 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

FROM THE
LIBRARY

OF

FRANK S. WRIGHT

AUBURN, NEW YORK

 

 
CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

LABORATORY
OF ORNITHOLOGY
LIBRARY

Gift of

rah d Begs

 
 

UPLAND PLOVER, OR BARTRAMIAN SANDPIPER.

Menaced with extinction in 1911 and still (1916) in danger. (From a drawing
made by Louis Agassiz Fuertes for the National Association of Audubon
Societies, and first reproduced in Bird-Lore.)
 

 

 

A HISTORY OF THE

Game Birds, Wild-Fow]l
and Shore Birds

OF

Massachusetts and Adjacent States

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Including those used for food which have disappeared since the
settlement of the country, and those which are now hunted
for food or sport, with observations on their
former abundance and recent decrease
in numbers; also the means for
conserving those still
in existence

By Edward Howe Forbush

State Ornithologist of Massachusetts

Second Edition, 1916

Issued by the
Massachusetts State Board of Agriculture
By Authority of the Leatslature of 1912

 

 

 

 

 

4

 

 

 
BOSTON
WRIGHT & POTTER PRINTING COMPANY, STATE PRINTERS
32 DERNE STREET
Che Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Resolves of 1910, Chapter 90.

A RESOLVE TO PROVIDE FOR THE PREPARATION AND PRINTING OF A SPECIAL
REPORT ON THE GAME BIRDS OF THE COMMONWEALTH.

Resolved, That there be allowed and paid out of the treasury of the
commonwealth a sum not exceeding four thousand dollars for preparing and
printing, under the direction of the state board of agriculture, in an edition
of five thousand copies, a special report on the game birds of the common-
wealth economically considered, to include the facts already ascertained by
the state ornithologist, relating to their history, value and the necessity for
their protection, to be distributed as follows: — Two copies to each free
public library in the commonwealth; two copies to each high school, and
two copies to such schools in towns which have no high school as the school
committee may designate; one copy to the library of congress and one copy
to each state or territorial library in the United States; ten copies to the
state library; one copy to the governor; one copy to the lieutenant governor
and each member of the council; one copy to the secretary of the common-
wealth; one copy to the treasurer and receiver general; one copy to the
auditor of the commonwealth; one copy to the attorney-general; one copy
to each member of the present general court applying for the same; one
copy to each elective officer of the present gerieral court; one copy to each
member of the state board of agriculture; five copies to the secretary of the
state board of agriculture; and four hundred and fifty copies to the state
ornithologist for distribution to those who have assisted by contributing
material for the report; the remaining copies to be sold by the secretary
of the state board of agriculture at a price not less than the cost thereof.
Additional copies may be printed for sale at the discretion of the secretary
of the state board of agriculture, the expense thereof to be paid from the
receipts of such sales. Any amount received from sales shall be paid into
the treasury of the commonwealth. [Approved May 5, 1910.
PREFACE.

 

This volume is intended to fill a place heretofore unfilled,
in at least two respects, by any American work. The former
abundance and later decrease of the migratory game birds of
eastern North America have been studied and narrated at
length for the first time, and the histories of the food species
of New England which have been exterminated since the set-
tlement of the country have been brought together. This
has been done with a purpose.

Whenever legislation for the protection of shore birds or
wild-fowl has been attempted in the Maritime States of the
Atlantic seaboard, certain interested individuals have come
forward to oppose it, with the plea that these birds are not
decreasing in numbers, but, instead, are increasing, and that
they need no further protection. Some admit that certain
species are decreasing, but argue that shooting is not respon-
sible for this condition. Similar statements are made in sup-
port of proposed legislation for the repeal of existing protective
laws.

The object of the investigation on which this volume is
based was to secure information from historical and ornitho-
logical works, and from ornithologists, sportsmen and gun-
ners, regarding the increase or decrease of the birds which
are hunted for food or sport.

The report is published with the intention, first, to show
the former abundance of resident and migratory game birds
in America and their subsequent decrease in numbers; second,
to furnish gunners and others with the means of identifying
game birds, that the people may recognize the different species
and thus fit themselves to observe protective laws; and third,
to demonstrate how these birds may be conserved. The nar-
ratives of early explorers and pioneers show plainly the former
abundance of game birds. The unbiased statements of orni-
vi PREFACE.

 

thologists of the nineteenth century exhibit the great decrease
in numbers of many species, and estimates summarized in
this volume indicate that the majority of the best informed
’ gunners themselves now admit that the decrease of these
birds has continued during the past thirty years, and that it
is due largely to overshooting; therefore, the report will serve
as a basis for both restrictive and constructive legislation for
the protection and propagation of game birds.

The descriptions in Part I, written mainly in language
understood by the people, and the cuts which have been made
to show the form and markings of the species, taken together,
will answer the second purpose for which the book is written.
Prominent markings which readily may be recognized in the
field, and which will help in identifying the birds, are given
under the head of “field marks.”” The representations of the
notes and calls of birds are taken mainly from the writings of
others. Attempts to suggest bird notes on paper almost
always are inadequate. My own always have been unsatis-
factory, but it is hoped that those given may be of some assist-
ance to the beginner. Brief descriptions of the nests and eggs
of the species now nesting in Massachusetts or near-by States,
or which are believed to have nested here formerly are given
as a possible help to identification.

An attempt has been made to interest the reader in these
much-persecuted birds for their own sake. For this reason
the range, migration and habits of each bird are touched
upon in nearly all cases.

In the introduction an attempt is made to narrate briefly
the history of the decrease of resident and migratory game
birds along the Atlantic seaboard. Part I continues this his-
tory, but particularizes and localizes by taking up separately
each individual species that has been recorded from Massa-
chusetts and near-by States. Part II groups together the
histories of the species utilized as food which have disap-
peared from New England since the settlement of the country,
and exhibits the causes that brought about the destruction of
these species. Part III analyzes the causes of the decrease
of the species of game birds, wild-fowl and shore birds that
PREFACE. vii

 

are still extant, and indicates how they may be conserved and
how depleted areas may be restocked with certain species.

It was my intention before beginning the work to under-
take an investigation of the food of wild-fowl and shore birds,
but as Mr. W. L. McAtee of the Bureau of Biological Survey
of the United States Department of Agriculture was then
engaged in a similar quest, and hoped to have the results
published, I arranged with him to make use of his publication,
and give credit to the Survey. Unfortunately, very little of
the results of Mr. McAtee’s work have been published, and
this volume necessarily goes to press with but a small part
of them. For this reason the observations on the food of
these birds have not been brought down to date.

Many of Mr. Beecroft’s drawings, from which the line
cuts of the birds were made, have been corrected, and some
of them have been largely redrawn by myself, with the assist-
ance of Miss Annie E. Chase. Miss Chase also made the
drawing of the Whooping Crane, the plate of which faces
page 477. Mr. Beecroft was handicapped in his work by
having no opportunity to make studies from the living birds,
and by being obliged to draw his inspiration from skins,
stuffed specimens, photographs and the illustrations of
others. The drawings for the cuts of the Wood Duck, the
Mallard and the Red Phalarope are my own; also the draw-
ings for the cuts on pages 40, 49, 59, 70, 111, 147, 202, 224,
228, 230, 271, 277, 326, 331 and 417 (all after C. B. Cory), and
the figures on pages 133 and 147. All concerned in the prep-
aration of the drawings must acknowledge their indebted-
ness to many artists from the time of Audubon to the present
day, and particularly to Mr. Louis Agassiz Fuertes, whose
excellent drawings as figured in Eaton’s Birds of New York,
gave many suggestions. The faults of the illustrations are
obvious, but every effort has been made to secure such rep-
resentations of form, proportion and markings as to make
the species recognizable. It was my intention to have the
birds of each family represented in Part I figured in proper
proportion one to the other, —to have the Sandpipers, for ex-
ample, of such relative size as to suggest the differences in
viii PREFACE.

 

size between the different species. The engraver has not
always been accurate in his reductions, but, in the main, the
idea has been carried out.

The bibliography which was planned for publication here-
with was crowded out because of the vast amount of material
available for the work, which has resulted in increasing its
bulk beyond the limit at first contemplated, and which has
made necessary an abridgment of even the index; but the
names of authors, contributors and collectors are inserted in
the index because of the omission of the bibliography.

What an embarrassment is that of the author who desires
to acknowledge his indebtedness to those who have gone
before! I am under obligations to many hundreds of indi-
viduals from the early explorers, like Champlain and Hudson,
down through the centuries to the ornithologists and sports-
men of the present day. A long list of the names of observ-
ers who have furnished information in regard to the commoner
species is presented on the last pages of this volume, and many
correspondents in many States whose names are not mentioned
there are gratefully remembered. The writings of Mr. Wil-
liam Brewster, Dr. C. W. Townsend and Dr. D. G. Elliot
have been exceedingly helpful, and those of many others have
furnished facts and suggestions. In this connection mention
should be made of a description of a flight of water-fowl in
“The Water-fowl Family,” by Sanford, Bishop and Van Dyke,
which furnished the model for a similar description on page
4 of this volume. I am indebted particularly to my friends,
Mr. William Brewster and Dr. George W. Field, who have
kindly read brief parts of the manuscript, and more than I
can tell to my wife, who has patiently assisted in reading
manuscript and proof, and to Mr. Wilson H. Fay for his work
upon the index. It is a pleasure to acknowledge the courtesy
of the managements of Collier’s Weekly, Forest and Stream and
Bird-Lore, who, with many others, have given permission to
quote or to use illustrations. Acknowledgments are due to Rev.
Herbert K. Job, Mr. Charlesworth Levy, Mr. Howard H. Cleaves
and others, whose names are mentioned elsewhere, for photo-
graphs. The Bureau of Biological Survey of the United
PREFACE. ix

 

States Department of Agriculture has placed me under great
obligations for much information for which the Survey has
not always been given credit in the text; Prof. W. W. Cooke’s
paper on the Distribution and Migration of American Ducks,
Geese and Swans, also his paper on the Distribution and Migra-
tion of North American Shore Birds, and Mr. W. L. McAtee’s
paper on Our Vanishing Shore Birds, all published by the
Survey, have been utilized freely in the preparation of this
volume. It would be extremely ungracious for any one at
the present day to write anything on the economic relations
of birds without acknowledging his indebtedness to the pains-
taking workers of the Survey, who have given to the world
the greatest amount of valuable material on such subjects
ever published anywhere. Mr. Charles W. Johnson, curator
of the Museum of the Boston Natural History Society, has
given every opportunity to both author and artist whenever
specimens have been needed for examination. Mr. Ralph
Holman has placed all his field notes at my disposal. The
ornithological nomenclature used in heading each description
of a species is that contained in the third edition of the Check
List of the American Ornithologists Union, published in 1910.
The range of each species is taken from the Check List in
nearly all cases, though somewhat abridged. The statements
regarding the decrease of birds taken from various authors
are not quoted in full, but are abridged, care being taken not
to distort their assertions. Dr. M. L. Fernald has placed me
under obligations by bringing down to date the names of plants
in the lists on pages 582-587. Other scientific nomenclature
of plants and animals is given unchanged as taken from various
authors from the time of Audubon to the present day.

Much of the manuscript necessarily was written and re-
vised when I was fully occupied in other work of an executive
character, often when travelling by train or boat, and at a
distance from any library; otherwise, the task could not have
been completed within the time limit. It is to be regretted that
a work of this kind should have been done of necessity under
circumstances of pressure that precluded literary excellence,
but care has been exercised to state only facts, and I have en-
x PREFACE.

 

deavored always to give credit to other authors whenever it
has been feasible.

It remains to express my gratitude to Mr. J. Lewis Ells-
worth, secretary of the State Board of Agriculture, and the
members of the Board, who have advocated the publication
of this work and loyally supported the undertaking. This
support has made the publication possible, and to these gen-
tlemen is due whatever credit may be given. The responsi-
bility for the shortcomings of the work is my own.

Epwarp Howe Forsusu.
JUNE 1, 1912.
PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION.

In the seven years that have elapsed since this volume was
projected, many changes have taken place. Many individuals,
associations and States have adopted measures recommended
herein for the purpose of protecting and increasing game birds,
shore birds or wild fowl. Massachusetts has taken up most of
these recommendations and the Legislature has enacted laws
embodying many of them. Already the results of these various
beneficial enactments have been felt over wide areas. The Con-
gress of the United States, conforming to one of these recom-
mendations, has enacted a statute making migratory game birds
and insectivorous birds wards of the government. Certain
game birds are increasing in numbers, and the situation is much
more hopeful than it was in 1908.

Appendices have been added to this edition to permit refer-
ence to these changes and to make room for certain records of
occurrences of rare birds that have been noted or published since
the first edition was made ready for the printer. Otherwise,
comparatively few changes have been made to bring the first
edition down to date.

Much more information regarding the food of many species
might be added now from the publications of the Biological
Survey and from other sources, but as the first edition was elec-
trotyped, the cost of making numerous changes in the plates
would be prohibitive, and the task must be left for a later
edition.

Epwarp Howe Forsusu.
Avaeust 24, 1915.
CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION: —
America, A Country of Game Birds, ‘ ‘
Abundance of Game found by Explorers and Colonists,
Former Abundance of Game Birds in the West and South,
The Decrease of Edible Birds,

PART I.

A History or THE BIRDS NOW HUNTED FOR Foop or Sport In Massacuvu-
SETTS AND ADJACENT STATES: —
Grebes,
Loons,
Mergansers,
River Ducks,
Bay and Sea Ducks,
Geese,
Swans, 2
Rails, Crakes, Gallinules and Coots,
Phalaropes,
Avocets and Stilts,
Snipes, Sandpipers, etc.,
Plovers,
Turnstones,
Oyster-catchers,
Bob-whites,
Grouse, ‘
Pigeons and Doves,

PART II.

A History or tHE Game Birps AnD OTHER Brirps HUNTED FoR Foop or
SpoRT WHICH HAVE BEEN DRIVEN OUT OF MASSACHUSETTS AND
ADJACENT STATES, OR EXTERMINATED SINCE THE SETTLEMENT
OF THE COUNTRY: —

Extinct Species,
Great Auk,
Labrador Duck,
Eskimo Curlew,
Passenger Pigeon, .

Extirpated Species,
Trumpeter Swan, . 3 ‘i
Whooping Crane, . : é
Sandhill Crane, . ¥ ¥ ‘
Wild Turkey, % ‘ . ié

PAGE

12
22

39

49

58

69
111
169
193
201
224
230
235
334
358
361
367
375
393

399
399
41
416
433
472
472
477
483
487
XIV CONTENTS.

 

PART III.

