Chapter XIV: Part 14

See Orn. Lower Rio Grande, Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv., IV, No. 1, 1878,
p. 39.

Footnote 25:

See Ibis, 1866, p. 33.

Footnote 26:

In Memoriam. The Collected Scientific Papers of the late Alfred Henry
Garrod, M. D., F. R. S., etc. Edited, with a biographical memoir of
the author, by W.A. Forbes, B. A., etc. London: R. H. Porter: 6
Tenterden Street. 1881. 1 vol. 8vo. pp. xxvi, 538, pll. 33, frontisp.
(portrait), and many cuts in text.

Footnote 27:

Osteology of the North American Tetraonidæ. By Dr. R. W. Shufeldt,
U.S.A. Bull. U.S. Geol. and Geog. Surv. Territories, Vol. VI, No. 2,
pp. 309–350, pll. V-XIII.

Footnote 28:

Osteology of Lanius ludovicianus excubitorides. By Dr. R. W. Shufeldt,
U.S.A. Bull. U.S. Geol. and Geog. Surv. Territories, Vol. VI, No. 2,
pp. 351–359, pl. XIV.

Footnote 29:

Illustrations of the Nests and Eggs of the Birds of Ohio. Part VIII,
April, 1881 Part IX, July, 1881. Pll. xxii-xxvii. fol.

Footnote 30:

American Naturalist, Nov., 1881, pp. 906–908.

Footnote 31:

Osteografische Beiträge zur Naturgeschichte der Vögel. Ueber das
Nagelglieder der Flügelfinger, besonders der Daumen. Leipzig, 1811, S.
89.

Footnote 32:

A List of the Birds of Minnesota. By Dr. P. L. Hatch. Ninth Ann. Rep.
Geol. and Nat. Hist Surv. Minn., for 1880, 1881, pp. 361–372.

The Water Birds of Minnesota. By Thomas S. Roberts. _Op. cit._, pp.
373–383.

Footnote 33:

On birds observed in Amelia County, Virginia. By Percy E. Freke.
Scientific Proceedings of the Royal Dublin Society, Vol. III, Part
III. [Read Feb. 21st, 1881.]

Footnote 34:

Field Notes on Louisiana Birds. By Dr. F. W. Langdon. Jour. Cincinnati
Soc. Nat. Hist., July, 1881, pp. 145–155.

Footnote 35:

Forty Years’ Notes of a Field Ornithologist, by John Krider, Member of
the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences and author of Krider’s
Sporting Anecdotes, Philadelphia. Giving a description of all birds
killed and prepared by him. Philadelphia, 1879, 8vo. pp. i-xi, 1–84.

Footnote 36:

Zoölogical Miscellany, edited by Dr. F. W. Langdon. Jour. Cincinnati
Soc. Nat. Hist., Vol. IV, Dec., 1881, pp. 336–346.

Footnote 37:

Annotated List of the Birds of Nevada. By W. J. Hoffman, M. D. Bull.
U. S. Geol. and Geog. Survey of the Territories, Vol. VI, No. 2, Sept.
19, 1881, pp. 203–256, and map.

Footnote 38:

Ornithologist and Oölogist, Vol. VI, pp. 78, 79.

Footnote 39:

This Bulletin, Vol. III, p. 123.

Footnote 40:

See this Bulletin, Vol. IV, p. 137.

Footnote 41:

Its distribution in Arizona is apparently limited to a comparatively
small area which, according to Mr. Stephens’ experience, is bounded on
the east by the valley of the San Pedro; on the west by a point “a few
miles east of the Hassayampa, on the desert between it and Salt
River.”

Footnote 42:

Vol. XV, No. 3, March, 1881.

Footnote 43:

This Bulletin, Vol. VI, p. 67.

Footnote 44:

Birds of the Colorado Valley, p. 74.

Footnote 45:

Birds of the Colorado Valley, p. 75.

Footnote 46:

In a recent letter Mr. Stephens adds:—“From my own observations I
should characterize the respective haunts of the Arizona Thrashers as
follows: _H. lecontei_ is exclusively a bird of the deserts. _H.
bendirei_ is a desert bird approaching the valleys. _H. palmeri_
occurs along the edge of deserts, occasionally appearing in valleys.
_H. crissalis_ haunts valleys and broad cañons, seldom venturing into
the deserts.”

