagan Valley, British Columbia.Auk, vol. 36, pp. 64-74.MUNSTEEHJELM, L.1922. Meddelanden f. Goteborgs Musei. Zoolog. Avdelning, 13.Musselman, Thomas Edgae.1926. Chimney swift banding. Wilson Bull., vol. 38, pp. 120-121.1931. Disasters to swifts. Bird-Lore, vol. 33, p. 397.NowoTNY, Dr.1898. The breeding of the Carolina paroquet in captivity. Auk, vol. 15, pp.28-32.Obeeholser, Haeby Chuech.1896. A preliminary list of the birds of Wayne County, Ohio. Bull. OhioAgr. Exper. Sta., techn. ser., vol. 1, pp. 243-354.1914. A monograph of the genus Chordeiles Swainson, type of a new familyof goatsuckers. U. S. Nat. Mus. BuU. 86.1918. Description of a new subspecies of Cyanolaemus clemenciae. Condor,vol. 20, pp. 181-182.1925. The migration of North American birds. Bird-Lore, vol. 27, pp.103-104, 326.1926. The migration of North American birds. Bird-Lore, vol. 28, pp.255-261.Oke, Robeet Thomas.1939. Observations on the nesting of the Allen hummingbird. Condor, vol.41, pp. 17-24.
486 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMPalmer, Theodore Sherman.1918. Costa's hummingbird?its type locality, early history and name.Condor, vol. 20, pp. 114-116.Palmer, William.1894. An Asiatic cuckoo on the Pribylof Islands, Alaska. Auk, vol. 11,p. 325.Patton, F. A.1924. Birds of the foot hills. Nesting of the Sennett's night hawk. Oologist,vol. 41, p. 111.Pearson, Thomas Gilbert.1911. The chimney swift. Bird-Lore, vol. 13, pp. 115-118.Pemberton, John Roy,1916. Variation of the broken-wing stunt by a roadrunner. Condor, vol. 18.p. 203.Pickens, Andrew Lee.1927. Unique method of pollination by the ruby-throat. Auk, vol. 44, pp.24r-27.1930. Favorite colors of hummingbirds. Auk, vol. 47, pp. 34&-352.PiCKWELL, GATLE BeNJAMIN,1937. Winter habits of the white-throated swift. Condor, vol. 39, pp.187-188.Pickwell, Gatle Benjamin, and Smith, Emily.1938. The Texas nighthawk in its summer home. Condor, vol. 40, pp.193-215.Poling, Otho Citrtis,1890. Notes on Eugenes fulgens. Auk, vol. 7, pp. 402-403.QijiixiN, Roy William.1935. New bird records from Texas. Auk, vol, 52, pp. 324-325.Rathbun, Samuel Frederick.1925. The black swift and its habits. Auk, vol. 42, pp. 497-516.Ray, Rose Carolyn.1925. Discovery of a nest and eggs of the blue-throated hummingbird.Condor, vol, 27, pp. 49-51.Ressel, Cyrus B.1889. Birds of Chester County, Penn. Ornithologist and Oologist, vol. 14,pp. 97-101,Richmond, Charles Wallace.1893, Notes on a collection of birds from eastern Nicaragua and the RioFrio, Costa Rica, with a description of a supposed new trogon.Proc. U. S. Nat, Mus., vol. 16, pp, 479-532,RiDGwAY, Robert,1877. United States geological exploration of the fortieth parallel. Part 3:Ornithology,1892. The humming birds. Rep. U. S. Nat. Mus. for 1890, pp. 253-383.1898. Description of a new species of hummingbird from Arizona, Auk, vol.15, pp. 325-326.1911. The birds of North and Middle America, U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 50, pt, 5.1912. Color standards and color nomenclature.1914. The birds of North and Middle America. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 50, pt. 6.1916. The birds of North and Middle America. U. S. Nat. Mus. BuU. 50, pt. 7.Roberts, Thomas Sadler.1932. The birds of Minnesota. Vol. 1.
LITERATURE CITED 487RoBEETsoN, John McBkaib.1933. An unusual nesting of the black-chinned hummingbird. Condor, vol.35. pp. 241-242.Rockwell, Robert Blanchabd.1908. An annotated list of the birds of Mesa County, Colorado. Condor, vol.10, pp. 152-180.Rust, Henry Judson.1911. Western nighthawks. Oologist, vol. 28, pp. 18&-190.Samuels, Edward Augustus.1872. Birds of New England and adjacent States.1883. Our northern and eastern birds.Saundees, Aeetas Andrews.1915. A summer at Flathead Lake, Montana. Condor, vol. 17, pp. 109-115.1929. The summer birds of the northern Adirondack Mountains. RooseveltWild Life Bull., vol. 5, pp. 327-499.1936. Ecology of the birds of Quaker Run Valley, Allegany State Park, NewYork. New York State Mus. Handbook, 16.Saunders, Willl^m Edwin.1917. City nesting of nighthawks. Wilson Bull., vol. 29, p. 105.SoHLAG, Carl W.1930. Hummingbirds and their nests. Cardinal, vol. 2, pp. 195-200.Scott, William Earl Dodge.1886. On the avifauna of Pinal County, with remarks on some birds ofPima and Gila Counties, Arizona. Auk, vol. 3, pp. 431-432.1889. A summary of observations on the birds of the gulf coast of Florida.Auk, vol. 6, pp. 245-252.1890. On the birds observed at the Dry Tortugas, Florida, during parts ofMarch and April, 1890. Auk, vol. 7, pp. 301-314.1892. Observations on the birds of Jamaica, West Indies. Auk, vol. 9, pp.369-375.Seixeck, G. H.1916. A nighthawk family. Guide to Nature, vol. 9, pp. 4-6.Sennett, George Burbiti'.1878. Notes on the ornithology of the lower Rio Grande of Tesas. Bull.U. S. Geol. and Geogr, Surv., vol. 4, pp. 1-66.1879. Further notes on the ornithology of the lower Rio Grande of Texas.Bull. U. S. Geol. and Geogr. Surv., vol. 5, pp. 371-440.1888. Descriptions of a new species and two new subspecies of birds fromTexas. Auk, vol. 5, pp. 43-46.Seton, Ernest Thompson.1890. The birds of Manitoba. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 13, pp. 457-643.Sharp, Clarence Sauger.1907. The breeding birds of Escondido. Condor, vol. 9, pp. 84-91,Shaw, Tsen-Hwang.1936. The birds of Hopei Province.Sheldon, Harry Hasgrave.1922a. Top speed of the road-runner. Condor, vol. 24, p. 180.1922b. Vaux swift in migration. Condor, vol. 24, pp. 184-185.Shelley, Lewis Oeman.1929, Twig gathering of the chimney swift. Auk, vol, 46, p, 116,Shelton, Alfred Cooper.1911. Nesting of the California cuckoo. Condor, vol. 13, pp. 19-22.
488 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMSheeman, Althea Rosina.1913. Experimenting in feeding hummingbirds during seven summers.Wilson Bull., vol. 25, pp. 153-166.Shuteldt, Robeet Wilson.1885. On the feeding habits of Phalaenoptilus nuttalli. Auk, vol. 2, pp.382-383.Simmons, George Finlat.1915. On the nesting of certain birds in Texas. Auk, vol. 32, pp. 317-331.1925. Birds of the Austin region.Simpson, Chaeles Torrey.1920. In lower Florida wilds.Skinner, Milton Philo.1928. Kingfisher and sharp-shinned hawk. Auk, vol. 45, pp. lOO-lOl.Skutch, Alexander Frank.1931. The life history of Rieffer's hummingbird {Amazil'm tzacatl tzacatl)in Panama and Honduras. Auk, vol. 48, pp. 481-500.Sloanakee, Joseph L.1913. Bird notes from the South-west. Wilson Bull., vol. 25, pp. 187-199.Smith, Austin Paxil.1907. The thick-billed parrot In Arizona. Condor, vol. 9, p. 104.1915. Birds of the Boston Mountains, Arkansas. Condor, vol. 17, pp. 41-57.Smith, Emily.1928. Black swifts nesting behind a waterfall. Condor, vol. 30, pp. 136-138.Smith, Everett.18S3. The birds of Maine. Forest and Stream, vol. 19, pp. 504-505.Smith, Hugh McCormick, and Palmee, Wilijam.1888. Additions to the avifauna of Washington and vicinity. Auk, vol. 5,pp. 147-148.Smith, Philo W.1900. Nesting of Stephens's whippoorwill. Osprey, vol. 4, p. 89.Smith, Wilbur F.1920. A hummingbird story. Bird-Lore, vol. 22, pp. 274-275.Snyder, Lester Lynne, and Logiek, E. B. S.1931. A faunal investigation of Long Point, and vicinity, Norfolk County,Ontario. Contr. Roy. Ontario Mus. Zool., vol. 18, pp. 117-236.Soule, Caroline Gray.1900. A hummingbird experiment. Bird-Lore, vol. 2, p. 158.Spikee, Charles Jolley.1935. A popular account of the bird life of the Finger Lakes section of NewYork, with main reference to the summer season. Roosevelt WildLife Bull., vol. 6, No. 3.Spkot, George Doveton.1927. Notes on the courtship of the rufous hummingbird. Condor, vol. 29,pp. 71-72.Sprunt, Alexander, Jr., and Chamberlain, Edward Burnham.1931. Second supplement to Arthur T. Wayne's birds of South Carolina.Charleston Mus. Contr. No. 6.Stearns, Winfeid Axden.1883. New England bird life, pt. 2. Edited by Elliott Coues.Stephens, Frank.1913. Nighthawk drinking. Condor, vol. 15, p. 184.