THE CoNSERVATION OF GAME Brrps, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BirpDs: —

The Economic Value of Game Birds, Wild-fowl and Shore Birds,
The Decrease of Game Birds in Massachusetts,
The Reproductive Powers of Nature,
The Causes of the Decrease of Game Birds,
Market Hunting,
Spring Shooting,
Summer Shooting,
Settlement and Agriculture as a Cause for the Decrease of Wild- sew
Night Shooting,
Pursuing Wild-fowl in Boats,
The Use of Live Decoys,
The Elements, Storms and Cold,
Epidemic Diseases,
Natural Enemies,
Telegraph, Telephone and Trolley Wires,
Minor Causes of the Decrease of Birds,
Lead Poisoning, ‘
The Destruction of the Feeding Grounds,
Erroneous Opinions regarding the Causes of the Decrease of Game Birds,
Wild-fowl and Shore Birds,
The Destruction of the Eggs of Wild-fowl for Commercial Purposes,
The Decline of Agriculture,
The Increase of Cottages and Camps,
The Shortening of the Open Season,
Guns Most Destructive,
The Viewpoint of the Hunter,
The Introduction of Foreign Game Birds,
Game Preserving,
The Game Preserve increases Insectivorous Birds,
Methods of Attracting Water-fowl, . i ‘i Fi ‘ s
Attracting Upland Game Birds, i i 5 . . ‘ .
Statutory Game Protection, f
Federal Supervision of the Protection of Migr: joe Birds,
Public Game and Bird Reservations,
A Brief Summary of Needed Reforms for Game Bibnieian:
Enforcement of the Game Laws, a a
A List of the Names of those who filled out the Blank Forms for Informa-
tion, which form the Basis of the Estimates on the Recent De-
crease of Game Birds, Wild-fowl and Shore Birds, i
Aprenpix A.— Records of the Occurrence of Rare or Accidental Species not
contained in the First Edition, . r ‘ ‘ ‘ x
APPENDIX B. — Progress in Game Protection since the First Edition was written,
INDEX, ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ .

PAGE
497
503
508
510
511
516
529
531
533
535
536
539
540
541
547
547
547
548

549
553
554
554
555
556
558
562
563
568
569
581
588
590
591
592
593

597

611

617
623
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

PLATES.

Upland Plover (Colored Plate),

PLATE
PLaTE
PLaTE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE

PuatTeE’

Puate

I. — River Ducks and Swans, 5
II. — Two Baldpates on Leverett Pond, on
III. — Canvas-back and Baldpate on Leverett Pond, Boston,
IV. — Group of Bay Ducks,

V. — Nest of Eider,

VI. — Barnacle Goose,

VII. — Woodcock on Nest,

VIII. — Spotted Sandpiper (Young),

IX. — Spotted Sandpiper (Adult),

X.— Ruffed Grouse Drumming,

XI.— Heath Hen, .

Puate XII. — Great Auk,

Puate XIII. — Labrador Duck, .

Puate XIV. — Eskimo Curlew,

PuiateE XV.— The Last Passenger Pigeon,

Puate XVI. — Pigeon Net,

Puate XVII. — Young Passenger Pigeon,

Puare XVIII. — Eggs of Passenger Pigeon and Mourning Dove,

Puatre XIX. — Band-tailed Pigeon, Passenger Pigeon and Mourn-
ing Dove,

Puate XX. — Trumpeter Swan,

PLate
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLatTE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE
PLATE

PuatTe:

XXI.— Whooping Crane,

XXII. — Sandhill Crane,

XXIII. — Wild Turkey,

XXIV. — Propagation,

XXV. — Protection,

XXVI. — Attracting Canada Geese, .

XXVII. — A Result of stopping Spring Side
XXVIII. — Wild-fowl on a Game Farm,
XXIX.— A Breeding Pen for Bob-whites,
XXX.— Group of Bob-whites in Confinement,
XXXI.— Wild Rice in Flower,

XXXII. — Winter Buds of Wild Celery,
XXXIII. — Seed Pods of Wild Celery,
XXXIV. — Wide-ranging Species of Pondweed,
XXXV. — Wide-ranging Species of Pondweed,
XXXVI. — Winter Shelter for Quail,

Frontispiece
faces page 39
faces page 69
faces page 69

faces page 111
faces page 150
faces page 193
faces page 235
faces page 322
faces page 322
faces page 377
faces page 385
faces page 399
faces page 411
faces page 416
faces page 433
faces page 438
faces page 450
faces page 460

faces page 460
faces page 472
faces page 477
faces page 483
faces page 487
faces page 497
faces page 497
faces page 508
faces page 524
faces page 540
faces page 563
faces page 563
faces page 571
faces page 576
faces page 576

igi pages 578 and 579
. between pages 578 and 579

faces page 581
xvi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

 

Holboell’s Grebe,
Horned Grebe, .
Pied-billed Grebe,
Loon,
Black-throated Loon, .
Red-throated Loon,
Merganser,
Red-breasted Merganser,
Hooded Merganser,
Mallard,

Black Duck,
Gadwall,

Baldpate,
Green-winged Teal,
Blue-winged Teal,
Shoveller,

Pintail (Male),
Pintail (Female),
Wood Duck,
Redhead, .
Canvas-back,

Scaup,

Lesser Scaup,
Ring-necked Duck,
Golden-eye,
Buffle-head,
Old-Squaw (Males),
Old-Squaw (Female),
Harlequin Duck,
Eider,

Scoter,
White-winged Scoter, .
Surf Scoter,

Ruddy Duck,

Snow Goose,

Blue Goose,
White-fronted Goose, .
Canada Goose, .
Brant,

Whistling Swan,
Clapper Rail,
Virginia Rail,

Sora Rail, .

Cours.

PAGE
41
43
46
50
56
57
60
64
67
71
76
81
86
91
95
99

102
104
105
113
118
121
124
127
129
135
139
140
144
148
153
160
163
166
170
174
175
177
183
194
205
207
210
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

 

xvii

PAGE

Yellow Rail, 213
Black Rail, 215
Purple Gallinule, 217
Florida Gallinule, 219
Coot, ‘“ 221
Red Phalarope, . 225
Northern Phalarope, . 227
Wilson’s Phalarope, 229
Avocet, s 231
Black-necked Stilt, 233
Wilson’s Snipe, 245
Dowitcher, 253
Stilt Sandpiper, . 260
Knot, 262
Purple Sandpiper, 268
Pectoral Sandpiper, 270
White-rumped Sandpiper, 274
Baird’s Sandpiper, 277
Least Sandpiper, 278
Red-backed Sandpiper, 282
Semipalmated Sandpiper, 286
Sanderling, 290
Marbled Godwit, 294
Hudsonian Godwit, 297
Greater Yellow-legs, 300
Yellow-legs, 303
Solitary Sandpiper, 306
Willet, ‘ 309
Buff-breasted Sandpiper, 320
Long-billed Curlew, 325
Hudsonian Curlew, 330
Black-bellied Plover, 335
Golden Plover, 340
Killdeer Plover, 348
Semipalmated Plover, 352
Piping Plover, 354
Ruddy Turnstone, 359
Oyster-catcher, 362
Bob-white, 368

FIGURES IN THE TEXT.

Figure 1.— Foot of Grebe, 40
Figure 2.— Foot of Loon, 49
Fiaure 3. — Bill of Merganser, 59

Ficure 4. — Foot of River Duck,

70
 

XViii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

PAGE
Figure 5. — Axillars of Baldpate, Axillars of European Widgeon, 84
Figure 6. — Foot of Sea Duck, . lll
Ficure 7. — Head of Female Ring-necked Duck, 128
Ficurs 8. — Head of Barrow’s Golden-eye (Male), 133
Ficure 9. — Bills of Eiders, 147
Figure 10. — Head of Male King Eider, 162
Ficure 11. — Foot of Coot, 202
Figure 12. — Foot of Red Phalarope, 224
Ficure 13.— Foot of Northern Phalarope, . 228
Ficure 14. — Foot of Wilson’s Phalarope, 230
Figure 15. — Tail of Pectoral Sandpiper, 271
Ficure 16. — Tail of Baird’s Sandpiper, ‘ 277
Figurs 17. — First Primary and Axillars of Long-billed Curlew, 326
Ficure 18. — First Primary and Axillars of Hudsonian Curlew, 331
Ficure 19. — Head of Wilson’s Plover, x 357
Figure 20. — Axillars and First Primary of Eskimo Curlew, 417
Ficure 21. — Pigeon Basket, 440
Figure 22. — Wild Rice, 574
Figure 23. — Wild Celery, : 576
Ficure 24.— Leaves of Wild Celery, showing Venation, 577
Ficure 25.— Sago Pondweed, 579
Figure 26. — Tubers of Sago Pondweed, 580
 

GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND
SHORE BIRDS.

 

 
Game Birds, Wild-fowl and Shore Birds.

INTRODUCTION.

AMERICA, A COUNTRY OF GAME BIRDS.

North America, at the time of its discovery, probably con-
tained more game birds in proportion to its size than any other
land. One hundred and seventy distinct species of game birds
are found on this continent, and the list might be considerably
extended by adding other birds which, although not considered
as game, have been used forfood. The check list of the Amer-
ican Ornithologists’ Union (1910) gives twenty-four species and
subspecies of Doves and Pigeons; six of Turkeys; forty-two of
Grouse; nineteen of Bob-whites, etc.; sixteen of Plover; seventy
of Snipe, Sandpipers, Godwits, etc.; twenty-six of Rails and
Cranes, etc.; and seventy-four of edible web-footed wild-fowl,
—all of which (excluding some necessary duplications) might
be included in the list of North American game birds.

Game birds bred in countless numbers throughout the region
now known as the United States and Mexico, when America
first became known to Europeans. In autumn, winter and
spring the migratory species swarmed in this region in num-
bers unprecedented in the experience of man in any land.
The shape and situation of the continent and islands of North
America are such as to provide in the temperate and northern
portions an immense breeding ground for migratory birds, and
to congest them in the southern part during the fall, winter
and early spring. The general conformation of the North
American continent is that of a triangle, with its base lying in
the arctic regions and its apex south of the tropic of Cancer.
The distance across the northern part of the continent, meas-
uring from the easternmost point of Newfoundland to the
northwestern shores of Alaska, is more than four thousand
miles, and from the eastern point of Greenland to the western-
2 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

most of the Aleutian Islands is quite as far. Contrast this
with the distance from the lower coast of Georgia to the Gulf
of California (less than two thousand miles). Note also that
a line drawn across Mexico on the tropic of Cancer measures
less than six hundred miles. Such conditions are found in no
other continent.

The position of South America is exactly the opposite in
relation to bird migration, for the apex of the triangle of that
continent lies toward the south pole and its base lies near
the equator; therefore, there could be no such congestion of
species caused by migration from the colder or southern parts
of that continent toward the equator as is found in North
America, when the birds that breed in the vast expanse of
the north migrate to the comparatively contracted southern
regions.

The lands of the eastern hemisphere, taken as one large
continent, are wider toward the equator than toward the poles,
and no conditions are found there similar to those in North
America, except perhaps in China, Indo-China, the peninsula
of India and the Malay peninsula, in all of which a congestion
of species similar to that once found in North America prob-
ably occurs in the migration periods, but on a smaller scale.

North America has an advantage over all other countries in
its great arctic breeding grounds, that offer extensive nesting
places and feeding grounds for water birds. A great archi-
pelago extends from the arctic coast of North America a thou-
sand miles toward the north pole, and the vast expanse of
Greenland lies to the eastward. On all these islands, great
and small, water-fowl may nest forever, unmolested by civil-
ized man.

In the light of our present knowledge, it is not difficult to
imagine the great migration that annually occurred before the
continent was peopled by the whites. When the short arctic
summer drew to a close, — when the young birds had become
strong on the wing, — the great exodus from the northern seas
began. The Brant, which penetrated to the northernmost
parts of Greenland and Ellesmere Land, even to the far shores
of the Polar Sea, turned their faces to the south. As they
moved southward, Auks, Murres, Gulls, Old-squaws and other
INTRODUCTION. 3

 

sea-fowl joined in the flight, part of which turned to the open
waters of the Atlantic on the east and part to the Pacific on
the west, but the greater part kept on, crossing the continent
to the south. As this concourse moved on, the great islands
of the North Georgia Archipelago gave up their quota of Snow
Geese and other water-fowl; and as the widening, deepening
wave rolled southward, it was swelled by countless Loons,
Cranes, Swans and Plover from the great and lonely lands
lying in the Arctic Ocean, between the Georgia Islands and
the coast of the continent. Banks Land, Behring Land,
Prince of Wales Land, King William Land, North Somer-
set Land, Cockburn Land and Baffin Land gave forth their
thousands and tens of thousands; and when at last the aerial
hosts reached the southern shores of the Arctic Sea, they were
joined by the vast swarms of Geese and Swans that bred
there upon the wide-spreading tundra. From the mouth of
the Yukon to the shores of Ungava, Geese, Eider Ducks and
many other water-fowl and myriads of shore birds joined the
advancing tide of bird life. The wave of migration secured
tremendous accessions from the Barren Grounds; but it was
the timbered region, the great plains of the northwest and
the river valleys of British America and Alaska that furnished
the greatest flights of Swans, Cranes, Canada Geese, Ducks
and Teal. Moving by easy stages through August and early
September, the vanguard of the host reached.the boundaries
of what we now know as the United States. Great flights of
Wood Ducks, Snipe, Curlews, Plover and Teal were in the
advance. We have no adequate early records of the move-
ments of these mighty hosts. A paragraph here and there
from the narratives of early explorers is all that can be
found, but even as late as the middle of the nineteenth
century the flights were still immense. Had De Soto and
the adventurers of his company kept and published an
account of the flights of birds that they witnessed, they
might have told of the impressions left by their first sight of
this great congregation of migratory fowl. The advance of
autumn and the sharp touch of the frost king in the north
had sealed the waters of the upper half of the continent, —a
seal that would remain unbroken until the return of spring.
4 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Dark clouds of coming storms obscured the northern sky, and
the wind blew wild and chill. The Indian hunter, standing
on the river shore at sunset, might then have seen the whole
sky overcast by clouds of birds, formed in dun strata, moving
fast and far in varying lines, but all trending toward the
south. Dense masses of Scaup winnowed their way low over
the land. Vast flocks of Teal swept close by, with a roar of
rushing pinions as they swayed and turned in quest of feeding
grounds. Lines of Mallards extended across the dome of the
sky, flock after flock, in almost continuous array. Swift flights
of Canvas-backs kept their unwavering course. Masses of
Red-heads kept them company, while smaller flocks dis-
charged their members like zigzag bolts to the wave below.
Here and there Teal and Widgeons rode down the air with
stiffening wing, concentering upon lake or river, where many
a weary flock sought rest, until the water was black with float-
ing birds, and still unwearied myriads high in air sped south-
ward. Canada Geese, in the long “V” formation of the
unbroken flock, in shattered ranks or in changing lines, trail-
ing, crossing and diverging or converging in the sky, passed
over in untold numbers with unslackening wing. Their musi-
cal notes filled the air like the cries of a thousand packs of
hounds. The upper air was full of nameless water-fowl,
while far above them all great flocks of Cranes swam in the
blue sky; and higher still, in the full light of a sun now
passed from view, rode long lines of snowy Swans, their clang-
ing, trumpet tones lost among the nearer sounds of voice
and wing that fell from the mighty hosts of smaller water-
fowl and waders rushing on their way. Scenes approach-
ing this great concourse of moving fowl were witnessed and
described even as late as the middle of the last century, in
the sparsely settled country of the middle west.