Footnote 47:

The name “os prominens,” proposed by Dr. Shufeldt, has been adopted by
me because it seems eminently proper that so large a sesamoid,
frequently equalling the patella in size, should receive a distinctive
appellation.

Footnote 48:

The English Sparrow, which is but an indifferent flyer, can be
deprived of one-half of the secondaries and one-fourth of the
primaries of both wings, in the long axis of the pinion, without
apparently impairing its flight. See Pettigrew.

Footnote 49:

I find that this statement must be modified in regard to Gulls, if not
retracted altogether, for since this paper was written I have found
the os prominens in _Larus glaucus_ and _L. dominicanus_. It is
present as a small, elongated, trihedral prism, imbedded in the tendon
of the extensor patagii longus, and playing over the flattened surface
of the scapho-lunar.

Footnote 50:

[See p. 122 of this issue.—EDD.]

Footnote 51:

For an account of its breeding at Houlton see this Bulletin, Vol. IV,
pp. 37–39.

Footnote 52:

The Coues Check List of North American Birds, revised to date and
entirely rewritten under direction of the author, with a Dictionary of
the Etymology, Orthography and Orthoëpy of the scientific names, the
Concordance of previous lists, and a Catalogue of his Ornithological
Publications. Boston: Estes and Lauriat. 1882. 1 vol. roy. 8vo. pp.
165.

Footnote 53:

Extract from a Report of Exploration by Professor John Macoun, M. A.,
F.L.S. Report of Department of Interior (n. d., n. p. Ottawa, 1881?
8vo, pp. 48.)

Footnote 54:

A Revised List of the Birds of Brandon, Vt. and vicinity. By F. H.
Knowlton. The Brandon Union (newspaper), February 10, 1882. See also,
by the same author:—A Partial List of the Birds of Brandon, Vt. The
Brandon Union, December 13, 1878.

Remarks on some Western Vermont Birds. Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club, Vol.
VII, January, 1882, pp. 63, 64.

Footnote 55:

Dr. C. Fr. W. Krukenberg. Die Farbstoffe der Federn, in Dessen
Vergleichendphysiologische Studien. I Reihe, V Abth., 1881, s. 72–92.
Plate III.

Footnote 56:

See this Bulletin, Vol. IV, p. 8.

Footnote 57:

See this Bulletin, Vol. VII, pp. 54–55.

Footnote 58:

It should be stated that Mr. Purdie, with characteristic courtesy,
declines to publish this note as, after discovering his prior
knowledge of the specimen, I requested him to do.

Footnote 59:

See Brewer, Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. XVII, 1875, p. 446.

Footnote 60:

This Bulletin, Vol. VII, p. 40.

Footnote 61:

Voyages of Samuel de Champlain, translated from the French by Charles
Pomeroy Otis, Ph.D., with historical illustrations, and a Memoir, by
Rev. Edmund F. Slafter, A. M. Vol. II, 1604–1610, Boston, published by
Prince Society, 1878.

Footnote 62:

Birds of the Northwest, 1874, pp. 679, 680.

Footnote 63:

Mr. Sennett and Dr. Merrill found it breeding on the Lower Rio Grande
in Texas. (Sennett, B. Rio Grande, 1878, pp. 65, 66; Merrill, Ornith.
Southern Texas, 1878, p. 172.)

Footnote 64:

This Bulletin, Vol. VII, p. 33.

Footnote 65:

For an excellent review of the races of _H. unalascæ_, by Mr. H. W.
Henshaw, see this Bulletin, Vol. IV, p. 134. Several errors, perhaps
typographical, are apparent in the tables of measurements given in
this paper. For example, the bill of var. _pallasi_ is said to average
.53 inch, whereas the largest specimen of that form is afterwards
credited with a bill of only .51. Again, var. _nanus_ (_i.e._,
_unalascæ_) does not appear from the table of extreme measurements to
have been found with a smaller bill than .49, though it had previously
been said to average .48. The difference in length of bill exhibited
by the three races of this species is almost microscopic. A much more
tangible character, not mentioned by Mr. Henshaw, lies in the
disproportionate slenderness of the bill of the western varieties. In
a rather large (wing 3.67) example of _unalascæ_ before me, the bill
measured across the base of the culmen is but .20 wide, while in a
specimen of var. _pallasi_ of the same site it is .25 wide.