LITERATURE CITED 489
Ste3?u:^g, E.1885. Night hawks nesting. Forest and Stream, vol. 25, p. 4.Stevens, Hekbeet.1925. Notes on the birds of the Sikkim Himalayas. Journ. Bombay Nat.Hist. Soc, vol. 30, pp. 664-685.Stockard, Charles Rupert.1905. Nesting habits of birds in Mississippi. Auk, vol. 22, pp. 14&-15S.Stone, Witmer.1894. Capture of Cerylc torquata (Linn.) at Laredo, Texas. A species newto the United States. Auk, vol. 11, p. 177.Stoker, Tracy Irwin.1921. The northward range of the Allen hummingbird. Condor, vol. 23, pp.160-162.Strotheb, W. A.1886. An albino nighthawk. American Field, vol. 26, p. 415.StJTTON, George Miksch.1922. Notes on the road-runner at Fort Worth, Texas. Wilson Bull., vol. 34,pp. 3-20.1928. Notes on the flight of the chimney swift. Cardinal, vol. 2, pp. 85-92.1935. An expedition to the Big Bend country. Cardinal, vol. 4, pp. 1-7,1936. Birds in the wilderness.SWAETH, HAKRY SCHELWALD.1904. Birds of the Huachuca Mountains, Arizona. Pacific Coast Avifauna,No. 4.1912. Differences due to sex in the black swift. Auk, vol. 29, pp. 241-242.1920. Birds of the Papago Saguaro National Monument and the neighbor-ing region, Arizona.1922. Birds and mammals of the Stikine River region of northern BritishColumbia and southeastern Alaska. Univ. California Publ. Zool.,vol. 24, pp. 125-314.1929. The faunal areas of southern Arizona: A study in animal dis-tribution. Proc. California Acad. Sci., vol. 18, pp. 267-383.Swenk, Myron Hakmon.1934. The interior paroquet as a Nebraska bird. Nebraska Bird Rev., vol.2, pp. 55-59.SWINHOE, ROBESIT.1860. Letter on birds of Lam-yit. Ibis, 1860, pp. 428-429.1870. On the ornithology of Hainan. Ibis, 1870, pp. 77-97.1874. Ornithological notes made at Chefoo. Ibis, 1874, p. 435.Tate, Ralph C.1926. Some materials used in nest construction by certain birds of theOklahoma Panhandle. Univ. Oklahoma Bull., vol. 5, pp. 103-104.1928. Rufous hummingbird in the Oklahoma Panhandle. Condor, vol. 30,pp. 252-253.Ta\ternee, Percy Algernon, and Swales, Bkadshaw Hall.1907. The birds of Point Pelee. Wilson Bull., vol. 19, pp. 133-153.Tayt-ob. W^ulter Penn, and Shaw, William Thomas.1927. Mammals and birds of Mount Rainier National Park.
.Thayer, Gerald Henderson.1899. The chuck-will's-widow on shipboard. Auk, vol. 16, pp. 273-276.1903. The mystery of the black-billed cuckoo. Bird-Lore, vol. 5, pp. 143-145.
490 BULLETIN- 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMThate^r, John Euot.1906. Eggs and nests of the thick-billed parrot {Rliyncopsitta pachyrhyncha)
.
Auk, vol. 23, pp. 223-224.Thomas, Edwabd S.1932. Chuck-will's-widow, a new bird for Ohio. Auk, vol. 49, p. 479.Thompson, Axbert Ervin.1937. A swift in a granite wall. Nature Mag., vol. 30, p. 141.Todd, Walter Edmond Clyde.1916. The birds of the Isle of Pines. Ann. Carnegie Mus., vol. 10, pp.146-296.TOEREY, BR.\DF0RD.1S92. The foot-path way.1903. The clerk of the woods.TowNSEND, Charles Wendeix.1906. Notes on the birds of Cape Breton Island. Auk, vol. 23, pp. 172-179.1912. Notes on the summer birds of the St. John valley. New Brunswick.Auk, vol. 29, pp. 16-23.1918. Ipswich bird notes. Auk, vol. 35, pp. 182-185.1920a. Supplement to the birds of Essex County, Massachusetts. Mem.Nuttall Orn. Club, No. 5.1920b. Courtship in birds. Auk, vol. 37, pp. 380-393.TULLSEN, H.1911. My avian visitors : Notes from South Dakota. Condor, vol. 13, pp.89-104.TuRNBirLL, William Patterson.1869. The birds of eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey.TuTTLE, Henby Emerson.1911. The nesting of the whip-poor-will. Bird-Lore, vol. 13, pp. 235-238.Tylee, John Geeppee.1913. Some birds of the Fresno district, California. Pacific Coast Avifauna,No. 9.Van Rossem, Adeiaan Joseph.1927. Eye shine in birds, with notes on the feeding habits of some goat-suckers. Condor, vol. 29, pp. 25-28.1936. Notes on birds in relation to the faunal areas of south-central Arizona.Trans. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. 8, pp. 121-148.1938. See Dickey and van Rossem, 1938.Van Rossem, AlDRIaan Joseph, and Bowles, John Hoopee.1920. Nesting of the dusky poor-will near Sangus, Los Angeles County,California. Condor, vol, 22, pp. 61-62.Van Tyne, Josselyn, and Sutton, Geoege Miksch.1937. The birds of Brewster County, Texas. Univ. Michigan Mus. Zool.,Misc. Publ. No. 37.Vaughan, Robert E., and Jones, Kenneth Huelstone.1913. The birds of Hong Kong. Macao, and the West River or Si Kiang insouth-eastern China, with special reference to their nidifieationand seasonal movements. Ibis, 1913, pp. 163-201.ViSHEB, Stephen Sargent.1910. Notes on the birds of Pima County, Arizona. Auk, vol 27, pp. 279-288.VoRHiES, Charles Tayloe.1934. Arizona records of the thick-billed parrot. Condor, vol. 36, pp. 180-181.
LITERATURE CITED 491VEOOMAN, AI3EBT GEOBGE.1901, Discovery of the egg of the black swift {Cypseloides niger Mrealis).Auk, vol. 18, pp. 394r-395.Waeren, Benjamin Haeey.1890. Report on the birds of Pennsylvania. Ed. 2.Wabeen, Edv^aed Royal.1916. Notes on the birds of the Elk Mountain region, Gunnison County,Colorado. Auk, vol. 33, pp. 292-317.Watson, She^pakd Abthub.1933. The Vaux swift at WMttier, California. Condor, vol. 35, pp. 203-204.Wayne, Abthub Teezkvant.1910. Birds of South Carolina.Wells, John Gbant.1902. Birds of the island of Carriacou. Auk, vol. 19, pp. 343-349.Weltee, Wilfeed August.1935. Nesting habits of ruby-throated hummingbird. Auk, vol. 52, pp.88-89.Westovee, Myeon F.1932. The flight of swifts. Bird-Lore, vol. 34, pp. 253-254.Wetmoee, Alexandeb.1916. Birds of Porto Rico. U. S. Dept. Agr. Bull. 326.1920. Observations on the habits of birds at Lake Burford, New Mexico.Auk, vol. 37, pp. 393-412.1921. Further notes on birds observed near Williams, Arizona. Condor,vol. 23, pp. 60-64.1927. The birds of Porto Rico and the Virgin Islands. New York Acad. Sci.,vol. 9, pt. 4, pp. 409-571.1932. Seeking the smallest feathered creatures. Nat. Geogr. Mag., vol.62, pp. 65-89.1935. The thick-billed parrot in southern Arizona. Condor, vol. 37, pp.18-21.Weydemeyeb, Winton.1927. Notes on the location and construction of the nest of the calliopehummingbird. Condor, vol. 29, pp. 19-24.Wheelei{, Haery Edgab.1922. Random notes from Arkansas. Wilson Bull., vol. 34, pp. 221-224.Wheelock, Ibene Gbos\'enoe.1904. Birds of California.1905. Regurgitative feeding of nestlings. Auk, vol. 22, pp. 54-70.Whittle, Chables Livy.1937. A study of hummingbird behavior during a nesting season. Bird-Banding, vol. 8, pp. 170-173.WiDMANN, Otto.1907. A preliminary catalog of the birds of Missouri,WlLLABD, FeANCIS COTTLE.1899. Notes on Eugenes fulgens. Osprey, vol. 3, pp. 65-66.1911. The blue-throated hummingbird. Condor, vol. 13, pp. 46-49.Wn-soN, Alexandeb.1828-1832. American ornithology. Vols. 1, 2.Woodbury, Angus M.1938. Red-naped sapsucker and rufous hummingbird. Condor, vol. 40,p. 125.
492 BULLETIN" 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMWoods, Robeet S.1922. The development of young Costa hummingbirds. Condor, vol. 24,pp. 189-193.1924a. Some birds of the San Gabriel wash. Bird-Lore, vol. 26, pp. 1-9.1924b. Notes on the life history of the Texas nighthawk. Condor, vol. 26,pp. 3-6.1927a. Road-runner versus mockingbird. Condor, vol. 29, p. 273.1927b. The hummingbirds of California. Auk, vol. 44, pp. 297-318.1934. A hummingbird entangled in a spider's web. Condor, vol. 36, p.242.Wright, Axbebt Hazen. and Haepee, Francis.1913. A biological recouuaissance of Okefinokee Swamp: The birds. Auk,vol. 30, pp. 477-505.Wyman, Luthee Eveeet.1920. Notes on the calliope hummingbird. Condor, vol. 22, pp. 206-207.ZAEEQA, Louis Augustus di.1882. The nighthawk in cities. Forest and Stream, vol. 18, p. 467.