In early days the discharge of a musket near a marshy
pool would seem to cause the whole marsh to rise in a mass
that blotted out the sky. For days the sky was never clear
of Pigeons, and sometimes was entirely obscured for hours.

The shape and character of the continent and its elevations
and depressions are such that, while the autumn movement
was generally south throughout the country, much of the
INTRODUCTION. 5

 

wave of migration which reached across the land swept from
northwest to southeast; therefore, the greatest congestion of
birds in winter was found along the middle and south Atlantic
coasts, and in the southern States bordering upon the Gulf
of Mexico. There was also in Mexico a similar congestion
upon a smaller scale, for a considerable part of the flight com-
ing down the Pacific coast penetrated to Mexico and beyond.
Some species went on to South America, and a few followed
the South American continent to Patagonia. This line of
migration continues unchanged to-day, except for the decrease
in numbers.

While many Alaskan birds come down the Pacific coast
in their migration, a great part of them follow up the region
watered by the Yukon and its tributaries, going southeast
into the Mackenzie-Athabasca region, and reach the Atlantic
coast, together with many of the birds of that area and others
of the Hudson Bay country, by passing down south of Hudson
Bay and through the region of the Great Lakes. Some thus
reach southern New England and New York, while others
appear on the Atlantic coast farther south; still others turn
more to the southward, and, keeping east of the Rocky Moun-
tains and the higher plains, or passing down the Mississippi
valley, reach Florida and the other Gulf States. Southern
New England was once particularly fortunate in the numbers
of species and individuals which came into its territory in
migration. Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut lie
within the scope of the great wave of southeastern migration
from Alaska and the region west of Hudson Bay, and they are
also directly in the path of the flight from Greenland, Baffin’s
Land, Labrador and the Maritime Provinces. It was in part
this fortunate position at the junction of two streams of
migration that gave southern New England the abundance
of migratory game birds which the early voyagers and settlers
found there. Most of the maritime species from the Arctic
and the north Atlantic come as far as Massachusetts in winter,
while nearly all the wild-fowl and shore birds of the interior
once visited our waters and shores in fall, winter and spring.
6 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

ABUNDANCE OF GAME FOUND BY EXPLORERS AND COLONISTS.

When the settlement of America was begun, the number of
individuals of these species was beyond computation, and the
statements made by those who wrote about the game of the’
country at that time seem utterly incredible when repeated
to-day. Nearly all the earlier explorers and travellers who
mention birds or mammals in their narratives tell of the
“great store’ of fowl in the country.

It is recorded that water-fowl, shore birds, Cranes and
Herons bred along the Atlantic coast from Maine to Florida,
and that they migrated back and forth along the Atlantic
seaboard in incredible numbers. Ruffed Grouse, Pinnated
Grouse, Bob-whites and Wild Turkeys were reported as
appearing in great flocks, not only in the interior of the
country, but along the coast, in suitable localities. We are
not now accustomed to regard the Atlantic seaboard as a
great breeding place and resort for water-fowl and game
birds, but the early explorers and colonists found it alive
with them, from the West Indies to Labrador. A few of
their statements may be cited here.

Beginning with the West Indian records of the early
explorers, we find that George Percy of Captain John Smith’s
company contributes a narrative in which he asserts that on
April 4, 1607, the company anchored at the Isle of “ Virgines,”
where, he says, they killed “great store” of wild-fowl; and
again he says: “‘On the nineth day of April, in the afternoone,
we went off with our boat to the Ile of Moneta, [Monica]
some three leagues from Mona [an island near Hayti]. After
wee got to the top of the Ile wee found it to bee a fertill and a
plaine ground, full of goodly grasse and abundance of Fowles
of all kindes. They flew over our heads as thicke as drops of
Hale: besides they made such a noise that wee were not able
to heare one another speake. Furthermore, wee were not able
to set our feet on the ground, but either on Fowles or Egges
which lay so thicke in the grasse. Wee laded two Boats full
in the space of three houres, to our great refreshing.”’ 1

 

 

1 Tyler, Lyon Gardiner: Narratives of Early Virginia, 1907, p. 9.
INTRODUCTION. 7

 

There is no clew, however, to the species of birds found,
except that they were “wild fowles” which in general im-
plies that they were water-fowl. Undoubtedly many of the
birds seen breeding in these lower latitudes were such as
are known as sea-fowl or water birds, probably including
Pelicans and Cormorants. Capt. John Smith mentions the
Pelican as one of the birds on which he and his adventurers
daily feasted in the “ Virgines Isles.”"1 He also states that
on the isle called Monica they took from the bushes with
their hands nearly two hogsheads full of birds in two or
three hours.

When the first explorers reached Florida they found it
swarming with wild-fowl, Turkeys and birds of many kinds.
In A Notice of Commodities found in Florida, Monsieur René
de Laudonniére early in the seventeenth century writes that
there is “an infinite sort of all wild fowl.” ?

The English gave the name of Virginia to all the country
between Florida and Nova Francia (Canada); this included
New England. During the period between 1600 and 1630
many writers speak of the abundance of game birds and wild-
fowl in this region or parts of it.

Capt. Philip Amidas, the first Englishman to set foot in
North America, and Capt. Arthur Barlowe landed in 1584
upon an island in Pamlico Sound, “ Virginia,” named by the
Indians “ Wokokon.” Here, their account states, they found
“ Deere, Conies, Hares and Fowle, even in the middest of Sum-
mer in incredible abundance.’ ®

Lawson, in his travels in Carolina (1700), speaks of large
savannas on the Santee River as “ plentifully stored’ with
Geese and other fowl. In the adjacent woods were great flocks
of Turkeys.‘ At sunrise flocks of Turkeys, containing several
hundreds in a flock, were seen. Again he says: ‘“‘ We saw
plenty of Turkeys, but perched on such lofty oaks that our
guns would not kill them.” ® .

Sir Samuel Argal (1624) stated that in Virginia there were

 

1 Smith, Capt. John, Works of: The English Scholars Library, No. 16, 1884, p. 386,

2 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. VIII, 3d ser., p. 117.

3 Jameson, J. Franklin: Early English and French Voyages, Am. Hist. Asso., 1906, p. 229.
4 Lawson, John: History of Carolina, 1860, pp. 34, 50.

5 Ibid., p. 79.
8 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

fowl in abundance, such as Swans, Brant, Geese, Turkeys,
Cranes and Ducks.!

William Strachey (1610) says, in his True Declaration of
Virginia: ‘‘ The Turkyes of that Countrie are great, and fat,
and exceeding in plentie. The rivers from August, or Sep-
tember, till February, are couered with flocks of Wildfoule;
as swannes, geese, ducke, mallard, teal, wigeons, hearons, bit-
ters, curlewes, godwights, plouers, snights, dottrels, cormo-
rants, in such abundance as are not in all the world to be
equalled.” ?

Colonel Norwood (1649) states that great flights of fowl
frequented an island on which he was cast away off the coast
of Virginia.®

John Clayton (1688), in a letter to the Royal Society, giv-
ing accounts of “several observables in Virginia,” says that
Wild Geese and Brant in winter came in mighty flocks, with
wild Ducks innumerable.‘

Edward Williams, writing of “ Virginia,” states that wild-
fowl in their seasons were innumerable.®

Ny Thomas Glover (1676) says that on the bay and rivers
“feed so many wild fowl as in winter time they do in some
places cover the water for two miles.” 6

The above accounts refer mainly to the southern and middle
portions of our Atlantic seaboard. Narratives of the Dutch,
who first settled New Netherlands (now part of New York,
New Jersey and the region along the Hudson), gave evidence
of the vast numbers of wild-fowl and game birds found there
during the early days of settlement.

Johannes de Laet (1633) says: ‘“‘ Innumerable birds are also
found here, both large and small, those that frequent the
rivers and lakes, as well as the forests, and possess plumage of
great elegance and variety of colors.”

Nicolaes van Wassenaer (1624) writes: ‘“‘In their waters

 

1 Purchas, Samuel: His Pilgrimes, Glasgow, 1906, Vol. XIX, p. 209.

2 Tracts by Peter Force, 1884, Vol. III, Tract No. 1, p. 13.

% Ibid., Tract No. 10, p. 23.

4 Ibid., Tract No. 12, p. 33.

5 Ibid., Tract. No. 11, p. 48.

6 Glover, Thomas: An Account of Virginia, Philos. Trans. Royal Soc., June 20, 1676, reprint of
1904, p. 8.

7 Jameson, J. Franklin: Narratives of New Netherland, Am. Hist. Asso., 1909, p. 56.
.

.

INTRODUCTION. 9

 

are all sorts of fowls, such as cranes, bitterns, swans, geese,
ducks, widgeons, wild geese . . . Birds fill also the woods.” !

Isaack de Rasieres, in a letter to Samuel Blommaert (1628),
states that there were many birds.which were in abundance
there in the winter.’

Rev. Johannes Megapolensis, Jr. (1644), asserts: “‘ We have
here, too, a great number of all kinds of fowl . . . which sport
upon the river in thousands in the spring of the year, and
again in the autumn fly away in flocks, so that in the morn-
ing and evening any one may stand ready with his gun before
his house and shoot them as they fly past.”

David Pieterszoon de Vries (1642) speaks of great quanti-
ties of different kinds of Geese, Curlews, Snipe, Gulls and
many shore birds. Turtle Doves (Passenger Pigeons) were so
numerous that the light could hardly be discerned where they
flew, and other species of birds in large numbers.

Hubbard (1680) says that on Long Island there was “ great
store’’ of wild-fowl, such as Turkeys, Heath Hens, Quail,
Partridges, Pigeons, Cranes, Geese of several sorts, Brant,
Ducks, Widgeons, Teal ‘‘ and divers others.”’ 5

Martin Pring (1603), who visited the northern part of
Virginia (New England and adjacent lands), states that there
was “great store” of river and sea fowl.®

In Archer’s account of Gosnold’s voyage we find the
statement that about May 22, 1602, the company reached
an island, south of Cape Cod, which they called Martha’s
Vineyard, where they found wild-fowl breeding in abun-
dance. This island evidently was that now known as ‘‘ No
Man’s Land.” It is given as in “latitude 4114.7

In Brereton’s account of Gosnold’s voyage (1602) there
is a description of a fresh-water lake (which some later his-
torians have located on the island now known as Martha’s

ee

Vineyard), in which stood a small island that was ‘‘ exceed-

 

1 Jameson, J. Franklin: Narratives of New Netherland, Am. Hist. Asso., 1909, p. 71.

2 Ibid., p. 113.

3 Ibid., p. 169.

4 Ibid., p. 221.

§ Hubbard, William: General History of New England, Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. VI, 2d ser.,
b. 672,

6 Jameson, J. Franklin: Early English and French Voyages, Am. Hist. Asso., 1906, p. 350.
"~7 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. VIII, 3d ser., p. 76.
10 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

ingly frequented with all sorts of fowls,” some of which bred
low on the banks, and others on low trees about the lake
in great abundance, the young of which the explorers took
and ate.?

In the various historical collections there may be found
fragmentary accounts of the birds of Massachusetts, most of
which will be referred to in their proper places under the
heads of the various species. Josselyn (1672) particularly
mentions large numbers of Wild Turkeys.’

Higginson (1630) says: ‘‘ Fowles of the Aire are plenti-
full here. . . . Here are likewise aboundance of Turkies often
killed in the Woods. . . . In Winter time this Countrey doth
abound with wild Geese, wild Duckes, and other Sea Fowle,
that a great part of the winter the Planters haue eaten noth-
ing but roastmeat of diuers Fowles which they haue killed.”’*

Morton (1632), who was a “fowler,” also speaks of the
numerous quantities of wild-fowl, shore birds, Turkeys,
Cranes, Grouse, Partridges and Quail in New England. He
asserts that he often had a thousand Geese before the muzzle
of his gun, and that the feathers of the Geese that he killed in
a short time paid for all the powder and shot that he would
use in a year.?

Wood (1629-34) also writes of the large numbers of Tur-
keys, Cranes and other large birds, as well as Pigeons, shore
birds and wild-fowl.é

These writers refer mainly to the region about Boston harbor
and Massachusetts Bay, where the first settlements were made.

Lewis says of Lynn that at the time of the first settlement
~ (1630) the ponds and streams were filled with fish, and that

the harbor was covered with sea-fowl, which laid their eggs on
the rocks and sands of the shores; he says that fifty Ducks
were sometimes killed at one shot.° He states, also, that gulls
in abundance bred on Egg Rock, which lies off Nahant.

 

1 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. VIII, 3d ser., p. 89.

2 Josselyn, John: New England's Rarities, Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. III, 3d ser., p. 277.

3 Higginson, Francis L.: New England's Plantations, Tracts by Peter Force, 1836, Vol. I, Tract
No. 12, pp. 10, 11.

4 Morton, Thomas: New: English Canaan, Tracts by Peter Force, 1838, Vol. II, Tract No. 5,
pp. 46, 47.

5 Wood; Wm.: New England’s Prospect, Pub. Prince Soc., 1865, pp. 32, 33.

6 Lewis, Alonzo, and Newhall, James R.: History of Lynn, 1865, pp. 46, 57, 89.
INTRODUCTION. ll

 

Wood asserts that the marsh at the mouth of the Saugus
River near Lynn was crowded with creeks, where lay “ great
stores of Geese and other Ducks.”