Footnote 66:

Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club, Vol. VI, pp. 225–235.

Footnote 67:

Descriptions of the various pigments may be found in:

Krukenberg, Dr. C. Fr. W.; Vergl.-phys. Studien, 1 R, v. Abth. 1881,
SS. 72–99, u. 2 R, 1 Abth., 1882, SS. 151–171.

Bogdanow, A., Note sur le pigment des touracos. Compt. rend., T. LIV,
1862, pp. 660–663. Études sur les causes de la coloration des Oiseaux.
Compt. rend T. XLVI, 1858, pp. 780, 781

Church, H. H., Researches on Turacine, an animal pigment containing
copper. Chemical News, vol. XIX, 1869, No. 496.

Blasius, W., A. D. Sitzungsb des Vereins f. Naturwiss, zur
Braunschweig. Braunschweigische Anzeigen, 1877, Nr. 29.

Footnote 68:

Annals N. Y. Lyceum Nat. Hist., Vol. XI, p. 136.

Footnote 69:

Hist. N. A. Birds, Vol. I, 1874, pp. 297–298.

Footnote 70:

A letter just received from Mr. Stephens contains the following very
satisfactory confirmation of the above evidence. “The identification
of your nest of _S. picta_ is _positive_. I saw the parent plainly,
and could easily have shot her. Indeed I should never have found the
nest had not my attention been called to it by the birds flying from
it as I brushed past almost within touching distance. When first
found, the nest contained three eggs. I thought it best to leave them
until next day to see if more might not be laid. * * * When I
returned, however, the bird was not at home and as it was a long,
rough walk to camp, I took the nest, their being no occasion to visit
the spot again. * * * The locality was a wide part of a cañon between
the two Santa Rita peaks, perhaps two miles from the top of the high
ridge connecting them. Up this cañon passed an old Mexican road to the
pine timber above. It had not been used for many years. In its course
it cut through an occasional projecting bank, and in one of these
places was the nest. It was under a small boulder in the side of a
nearly perpendicular bank, which was but two or three feet high. The
vicinity was heavily timbered with oak and sycamore. I regard the
position as exceptional: still, it may be the rule.”

Footnote 71:

U. S. Geol. Surveys W. 100 Merid., 1879, pp. 291–293.

Footnote 72:

For an account of the nesting of this species at Grand Falls, see this
Bulletin, Vol. VII, p. —.

Footnote 73:

For descriptions of the nesting of this species at Houlton and Fort
Fairfield see this Bulletin, Vol. III, pp. 166–168, and Vol. IV, pp.
241, 242.

Footnote 74:

“Descriptions of two new Thrushes from the United States.” Proceedings
U. S. National Museum, Vol. 374, pp. 374–9.

Footnote 75:

The highest peak of the Catskills,—4,205 feet altitude.

Footnote 76:

Both birds were carefully examined and the evidence on this point was
positive and unequivocal. A Thrush’s nest containing spotted eggs
discovered near the top of Slide Mountain may have been either that of
this form or of _swainsoni_, but as positive identification was
prevented, further allusion to it is, for the present, withheld.

Footnote 77:

Though averaging of greater length, in proportions this bird averages
smaller than _swainsoni_, and some specimens are much smaller than any
I have seen of the latter species. The wide difference from true
_aliciæ_ here implied may be illustrated by the following extreme
measurements given by the birds of my series:—

_aliciæ_, length, 8.00; extent, 13.12; wing, 4.35; tail, 3.40.
_bicknelli_, „ 6.55; „ 10.56; „ 3.40; „ 2.60.

Footnote 78:

See “The Coues Check List of North American Birds,” p. 24.

Footnote 79:

Birds of North America, p. 12.

Footnote 80:

Field Notes on Louisiana Birds. By Dr. F. W. Langdon. Journal of the
Cincinnati Society of Natural History, July, 1881, pp. 145–155. A List
of Birds from the Lower Mississippi Valley, Observed During the Summer
of 1881, with Brief Notes. By O. P. Hay. Bull. Nutt. Ornith. Club,
Vol. VII, pp. 89–94.