INDEX
Abbott, C. G., on eastern nighthawk,227.acutipennis inferior, Chordeiles, 252,253.acutipennis texensis, Chordeiles, 244.Aeronautes saxatilis nigrior, 319.saxatilis saxatilis, 310.aflBnis, Micropus, 309.Aiken, C. E. H., and Warren, E. R., onbroad-tailed hummingbird, 390.albicoUis albicoUis, Nyctidromus, 200.albicollis merrilli, Nyctidromus, 199.Alcedinidae, 111.alcyon alc3'on, Megaceryle, 111.alcyon caurina, Megaceryle, 127, 129.Aldrich, E. C, viii.on dusky poorwill, 195, 196.on Nuttall's poorwill, 189.alexandri, Archilochus, 352.Alfaro, Anastasio, on groove-billed ani,27, 34.Allard, H. A., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 345.Allen, A. A., on eastern nighthawk, 214.on ruby-throated hummingbird,341, 343.Allen, C. A., on Allen's hummingbird,412,416.on Vaux's swift, 297, 301.Allen, F. H., on eastern belted kingfisher,111, 124.on eastern whippoorwill, 172.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 57.Allen, J. A., on chuck-wiU's-widow, 148.on roadrunner, 43.Allen, Mary P., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 347.Allen, W. E., on roadrunner, 46.alleni, Selasphorus, 411.Allen's hummingbird, 411.Allison, Andrew. (See under Beyer,G. E.)Amadon, Dean, viii.Amazilia cinnamomea, 433.salvini, 446.tzacatl tzacatl, 432,violiceps, 446.yucatanensis cerviniventris, 444.yucatanensis chalconota, 444.ambiguus ambiguus, Trogon, 106.American Museum of Natural History,viii.americana septentrionalis, Chloroceryle,140.americanus americanus, Coccj'^zus, 54.
americanus occidentalis, Coccyzus, 67.ani, Crotophaga, 19.Ani, groove-billed, 26.San Lucas, 35.smooth-billed, 19.anna, Calypte, 371.Annandale, Nelson, 104.Anna's hummingbird, 371.Anthony, A. W., 376, 385.on Anna's hummingbird, 374.op roadrunner, 38, 45.on rufous hummingbird, 399.on Texas nighthawk, 250.Antrostomus carolinensis, 147.vociferus arizonae, 183.vociferus vociferus, 163.apus, Micropus, 309.apus var. B. leucopvga, Hirundo, 305.Archdale, M. M., 188.Archilochus alexandri, 352.colubris, 332.Arizona bluethroated hummingbird,325.arizonae, Antrostomus vociferus, 183.Arkansas Hoosier, on eastern nighthawk,227.Armstrong, F. B., 107, 131, 142.Arnold, L. W., on Anna's hummingbird,372, 380.aserriensis, Chordeiles minor, 232, 243.Ashdown, James, Jr., 349.Atthis heloisa, 455.heloisa ellioti, 419.heloisa heloisa, 417.heloisa margarethae, 419, 420.heloisa morcomi, 418.morcomi, 417.Attwater, H. P., 203.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 56.Audubon, J. J., 1.on Carolina parakeet, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8,9, 10.on chimney swift, 281, 287.on chuck-wiU's-widow, 148, 150.on eastern nighthawk, 228.on Louisiana parakeet, 12.on Maynard's cuckoo, 51, 52.on nighthawk, 207.on ruby-throated hummingbird,347.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 60.Aughey, Samuel, 60.on eastern belted kingfisher, 121.australis, Cypselus, 305. 493
494 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMBailey, A. M., viii.on rufous hummingbird, 400.Bailey, Mrs. F. M., on Arizona blue-throated hummingbird, 329.on black-chinned hummingbird,354, 356, 358.on broad-billed hummingbird, 466.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 388,392, 394.on coppery-tailed trogon, 106, 107.on eastern belted kingfisher, 116.on lucifer hummingbird, 430.on Nuttall's poorwill, 190, 191, 192.on roadrunner, 37, 46, 48.on rufous hummingbird, 396, 397,403, 408.on Stephens's whippoorwill, 187.on Texas nighthawk, 247, 249.on thick-billed parrot, 15.on western nighthawk, 236, 237.on white-throated swift, 314, 315.Bailey, G. A., on chimney swift, 277.Bailey, H. B., on Carolina parakeet, 5.Bailey, H. H., on eastern belted king-fisher, 125.on eastern nighthawk, 210, 227.Bailey, Vernon, 191, 430.Bailey, W. L., on eastern belted king-fisher, 115.Baird, S. F., on northern black swift,254.Baker, E. C. Stuart, viii.on Himalayan cuckoo, 84.on Khasia Hills cuckoo, 91.bakeri, Cuculus canorus, 88, 91.Bancroft, GrifBng, viii.on Costa's hummingbird, 365.on roadrunner, 40.on San Lucas ani, 35.Bangs, Outram, on Louisiana parakeet,11.Bangs, Outram, and Penard, T. E.,on San Lucas ani, 35.Bangs, Outram, and Peters, J. L., onKhasia Hills cuckoo, 105.Barnes, R. M., viii.Barrows, W. B., 78.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 60.Bartram, B. S., on Carolina parakeet, 2.Bartram, William, on Carolina parakeet,2.Bassett, F. N., on Allen's humming-bird, 411.on Anna's hummingbird, 383.Eatchelder, C. P., on eastern night-hawk, 209.Baynard, O. E., on eastern belted king-fisher, 114.on Maynard's cuckoo, 51.Baynes, E. H., on eastern nighthawk,225.Beal, F. E. L., 60.on eastern nighthawk, 225.Beal, F. E. L., and McAtee, W. L., onAnna's hummingbird, 380.Beal, F. E. L.; McAtee, W. L.; andKalmbach, E. R., on western night-hawk, 236.
Beal, Marv, on black-chinned humming-bird, 357.Beck, R. H., on dusky poorwill, 196.Beebe, William, on coppery-tailed tro-gon, 110.on thick-billed parrot, 17.Belding, Lyman, on San Lucas ani, 35.on Xantus's hummingbird, 447.Belted kingfisher, eastern. 111.western, 129.Bendire, C. E., 131, 175, 185, 197, 199,200, 204, 205.on Allen's hummingbird, 412.on black-billed cuckoo, 72, 73.on black-chinned hummingbird,354, 358.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 389,392.on buff-bellied hummingbird, 444.on California cuckoo, 69.on calliope hummingbird, 423.on Carolina parakeet, 6.on chuck-will's-widow, 150.on Costa's hummingbird, 364, 365,367, 368.on coppery-tailed trogon, 106, 109.on eastern belted kingfisher, 112,113, 115, 121.on eastern nighthawk, 227.on eastern whippoorwill, 165, 167,171.on Florida nighthawk, 237.on groove-billed ani, 27, 32.on Merrill's pauraque, 203.on northern black swift, 257.on Nuttall's poorwill, 187, 188, 189.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 320, 321,322, 323.on Pacific nighthawk, 241,on ruby-throated hummingbird,338, 339, 340.on rufous hummingbird, 399, 400.on smooth-billed ani, 20.on Texas blue-throated humming-bird, 331.on Texas kingfisher, 141.on Texas nighthawk, 246, 247, 250.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 54, 56, 57,58, 61, 63.Benners, G. B., on ringed kingfisher,130.Benson, H. C, 106.Bent, A. C, 45, 344.on eastern whippoorwill, 168.on roadrunner, 40.Bergtold, W. H., on Nuttall's poorwill,191.on thick-billed parrot, 15, 17.bessophilus, Cyanolaemus clemenciae,326, 331.Lampornis clemenciae, 325.Beyer, G. E. ; Allison, Andrew; and Kop-man, H. H., on eastern belted king-fisher, 114.Biological Survey, U. S. Bureau of, viii,207, 224, 225, 226, 265, 315.Bishop, L. B., 446.on Sennett's nighthawk, 240.
INDEX 495Black-billed cuckoo, 70.Black-chinned hummingbird, 352.Black swift, northern, 254.Blake, C. H., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 345.Blakiston, T. W., and Pryer, H. J. S.,on white-rumped swift, 306.Blue-throated hummingbird, Arizona,325.Texas, 330.Blyth, Edward, on white-rumped swift,305.Boehm, Moritz, 164.BoUes, Frank, on eastern whippoorwill,164, 174.on ruby-throated hummingbird,343.borealis, Cypselus, 254.Hylocharis leucotis, 465.Nephoecetes niger, 254.Bowles, J. H., 376, 421.on Anna's hummingbird, 375.on California cuckoo, 68.on eastern nighthawk, 214.on eastern whippoorwill, 175.Bowles, J. H., and Dawson, W. L., onrufous hummingbird, 399.Bowles, J. H., and van Rossem, A. J.,on dusky poorwill, 195.Bracelin, Mrs. H. P., viii.Bradbury, W. C, on white-throatedswift, 311, 313.Bralliar, Floyd, on eastern beltedkingfisher, 117,123,Brandt, H. W., on coppery-tailed tro-gon, 106.Breninger, G. F., 327.Brewer, T. M., on eastern nighthawk,211.Brewster, William, 325.on black-billed cuckoo, 70, 80.on Carolina parakeet, 5.on chimney swift, 282, 284.on eastern belted kingfisher, 119,123, 124.on kingfisher, 141.on ruby-throated hummingbird,340.on Salvin's hummingbird, 446.on San Ignatio poorwill, 198.on San Lucas ani, 35.on San Lucas nighthawk, 253.on Stephen's whippoorwill, 184,185, 186, 187.on Xantus's hummingbird, 447, 449,450.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 61.Broad-billed hummingbird, 465.Broad-tailed hummingbird, 387.Brockway, A. W., on eastern beltedkingfisher, 125.Bromley, S. H., 176.Brooks, Maurice, viii.Brooks, W.E., 87.