In Obadiah Turner’s Journal, July 28, 1630, relating to the
first settlement of Lynn, we find the following: ‘‘ Of birdes wee
saw great store . . . manie of wch wee knew not ye names.
But wee are of a truth in a paradise of those moving things yt
be good for foode.”! In the same volume, under date of 1638,
it is stated: ‘“‘ Upon ye beach they spied great multitudes of
birdes of manie kindes, they being there to pick vp ye wormes
and little fishes. They haue long bills wch they thrust into ye
little holes in ye sand and pull up ye fat wormes with great
relish. They lay eggs in ye sand and ye heate of ye sun being
vpon them they speedilie hatch, and ye little birdes betake
themselves to feeding. Ye beach birdes are verrie shy and
quick a-wing, but our sportsmen, nevertheless, do bring down
great plentie for their own vse and if need to supply their
plantations.” ?

In an account of Levett’s voyage to New England (1623)
he mentions “ great plenty ” of wild-fowl at a pool nine miles
below the mouth of the Saco. He says, ‘“‘ In this place there
is a world of fowl,” and also speaks of ‘‘ much fowl” in other
places on the coast and islands.*®

In Rosier’s narrative of Waymouth’s voyage to the coast
of Maine, in 1605, he records visits to Monhegan Island and
St. Georges Isles, and in both places saw “ much fowl of divers
kinds” breeding. He gives a list of birds, and states that
there are “‘many other fowls in flocks, unknown.” 4

The enormous numbers of game birds, which formed a
staple article of food for settlers, were looked upon as a, val-
uable asset in the new country; and the abundance of fowl
was fully set forth in the publications destined for the eyes
of presumptive immigrants. _

The President and Council of New England (1622), setting
forth the advantages of New England as a place of residence,

 

1 Newhall, James Robinson: Lin, or, Jewels of the Third Plantation, 1880, p. 59.
2 Ibid., p. 67.

3 Coll. Me. Hist. Soc., Vol. II, pp. 80, 82, 83, 85.

4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. VITI, 3d ser., pp. 132, 157.
12 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

speak of the country as abounding with diversity of wild-fowl,
as Turkeys, Partridges, Swans, Wild Geese, wild Ducks and
many Doves.'

Sir Ferdinando Gorges (1658) states that there were plenty
of fish and fowl for the ‘ sustentation”’ of the settlers, ‘‘ so
that they could not say (according to the manner of their liv-
ing) they wanted anything nature did require.” ?

The Baron de Lahontan (May 28, 1687) speaks of the
immense numbers of Geese, Ducks and Teal, with an “infinity
of other fowl,” which he found at Lake Champlain, and states
that his party ate nothing but water-fowl] there for fifteen
days.?

The early explorers of Newfoundland, the St. Lawrence
River and Canada, both French and English, tell similar
stories of an abundance of fowl. The references to birds are
fragmentary, however, and the descriptions and nomenclature
of the species are often indefinite and confusing. We can see
from these accounts that game was very plentiful, and we can
get some valuable information regarding a few of the larger
and more conspicuous species; but to get an adequate idea of
the former numbers of game birds in America we must turn
to the more recent accounts of conditions in the great west,
which has been settled within a century, or to the narratives
of those who have hunted in the thinly settled parts of the
south Atlantic and Gulf coasts.

FORMER ABUNDANCE OF GAME BIRDS IN THE WEST AND
SOUTH.

Game has been abundant in the west and south within the
last half-century, and game birds are still plentiful in some
parts of these régions. Many species of game birds have been
decimated and their territory greatly restricted, but by the
records of their former or present abundance and _ their
decrease in the west and south we may be able to approxi-
mate the conditions that formerly existed on the Atlantic
seaboard. Audubon writes in his journal, in camp at the

 

1 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. IX, 2d ser., p. 18.
2 Ibid., Vol. VI, 3d ser., p. 89.
3 Lahontan, Baron de: Some New Voyages to North America, 1708, p. 61.
INTRODUCTION. 13

 

mouth of the Omaha River, October 1, 1843: ‘“‘ The wild Geese
are innumerable.” Again on October 3, when he passed
Soldier River, he writes: ‘“‘The Geese and Ducks are abun-
dant beyond description.”

Murphy (1882) said that it was doubtful if the wild-fowl
were as abundant in any other part of the world as they were
even then on the North American continent, ‘“‘ myriads” being
the only word that could give an idea of their numbers. In
the seasons of migration the country so swarmed with them
that they presented the appearance of numerous clouds of
feathers, and the number of species was greater than those of
any other part of the globe.!

In presenting the following well-considered statements of
standard writers, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of their
assertions; but, as most of them are known as authorities on
ornithology or sportsmanship, they will no doubt receive the
credence justly due them.

Audubon writes (1838) that innumerable Ducks fed in beds
of thousands, or filled the air at Chesapeake Bay; and that
great flocks of Swans, looking like banks of snow, rested near
the shores.

Lewis, writing of Chesapeake Bay (1850), says that all
species of wild-fowl resorted there then, in number beyond
credence or computation; and that it was necessary for a
stranger to visit the region, in order to form a just idea of the
wonderful multitudes and numberless varieties that darkened
the waters and hovered in interminable flocks around the
feeding grounds.?

Frank Forester avers that the bay and its tributary rivers
were frequented by innumerable hordes of wild-fowl.

Murphy states that the bay during the season was like a
battle ground, and that over ten thousand people were accus-
tomed to shoot there.

Grinnell says that in early days slave owners, who hired
out their slaves to others, stipulated in the contract that
Canvas-back Ducks should not be fed to them more than
twice each week; and copies of such contracts are said to be

 

1 Murphy, John Mortimer: American Game Bird Shooting, 1882, pp. 265, 266.
2 Lewis, Elisha J.: The American Sportsman, 1855, pp. 246, 247.
14 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

still in existence in Maryland. Redheads rafted in Eastern
and Hogg bays in bodies miles in extent, probably not less
than fifty thousand Ducks in a mass.’

“ Robert Law of Chicago, who lived on the Chesapeake in
his youth, is said to have hired slaves of their owners, and fed
them on Canvas-backs until they rebelled and refused to be
punished further with Canvas-backs, or to work longer unless
fed on pork at least twice a day.’

These Ducks, so little valued then, sold at seven dollars a
pair in 1890, and the demand is now unlimited.

Huntington asserts that the number of wild-fowl along

\. the Atlantic coast was almost beyond belief; that there were
flocks in sight following each other in quick succession for
days at a time, and acres of Ducks on the water.’

Wild Geese were, and still are, more abundant in the
southwest in winter than in any other part of the continent.
The Snow Geese and other species once moved in such vast
flocks that they might be compared to a snowstorm. They
often destroyed large crops of winter cereals, and in Califor-
nia left scarcely any grain in a large district that they fre-
quented. It is estimated that they destroyed crops valued at
two hundred thousand dollars in one county of California in
1878, and that their depredations in other sections were as
great. Shooting had so little effect on their numbers that the
farmers gave up in despair and resorted to poison.*

All sorts of devices were used for killing Geese and Ducks.
A man has been known to kill two hundred Geese in a day by
stalking them under cover of a horse. By using a horse or an
ox for stalking purposes, and a huge gun heavily loaded, one
man is said to have bagged from ten to forty at each discharge,
and earned in one day’a hundred dollars.®

Fifty drams of powder and a pound of shot fired from
a huge scatter-gun by a skilful gunner were sometimes very
effective. Dr. Hatch says that a citizen of Sacramento, Cal.,
many years ago published the offer of a Panama hat, worth

 

1 Grinnell, George Bird: American Duck Shooting, 1901, p. 473.

2 Leffingwell, W. B.: Shooting on Upland, Marsh and Stream, 1890, p. 414.
3 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1903, p. 141.

4 Murphy, John Mortimer: American Game Bird Shooting, 1882, p. 240.

5 Ibid., p. 242.
INTRODUCTION. 15

 

twenty-five dollars, to the person who would beat his record
—nearly fifty birds-—for a single shot at Geese. Fifteen
years later another gunner killed seventy-five birds at a single
shot on Suisun Bay.

More recently the editor of Recreation investigated a
story that W. E. Newbert and W. H. Young of Sacramento,
Cal., killed one hundred and seventy-three Geese and “ Brant”
in seven hours shooting. He found it to be a fact. The
Geese were so destructive to the newly sprouted grain that
the farmers were compelled to hire men to drive them off.

In Dakota it was customary to build great fires on the
roosting grounds of the Geese on dark nights, and to shoot
the birds as they flew in “clouds” over the fires. One man
in Minnesota is said to have killed three thousand Geese in
this manner in ten days.’

Gillmore states that he and one companion killed eighty-
five Geese and a “large number of duck” on the prairie in
one day; and at Grand Prairie, Ill., he alone killed nineteen
Geese and forty Ducks one day, and would have killed more,
but his ammunition gave out.®

Hunter states that in one day at Cobbs Island, Va., he
had killed fifty-six Brant when his shells gave out; and that
Nathan Cobb killed one hundred and eighteen, which he
considered a good day’s work. He stated that one hun-
dred and eighty-six was his best tally for one day.‘

A few of the scores made by gunners in the days of the
old muzzle loader, supplied with the flint-lock or the per-
cussion cap, will serve to indicate the former abundance of
Ducks. Capt. John Smith, in his account of his journey to
the Pamunkee, in 1608, makes the following assertion: “An
hundred and forty-eight fowls the President Anthony Bagnall
and Seriegent Pising did kill at three shoots.” >

Hearne (1769-72) says that some Indians frequently kill
as many as one hundred Snow Geese each in a day.®

 

1 Hatch, P. L.: Notes on the Birds of Minnesota, Zodl. Ser., Geol. and Nat. Hist. Surv. of Minn.,
1892, Vol. I, p. 76.

2 Murphy, John Mortimer: American Game Bird Shooting, 1882, p. 246.

3 Gillmore, Parker: Prairie and Forest, 1874, p. 249.

4 Hunter, Alex.: The Huntsman in the South, 1908, pp. 157, 158.

5 Smith, Capt. John: General History of Virginia and New England, 1819, p. 206.

§ Hearne, Samuel: A Journey to the Northern Ocean, 1795, p. 439.
16 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Audubon states that forty or fifty Ducks were often killed
at one shot with a small gun at Chesapeake Bay.

Murphy says that pot-hunters sometimes killed twenty
to forty “ at a round ”’ with a large naphtha lamp and reflector
in a boat at night; and that he had been told that two men
killed, in this way, with big guns, fifteen hundred birds from
7 p.m. to 3 a.m.; also, that two men in sneak boxes, armed
with six guns, killed five hundred and sixteen birds in a day.!

Grinnell says that four men on the Chesapeake enticed or
tolled in a flock of Redheads and Blackheads, and gathered
forty-seven birds from six shots; while poachers with big guns
shot into flocks at night, sometimes killing seventy-five to one
hundred birds at a shot.?

Many years ago there was a record of one gunner who
from a battery killed five hundred Ducks in one day; and a
more recent record of one who killed three hundred in a day’s
work.’

Mr. W. W. Levy killed one hundred and eighty-seven
Ducks in one day on Chesapeake Bay, and shot seven thou-
sand Canvas-backs in the season of 1846-47. <A party of
gunners often filled a small vessel with Ducks in two or
three days, and dispatched it to the markets of Baltimore,
Philadelphia or New York.*

Lewis states that in 1854, when the second edition of his
work was prepared, the gunners in the vicinity of Havre de
Grace killed three thousand Ducks on the first day of the
shooting season.> No wonder that the glories of Chesapeake
Bay as a shooting ground have long since departed.

In Ohio, before the game laws were enacted, the explosion
of guns in the marshes resembled the skirmish fire of an
army. A market gunner of Sandusky killed one hundred and
eighteen Ducks at a shot.®

On the Kankakee marshes Huntington saw boats come
in loaded to the guards with Ducks; some barely floated. On

 

1 Murphy, John Mortimer: American Game Bird Shooting, 1882, p. 292.
2 Grinnell, George Bird: American Duck Shooting, 1901, pp. 481, 482.

3 Ibid., p. 440.

4 Lewis, Elisha J.: The American Sportsman, 1855, p. 269.

5 Ibid., p. 288.

6 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1903, p. 142.
INTRODUCTION. 17

 

one occasion, he avers, the whole great marsh seemed to rise
up with a roar, and the water dropping from the Ducks
appeared like a heavy rain. The birds, he says, almost
obscured the sky.!

One clubman at the Palmer Island Club at Currituck
Sound, N. C., is said to have killed one hundred and sixty
Canvas-backs in a day’s shooting.’

At one small lake on the Pacific coast four men shooting
morning and evening made a record of over four hundred
Teal, all killed on the wing.*

Enormous numbers of wild-fowl formerly migrated to
Mexico in winter, and great multitudes still go there. Major
Price (1877) stated that “clouds” of wild-fowl were seen by
him on the River Santiago; and that even in China, one of
the finest countries for Duck shooting in the world, he never
saw these birds so numerous.*

Duck shooting in Mexico is largely monopolized by the
owners of large estates or preserves. One of the most success-
ful methods used in market shooting in Mexico is called the
armada. It is built in a half circle, just above the water line
of some pond. Two hundred to three hundred gun barrels
are set so that one half will sweep the surface of the water;
the other half are aimed a little higher. The Ducks are
baited to the pond with barley and corn, and they are care-
fully guarded and fed by men on horseback, who ride around,
but do not molest them until the birds become accustomed to
their presence. When everything is ripe for the slaughter the
Ducks are carefully driven within range, and the two sets
of barrels are then fired one after the other, by an ingenious
arrangement. The number of Ducks thus slaughtered in
Mexico cannot be estimated. At the Hacienda Grande, at the
north end of Lake Texcoco, four thousand six hundred and

\ninety-six Ducks were killed in this way at one discharge.
They sold for two hundred and fifty-six dollars. Signora
Cervantes de Rivas, owner of the hacienda, said that the net

 

1 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1903, p. 211.

2 Hunter, Alex.: The Huntsman in the South, Vol. I, 1908, p. 289.

3 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1903, p. 231.

4 Price, Maj. Sir Rose Lambart, Bart.: The Two Americas, London, 1877, p. 170.
18 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

profit in Ducks on that ranch in one winter was over thirteen
thousand dollars, which represents two hundred and eight
thousand Ducks; and there are hundreds of people pursuing
the same business.!| We accomplish the same result in the
United States, but more people share in the sport and the
profits.

Mr. T. Gilbert Pearson, secretary of the National Asso-
ciation of Audubon Societies, who visited President Diaz in
Mexico City during the winter of 1909-10, in the hope of
securing government action for the protection of game in
Mexico, found the armada still in operation there. Fortu-
nately, few if any wild-fowl that breed in New England or
pass through it migrate to Mexico.

If we turn to the waders, we shall find plentiful evidence
regarding their former overwhelming abundance, and the won-
derful migrating army which once swept not only along our
coasts but over the interior as well.