Footnote 81:

“Forest and Stream” Bird Notes. An index and summary of all the
ornithological matter contained in “Forest and Stream,” Vols. I-XII.
Compiled by H. B. Bailey. New York: F. & S. Pub. Co., 39 Park Row.
1881. 8vo., paper, pp. iv, 195.

Footnote 82:

A Catalogue of the Birds of New Brunswick, with brief notes relating
to their migrations, breeding, relative abundance, etc. By Montague
Chamberlain. Bulletin of the Natural History Society of New Brunswick.
No. 1, pp. 23–68. Published by the Society. Saint John, N. B., 1882.

Footnote 83:

Dr. C. Fr. Krukenberg. Die Farbstoffe der Federn. 2 Mittheilung, in
Dessen Verg.—phys. Stud., 2 R., I. Abth., 1882, SS 151–171.

Footnote 84:

On some generic and specific appellations of North American Birds. By
Leonhard Stejneger. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., June, 1882, pp. 28–43.

Footnote 85:

Ingersoll, Ernest. Birds’-Nesting: A Handbook of Instruction in
Gathering and Preserving the Nests and Eggs of Birds for the Purposes
of Study. Salem, 1882.

Footnote 86:

Vol. VII, pp. 23–25.

Footnote 87:

N. E. Bird Life, p. 104, foot note.

Footnote 88:

See Herrick, Birds of Grand Manan, p. 6.

Footnote 89:

See Rod and Gun, Vol. VI, p. 65.

Footnote 90:

See especially this Bulletin, Vol. VI, pp. 124–25.

Footnote 91:

See this Bulletin, Vol. IV, p. 108, and Vol. V, p. 63.

Footnote 92:

In citing this and the next form as races of _cinereus_, I follow Mr.
Henshaw, with whose views respecting the affinity of the three birds I
fully agree.

Footnote 93:

This Bulletin, Vol. VII, p. 26.

Footnote 94:

The question of the relationship which _M. cooperi_, _M.
erythrocercus_, _M. mexicanus_ and _M. crinitus_ bear to one another,
and that of the respective names which should be used for each, has
been recently discussed at some length. (See Bull. U. S. Geolog.
Surv., Vol. IV, pp. 32–33; _ibid._, Vol. V, No. 3, pp. 402–404; Proc.
U. S. Nat. Mus., Vol. 1, p. 139; and _ibid._, Vol. 3, pp. 13–15.)
While I cannot claim to have personally investigated the points at
issue, I am at present inclined to follow Mr. Ridgway’s ruling, at
least so far as _M. cooperi_ is concerned.

Footnote 95:

This Bulletin, Vol. VI, p. 252.

Footnote 96:

This Bulletin, Vol. VI, p. 252.

Footnote 97:

See this Bulletin, Vol. I. pp. 14–17 and 75–76, and Vol. V, pp. 20–25.

Footnote 98:

Proceedings U. S. Nat. Mus., Vol. I, p. 142.

Footnote 99:

This Bulletin, Vol. VI, pp. 69–72.

Footnote 100:

See Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv., Vol. V, Art. 5.

Footnote 101:

Of _Grallatores_, _Lamellirostres_, etc., I can give only a very
incomplete list, as I have never had favorable opportunity to observe
these birds.

Footnote 102:

Typical; the occurrence of both forms seems at first thought
anomalous, but _migratorius_ may be a migrant from Alaska, where it is
the representative bird.

Footnote 103:

_Var. nov._ See page 228 of this number.

Footnote 104:

Nearly typical, but showing slight approaches to var. _oregonus_.

Footnote 105:

Typical, and not approaching var. _caurinus_ of the coast region.

Footnote 106:

Typical.

Footnote 107:

One specimen, with a complete red nuchal band.

Footnote 108:

See my late paper on this Owl (this Bulletin, Vol. VII, pp. 27–33).
Six examples in the present collection offer no new points affecting
the position there taken.

Footnote 109:

Slightly aberrant; see remarks under _B. saturatus_ (p. 230).