Brown, D. E., on California cuckoo, 68.on Pacific nighthawk, 241.on rufous hummingbird, 398, 400.on Vaux's swift, 296.Brown, E. J., 3.Brown, W. W., Jr., 16, 40. 430, 468.Bryant, H. C, on Allen's hummingbird,413.on roadrunner, 38, 44, 46.Bryant, W. E., 447.Buflf-bellied hummingbird, 444.Bullock, William, on lucifer humming-bird, 430, 431.Burmeister, Herman, on ringed king-fisher, 131.Burns, F. L., on chimney swift, 276.on eastern whippoorwill, 170.on roadrunner, 41.on ruby-throated hummingbird,341.on rufous hummingbird, 400.Burroughs, John, 177.Burroughs, Julian, on chimney swift,284.Burrows, D. B., on Merrill's pauraque,199, 200, 204, 205.Butler, A. W., 3, 60.on eastern nighthawk, 225.on Louisiana parakeet, 14.Cahoon, J. C, 446.California cuckoo, 67.californianus, Geococcyx, 36.californicus, Phalaenoptilus nuttalli,193, 194, 198.calliope, Stellula, 420.Calliope hummingbird, 420.Calothorax lucifer, 430.Calypte anna, 371.costae, 361, 377.Cameron, E. S., on Nuttall's poorwill,188.Camp, R. D., on buflf-bellied hum-mingbird, 444.Campbell, A. J., 307, 309, 310.Campbell, E. K. and D., on chimneyswift, 288.Campbell, Mildred, viii.Canfield, J. B., on eastern nighthawk,228Canfield, Mrs. May, 197.canorus, Cuculus, 84, 89, 104, 105.Cuculus canorus, 88, 91, 92, 101.canorus bakeri, Cuculus, 88, 91.canorus canorus, Cuculus, 88, 91, 92,101.canorus telephonus, Cuculus, 91, 92,105.Carey, H. R., on eastern belted king-fisher, 117, 121, 122, 123, 124.Carolina parakeet, 1.carolinensis, Antrostomus, 147.carohnensis carolinensis, Conuropsis, 1.carolinensis ludovicianus, Conuropsis, 11.Caprimulgidae, 147.Caprimulgiformes, 147.
496 BULLETIN- 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMCarpenter, F. H., on eastern night-hawk, 226.Carter, T. D., on chimney swift, 276.Cassin, John, on western nighthawk,235.Catesby, Mark, 206.caudac'uta, Chaetura, 307, 309.caurina, Megaceryle alcyon, 127, 129.cerviniventris, Amazilia vucatanensis,444.Chaetura caudacuta, 307, 309.pelagica, 271, 302.vauxi, 294.chalconota, Amazilia yucatanensis, 444.Chamberlain, E. B., on chuck-will's-widow, 155.Chambers, W. L., on Anna's humming-bird, 373.Chance, Edgar, on Khasia Hills cuckoo,94, 100.Chaney, R. W., on eastern nighthawk,209.Chapman, Mrs. C. E., 257.Chapman, F. M., 3.on Carolina parakeet, 8.on chimney swift, 281, 290.on eastern nighthawk, 230.on Florida nighthawk, 238.on groove-billed ani, 34.on Merrill's pauraque, 204.on northern black swift, 257.on Rieffer's hummingbird, 442.on white-eared hummingbird, 462.chapmani, Chordeiles minor, 208, 232,237, 243.Cheney, S. P., on eastern whippoorwill,176.Cherrie, G. K., 27, 34.on Cherrie's nighthawk, 243, 244.on Rieflfer's hummingbird, 433.Cherrie's nighthawk, 243.Childs, J. L., on Arizona blue-throatedhummingbird, 327.on Carolina parakeet, 5, 6.Chimney swift, 271.Chloroceryle americana septentrionalis,140. mChordeiles acutipennis inferior, 252, 253.acutipennis texensis, 244.minor aserriensis, 232, 243.minor chapmani, 208, 232, 237, 243.minor henryi, 232, 235, 240.minor hesperis, 232, 235, 236, 240.minor howelli, 232, 236, 242.minor minor, 206.minor sennetti, 232, 235, 239.virginianus howelli, 244.virginianus sennetti, 241, 243, 244.virginianus virginianus, 235, 237,240.Christy, B. H., on black-chinned hum-mingbird, 356.Chuck-will's-widow, 147.Clabaugh, E. D., on Allen's humming-bird, 413.Clark, F. C, on Anna's hummingbird,380.
Clark, J. H., on Texas blue-throatedhummingbird, 331.Clarke, C. H. D., on eastern whippoor-wiU, 168.Clarke, C. K., on black-biUed cuckoo,72.Clay, C. I., on Vaux's swift, 296.Clay, Marcia B., on yellow-billed cuckoo,56, 62.clemenciae, Coeligena, 331.Cyanolaemus clemenciae, 326, 331.Lampornis clemenciae, 330.clemenciae bessophilus, Cyanolaemus,326, 331.clemenciae bessophilus, Lampornis, 325.clemenciae clemenciae, Cyanolaemus,326, 331.clemenciae clemenciae, Lampornis, 330.Coale, H. K., on eastern whippoorwill,164.Cochrane, H. L., on white-rumpedswift, 306, 307, 309.Coccyzus americanus americanus, 54.americanus occidentalis, 67.erythropthalmus, 70.minor maynardi, 51.minor minor, 51.minor nesiotes, 51.Cooke, W. W., on nighthawk, 206.cooki, Micropus pacificus, 304, 305, 310.Coeligena clemenciae, 331.Colibri thalassinus, 455.CoUett, John, on Louisiana parakeet, 14.colubris, Archilochus, 332.Colvin, John, 149.Colvin, Walter, on chuck-will's-widow,149.Conuropsis carolinensis carolinensie, 1.carolinensis ludovicianus, 11.Coppery-tailed trogon, 106.Coraciiformes, 111.Cordier, A. H., on yellow-billed cockoo,58.costae, Calypte, 361, 377.Costa's hummingbird, 361.Cottam, Clarence, 349.on chimney swift, 289.on northern black swift, 265.on white-throated swift, 315.Cottam, Clarence, and Knappen,Phoebe, on Arizona blue-throated hummingbird, 329.on broad-billed hummingbird, 470.on Carolina parakeet, 9.on coppery-tailed trogon, 109.on Merrill's pauraque, 204.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 323.on thick-billed parrot, 17.Coues, Elliott, 122.on chimney swift, 281.on NuttaU's poorwill, 191, 192.on roadrunner, 37, 38, 40.on Sennett's nighthawk, 239.Couper, William, on eastern nighthawk,211.Cowan, I. McT., viii.Crane, R. T., 122.
INDEX 497Crotophaga ani, 19.sulcirostris pallidula, 34, 35.sulcirostris sulcirostris, 26.Cuckoo, black-billed, 70.California, 67.Himalayan, 84.Khasia Hills, 91.mangrove, 51.Maynard's, 51.yellow-billed, 54.Cuckoos, roadrunners, and anis, 19.Cuculidae, 19.Cuculiformes, 19.Cuculus canorus, 84, 89, 104, 105.canorus bakeri, 88, 91.canorus canorus, 88, 91, 92, 101.canorus telephonus, 91, 92, 105.optatus optatus, 84.Cvanolaemus clemenciae bessophilus,326, 331.clemenciae clemenciae, 326, 331.Cynanthus latirostris, 446, 465.Cypselus australis, 305.borealis, 254.vittatus, 305.Daniel, J. W., Jr., on chimney swift, 274.Danforth, R. E., on ruby-throatedhummingbird, 348.Davis, W. B., on Vaux's swift, 298, 299.Davison, J. L., on black-billed cuckoo,73.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 56.Dawson, W. L., on Anna's humming-bird, 374, 378, 386.on Allen's hummingbird, 414.on black-chinned hummingbird,359.on calliope hummingbird, 421.on Costa's hummingbird, 363.on eastern nighthav?'k, 227.on Texas uighthawk, 250.on Vaux's swift, 296.on white-throated swift, 311.Dawson, W. L., and Bowles, J. H., onrufous hummingbird, 399.Day, Mary F., on chimney swift, 276.Deignan, H. G., viii.DeKay, J. E., on Carolina parakeet, 2.De Laubenfels, M. W., on Texas night-hawk, 251.Denslow, H. C, on chimney swift, 282.on yellow-billed cuckoo, CO.Densmore, Frances, ou eastern beltedkingfisher, 113, 121.Desert poorwill, 197.Deusing, Murl, viii.Dickey, D. R., 376.on Anna's hummingbird, 375.on desert poorwill, 197.Dickejs D. R., and van Rosscin, A. J.,on chuck-will's-widow, 160.ou Merrill's pauraque, 203.on ringed kingfisher, 131.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 320.on ruby-throated hummingbird,342.
Dickey, D. R., and van Rossem, A. J.,on Texas kingfisher, 140.on Texas nighthawk, 251.on white-eared hummingbird, 452,462.Dickey, S. S., viii.dickeyi, Phalaenoptilus nuttalli, 193,198."Didynius," on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 333.Dingle, E. S., on chuck-will's widow,160.Dixon, J. B., on Allen's hummingbird,412.on Anna's hummingbird, 373.on black-chinned hummingbird,356.on calliope hummingbird, 421, 423.on Costa's hummingbird, 363, 364,365.on white-throated swift, 311, 312,316.Dixon, Joseph, on northern black swift,258, 261.Dixon, Joseph; Grinnell, Joseph; andLinsdale, J. M., on calliope humming-bird, 422, 426.Doe, C. E., viii.Domaniewski, Janusz, on white-rumpedswift, 305.Downing, E. R., on Louisiana parakeet,12.Drew, F. M., on northern black swift,255, 262, 263, 264.Drury, Charles, 225.DuBois, A. D., on black-billed cuckoo,71.on eastern nighthawk, 226, 227.on eastern whippoor'svill, 169, 177.on Pacific nighthawk, 241, 242.on ruby-throated hummingbird,338.on rufous hummingbird, 398, 400,401, 402, 404, 405, 407.on yeilow-billed cuckoo, 55.Durfee, Owen, on black-billed cuckoo,71.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 55.Dusky poorwill, 194.Dutcher, William, on nighthawk, 230.Dybowski, B., on white-rumped swift,306, 308, 310.Dyer, E. I., on Allen's hummingbird,414.Eastern belted kingfisher, 111.Eastern nighthawk, 206.Eastern whippoorwill, 163.Eaton, E. H., on eastern nighthawk,227, 228.on eastern whippoorwill, 172.Eaton, Vf. F., on Carolina parakeet, 2.Edgerton, H. E., viii, 345.Eifrig, C. W. G., on eastern whippoor-will, 175.eUioti, Atthis heloisa, 419.Elliot's hummingbird, 419.