Frank Forester, writing about the middle of the last cen-
tury, said that from the Swan down to the Least Sandpiper
every species of aquatic bird abounded in its appropriate
latitude in his day. From Boston Bay to the mouth of the
Mississippi River some portions of the coast were then swarm-
ing at all times of the year with all the varieties of Curlews,
Sandpipers, Plover and other shore birds. Long Island, New
Jersey, the Chesapeake, the islands of Albemarle and Pam-
lico sounds, and the tepid waters of Florida, all abounded
with these aquatic myriads.’

Gillmore says (1874) that there was no portion of the
world with which he was acquainted where these birds were
so largely represented both in species and numbers as in
North America. Along the Atlantic seaboard of the United
States they abounded in spring and fall, and their principal
breeding places, like the coasts and interior of Labrador and
Newfoundland, fairly swarmed with them; while the western
prairies at the breaking up of winter were populated with
such numbers as almost to cause the surface of the soil to

 

1 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1903, p. 143.
2 Herbert, Henry William: Frank Forester’s Field Sports of the United States, 1873, Vol. II, pp.
7, 8.
INTRODUCTION. 19

 

appear to move as they rushed about in search of the insects
that formed their principal food.!

King (1866) says that one of the peculiarities of Lakes Erie
and Ontario consists of the great numbers of Sandpipers run-
ning along the beach in large flocks.?

Great bags of shore birds were made on the Atlantic coast,
even as late as the last quarter of the nineteenth century.

Giraud speaks of one hundred and sixteen Yellow-legs
killed at one shot.

Wilson tells of eighty-five Red-breasted Snipe taken at one
discharge of the musket, and Audubon saw one hundred and
twenty-seven killed by three barrels.

A gunner at Egg Harbor killed thirty-three Red-breasted
Snipe by shooting both barrels into a passing flock; and Frank
Forester says that in his day a sportsman might fill a bushel
basket with the proceeds of a day’s shooting on beaches and
marshes.

Lewis states that he saw twenty-three Dowitchers killed
at one discharge.

Bogardus mentions that he, with a friend, killed three
hundred and forty Wilson’s Snipe in a day on the Sangamon
River in Illinois, and says that his bag in the right season was
seldom as small as one hundred and fifty birds in a day.

Huntington states that on one occasion, in Ohio, he killed
twenty-eight Wilson’s Snipe in a little over an hour’s shoot-
ing.?

There is a story current among old gunners in Concord,
Mass., that years ago one man won a wager that he could
kill fifty Wilson’s Snipe in an hour or two with a limited
number of shots.

Gillmore says that in his day, within thirty-six hours’
travel of New York City, such Snipe shooting could be
enjoyed as was to be had in no other portion of the globe.
One of his acquaintances killed nine dozen in seven hours,
and frequently killed from seven to eight dozen in the same
time.

 

1 Gillmore, Parker: Prairie and Forest, 1874, p. 250.
2 King, W. Ross: The Sportsman and Naturalist in Canada, 1866, p. 114.
3 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1903, p. 273.
20 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Audubon says that adepts in the sport of Woodcock
shooting have been known to kill upwards of one hundred in
a day.

Doughty asserts that in 1825, in the meadows bordering
on the Cohansey River, in the lower part of New Jersey,
three men in about two hours killed more than forty Wood-
cock on a small spot of ground;! and also that in a very small
spot in the lowlands west of New York City a party of two or
three men killed upwards of eighty Woodcock, while in a very
small spot of afew acres in Salem County as many as one
hundred and fifty were killed during that day, and very many
more on the same spot on the day succeeding.?

In the early days of the settlement of America, and for
many years afterward, the Ruffed Grouse was not only very
numerous in the eastern and middle States and in Canada,
but was a tame and apparently stupid bird, as it still is in a
few of the wilder regions of the country. Lahontan regarded
the stupidity of the ‘Wood Hen” as the most comical thing
he had seen, for they sat upon the trees in flocks, and were
killed one after the other, without offering to stir. The
Indians shot at them with arrows, for they were not worth
a charge of powder.’ Evidently he refers to the Ruffed
Grouse, for he describes how they drum on a log.

Wilson, in travelling among the mountains that bounded
the Susquehanna River, was always able to get an abundant
supply of these birds without leaving the path.

Abbott avers that in the swamps of central New Jersey
these birds used to congregate by thousands, and that in
the closing years of the eighteenth century it was a common
sport on all farms to surround the Ruffed Grouse, and when
a great host of birds had been gathered in a few trees, all
the farmers would fire at a given signal, their old flint-locks
loaded with bits of nails and cut pieces of lead, and repre-
sentatives from the different farms would go home loaded
with a “big mess of patridge.”” The Grouse congregated in

 

1 Doughty, J. and T.: The Cabinet of Natural History and American Rural Sports, 1839, Vol. I,
p. 97.

2 Ibid., Vol. II, p. 15.

3 Lahontan, Baron de: Some New Voyages to North America, 1703, Vol. I, p. 66.
INTRODUCTION. 2\

 

the woods and swamps of central New Jersey by thousands,
where they were netted by the inhabitants.!

Audubon states that he had bought these birds at Pitts-
burg “some years ago ” for twelve and one-half cents a pair,
but that they now sold (1835) in the market at seventy-five
cents to one dollar in the eastern cities.

Abbott believes that, common as this bird still was in New
Jersey in 1895, it was as nothing compared to half a century
ago; and, judging from old manuscripts which refer presum-
ably to this Grouse, they were extremely abundant at one
time, or when the country was settled, when “ their drumming
in the woods would sound often as if every hive of bees was
swarming.”

The Pinnated Grouse was found in enormous numbers
along the Atlantic coast in suitable regions, and was still
more numerous in the interior. Other and larger game was
so plentiful that few people ate this bird during the first years
of settlement. Audubon says that a friend of his killed forty
of these Grouse with a rifle one morning without picking one
up; and that when he first went to Kentucky no hunter of
that State deigned to shoot them. In Massachusetts they
were looked upon with more abhorrence than the crows,
because of the injury they did in the orchards by picking off
the buds in winter and picking up sowed grain in the fields in
spring. Audubon states that his servants preferred fat bacon
to the flesh of these birds, which often fed with the domestic
fowls. As the deer and Turkeys became scarce, the Grouse were
utilized; and twenty-five years later they had been nearly
all driven out of Kentucky and had been nearly exterminated
in the east, being then so rare in the markets of Boston,
Philadelphia and New York that they sold at from five dollars
to ten dollars per pair.”

Later, as settlement progressed westward, these Grouse
were found so abundant in some portions of the west that it
was nothing unusual for a person armed with a breech-loader
to bag twenty or thirty brace a day.®

 

1 Abbott, C. C.: The Birds about us, 1895, pp. 189-191.
2 Audubon, J. J.: Ornithological Biography, 1835, Vol. II, pp. 491, 492.
3 Murphy, John Mortimer: American Game Bird Shooting, 1882, p. 63.
22 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS

 

Mr. Samuel C. Clarke states that Pinnated Grouse were
once so plentiful in Illinois that thirty to forty to a gun were
killed in a day; and that one man drove from Fox River to
Chicago, forty miles, with one dog, and killed about one
hundred Grouse on the way. At that time they sold for only
one dollar a dozen in the Chicago market.

The Bob-white or “Quail” was also found in countless
numbers in favorable localities all along the Atlantic coast.
Lewis says that a gentleman living on Chesapeake Bay, not
far from Havre de Grace, asserted that his next neighbor
caught in nets in one season on his own estate no less than
nine hundred of these birds. He kept them in coops, and
fed them to his negroes.? Lewis also avers that a gentleman
living near Lynchburg, Va., killed over one hundred of these
birds in a day’s shooting during the season of 1851-52.

Sir Thomas Button states that when his crew wintered
in Port Nelson River, in 1612, they killed eighteen hundred
dozen Grouse.

Hearne says that he has seen thousands of Ptarmigans in
flight, and that the whole surface of the snow seemed to be in
motion, where they fed on the tops of the short willows.‘

Much more evidence might be given regarding the great
numbers of game birds in America in early days; but sufficient
proof has been cited of the abundance of edible fowl in this
country at the time of its discovery and during its settlement.
Further evidence regarding early conditions in Massachusetts
will be given under the histories of the species. What have

we done with this bounteous supply, —this great host of
edible birds?

THE DECREASE OF EDIBLE BIRDS.

Josselyn, writing within forty years after the first settle-
ment in New England, stated that the Wild Pigeon had
decreased greatly, “the English taking them with nets;” and
he said that the English and Indians had ‘destroyed the
breed ”’ of Wild Turkeys, so that it was then very rare to meet

 

1 Leffingwell, W. B.: Shooting on Upland, Marsh and Stream, 1890,.p. 262.

? Lewis, E, J.:: The American Sportsman, 1855, p. 85.

3 Ibid., p. 108.

4 Hearne, Samuel: A Journey from Hudson Bay to the Northern Ocean, 1795, p. 411,
INTRODUCTION. 23

 

one in the woods. This is typical of the white man’s destruc-
tiveness. He puts firearms in the hands of the savages, and
destroys the large game and the gregarious birds that can be
taken easily in large numbers with the gun, trap, snare or net.
The Indian had a plentiful supply of game until the white
man came. The result of giving him firearms and a mar-
ket for game was well shown in the last century in the val-
ley of the Moisie River, Labrador. The Indians themselves
admitted that it was the guns sold to them by the whites
that proved their undoing. They shot the deer, sold the skins
for more guns, destroyed all the large game in the country,
and then either starved or left the country. The white men
killed only the larger game at first, or such birds as could be
shot in numbers from flocks. Even as late as the beginning
of the nineteenth century, Wilson said that gunpowder was
too precious in the mountains to be used on anything smaller
than a Turkey; but in the valleys and along the coast a few
years of settlement were sufficient to destroy most of the
larger and much of the smaller game. Hunting was unre-
stricted. Practically all the male inhabitants were accus-
tomed to the use of firearms. Like the Indians, the settlers
killed game at all seasons. The mother bird on her nest, the
eggs and young, —all were taken wantonly, without restraint,
and all utilized as food. The result of such destructiveness
was never for a moment in doubt. The end came quickly.
The large game and the resident game birds suffered most,
particularly near the centers of population, where the larger
game animals and the breeding game birds, such as the deer,
Wild Turkey and Pinnated Grouse, were soon extirpated.
Professor Kalm states that all the old Swedes and English-
men born in America, whom he questioned, asserted that
there were not nearly so many birds fit for eating “‘at the
present time”’ (1748) as there were when they were children
(1670-90), and that the decrease of these birds was visible.
They said that their fathers also had complained of this; say-
ing that in their childhood the bays, rivers and brooks were
quite covered with all sorts of water-fowl; but when Kalm
was at Swedesboro, New Sweden (now New Jersey) (1748),
there was sometimes not a single Duck to be seen. He was
24 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

informed that sixty or seventy years earlier a person could
kill eighty Ducks in a morning; “but at present,” he says,
“you frequently wait in vain for a single one.” The Wild
Turkeys, Grouse and Cranes, which were so numerous in
former years, were now nearly all gone. Kalm says that the
cause of this diminution was not difficult to find, for after the
arrival of great crowds of Europeans the country had become
well peopled, the woods had been cut off, and the people had
by hunting and shooting, partly exterminated the birds and
partly frightened them away. There were no regulations or
laws to prevent the destruction of birds at any season of the
year, and, had any existed, the spirit of freedom prevailing in
the country was such that they would not have been obeyed.
He heard great complaints of the decrease of eatable fowl, not
only in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, of which he speaks par-
ticularly, but in all parts of America, wherever he travelled.!
Audubon, in his Missouri River journals, frequently men-
tions the fact that Geese with young were shot, or shot at, by
members of his party or the boat’s crew; but he says that
in some cases “the poor things fortunately escaped.” This
destruction of birds in the nesting season was even then
common throughout the country. Audubon well describes the
rapid destruction of game on the Ohio River during the early.
part of the nineteenth century. He says that when he first
visited the region (about 1810) the shores of the river were
amply supplied with game. A Wild Turkey, Grouse or Teal
could be procured in a few minutes, and his party fared well.
There were then great herds of elk, deer and buffalo on the
hills and in the valleys. Twenty years later these herds had
ceased to exist. The country was covered with villages, towns
and farms, and the din of hammers and machinery was con-
stantly heard. The woods were fast disappearing under the
axe and fire, hundreds of steamboats were gliding to and fro
over the whole length of the river, and most of the game was
gone.
The gunner and hunter were not entirely to blame for the
/ destruction of game; the cutting down of forests drove out

 

1 Kalm, Peter: Travels in North America, 1770, Vol. I, p. 289.
INTRODUCTION. 25

 

many birds and mammals, and many were killed by fires in
the woods. These fires not only killed many upland game
birds, but they also destroyed many water-fow] as well. Wild-
fowl, disturbed and bewildered by the light of the burning

\ forest at night, have been seen to circle around the fire until
overcome by the heat and smoke, when they fell into the
flame. Some fell like stones from immense heights; others
dove down, seeming to be fascinated, like moths, by the
flame.!

After all, however, the fires were local, and not nearly
so destructive as the devices invented to capture the birds.
Great traps were made, in which whole flocks of Turkeys or
Quail were caught. Nets also were used for catching the
smaller game birds, and the woods were full of snares in
which Grouse and other small game were taken. The great
guns used for shooting into the flocks of wild-fowl were
destructive. They were usually mounted upon a swivel in
the bow of a boat, like a small cannon, and the breech was
held to the shoulder to take aim.

—> The diminution of game progressed faster along the coast,
in the river valleys and, about the lake shores than elsewhere,
for there settlement first began; while in the unsettled interior
of the north and west the birds were still nearly as plentiful
as ever. Up to the early part of the nineteenth century the
great interior of the northwest beyond the Great Lakes and
in Canada was not only unsettled, but unexplored; there-
fore, notwithstanding the great decrease of the resident game
birds along the Atlantic coast for three centuries after the dis-
covery of America, the wild-fowl, shore birds and game birds
still bred in almost undiminished numbers in the unexplored
interior of the United States, British America and the lands
of the Arctic Sea; and they still appeared in vast numbers in
their migrations, sweeping in clouds over the interior, and
moving in great flocks up and down the Atlantic seaboard.
It was the unsettled wilderness, and the wilderness alone,
which so far had maintained the supply; but when, in the
latter part of the nineteenth century, railroads began to

 

1 Hind, H. Y.: The Labrador Peninsula, 1863, Vol. I, p. 209.
26 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

 

extend throughout the great west and northwest, a rapid
extermination of game commenced, such as was never known
before in the world’s history. The railroads carried settlers
into the wilderness, and opened to them the markets of the
east.