Footnote 110:

See remarks under _A. atricapillus_ (pp. 231, 232).

Footnote 111:

As Mr. Ridgway has lately pointed out, Cassin’s _pacificus_ was
clearly based on specimens of _subarcticus_, a very distinct race
first recognized by Hoy in 1852. Hence the name _pacificus_ must give
place to _saturatus_, proposed by Mr. Ridgway for “a northern littoral
form, of very dark colors.”

Footnote 112:

The supposed adult, described by Mr. Ridgway in the “History of North
American Birds” (Vol. III, p. 148), proves to be an immature bird in
its second year. The real adult, however, was figured in the second
edition of this work.

Footnote 113:

“Darker (brownish-black) markings prevailing in extent over the
lighter (nearly clear white) ones. Stripes beneath broad,
brownish-black; those on the flanks cordate and transverse.”

Footnote 114:

The type of the adult _striatulus_ has turned out to be merely a
light-colored, faintly marked example of _atricapillus_.

Footnote 115:

See this Bulletin, Vol. VII, pp. 120, 121.

Footnote 116:

See this Bulletin, Vol. VI, p. 246.

Footnote 117:

The Coues Check List of North American Birds. Second Edition, Revised
to Date, and entirely Rewritten, under Direction of the Author, with a
Dictionary of the Etymology, Orthography, and Orthoëpy of the
Scientific Names, the Concordance of previous Lists, and a Catalogue
of his Ornithological Publications. [Monogram.] Boston. Estes and
Lauriat. 1882. 1 vol. imp. 8vo. pp. 165.

Footnote 118:

The 10 species retired are: _Ægiothus fuscescens_; _Centronyx
ochrocephalus_; _Sphyropicus williamsoni_; _Lampornis mango_;
_Agyrtria linnæi_; _Momotus cœruleiceps_; _Ibis thalassina_; _Ardea
wuerdemanni_; _Sterna “longipennis”_ (_S. pikii_ Lawr.); _Podiceps
cristatus_. The list of added species (too long to print here) is
given on pp. 6–8 and 10 of the Check List.

Footnote 119:

Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., June, 1882, pp. 28–43.

Footnote 120:

This Bulletin, Vol. VII, pp. 178, 179.

Footnote 121:

While it is unfortunate that there should be two check lists of North
American birds, Dr. Coues’s right to publish his views in this form
was undeniably established when his first list was issued and
accepted. Moreover, we see no reason why others should be debarred
from the same privilege, and we fancy that a third list, representing
a different and more conservative school of thought, especially in the
matter of nomenclature, would have a large following. As regards a
choice of names, in the comparatively few cases where the present
authorities differ we should weigh well before accepting either. Many
persons, doubtless, have neither the time nor the inclination to do
this, and such, necessarily, must be guided by individual preferences
in favor of one or the other author. In all cases of publication,
however, a simple statement of the authority followed will be
sufficient to prevent any confusion or misunderstanding.

Footnote 122:

Illustrations of Nests and Eggs of Birds of the United States, with
Text, by Thos. G. Gentry. Philadelphia: J. A. Wagenseller, Publisher,
No. 23 North Sixth Street. Copyright by J. A. Wagenseller, 1881. [4to,
parts 1–25, pp. 1–300. 54 col. chromo-lithographs, and chromo-portrait
frontispiece of the author. Price, $25.00. 1880–82.]

Footnote 123:

“Monograph of the Alcidæ,” Proc. Phila. Acad., Vol. XX, 1868, p. 77.

Footnote 124:

See F. C. Browne, Forest and Stream, Vol. XVIII, June 15, 1882, p.
386.

Footnote 125:

Vol. VII, p. 185.

Footnote 126:

This Bulletin, Vol. VII, p. 185.

Footnote 127:

“A Naturalist in the Magdalen Islands,” p. 42.

Footnote 128:

See this Bulletin, Vol. VI, p. 225, and Vol. VII, p. 128.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES

1. Silently corrected obvious typographical errors and variations in spelling. 2. Retained archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as printed. 3. Re-indexed footnotes using numbers and collected together at the end of the last chapter. 4. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_. 5. Enclosed bold or blackletter font in =equals=.