178223?40 38
498 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMElzey, M. G., on eastern nighthawk,230.erythropthalnaus, Coccyzus, 70.Eugenes fulgens, 319.Everhart, B. M., 121.Evermann, B. W., on chimney swift,274.Everett, Constance and E. A., on chim-ney swift, 279.Farley, F. L., on black-billed cuckoo, 77.on rufous hummingbird, 403.Figgins, J. D., 369.Finley, W. L., on rufous hummingbird,400.on Vaux's swift, 297, 298.Finley, W. L. and Irene, on roadrunner,41.Finsch, O., on white-rumped swift, 309.Fisher, A. K., 452.on coppery-tailed trogon, 109.on eastern belted kingfisher, 113.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 320.on Stephens's whippoorwill, 18.5.Fisher, W. K., on roadrunner, 45.Flint, H. W., on black-billed cuckoo, 72.on eastern whippoorwill, 175.Florida nighthawk, 237.Floyd, C. B., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 333.Forbes, S. A., 78.Forbush, E. H., on black-billed cuckoo,78.on chimney swift, 273, 277.on eastern belted kingfisher, 114,126.on eastern nighthawk, 214, 226, 227.on eastern whippoorwill, 172, 176,177.on goatsuckers, 153.on ruby-throated hummingbird,341.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 59, 60, 62.Foreman, Grant, on yellow - billedcuckoo, 55.Fowler, F. H., 106.on coppery-tailed trogon, 109.on eastern whippoorwill, 185.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 323, 324.Frazar, M. A., 35, 36, 254, 447, 449.on San Ignatio poorwill, 198.Friedmann, Herbert, on Khasia Hillscuckoo, 105.Fuertes, L. A., 281.fulgens, Eugenes, 319.Gage, D. S., 12.Gander, F. F., on Anna's hummingbird,377.Ganier, A. F., on nighthawk, 230.Gentry, T. G., on eastern nighthawk,210, 214, 225, 228.Geococcyx californianus, 36.Gillin, J. H., viii.Gilman, M. F., on roadrunner, 41, 48.Goatsuckers, 147.
Gofi', Milton, on eastern nighthawk, 217.Gorsuch, D. M., 107.Goss, N. S., on eastern nighthawk, 227.on Louisiana parakeet, 13.Gosse, P. H., on smooth-billed ani, 22,23, 24.Gould, John, on North American hum-mingbirds, 377.on white-rumped swift, 305.Grayson, A. J., on coppery-tailed trogon,107.on ringed kingfisher, 131.Grinnell, Joseph, on Allen's humming-bird, 415.on black-chinned hummingbird,353, 358.on calliope hummingbird, 424.on Costa's hummingbird, 368.on Nuttall's poorwill, 190.on Pacific nighthawk, 240, 241, 242.on rufous hummingbird, 406.on San Ignatio poorwill, 198.on Texas nighthawk, 245, 249.on western belted kingfisher, 129.Grinnell, Joseph; Dixon, Joseph; andLinsdale, J. M., on calliope humming-bird, 422, 426.Grinnell, Joseph, and Linsdale, J. M.,on Allen's hummingbird, 413.Grinnell, Joseph, and Storer, T. I., onAnna's hummingbird, 377.on calliope hummingbird, 420, 427,428.on dusky poorwill, 197.on northern black swift, 269.on rufous hummingbird, 409.on Texas nighthawk, 245, 250.on western belted kingfisher, 130.Griscom, Ludlow, on Salvin's humming-bird, 446.Groove-billed ani, 26.Gross, A. 0., viii, 235.on eastern nighthawk, 206.Grover, W. E., on eastern nighthawk,227.Hair, John, 122.Hall, Robert, on white-rumped swift,308.Hammersley, Gladys, on rufous hum-mingbird, 402, 406.Hanna, G. D., and Mailliard, Joseph,on white-rumped swift, 304.Hanna, W. C, viii.on California cuckoo, 69.on white-throated swift, 313, 316,317, 318.Hands, F., on thick-billed parrot, 18.Hands, Percy, on thick-billed parrot, 15.Hardy, Manly, on eastern belted king-fisher, 120.Harington, H. H., on white-rumpedswift, 305.Harlow, R. C, viii.Harper, Francis, and Wright, A. H., onyellow-billed cuckoo, 56.
INDEX 499Harris, Harry, on Louisiana parakeet,12.Harris, W. G. F., viii.Hartert, Ernst, on Khasia Hills cuckoo,91.on white-rumped swift, 308, 309.Hartman, F. A., on eastern night-hawk, 228, 229.Hasbrouck, E. M., on Carolina para-keet, 2Haskin, L. L., on rufous hummingbird,397, 398, 403.Hedden, A. E., 2.Heermann, A. L., 38.Heggeness, H. G., on dusky poorwill,197.heloisa, Atthis, 455.Atthis heloisa, 417.heloisa ellioti, Atthis, 419.heloisa heloisa, Atthis, 417.heloisa margarethae, Atthis, 419, 420.heloisa morcomi, Atthis, 418.Heloise's hummingbird, 417.Henderson, Junius, on Anna's hum-mingbird, 380.Henry, T. C., 235.henryi, Chordeiles minor, 232, 235, 240.Henshaw, H. W., 411.on Allen's hummingbird, 416.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 388,394.on calliope hummingbird, 427, 428.on lucifer hummingbird, 430.on Nuttall's poorwill, 192.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 320.on roadrunner, 48.on rufous hummingbird, 396, 405,408.Herbert, E. G., 104.Herman, W. C., on Carolina parakeet,6, 10.Herrara, A. L., on groove-biUed ani, 32.Herrick, F. H., on black-biUed cuckoo,74, 76, 77.on eastern belted knigfisher, 116.on eastern nighthawk, 226.Hersey, F. S., viii.on eastern whippoorwiU, 164, 174,177.hesperis, Chordeiles minor, 232, 235,236, 240.Hess, I. E., on eastern nighthawk, 210.Himalayan cuckoo, 84.Hine, Jane L., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 335.Hirundo apus var. B. leucopyga, 305.pacifica, 304.Hoffmann, Ralph, on northern blackswift, 267, 269.on calliope hummingbird, 421.on Costa's hummingbird, 362.on Vaux's swift, 299, 301.on white-throated swift, 317.Hollister, Ned, on Texas nighthawk,250.Holt, W. L., on dusky poorwill, 195.
Hopkins, H. C, on eastern belted king-fisher, 120.Hopwood and Mackenzie, 84, 104.Horsfall, R. B., 227.Howard, O. W., 468.on broad-billed hummingbird, 466.Howell, A. B., on coppery-tailed trogon,106.on Nuttall's poorwill, 190.on roadrunner, 47.Howell, A. H., 243.on Carolina parakeet, 3.on chuck-will's-widow, 148.on eastern belted kingfisher, 114.on Florida nighthawk, 237.on Maynard's cuckoo, 51, 52.howelli, Chordeiles minor, 232, 236, 242.Chordeiles virginianus, 244.Howes, P. G., on black-billed cuckoo,72.Howlsey, L. B., viii.Hoxie, Walter, on eastern nighthawk,213Hudson, W. H., 384.Huey, L. M., 197.on black-chinned hummingbird,353.huevi, Phalaenoptilus nuttalli, 193, 197,198.Hummingbird, Allen's, 411.Anna's, 371.Arizona blue-throated, 325.black-chinned, 352.broad-biUed, 465.broad-tailed, 387.bufif-bellied, 444.calliope, 420.Costa's, 361.Elliot's, 419.Heloise's, 417.lucifer, 430.Margaret's, 419, 420.RieflFer's, 432.Rivoli's, 319.ruby-throated, 332.rufous, 396.Salvin's, 446.Texas blue-throated, 330.white-eared, 452.Xantus's, 447.Hummingbirds, 319.Hunt, Richard, on roadrunner, 38.Hyde, A. S., on chimney swift, 274.Hyer, E. S., 3.Hylocharis leucotis borealis, 465.leucotis leucotis, 452.magica, 465.xantusi, 447.inferior, Chordeiles acutipennis, 252,253.Ingcrsoll, Ernest, on eastern whippoor-wiU, 172.Ingram, CoUingwood, on white-rumpedswift, 306, 309.Ishizawa, T., 308.
500 BULLETIlSr 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMJacot, E. C, 109.on coppery-tailed trogon, 110.Jariiec, Joseph, on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 348.Jardine, William, and Selby, P. J., onwhite-rumped swift, 305.Jasper, Theodore, on eastern nighthawk,228.Jencks, F. T., on eastern belted king-fisher, 124.Jensen, J. K., 388.on roadrunner, 48.JeM'ell, H. W., on eastern nighthawk,210.Jones, A. E., on Himalayan cuckoo, 84.Jones, K. H., and Vaughan, R. E., onwhite-rumped swift, 306.Jones, Lynds, on eastern nighthawk,210.Johnson, C. E., on eastern nighthawk,209.Jourdain, F. C. R., viii.on white-rumped swift, 304.Judd, S. D., on yellow-billed cuckoo, 60.Kalmbach, E. R., 225.(See also under Beal, F. E. L.)kamtschaticus, Micropus pacificus, 305.Kearny, C. H., 141.Keays, J. E., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 349.Kellar, C. L., 400.Kemery, V. M., on'eastern nighthawk,210.Kennard, F. H., on black-billed cuckoo,75.on chimney swift, 274, 275, 276,282, 289.on eastern belted kingfisher, 125.Kennerly, C. B. R., 254.Kershaw, J. C, on white-rumped swift,309.Khasia Hills cuckoo, 91.Kimball, H. H., 187, 468.King, F. H., on black-billed cuckoo, 78.Kingfisher, eastern belted. 111.ringed, 130, 'Texas, 140.western belted, 129.Kingfishers, 111.Kinsey, E. C, on Anna's hummingbird,386.Knappen, Phoebe, on chuck-will's-widow, 153, 154.on eastern nighthawk, 226.Knappen, Phoebe, and Cottam, Clar-ence, on Arizona blue-throatedhummingbird, 329.on broad-billed hummingljird," 470.on coppery-tailed trogon, 109.on Merrill's pauraque, 204.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 323.Knight, O. W., on chimney swift, 278.on eastern belted kingfisher, 121.on eastern whippoorwill, 171.Knowlton, F. H., on eastern nighthawk,226.