Before the advent of the railroads, game had been plenti-
ful and cheap in the markets of the western cities. Audubon
says in his journal that in 1843 at St. Louis the markets
abounded with the good things of the land: Grouse could be
had two for a York shilling; Turkeys, wild or tame, twenty-
five cents each; Ducks, three for a shilling; Wild Geese, ten
cents each; and Canvas-backs, a shilling a pair. When the
railroads reached the country tributary to St. Louis, and thus
connected it with eastern markets, building up also great
markets in the central west, the prices of game gradually
rose, while the game rapidly decreased. The fame of America
as a game country was noised far and wide. Hunters and
sportsmen came from every land; sportsmen, market hunters,
big game hunters and skin hunters crowded into the new
country. The improvement in firearms kept pace with the
increased transportation facilities. The breech-loader gave
the hunter an added advantage. Then followed the practical
extermination of the American bison, the deer, elk, antelope,
mountain sheep, mountain goat, Wild Turkey and Prairie
Chicken over wide areas. Then first began the marked
decrease in the numbers of game birds, shore birds and wild-
fowl throughout most of the United States and British
America, that has since become historic, and has had a
marked effect on the migratory species that once inhabited
or passed through Massachusetts and the other New Eng-
land States in immense multitudes. Every chronicler, be he
hunter, sportsman or naturalist, situated anywhere east of the
Mississippi, records this decrease. The settler, the farmer,
the sportsman and the market hunter eventually exterminated
or drove out nearly all the breeding wild-fowl from the United
States; and then the settlement of the country, the occupa-
tion of the birds’ breeding grounds for agricultural purposes,
and incessant gunning at all seasons, began to make itself
INTRODUCTION. 27

 

felt upon the vast multitudes of water-fowl that bred in the
Canadian northwest. Farmers used every possible method
to destroy the Ducks and Geese which consumed their crops.
Market hunters systematically hunted the country. Flocks
of Quail were enticed to certain points, where they were
netted or trapped. Grouse were hunted by men in wagons,
with trained dogs ranging near to put up the birds. Plover
and Curlews were pursued by a small army of men, who fol-
lowed them during their migration, and shipped the game to
both western and eastern markets. The fact that these birds
were among the most beneficial species on the prairie farms
was not considered; they were exterminated without mercy.
It was customary in the early days for a party of wild-fowl
gunners to take along a horse and wagon to haul home their
loads of birds. Mr. E. Hough, in writing of Duck shooting
in North Dakota (1897), says that up to within two years of
that time it was a daily sight at Dawson station to see the
entire platform lined with Ducks. In warm weather it was
not unusual to see two or three wagonloads of spoiled birds
hauled away and dumped into a coulee.!

Huntington tells of a time when the Ducks were so
abundant in the markets of Detroit that they could not
be used, and, warm weather coming on, they were thrown
away.” He says that it was common in the old days for pot-
hunters to fill their gunning boats to the gunwales, making
‘ such a glut in the market that large quantities of the birds
spoiled.’

“Tnvisible,” writing in Forest and Stream, in 1899 states
that there was not then one Goose left on the River Platte
to fifty in days gone by. Ten or fifteen years earlier he had
known a man to kill fifty-two between 2 o’clock and sundown.
Similar statements came from sportsmen and ornithologists in
many parts of the middle west. The shooting scores of gun-
ning clubs show the decrease of the birds during the latter part
of the nineteenth century.

 

1 Grinnell, George Bird: American Duck Shooting, 1901, pp. 320, 321.
+ 2 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1903, pp. 182, 183.
3 [bid., p. 206.
28 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The following score,! from the Winous Point Club, indicates
the decrease of Redheads in their region in twenty years: —

 

 

 

Year. ae Year. free
1881, 1,415 || 1891, 31
1882, 1,987 || 1892, 510
1883, 1,699 || 1893, 216
1884, 927 || 1894, 40
1885, 1,058 || 1895, 5
1886, 366 || 1896, 207
1887, 21 | 1897, 68
1888, 56 || 1898, 4
1889, 16 || 1899, ‘19
1890, 63 || 1900, 1

 

 

 

 

Another score? from the same club gives some information
regarding three other species during the same time: —

 

 

 

Year. Canvas-backs. Mallards. B le iniaed
1880, 665 1,319 2,110
1885, 237 943 1,019
1890, 697 394 603
1895, 72 218 Q1
1900, 1 232 =

 

 

 

 

‘A club record? from the Sandusky marshes in Ohio shows
the decrease in Blue-winged Teal and Green-winged Teal in

eighteen years: —

 

 

 

YEAR. lng wae eee
1881, 1,646 441
1885, 1,019 506
1890, 603 373
1899, 255 184

 

 

 

1 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1903, p. 183.

2 Ibid., p. 212.

3 Ibid., p. 232.
INTRODUCTION. 29

 

Long before the time of Audubon a decrease of the wild-
fowl in Chesapeake Bay had begun, but they were still
remarkably numerous there in his day and later. All writers
since then who have investigated the diminution of the birds
about the bay have found it progressive and continuous, not-
withstanding the periodical fluctuations in numbers. Grin-
nell (1901) says that its glories as a Duck shooting ground
largely have departed, that the gunning is a memory rather
than a reality, and that the birds are yearly becoming more
searce. Similar reports have come from most of the ducking
grounds of the United States. This decrease of game birds has
been general throughout the country, except in a few far west-
ern States; but even on the Pacific coast the diminution of
shore birds and wild-fowl has been noticeable in many places.

Dr. D. G. Elliot, author of several standard works on game
birds, says: ‘“‘ North America at one time probably contained
more Wild Fowl than any other country of the globe, and even
in the recollection of some living, the birds came down from
the northland during the autumn in numbers that were
incredible, promising a continuance of the race forever. I
have myself seen great masses of Ducks, and also of Geese,
rise at one time from the water in so dense a cloud as to
obscure the sky, and every suitable water-covered spot held
some member of the Family throughout our limits. But those
great armies of Wild Fowl will be seen no more in our land,
only the survivors of their broken ranks.”’!

The following is an extract from a recent work, The Water
Fowl Family, by Sanford, Bishop and Van Dyke: “Between

_ 1870 and 1875 fifteen thousand Ducks were not uncommonly
killed in Chesapeake Bay in a single day. Here in February
| and March it was possible to see redheads and canvas-backs
in rafts miles long, containing countless thousands of birds.
Wild fowl up to 1860 had not been much hunted in this
country, and during the Civil War were unmolested. From
1865 began their destruction, which has been steadily increas-
‘ing since, with a result inevitable. In twenty-five years the
jatbaaed natural home in the world for wild ducks has been

 

1 Elliot, D. G.: Wild Fowl of North America, 1898, Intro., pp. 21, 22.
*

30 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

nearly devastated of its tenants. The past few years have
shown some betterment in the shooting there, and, with care,
it may still improve, but the vast hordes of the past will not
return. Inland bodies of water, extending through the middle
west to the mountains, tell the same story. What sights were
once seen on the sloughs of Indiana, Illinois and Minnesota!
Now, in many places, the numbers left, an insignificant rem-
nant, bear evidence of the past. After the large game had
been destroyed and driven off, the small game was taken up,
and the past twenty years have decimated the wild fowl almost
beyond conception. Practically unprotected, shot from their
first coming in the fall to the end of their stay in the spring,
the result has been inevitable. Many of the most famous
resorts are devastated, and the existing haunts exposed to
such incessant persecution that local extinction is threatened,
unless prompt measures of relief are afforded.”

Prof. Lawrence Bruner, in his Notes on Nebraska Birds
(1896), says that man, the greatest enemy, has so depleted
their ranks in many localities that they have become scarce.

Mr. Rudolph M. Anderson, in his Birds of Iowa, tells of
the decrease or disappearance of many species of edible birds.

Prof. Otto Widmann, in the Preliminary Catalog of the
Birds of Missouri, says that the gun is the main factor in the
disappearance of all the larger birds. .

Mr. Witmer Stone, in his Birds of New Jersey, says that
the number of gunners is vastly increased, and the number of
game birds vastly decreased.

Dr. Sylvester D. Judd, in his The Grouse and Wild Turkeys
of the United States and their Economic Value, says that a
number of our game birds are now gone or are fast disappear-
ing from their former haunts. The Heath Hen is practically
extinct, and the Prairie Hen is nearly or quite gone from large
areas in the west where it was numerous a few years ago.

Hearne said (1769-72) that in the Hudson Bay country the
Snow Geese came in such numbers that when they alighted in
‘the marshes the ground appeared like a field covered with
snow. At Churchill River the people sometimes killed five or
six thousand, and at York Fort they have salted forty hogs-
INTRODUCTION. 3)

 

heads in a season. But he says, naively, that ‘Geese do not
frequent these parts in such numbers as formerly.” The
sequel follows. In 1909 Mr. Henry Oldys of the Bureau of
Biological Survey of the United States Department of Agri-
culture wrote me that Mr. Preble had learned, in his explo-
rations about the west coast of Hudson Bay, that in this
region, formerly one of the great highways of wild-fowl, the
birds have become so reduced in numbers that the inhabit-
ants, who were formerly accustomed to put down many of
these birds for winter, are much straitened in their supply of
food. In that wild region, where the supply of game is all-
important to furnish food for the inhabitants, a diminution of
water-fowl is seriously felt; and where moose are absent, cari-
bou rare and the fishing poor, it is a serious matter. Many
of the wild-fowl that go to the Atlantic coast in winter, as
well as others that go to the gulf, breed in or pass through the
region west of the bay. The destruction of these birds in
the United States during migration is believed to have been
the main cause of the present scarcity in these northern
regions. Where one is killed there, a hundred are killed here.
Only since protection in the spring has been given wild-fowl
in the greater part of British America, and in most of the
States, has there been any check to this continuous decrease
of the wild-fowl in North America.

Regarding the general decrease in the numbers of shore
and marsh birds, including Snipe, Plover and Sandpipers, the
older gunners practically agree that it has been tremendous
and continuous for many years, and, although some of them
believe that the birds have gone somewhere else or “ changed
their line of flight,”’ still, they say the birds ‘‘ do not come here.”

For about forty years, during which much of my time has
been passed in the woods and fields and along the shores of
Massachusetts, I have had opportunity to observe the dimi-
nution in numbers of those birds that are hunted for food, for
their feathers or for sport. I have noted the gradual disap-
pearance of Passenger Pigeons and Eskimo Curlews, the great
reduction in the numbers of Golden Plover, Wood Ducks and
other species of shore birds and wild-fowl, and I have kept
32 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

informed regarding the condition of the upland game birds;
but during all this time I had hardly realized the gravity of
the situation, until, in the pursuit of an inquiry regarding the
destruction of birds by the elements, which was authorized by
the State Board of Agriculture in 1903, people began volun-
tarily to send in evidence regarding the general decrease of
birds. It was asserted by many correspondents that the extir-
pation of certain species was imminent in the region with
which they were familiar, and that many others were rapidly
decreasing in numbers.

The secretary of the State Board of Agriculture, on receipt
of this evidence, authorized further investigation regarding
the decrease of birds. Four hundred circulars asking for
information were ‘prepared and sent out in July, 1904, to
naturalists, secretaries of game protective associations, sports-
men, game wardens, market hunters, farmers and other
interested observers. In response to these circulars two hun-
dred and seventeen satisfactory replies were received, and a
large correspondence was opened, all of which formed the
basis for a special report of one hundred and sixty-six pages.*

The consensus of opinion of those correspondents who
might be considered as competent to give expert testimony
indicated a great decrease among game birds, shore birds,
wild-fowl, Herons, birds of prey, and, in fact, among all the
birds most hunted, and a somewhat less diminution among a
certain few species of the smaller birds. It was shown that
Ducks, Geese and Loons were disappearing from the ponds
and rivers of the interior, and that even on the coast the
most desirable species had greatly decreased. Grouse and
Bob-whites were estimated to have suffered a diminution of
from fifty to seventy-five per cent. within the memory of liv-
ing men, and an even greater decrease was attributed to the
shore birds. The completion of this report and its favorable
reception led to the publication of a special report on the use-
ful birds of the Commonwealth, and means for protecting
them.?

 

1 Forbush, Edward Howe: The Decrease of Birds, and its Causes, with Suggestions for Bird Pro-
tection, Mass. State Board Agr., 1904.
2 Forbush, Edward Howe: Useful Birds, and their Protection, Mass. State Board Agr., 1907,
INTRODUCTION. 33

 

When this had been published, and while it was going
through its several editions, my attention was again urgently
called to the scarcity of game birds in Massachusetts, New
England and the adjacent States. Reports indicated that
Ruffed Grouse and Bob-whites had reached the lowest ebb in
numbers ever known. This, with the previous decrease in
water-fowl and shore birds, left New England, and particu-
larly Massachusetts, with fewer game birds than at any time
of which we have record. An insistent demand arose for
more game. State game commissioners and individuals began
to look about to see where it could be obtained. Attempts
to procure Grouse and Bob-whites from other States were
ineffectual, owing to laws which forbade the exportation of
game.

Partly as a result of these laws, large numbers of European
Partridges, Grouse and Asiatic Pheasants were introduced,
and liberated in New England; while attempts were made in
several Legislatures to prohibit the killing of all game birds
for a series of years, or to further shorten the shooting season.
The unrest of the sportsmen and gunners was manifested in
attempts to change the personnel of the State fish and game
commissions, and to secure better enforcement of the game
laws. Advocates of the abolition of all game laws arose, and
gained some following. The promulgators of new game laws
readily secured a hearing. People began to awaken to the
fact that game was disappearing, and to seek aremedy. The
Legislature of Massachusetts enacted a statute providing
for the appointment of a State Ornithologist, and he was
authorized by the State Board of Agriculture to undertake
an investigation of the former decrease in numbers, and the
present scarcity of game birds in the Commonwealth, with a
view to submitting a report on the causes of such decrease
and the means of increasing the supply. After a study of the
literature on the subject and considerable correspondence with
those who were conversant with the conditions, a sixteen-page
circular of information was prepared in October, 1907, con-
taining questions regarding the most important food birds
resident in the Commonwealth or migrating through it.
34 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

These circulars were sent out to old and experienced gunners,
sportsmen and naturalists within the State, and to others
along the Atlantic seaboard from the Maritime Provinces of
Canada to the Carolinas, in order to secure data regarding the
species that migrate through Massachusetts and all the coast
region in their annual flights.