Kobayashi, K., on white-rumped swift,308, 310.Kobbe, W. H., on rufous hummingbird,403, 405.Kopman, H. H., on chimney swift, 271.(See also under Beyer, G. E.).Kozlova, Madame E. V., on white-rumped swift, 308.kurodae, Micropus pacificus, 305.Lacey, Howard, on roadrunner, 49.Lamb, C. C, 420, 447, 457.on broad-billed hummingbird, 467.on nighthawk, 225.on Xantus's hummingbird, 448,450, 451.Lampornis clemenciae bessophilus, 325.clemenciae clemenciae, 330.Lantz, D. E., on Nuttall's poorwill, 188.Latham, John, on white-rumped swift,304, 305.Latham, Roy, on chimney swift, 288.latirostris, Cynanthus, 446, 465.La Touche, J. D. D., on Himalayancuckoo, 85, 88, 89, 90.on Khasia Hills cuckoo, 101.on white-rumped swift, 309.Law, J. E., on roadrunner, 48.Lawrence, G. N., 131.LaMTcnce, R. H., 358.on Costa's hummingbird, 367.on dusky poorwill, 197.Lemmon, Isabella McC, on ruby-throated hummingbird, 340.Leopold, Aldo, 15.on roadrunner, 44.leuconyx, Micropus pacificus, 304, 305,310.leucopyga, Hirundo apus, 305.leucotis, Hylocharis leucotis, 452.leucotis borealis, Hylocharis, 465.leucotis leucotis, Hylocharis, 452.Lewis, J. B., on chimney swifts, 274,276, 277.Lincoln, F. C, viii, 311.on Costa's hummingbird, 369.on eastern belted kingfisher, 123.Linsdale, J. M., on broad-tailed hum-mingbird, 388, 389, 391, 392.Linsdale, J. M., and Grinnell, Joseph,on Allen's hummingbird, 413.Linsdale, J. M.; Grinnell, Joseph; andDixon, Joseph, on calliope humming-Sfbird, 422, 426.Linton, Edwin, on chimney swift, 286.Livesey, T. R., on Himalayan cuckoo,"84.on Khasia HiUs cuckoo, 92, 100, 102.Lockwood, Mary E., on ruby-throatedhummingbird, 348.Logier, E. B. S., and Snyder, L. L., onyellow-billed cuckoo, 57.Long, R. L., 5.Long, W. S., on chuck-will's-widow,156.
INDEX 501Longstreet, R. J., on chuck-will's-widow, 148.on Florida nighthawk, 238.Lord, J. K., on northern black swift,255.Louisiana parakeet, 11.Lowery, G. H., Jr., on ruby-throatedhummingbird, 349.on Vaux's swift, 302.Lucas, F. A., on ruby-thiT>ated hum-mingbird, 342.on Xantus's hummingbird, 450.lucifer, Calothorax, 430.Lucifer hummingbird, 430.ludovicianus, Conuropsis carolinensis,11.Lugger, Otto, 60.Lusk, R. D., on thick-billed parrot, 15,16.Macgillivray, W., on white-rumpedswift, 310.Mackenzie and Hopwood, 84, 104.Macnamara, Charles, viii.magica, Hylocharis, 465.Mailliard, Joseph, on Allen's humming-bird, 413.Mailliard, Joseph, and Hanna, G. D.,on white-rum])ed swift, 304.Mangrove cuckoo, 51.margarethae, Atthis heloisa, 419, 420.Margaret's hummingbird, 419, 420.Marsden, H. W., 446.Mason, R. F., Jr., viii.Mayfield, G. R., on eastern nighthawk,227.Maynard, C. J., on Carolina parakeet,4, 5, 7, 8, 10.on Maynard's cuckoo, 52, 53.on smooth-billed ani, 22, 23.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 61.roaynardi, Coccyzus minor, 51.Ma.ynard's cuckoo, 51.McAtee, W. L., on chimney swift, 278.on eastern nighthawk, 225, 226.on roadrunner, 44, 50.(See also under Beal, F. E. L.)McBride, J. M., on chuck-will's -widow,157.McClanahan, Robert, 349.McCormick, W. J. F., 3.Mcllhenny, E. A., on eastern whippoor-will, 175.Mcllwraith, Thomas, on black-billedcuckoo, 72.Mearns, E. A.,3, 106.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 388,393.on western nighthawk, 235, 236.Megaceryle alc3'on alcyon, 111.alcyon caurina, 127, 129.torquata torquata, 130.Melcher, Mrs. C. W., on ruliy-throatcdhummingbird, 336.
Merriam, C. H., on broad-tailed hum-mingbird. 394.Merrill, J. C, 110.on buflF-beUied hummingbird, 444.on Merrill's pauraque, 199, 200, 204,on Texas nighthawk, 245, 246, 251.merrilli, Nyctidromus albicoUis, 199.Merrill's pauraque, 199.Michael, C. W., on northern blackswift, 258, 259, 260, 261.Michael, Enid, on northern black swift,262, 268.on V/'hite-throated swift, 311, 314,316.Micropodidae, 254.Micropodiiformes, 254.Micropus affinis, 309.apus, 309.pacificus cooki, 304, 305, 310.pacifieus kamtschaticus, 305.pacificus kurodae, 305.pacificus leueonyx, 304, 305, 310.pacificus pacificus, 304.Miller, A. H., on groove-billed ani, 28.on Pacific nighthawk, 229.on Texas nighthawk, 245, 251.Miller, L., 321.Miller, Olive Thome, on black-billedcuckoo, 79.minor, Choi-deiles minor, 206.Coccyzus minor, 51.minor assericnsis, Chordeiles, 232, 243.minor chaomani, Chordeiles, 208, 232,237 243.minor hen'ryi, Chordeiles, 232, 235, 240.minor hesperis, Chordeiles, 232, 235,236, 240.minor howelli, Chordeiles, 232, 236, 242.minor maynardi, Coccyzus, 51.minor minor, Chordeiles, 206.Coccyzus, 51.minor nesiotes, Coccyzus, 51.minor sennetti, Chordeiles, 232, 235, 239.Minot, H. D., on black-billed cuckoo,78.Moncrieff, Hugh, 349.Moore, N. B., on chuck-will's-widow,156.Moore, R. T., viii.on Amazilia violiceps ellioti, 446.on broad-billed hummingbird, 465,466, 469, 471.on hummingbirds, 419.on white-eared hummingbird, 457,463.Moore, W. H., on black-billed cuckoo,74.on chinmey swift, 274.Morcom, G. F., 417.morcomi, Atthis, 417.Atthis heloisa, 418.Mosher, F. H., 60, 78.Moulton, H. F., 114.Mouslcy, Henry, on eastern beltedkingfisher, 118.
602 BULLETIN 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMMunro, J. A., on calliope hummingbird,42Lon Vaux's swift, 297.Munsterhjelm, L., on white-rumpedswift, 306.Murphey, E. E., on chuck-will's-widow, 159, 160.Musselman, T. E., on chimney swift,275, 284, 288.National Association of Audubon So-cieties, 230.Nehrling, H., on eastern nighthawk, 227.Nelson, E. W., on Texas blue-throatedhummingbird, 331.Nelson, George, on eastern whippoor-will, 179, 180.Nephoecetes niger borealis, 254.niger niger, 254.nesiotes, Coccyzus minor, 51.Nicholson, D. J., on chuck-will's-widow, 148.Niedrach, R. J., 313.niger, Nephoecetes niger, 254.niger borealis, Nephoecetes, 254.niger niger, Nephoecetes, 254,Nighthawk, Cherrie's, 243.eastern, 206.Florida, 237.Pacific, 240.San Lucas, 253.Sennett's, 239.Texas, 244.western, 235.nigrior, Aeronautes saxatilis, 319.nitidus, Phalaenoptilus nuttalli, 190,197, 198.Norris-Elye, L. T. S., on ruby-throatedhummingbird, 349.Northern black swift, 254.Norton, A. H., 207.Nowotny, Dr., on Carolina parakeet,6,7.nuttalli, Phalaenoptilus nuttalli, 187,194, 197, 198.nuttalli californicus, Phalaenoptilus, 193,194, 198.nuttalli dickeyi, Phalaenoptilus, 193,198.nuttalli hueyi, Phalaenoptilus, 193, 197,198.nuttalli nitidus, Phalaenoptilus, 190,197, 198.nuttalli nuttalli, Phalaenoptilus, 187,194, 197, 198.Nuttall's poorwill, 187.Nyctidromus albicolUs albicollis, 200.albicollis merrilli, 199.Oberholser, H. C, 303.on Arizona blue-throated hum-mingbird, 326.on Cherrie's nighthawk, 244.on Florida nighthawk 237.on Howell's nighthawk, 243.on Texas blue-throated humming-bird, 331.
Oberholser, H. C.,on Texas nighthawk,248, 249.on white-eared hummingbird, 452.on western nighthawk, 235.on yellow-billed cuckoo. 56.occidentalis, Coccyzus ainericanus, 67.optatus optatus, Cuculus, 84.Orr, R. T., viii.on Allen's hummingbird, 415.Osmaston, B. B., on Himalayan cuckoo,84.O'SuUivan, St. John, 45.Owen, V. W., 186.Owston, Alan, on white-rumped swift,306, 307, 309.Pacific nighthawk, 240.pacifica, Hirundo, 304.pacificus, Micropus pacificus, 304.pacificus cooki, Micropus, 304, 305, 310.pacificus kamtschaticus, Micropus, 305.pacificus leuconyx, Micropus, 304, 305,310.pacificus murodae, Micropus, 305.pacificus pacificus, Micropus, 304.pachyrhyncha, Rhynchopsitta, 14.Pallas, P. S., on white-rumped swift,305.pallidula, Crotophaga sulcirostris, 34,35.Palmer, T. S., on Costa's hummingbird,363.Palmer, William, on Himalayan cuckoo,90.Palmer, William, and Smith, H. M., onCarolina parakeet, 3.Parakeet, Carolina, 1.Louisiana, 11.Parrot, thick-billed, 14.Parrots and parakeets, 1.Parrott, W. E., on rufous humming-bird, 404.Patterson, J. E., 195.Patton, F. A., on Sennett's nighthawk,239, 240.Pauraquc, Merrill's, 199.Pearson, T. G., 278.pelagica, Chaetura, 271, 302.Pemberton, J. R., on roadrunner, 40, 49.Penard, T. E., and Bangs, Outram, onSan Lucas ani, 35.Pendry, H. E., 5.Pennock, C. J., on chuck-will's-widow,148.on ruby-throated hummingbird,341.Perry, T. D., on chuck-will's-widow,148.Peters, J. L., and Bangs, Outram, onKhasia Hills cuckoo, 105.Peyton, S. B., 366.Phalaenoptilus nuttalli californicus, 193,194 198.nuttalli dickeyi, 193, 198.nuttalli hueyi, 193, 197, 198.nuttalli nitidus, 190, 197, 198.nuttalli nuttalli, 187, 194, 197, 198'
INDEX 503Philipp, P. B., viii, 468.Phillips, A. R., viii.Pickens, A. L., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 346.Pickwell, Gaj'le, on white-throatedswift, 316, 318.Pickwell, Gayle, and Smith, Emily, onTe.xas nighthawk, 248.Pinckney, A. J., viii.platycercus, Selasphorus, 433.platycercus platycercus, Selasphorus,387Poling, O. C, 186.on Rivoh's hummingbird, 320, 323,324.Poorwill, desert, 197.dusky, 194.Nuttall's, 187.San Ignatio, 198.Potter, L. B., on eastern belted king-fisher, 111.Price, W. W. 321.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 323.Pryer, H. J. S., and Blakiston, T. W., onwhite-rumped swift, 306.Przewalski, N. M., on white-rumpedswift, 306, 309.Psittacidae, 1.Psittaciformes, 1.Quillin, R. W., on black-chinned hum-mingbird, 357.Ralph, W. L., 165, 237.Rapp, F. W., on eastern nighthawk, 212.Rathbun, S. F., on Allen's humming-bird, 411.on black-billed cuckoo, 71.on northern black swift, 255, 256,262-269.on rufous hummingbird, 408.on Vaux's swift, 294-296, 299-302.on white-throated swift, 315.Rattray, R. H., 87.Ray, M. S., viii.Ray, M. S. and Rose C, on Arizonablue-throated hummingbird, 328, 329.Redding, Henry, 3.Ressel, C. B., on eastern nighthawk, 210.Rhynchopsitta pachyrhyncha, 14.Rice, J. H., Jr., on chuck-will's-widow,159.Richmond, C. W., on groove-billed ani,27, 32.on Rieffer's hummingbird, 433.on ringed kingfisher, 137.Richmond, Return, 14.Ridgway, Robert, 3, 5, 6, 390, 411.on Allen's hummingbird, 407, 416.on Anna's hummingbird, 377.on blaek-cliinned hummingbird,358, 360.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 391,392.on buff-bellied hummingbird, 444.on calliope hummingbird, 425.on Carolina parakeet, 7.
Ridgway, Robert, on chuck-will's-widow, 152.on coppery-tailed trogon, 108.on eastern whippoorwill, 171.on Heloise's hummingbird, 417, 418.on Louisiana parakeet, 11.on mangrove cuckoo, 51.on Merrill's pauraquc, 202.on northern black swift, 254, 255,263.on Nuttall's poorwill, 189.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 322, 324.on rufous hummingbird, 397, 407.on Xantus's hummingbird, 450.Riefi'er's hummingbird, 432.Riley, J. H., viii.Ringed kingfisher, 130.Ringer, P., 306.Rising, H. G., 417.Rivoli's hummingbird, 319.Roadrunner, 36.Roberts, T. S., on black-billed cuckoo,74.on eastern belted kingfisher, 113,121.Robertson, J. McB., on black-chinnedhummingbird, 355.RockweU, R. B., on broad-tailed hum-mingbird, 390, 392, 393.on Howell's nighthawk, 243.on Nuttall's poorwill, 189.Ruby-throated hummingbird, 332.Rufous hummingbird, 396.rufus, Selasphorus, 377, 396.Rust, H. J., on Pacific nighthawk, 241.on western nighthawk, 210.Salvin, Osbert, on Rivoli's humming-bird, 324.salvini, Amazilia, 446.Salvin's hummingbird, 446.Salvadori, T. A., on white-rumped swift,309.Sams, F. W., 3.Samuels, E. A., on black-billed cuckoo,79.on eastern nighthawk, 209.San Ignatio poorwill, 198.San Lucas ani, 35.San Lucas nighthawk, 253.Saunders, A. A., on black-billed cuckoo,80.on calliope hummingbird, 427.on rubv-throated hummingbird,337, 338, 339, 346.Saunders, W. E., on eastern nighthawk,211.saxatilis, Aeronautes saxatilis, 310.saxatilis nigrior, Aeronautes, 319.saxatilis saxatilis, Aeronautes, 310.Schlag, C. W., on rubj'-throated hum-mingbird, 335, 341.Schnack, C. T., 312.Scott, C. D., on Anna's hummingbird,383, 386.on roadrunner, 46.on Texas nighthawk, 247.
504 BULLETIN- 17 6, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUMScott, W. E. D., 19, 20, 24, 365.on Carolina parakeet, 3.on roadrunner, 41.on rubj'-throated hummingbird,333.Selasphorus alien!, 411.platycercus, 433.platvcercus platycercus, 387.rufus, 377, 396.Selby, P. J., and Jardine, V/illiam, onwhite-rumped swift, 305.Selleck, G. H., on eastern nighthawk,213.Semple, John, 40.Scnnett, G. B., on groove-billed ani, 26.on Merrill's pauraque, 199, 202,203.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 56.sennetti, Chordeiles minor, 232, 235,239.Chordeiles virginianus, 241, 243,244.Bennett's nighthawk, 239.septentrionalis, Chloroceryle americana,140.Seton, E. T., on Sennett's nighthawk,239.Seward, W. B., 14.Sharp, C. S., on Texas nighthawk, 210.Sharps, R. B., on white-rumped swift,309.Shaw, Henry, 78.Shaw, T. H., on white-rumped swift,306, 308, 309.Shaw, W. T., and Taylor, W. P., onrufous hummingbird, 408.Sheldon, H. H., on roadrunner, 39.on Vaux's swift, 294.Shelley, L. O., on chimney sv/ift, 281.Shelton, A. C, on California cuckoo, 67.Sherman, Althea R., on ruby-throatedhummingbird, 342, 346.Shufeldt, R. W., on Nuttall's poorwill,191.Silliman, O. P., viii.Simmons, G. F., 444.on black-chinned hummingbird,358, 360.on Howell's nighthawk, 243.on NuttaU's poorwiU, 188, 192.on Texas kingfisher, 140, 145.on yellow-billed cuckoo, 55.Simpson, C. T., on chuck-will's-widow,159.Skinner, M. P., on Anna's humming-bird, 378.on black-chinned hummingbird,359.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 388.on calliope hummingbird, 426.on eastern belted kingfisher, 126.on northern black swift, 267.on rufous hummingbird, 403, 407.Skutch, A. F., viii, 372.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 389.on Elliot's hummingbird, 419.on groove-billed ani, 26, 28-33.on pauraque, 200-202.
Skutch, A. F., on Rieflfer's humming-bird, 432.on ringed kingfisher, 131, 132-139.on smooth-billed ani, 21.on Texas kingfisher, 141, 142-145.on white-eared hummingbird, 452.Sloanakt-r, J. L., on roadrunner, 37.Smith, A. P., on ruby-throated hum-ingbird, 333.on tliick-billed parrot, 15, 17.Smith, Emily, viii.on northern black swift, 259, 261.Smith, Emily, and Pickwell, Ga.yle, onTexas nighthawk, 248.Smith, Everett, on eastern nighthawk,225.Smith, IT. M., and Palmer, William,, onCarolina parakeet, 3.Smith, P. W., Jr., on Stephens's wbip-poorwill, 186.Smith, vV. F., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 341.Smith, W. G., 389.Smooth-billed ani, 19.Snyder, L. L., and Lcgier, E. B. S., onyelloM'-billed cuckoo, 57.Soule, Caroline G.. on ruby-throatedhummingbird, 343.Spiker, C. J., on yellow-billed cuckoo,63.Sprot, G. D., on rufous hummingbird,397, 407.Sprunt, Alexander, Jr., viii.on chuck-will's-widow, 147.Stearns, W. A., on eastern nighthawk,228.Steinbeck, W. P., viii.Stellula calliope, 420.Stephens, Frank, 325.on black-chinned hummingbird, 355.on nighthawk, 226.on Stephens's whippoorwill, 184.Stephens, T. C, on black-billed cuckoo,71.Stephens's whippoorwiU, 183.Sterling, E., on eastern nighthawk, 211,230.Stevens, Herbert, on Himalayan cuckoo,85.Stevens, O. A., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 343.Stockard, C. R., on nighthawk, 230.Stoddard. H. L., on chuck-will's-widow,151, 158, 160.Stone, Witmer, on ringed kingfisher, 130.Storer. T. I., on Allen's hummingbird,411.Storer, T. I., and Grinnell, Joseph, onAnna's hummingbird, 377.on calliope hummingbird, 420, 427,428.on dusky poorwill, 197.on northern black swift, 269.on rufous hummingbird, 409.on Texas nighthawk, 245, 250.on vv'estern belted kingfisher, 130.Strother, W. A., on eastern nighthawk,224.