The replies on nearly five hundred blanks that were
returned from these observers, together with facts from my
own experience and much material gleaned from literature
on the subject, formed the basis of this volume. Most of the
observers who reported consulted with others when filling out
the blanks; in some cases two or more assisted one another
with notes and data. In other cases many of the members
of a gun club were consulted, the different species were fully
discussed, and the report as sent to me represented the com-
bined knowledge and experience of many men. Probably
these reports represent the observations of between one thou-
sand and two thousand Massachusetts men (mainly gunners)
regarding the present status of the game birds. They come
from every county in the State. Many men give the esti-
mated percentage of increase or decrease of each species;
others do not. The average period during which these observ-
ers have been afield is twenty-seven years and three months.
A careful comparison of these reports one with another, to-
gether with a consideration of the known and recorded facts
relating to the subject, indicates that in nearly every case a
conscientious effort has been made to state only facts. There
are perhaps two or three cases where gunners in one county
have overstated the increase of birds, in the attempt to show
that the birds are increasing. When a man states that all
species of certain families have increased two hundred per
cent., where other observers in the same town see a decrease,
or a very slight increase, there is something wrong with his
mental attitude toward the facts.

Nevertheless, in making up the average for each species I
have included all the estimates, for the reason that there are
probably some pessimistic reports that will balance those that
are extremely optimistic. Any estimate giving the percent-
INTRODUCTION. 35

 

age of increase or decrease of any species in a given locality
must be regarded as merely an approximation; but, as these
estimates are given by persons of intelligence and experi-
ence, the average of their opinions throughout the State must
surely approach the actual facts. The results of this investiga-
tion are given in part under the heads of the individual species
in the histories that follow in parts I and II, and a summary
of the percentages of increase and decrease reported in Massa-
chusetts is given on pages 504 and 505.

Many of the suggestions noted in the blanks filled out by
correspondents appeared so full of possibilities that they were
made the subject of correspondence. Some observers, not
content with filling out the blanks, sent in long letters detail-
ing their observations and experiences with birds in which
they were particularly interested. Others failed to fill out
blanks, but sent letters instead. This correspondence con-
tinued for three years and is not completed as the book goes
to press. It will be seen that the author is so overwhelmed
with material that he can publish but a small part of it in
this volume, and can merely summarize a still larger part.
Much of this interesting and valuable material may never
reach the public; but it has aided the author greatly in reach-
ing the conclusions expressed in this volume. A list of those
who have filled out and returned the printed circulars will be
found on the last pages of this volume. Statements from other
correspondents are credited to them in the text.
 

 

PART I.

A HISTORY OF THE BIRDS NOW HUNTED FOR
FOOD OR SPORT IN MASSACHUSETTS
AND ADJACENT STATES.

 

 
(14g eBed 985) (016) ‘0 1equia.aq ‘UO}sog ‘pudg edIeWEP ‘Kane7 YYOMSELIEYD "MA
Aq ydessojyoyg) ‘puod ey3 3 paiq spiiqdy are suems ey] 89! 84} JO adpa ay} 1eeuU Bulmwims ole yOnNG Appny euo
Pue s}COD UBdIAWIY OM} ‘ spsel|eW SU} oY} Guowe ae sayedpjeg om} ! punouSyoeq ay} ul 9d! ay} UO BuljzIs aie syong
4oe!g piimAuew *payoazoid aie Kay} ovaym ‘saizio ul uaaa ‘spuod 0} pajoeqze aq Aew |Mo}-pjim MOY SMOUS Ydeisojoud siy]

“SNVMS GNV SONG Y3SAIY—'l JLWId

 

 
PART I.

BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT.

The following histories of living birds include practically
all the species and subspecies that are now hunted for food or
sport in Massachusetts. The list includes many which are
not strictly game birds; but most of them are of some value
as food. The aim has been to present, first, a brief description
of each bird and the principal marks and notes by which it
may be identified; next, in case of those species which breed
or formerly bred in Massachusetts or nearby States, a descrip-
tion of the nest and eggs. The history of the common birds
contains such facts as could be gathered regarding their
former abundance, together with some account of their deple-
tion up to the year 1909; also some observations on interesting
habits, migration movements and food. Unfortunately, the
results of the work on the food of wild-fowl and shore birds,
which has been undertaken by the Bureau of Biological Sur-
vey, have not yet been published, and there is no authoritative
publication on this subject; but such material as is readily
available regarding the food of each species has been utilized
in the following pages.

GREBES (Family Colymbidez).

In the modern system of classifying natural objects it is
customary to present first the lowest and simplest forms.
Since the extermination of the Great Auk, the Grebes have
been the lowest in the scale of classification of the forms of
bird life commonly hunted. They rank near to the flightless
Penguins and the Auks, and only just above the Guillemots
and Puffins. All these birds seem closely allied in some
respects. to the reptiles, from which birds are supposed to
have originated. The beak of the Grebe is usually sharply
pointed; the eyes well forward, the skin in front of them
40 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

bare; the head in most cases ruffled or crested, in the breed-
ing season at least; and the neck long. The plumage is com-
pact, smooth and rather hairlike, and of such a texture that
when well dressed by the bird it is absolutely waterproof, and
therefore Grebes, though constantly diving, never get wet.
The wings are short and concave; the tail is a mere downy
tuft, entirely without quill feathers; the legs are buried be-
neath the skin and feathers of the body, and the tarsi (com-
monly called legs, but which are in reality those parts of the
foot extending from the heel to the junction of the toes) are
very far back, and flattened so as to present the least possible
resistance in swimming. The toes are
flattened and are further widened with
broad lobes, and connected at the base by
webs (Fig. 1); the nails are short and
rounded, something like human finger
nails. The whole foot forms a hard, scaly,
flattened compound paddle, which, on
the back stroke, spreads to push against
the water, and automatically turns or
“feathers,” so as to present little resist-
ance to the water on the return stroke.

The feet and legs are so far back and so ill suited for walk-
ing that the Grebe, when on land, merely rests on its breast,
or stands upright and can hardly walk at all. If hurried it
flounders along on its breast, using wings and feet in an im-
perfect imitation of a tortoise. The feet are principally used
in swimming, and they are among the most perfect and pow-
erfully designed swimming feet of vertebrate animals. When
a Grebe is held in the hand its feet will sometimes move so
rapidly as to give them a hazy appearance, like the wings of a
humming bird in motion. In flight, the feet are carried well
out behind, where they appear to be utilized as rudders, serv-
ing the same purpose, then, that the tail serves on many other
birds. The body of the Grebe is wide, boat-shaped and quite
as much flattened as that of most other swimming birds.

Grebes may be distinguished from Ducks on the water by
the sharp or pointed bill, the narrow head and neck, and the
relative length of the neck when stretched.

 

Fig. 1.— Foot of Grebe.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. Al

 

HOLBCELL’S GREBE (Colymbus holbeili).

Common or local name: Red-necked Grebe.

 

WINTER. : SUMMER.

Length. — 18 to 20.50 inches.

Adult in Late Spring.-— Upper parts dusky; top of head, small crests,
nape and back of neck glossy greenish black; chin, throat and sides
of head light ashy; front and sides of neck and sometimes upper breast
rich chestnut; wings with a white patch; under parts silvery white
dappled with darker; sides tinged with reddish brown; bill yellow
below at base, black above and toward tip; iris carmine; feet black,
yellow inside.

Adult in Fall and Winter. — Crests not noticeable; above blackish brown;
front and sides of neck pale reddish brown; throat, sides of head and
under parts whitish; mostly unspotted below.

Young. — Similar, but no reddish brown; neck gray; bill largely yellowish;
tip dusky.

Field Marks. — Largest of the Grebes; may be distinguished from the
smaller Loon by the white wing patch, which shows in flight or when
the wing is flapped.

Notes. — An explosive kup; exceedingly harsh note, not unlike the voice of an
angry crow, but much louder; the calls given more slowly, with singular
deliberation; car, car, three or four times, sometimes lengthened to caar,
and again broken and quivering, like c-a-a-r or ca-a-a-r (Brewster).

Season. — Not uncommon in winter coastwise; October to May.

Range. — North America and eastern Asia. Breeds from northwestern
Alaska and Ungava south to northern Washington and southwestern
Minnesota; winters from southern British Columbia and Maine south
to southern California and North Carolina; casual in Georgia.
42 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

Holbeell’s Grebe seems to have very little history, except
in the way of synonymy. American ornithologists have little
to say of it. Wilson did not mention it; Audubon notices it
briefly, and no one seems to have made or published any
exhaustive study of its habits or food. Nevertheless, in
migration it is not rare along our coasts; it winters here in
small numbers, and sometimes visits the small fresh-water
lakes and streams of the interior. Furthermore, it is one of
the few species commonly hunted which does not appear to
have decreased much in Massachusetts within a lifetime.
This is possibly due to the fact that it is difficult to shoot
while on or in the water. Possibly no other Grebe can escape
a charge of shot at such close range as can this species. I
believe that the bird was formerly much more common than
now in the smaller fresh-water ponds, but that through the
instinct of self-preservation it has learned to forsake them for
the comparative safety to be found in larger bodies of water.
Most of the individuals of this species seen here are believed
to be young birds, but occasionally an adult may be seen in
breeding plumage in the month of May.

It is not uncommon on the Great Lakes and other large
fresh-water lakes. In winter, when these are suddenly frozen,
this Grebe is sometimes captured on the ground, ice or snow,
where it has fallen exhausted in its attempts to reach unfrozen
water. It is a bird of the open water, avoiding such shallow
and weedy waters as are frequented by the Pied-billed Grebe.

Holbeell’s Grebe apparently migrates over the greater part
of the United States and Canada, and it is surprising that so
little seems to be known of its habits and life history.

Audubon states that it feeds on small fish fry, amphibious
reptiles, insects and: vegetables. Dr. Warren found sand,
blades of grass, small roots and feathers in the stomachs of
two birds of this species. Knight states that as far as can be
ascertained its food along the coast of Maine consists of small
fish and surface-swimming crustaceans. In inland regions
tadpoles and fish are reported as a part of the bill of fare.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 43

 

HORNED GREBE (Colymbus auritus).

Local or common names: Hell-diver; Devil-diver.

 

WINTER. SUMMER.

Length. — About 14 inches.

Adult in Breeding Plumage. — Upper parts dark brown or brownish black,
the feathers paler on the edges; a brownish yellow stripe over eye,
broadening, and deepening in color toward end of crest; throat and
that portion of crest on side of head below eye black; bill black, yellow
tipped; feet dusky and yellowish; iris carmine, with fine white ring
next pupil; fore neck and flanks reddish brown; wings varied with
white; lower parts silvery white.

Adult in Winter, and Young. — Similar, but grayer, with sides of head,
throat and fore part of neck white, this color nearly encircling nape,
and lightly washed with ashy gray on front of neck and lower belly;
feathering of head not so full and fluffy as in summer; bill dusky, but
somewhat whitish below.

Field Marks. — In breeding plumage the crested head of black and brownish
yellow is distinctive; pure white under parts, and white wing patch
which shows when the wing is open, distinguish it in any plumage from
the Pied-bill. In winter the white cheeks contrast strongly with the
dark upper head.

Season. — Common winter visitor coastwise; irregular inland; October 1
to May.

Range. — Northern part of northern hemisphere. Breeds from near the
arctic coast south to British Columbia, central Minnesota, southern
Ontario and northeastern Maine; winters from southern Ontario and
Maine south to southern California and Florida.
44 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

The Horned Grebe is known mainly as a salt-water bird,
but is not by any means rare in fresh-water lakes and streams.
Formerly a few summered in Massachusetts, according to Dr.
J. A. Allen, who states that he has seen a pair in breeding plum-
age in June at Springfield. Probably it is now rarely seen
inland here, except when driven in from the sea by severe
storms. I remember that no longer ago than the 70’s and
80’s large numbers occasionally came into ponds of Worcester
County on such occasions and remained for several days, or
until killed off or driven out by constant persecution. Mr.
Ralph Holman records in his notes that during the first week
in November, 1886, a large flight of Grebes of all three native
species came into North Pond, Worcester, after a severe six-
day northeast storm, and a great many birds were killed there.
All except the cripples left on the night of November 3.
Probably few alight in that pond now, but along the coast
they are still common in tidal streams and off the beaches.
They are usually most numerous in October, but are common ,
along rocky shores in winter. Brewster notes them occasion-
ally in the ponds of the Cambridge region, and Dr. John C.
Phillips regards them as not very common on Wenham Lake.

The expressive common names given this and other Grebes
were suggested by their mysterious disappearances and the
facility with which they seem to escape the charge of the gun
by diving at the flash. The flint-lock was a poor weapon to
use against them, and even with modern guns and smokeless
powder the bird sometimes escapes. If it is at long range,
heading toward the hunter, it is very likely to be mostly
under water when the charge arrives. It then offers a very
small mark, and even if it is hit the shot may glance from the
feathers and bones of its back. In diving hurriedly it usually
leaps forward and shoots beneath the water like a flash, but
it can settle quietly down and disappear, leaving hardly a
ripple to mark the spot. Sometimes it apparently remains
under water nearly a minute, and it can swim or float indefi-
nitely, with only the bill protruding above the surface. Dr.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 45

 

Langdon is quoted by Dawson as stating that the young of
this species, which he removed from the egg and placed in the
water, immediately swam and attempted to dive.

I have never seen this Grebe use its wings for propulsion
beneath the surface, but Mr. C. W. Vibert of South Windsor,
Conn., informs me that one which he kept alive for a time
often raised its wings slightly when swimming under water.
When driven into the ponds by storms, Grebes as well as
Ducks show signs of weariness from their struggle with the
sea, and are often so sleepy in the daytime that they will
sleep on the water with the head drawn back and the bill
usually thrust into the feathers of the right breast or shoulder.
In this position a bird will often keep its place, head to the
wind, or whirl about by paddling automatically with both feet
or with one alone.

The food of the Horned Grebes, while on salt water, ap-
' pears to be composed very largely of animal matter, shrimps,
crustaceans, small fish and fish fry, but when on fresh water
they appear to feed to a great extent on vegetable matter.
They also take aquatic and terrestrial insects, leeches, small
frogs, tadpoles and water lizards. Seeds and various portions
of grasses and water plants are eaten; also, all Grebes appear
to eat feathers, either from their own breasts or from birds of
other species. These are found in their stomachs, particularly
in spring.

 

1 Dawson, William Leon, and Jones, Lynde: Birds of Ohio, 1903, p. 631.
46 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

PIED-BILLED GREBE (Podilymbus podiceps).
Common or local names: Dipper; Didapper; Dabchick; Hell-diver; Water-witch.

   

=f
ApuLT in SUMMER.

Length. — Varying from 12 to 15 inches.