IITDEX 505Stuart, G. H., 3cl, viii.eulcirostris sulcirostris, Crotophaga, 26.sulcirostris pallidula, Crotophaea, 34,35.Sullivan, D. S., 15.Suthard, J. G., on eastern whippoor-will, 170.Sutton, G. M., viii.on chimney swift, 273, 280.on eastern belted kingfisher, 114.on roadrunner, 36.on white-tliroated swift, 311.Sutton, G. M., and Van Tyne, Josselyn,on black-chinned hummingbird,356.on lucifer hummingbird, 430.on Nuttall's ponrwiil, 190, 191.on Texas blue-throated humming-bird, 331.Swales, B. H., and Taverncr, P. A., oneastern whippoorwill, 174, 179.on ruby-throated hummingbird, 349.Swarth, H. S., on brond-tailed hum-mingbird, 388, 393.on California cuckoo, 67, 70.on calliope hummingbird, 428.on Nuttall's poorwiil, 188.on northern black swift, 264, 269.on rufous hummingbird, 397, 403,408.on Stephens's whippoor^vill, 184, 187.Swarth, H. S., on Texas nighthawk, 244,245.Swenk, M. H., on Louisiana parakeet,12, 13, 14.Swift, chimney, 271.northern black, 254.Vaux's, 294.white-rumped, 304.white-throated, 310.Swifts, 254.Swinhoe, Robert, on white-rumpedswift, 305, 306, 309.Talmadge, R. R., viii.Tate, R. C., on broad-tailed humming-bird, 390.on rufous hummingbird, 406.Taverner, P. A., and Swales, B. H., oneastern whippoorwill, 174, 179.on ruby-throated hummingbird,349.Taylor, C. B., on smooth-billed ani, 19,20 23Tavl'or, W. P., 130.Taylor, W. P., and Shaw, W. T., onrufous hummingbird, 408.telephonus, Cuculus canorus, 91, 92,105.Terrill, L. McL, on eastern whippoor-will, 166, 167, 170.Texas blue-throated hummingbird, 330.Texas kingfisher, 140.Texas nighthawk, 244.texensis, Chordeilos acutipennis, 244.Thacker, T. L., on Vaux's swift, 297.thalassinus, Colibri, 455.
Thayer, G. H., on black-l.iUod cuckoo80.on chuck-will 's-widow, 153, 156.Thayer, J. P^., on thick-billed parrot, 16.Thick-billed parrot, 14.Thomas, E. S., on chuck-will's-widow,150.Thomas, G. B., 313.Thompson, A. E., on northern blackswift, 260.Todd, H. O., Jr., viii.Todd, W. E. C., on smooth-billed ani,22.torquata torquata, Megacer3'le, 130.Torrev, Bradford, on ruby-throated
" hummingbird, 337, 339, 340, 341
,
344, 348.on rufous hummingbird, 400.Townsend, C. W., on black-biUedcuckoo, 80.on chimney swift, 277, 286.on eastern belted kingfisher, 122.on eastern nighthawk, 208.Treat, Mrs. Mary, on eastern beltedkingfisher, 122.Trochilidae, 319.Trogon, coppery-tailed, 106.Trogon ambiguus ambiguus, 106.Trogonidae, 106.Trogoniformes, 106.Trogons, 106.Tullsen, H., on nighthawk, 227.Turnbull, W. P., on eastern nighthawk,211.Tuttle, H. E., on eastern whippoorwill,167, 168, 169, 175.Tyler, B. P., viii.Tyler, J. G., on Texas nighthawk, 247.Tyler, W. M., viii.on chimney swift, 271.on eastern whippoorwill, 163.on ruby-throated hummingbird,332.tzacatl tzacatl, Amazilia, 432.Vaiden, M. G., on chuck-will's-widow,149.Van Rossem, A. J., on coppery-tailedtrogon, 107, 110.on desert poorwiil, 198.on dusky poorwiil, 195.on groove-billed ani, 28, 31, 33, 34.on Stephens's whippoorwill, 184,185, 186.on Texas kingfisher, 145.on Texas nighthawk, 249.Van Rossem, A. J., and Bowles, J. H.,on dusky poorwiil, 195.Van Rossem, A. J., and Dickey, D. R.,on chuck-will's-widow, 160.on Merrill's pauraque, 203.on ringed kingfisher, 131.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 320.on ruby-throated hummingbird,342.on Texas kingfisher, 140.on Texas nighthawk, 251.
506 BULLETIN 17 6, TXITED STATES 2sATI0NAL MUSEUMVan Rossem, A. J., and Dickey, D. R.,on white-eared hummingbird, 452,462.Van Tj'ne, Josselyn, 50.V^an Tyne, Josseiyn, and Sutton, G. M.,on black-chinned hummingbird,356.on lucifer hummingbird, 430.on Xuttall's poorwill, 190, 191.on Texas blue-throated humming-bird, 331.Vaughan, R. E., and Jones, K. H., onwhite-rumped swift, 306.vauxi, Chaetura, 294.Vaux's s%\ift, 294.violiceps, Amazilia, 446.virginianus, Chordeiles virginianus, 235,237, 240.virginianus howelli, Chordeiles, 244.virginianus sennetti, Chordeiles, 241,243, 244.virginianus virginianus, Chordeiles, 235,237, 240.Visher, S. S., on roadrunner, 45.vittatus, Cypselus, 305.vociferus, Antrostomus vociferus, 163.vociferus arizonae, Antrostomus, 183.vociferus vociferus, Antrostomus, 163.Vorhies, C. T., 14, 15.Vrooman, A. G., 257.on northern black swift, 256.Walkinshaw, L. H., on eastern beltedkingfisher, 126.on vellow-billed cuckoo, 58.Ward, Phillip, 207.Warren, B. H., on eastern belted king-fisher, 121.on eastern nighthawk, 207, 209,213, 225.Warren, E. R., and Aiken, C. E. H., onbroad-tailed hummingbird, 390.Watson, S. A., on Vaux's swift, 301.Wayne, A. T., on Carolina parakeet, 8.on chuck-will's-widow, 148, 160.Webster, Mrs. L. J., 344, 345.Wells, J. G., on smooth-billed ani, 20.Welter, W. A., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 339.Werner, Mr., 141.Western belted kingfisher, 129.Western nighthawk, 235.Westover, M. F., on chimney swift, 281.Wetmore, Alexander, 15.on Arizona blue-throated hum-mingbird, 329.on broad-billed hummingbird, 471.on Xuttall's poorwill, 188, 189,191, 192.on riifous hummingbird, 406.on smooth-billed ani, 20, 22, 23, 24.on thick-billed parrot, 17.on white-throated swift, 317.Wevdemever, Winton, on calliope hum-mingbird, 422, 424.
^Tieeler, H. E., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 338.
Wheelock, Mrs. I. G., on Costa's hum-mingbird, 367.on eastern belted kingfisher, 116.on rufous hummingbird, 404.Whippoorwill, eastern, 163.Stephens's, 183.White-eared hummingbird, 452.Whitehead, Mr., 100.Wliite-rumped swift, 304.White-throated swift, 310.Whittle, C. L., on ruby-throated hum-mingbird, 336.Whittle, Mrs. C. L., 337.Widmann, Otto, 12.Wiedemann Brothers, 297.Wilder, Dr., 90.Willard, F. C, 40, 185, 235, 246, 323.on Arizona blue-throated humming-bird, 327, 328, 329.on broad-billed hummingbird, 468.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 390.on Rivoli's hummingbird, 321, 322.Willett, George, 303.Williams, L. O., \nii.Wilson, Alexander, 206.on Carolina parakeet, 1, 5.on chimney swift, 282.on eastern nighthawk, 228.on eastern whippoorwill, 163, 168,171, 176.on Louisiana parakeet, 13, 14.on rubv-throated hummingbird,337, 343.Wilson, G. R., viii.Winkler, R., 15.Wood, H. B., viii.Woodburv, A. M., on rufous humming-bird, 403.Woods, R. S., viii.on AUen's hummingbird, 411, 415.on Anna's hummingbird, 371.on black-chinned hummingbird,354, 359, 360.on broad-tailed hummingbird, 394.on Costa's hummingbird, 362, 363,365, 366, 368, 369.on roadrunner, 45.on rufous hummingbird, 397, 409.on Texas nighthawk, 246, 247, 250.Worthington, W. W., 3.Wright, A. H., and Harper, Francis, onyellow-billed cuckoo, 56.Wvman, L. E., on calliope humming-bird, 422, 427.Wythe, Miss M. W., viii.Xantus, John, 447.xantusi, Hylocharis, 447.Xantus's hummingbird, 447.Yamashima, Marquis, on white-rumpedswift, 308.Yellow-billed cuckoo, 54.vucatanensis cerviniventris, Amazilia,444.yucatanensis chalconota, Amazilia, 444.Zarega, L. A., on eastern'nighthawk, 211.o





SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION LIBRARIES
3 9088 01421 2591