Adult in Summer. — Above mainly dark grayish brown or brownish black;
chin and middle of throat black; sides of head and neck gray; fore
neck and breast brownish gray; belly silvery ash; iris brown and white;
eyelids white; bill very pale bluish, crossed near the middle by a black
band; feet greenish black outside, leaden gray inside.

Adult and Young in Winter. — Upper parts sooty brownish; throat whitish,
with no black patch; fore neck, breast and sides brown; rest of under
parts silvery whitish; bill dusky yellowish, without band. Young
have head streaked with whitish and throat with brownish.

Field Marks. — This bird has a more brownish cast than our other Grebes;
the brownish upper breast distinguishes it from the Horned Grebe,
but the best mark is the short and thick bill. In the breeding season
the black throat patch and band on the bill are noticeable. This bird
lacks the shining white cheeks peculiar to the Horned Grebe in winter.

Notes. — Somewhat like those of a cuckoo. A loud, sonorous cow-cow-cow-
cow-cow-cow-cow-cow-cow-uh, cow-uh, cow-uh, cow-uh (Chapman).

Nest. — A mass of stalks, etc., sometimes floating, and attached to sur-
rounding reeds.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 47

 

Eggs. — Four to eight, dull white, often tinged with greenish, more or less
soiled or stained, about 1.70 by 1.

Season. — Summer resident; late March or early April to December.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from British Columbia and
New Brunswick south to Chile and Argentina, but often rare or local;
winters from Washington, Texas, Mississippi and Potomac valley
southward.

History.

The Pied-billed Grebe is the common Grebe of eastern
inland waters. Undoubtedly it once bred here in considerable
numbers, and as its habits during the breeding season are very
secretive, it is probably more common still, locally, than the
few records of its nesting would lead us to believe. Appar-
ently it was very common in Massachusetts as late as the
middle of the last century; but it has diminished much in
numbers of late, and has disappeared from many places where
it bred no longer than twenty or thirty years ago. It is shot
wantonly by boys, gunners and sportsmen at every oppor-
tunity. Were it not for its facility in diving and concealing
itself, it probably would have been extirpated ere now. This
and all other Grebes should be protected by law at all times.
Grebes are practically worthless as food, but they have a
certain zesthetic value. Alive, they belong to all the people,
and give pleasure to all who have the opportunity to watch
their peculiar motions and antics. Dead, they are the prop-
erty of the shooter, and are valueless beyond what their
plumage will bring from the milliners’ agent. There is a
great demand for their plumage at times, and this demand
alone may lead to their extinction, unless they are protected
always. They are useful as decoys to lure water-fowl into our
ponds and lakes, as they are less cautious than most other
fowl, and whenever Grebes alight in a lake or river other wild-
fowl will follow. Grebes are far more useful alive to the
gunner as decoys than they can ever be for any purpose after
death.

These little fowls have many natural enemies. Hawks
stoop at them from the air above; turtles, fish and water
snakes attack them from the depths. I once saw a Grebe,
while watching a Hawk, spring out of the water to escape a
48 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

pickerel which had tried to seize it by the feet. The Grebe is
able in some way to sink gradually backward into the water,
like a “scared frog,” sustain itself at any depth, and swim
about with a little of the back showing, or with merely the
head or bill out of water. When injured it will sometimes
dive or sink, swim in among the water plants, come up quietly,
showing only its bill above the surface, and, thus concealing
itself, await the departure of its enemy. I have known a
gunner to declare, at such a time, that the bird must have
committed suicide, “‘as it never came up.” I have never seen
this species use its wings in flight under water, and ornitholo-
gists generally agree that it does not, but the speed that it
sometimes attains leads me to believe that occasionally the
wings are thus used. Audubon declares that he has seen one
use its wings while swimming under his boat.

This species apparently is averse to flight. It cannot rise
from the land, and rises from the water only after a run along
the surface against the wind; but when once in the air it flies
quite fast, with rapidly beating wings, neck fully stretched and
feet trailing behind.

The nest, a mass of wet, muddy vegetation, anchored by
growing grass or reeds, but often practically floating on the
water, is an unattractive home for the little dabchicks. They
tumble off into the water immediately after they leave the
eggshell. Thereafter their only nest is the back of the mother
bird, to which they scramble as she rises beneath them.
When she dives they are left floating on the surface, but soon
resume their place when she comes up. She can turn her
head and feed them, and there they snuggle down amid the
feathers between her shoulders, only their little heads showing
above the contour of her back.

The food of the Pied-billed Grebe, according to Audubon,
“consists of small fry, plant seeds, aquatic insects and snails;
along with this they swallow gravel.” He also found in their
gizzards a quantity of hair and a feather-like substance which
he “at length found”’ to be the down of certain plants, such
as thistles, with the seeds remaining undigested and attached.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 49

 

Loons (Family Gaviide).

The bill of the Loon is stout, straight, narrow, sharp-
pointed, with sharp edges so constructed that they cut into
and hold securely the slippery fishes on which these birds
mainly subsist. The head is feathered to the beak; the neck
is long and sinuous. The plumage of the head and neck is
short and of rather a furry texture, while that of the body is
hard and compact; it forms a perfect waterproof garment.
The wings are rather narrow, short and pointed, but are ample
to lift the heavy body. The tail, though very short, is not
downy and rudimentary like that of the Grebe, but is com-
posed of eighteen or twenty stiff quill feath- Ae
ers. The leg, like that of the Grebe, is placed %
so far back and is so bound up in the skin of
the body that the Loon walks or runs with
difficulty. The tarsus is narrowed, like that
of the Grebe, but the foot (Fig. 2) is a simple
paddle, resembling somewhat the foot of a
Duck. Loons, like Grebes, have a peculiar
faculty of sinking gradually in the water with-
out apparent effort, and thus remaining partially submerged.
It is believed that they are able to expel the air from the air
cells in different parts of the body. Many water birds are
provided with a cushion of air cells between the body and the
skin, particularly on the breast and lower parts. If Loons
are able to inflate or deflate these and other air cells at any
time, the mystery of floating or sinking at will is explained.
They are noted for their powers of diving and the long dis-
tances that they can swim under water without rising to the
surface. The large size of the Loons, the long neck and rather
long, narrow, sharp-pointed bill, distinguish them from the
Ducks. Loons may be readily distinguished from Geese by
their larger and more pointed bills, and from Grebes by their
larger size, although the larger Grebes approach the size of
the smaller Loons and are sometimes mistaken for them.

 

Fic, 2.— Foot of Loon.
50 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

LOON (Gavia immer).

 

 

SUMMER. Fat.

Length. — Very variable, ranging from 28 to 36 inches.

Adult in Spring. — Mantle black, spotted with white; head and neck
black, with green and purple reflections; neck with three bands of
white stripes; under parts white; bill and feet black; iris red.

Adult and Young in Fall.— Bill yellowish or bluish white, blackening
above and toward tip; iris brown; legs and feet brownish or yellowish,
never black; top of head and hind neck dull brownish black; other
upper parts dark grayish brown, mottled a little, but with no white
spots; sides of head and neck more or less mottled with ashy and dusky;
chin, throat, fore neck and other under parts white.

Field Marks. — The size of a Goose. The black and white spotted adult
is unmistakable in spring. The fall birds resemble the fall Red-throated
Loon, but are much larger, have a bill much thicker at base, yellowish,
with much of the tip black, while the Red-throated Loon has a slender,
lighter colored bill, more white on cheeks and a bluish gray cast to the
top of head and back of neck, where the Loon is brownish black.

Notes. — Loud maniacal laughing cries.

Nest. — A slight depression in ground close to water or an old muskrat house.

Eggs. — Two, about 3.50 by 2.25, elongated and pointed, olive drab, or
dark olive brown, thinly spotted with dark brown and blackish.

Season. — Abundant transient coastwise; September to June; less common
in the interior; a few summer here.

Range. — Northern part of northern hemisphere. Breeds in America from
arctic coast and islands south to northern California, northern New
York, New Hampshire, Massachusetts (rarely) and Nova Scotia;
winters from southern British Columbia and southern New England
to Lower California, Gulf coast and Florida.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 51

 

History.

Probably the Loon once bred in suitable localities through-
out Massachusetts. Wilson says that it is said to breed in
“‘Missibisci Pond near Boston.” Nuttall states that he found
and captured in the Chelsea marshes (now Revere) a young
bird partly grown. S. Davis asserts in his Notes on Plym-
outh, Mass. (1815), that the ‘‘loon cries and leaves her eggs”
on the lesser island in Fresh Lake, now Billington Sea.!
Old gunners have assured me that they have seen the Loon
with small young near the shores of Buzzards Bay. Others
report the bird as formerly breeding on Block Island, R. I.;
and they bred about the ponds of northern Worcester County
when I first visited them, more than thirty years ago. In
1888 Brewster reported them as breeding in all ponds of suffi-
cient size near Winchendon, Mass.?. They have gradually dis-
appeared from Massachusetts waters in the breeding season.
Probably they have not been driven away, as neither human
neighbors nor much shooting have driven Loons from a
favorite nesting place, but their eggs have been taken and the
birds have been shot one by one, until all have vanished.
There may be a few pairs still breeding in the State. If so, I
cannot learn of them.

The Loon is not considered desirable as a table fowl. I
have tasted one and do not care for more. Indians and some
fishermen eat Loons and consider the young quite palatable.
They are pursued mainly for mere sport by the devotees of
the rifle and shotgun, and whenever one is accidentally
stranded on the ice or on land it is usually pursued and
clubbed to death. Boardman said that an Indian killed
thirty Loons with clubs in the ice after a freeze? The
mania for senseless slaughter seems to possess man, savage
or civilized.

Probably the spring shooting of Loons has had something
to do with their decrease in numbers. From the middle of
April to about the first of June Loons fly eastward and north-
ward along our coast. One principal line of their flight is up

 

1 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. II, 2d ser., p. 181.
2 Brewster, William: Auk, 1888, p. 390.
3 Forest and Stream, 1874, Vol. III, p. 291.
52 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Buzzards Bay to its head, where, on the way to Massachusetts
Bay, they cross the neck of Cape Cod at the narrowest point
near the mainland, where the Cape Cod canal is now (1910) in
process of construction. Tobey and Mashnee Islands lie on
either side of the channel leading from Buzzards Bay into
Manomet Bay. When the wind blows from the southwest
the Loons pass up the strait between these islands at morning
and at night, flying comparatively low. When the wind
blows from any. other quarter they fly high. Mackay says
that years ago he has seen three tiers, of ten or a dozen boats
each, stretched across this passage, and that sometimes on a
“good southwest morning” fifty or sixty Loons were killed,
and as many more wounded, which could not be recovered.
He states that he is informed that this sport is kept up to the
present day (1892).!_ Doubtless fewer Loons are killed there
now. The spring shooting of Loons should be prohibited by
law. Nothing can be more destructive than shooting at that
time, when the birds are paired and headed for their breeding
grounds.

Of all the wild creatures which still persist in the land,
despite settlement and civilization, the Loon seems best to
typify the untamed savagery of the wilderness. Its wolflike
cry is the wildest sound now heard in Massachusetts, where
nature has long been subdued by the rifle, axe and plow.
Sometimes at sea, when I have heard the call of the Loon
from afar, and seen its white breast flash from the crest of a
distant wave, I have imagined it the signal and call for help
of some strong swimmer, battling with the waves.

It is generally believed that in migration at least the Loon
passes the night upon the sea or the bosom of some lake or
river. The Gulls, Auks, Puffins and Cormorants, which live
upon the sea, usually alight upon the high shores of some
rocky island or on some lonely sand bar at night, but the Loon
is often seen at sea when night falls, and its cries are heard
by the sailors during the hours of darkness. Notwithstand-
ing the general belief that it normally sleeps on the water, I
believe that it prefers to rest on shore at night, when it can

 

1 Mackay, George H.: Auk, 1892, p. 292.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 53

 

safely do so. Audubon satisfied himself.that on its breeding
grounds it was accustomed to spend the night on shore. On
an island off the coast of British Columbia, where there was
no one to trouble the birds, I once saw, just at nightfall, a pair
of Loons resting flat on their breasts at the end of a long
sandy point. Cripples instinctively seek the shore when
sorely wounded, but on our coast a Loon must keep well off
shore to insure its safety, and probably few but cripples ever
land on shores frequented by man.

The Loon’s nest is usually a mere hollow in the bog or
shore near the water’s edge on some island in a lake or pond.
Sometimes the nest is lined with grasses and bits of turf; more
rarely it is a mere depression on the top of a muskrat’s house,
and more rarely still it is placed on the shore of the lake or on
some debouching stream. Where the birds are not much dis-
turbed, and where food is plentiful, two or three pairs some-
times nest on the same island. No doubt there was a time
when nearly every northern pond of more than a few acres
contained its pair of Loons in the breeding season, and this is
true to-day of ponds in parts of some Canadian Provinces.
The nest is usually so near the margin that the bird can
spring directly into the water, but sometimes in summer the
water recedes until the nest is left some distance inland.

The Loon is a clumsy, awkward traveller upon land, where
when hurried, it flounders forward, using both wings and feet.
Audubon, however, says that his son, J. W. Audubon, winged
a Loon which ran about one hundred yards and reached the
water before it was overtaken. Its usual method of taking to
the water from its nest is by plunging forward and sliding on
its breast. It cannot rise from the land, hence the necessity
of having the nest at the water’s edge.

When the young are hatched the mother carries them
about on her back a few days (Boardman), after which they
remain afloat much of the time until they are fully grown. If
food becomes scarce in their native pond they sometimes leave
it and travel overland to another. Dr. Hatch says that early
in the morning the parents and the well-grown young run
races on the lake, using their broad paddles for propulsion
54 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

and their half-extended wings for partial support. Starting
all together they race down the lake, and then, turning, rush
back to their starting point. Such exercises no doubt
strengthen the young birds for the long flights to come.

The Loon finds some difficulty in rising from the water,
and is obliged to run along the surface, flapping its short
wings, until it gets impetus enough to rise. It is said that it
cannot rise at all unless there is wind to assist it. Its great
weight (from eight to nearly twelve pounds) and its short
wings make flight laborious, but its rapid wing beats carry it
through the air at great speed. Mr. R. M. Barnes states that
one warm sunny afternoon, about 5 o’clock, on the flooded
bottom of the Illinois River he saw a Loon rising from the
water in a great circle, flapping its wings and then sailing. It
circled much after the fashion of a Bald Eagle, rising higher
and higher, continuing its flapping movements, alternated
by sailing, until it reached a great altitude. When it had
attained a height at which it appeared but little larger than a
blackbird, it set its wings, and, pointing its long neck toward
the pole, sailed away with great rapidity. He watched the
bird with the glass until it passed out of sight, and could see
no movement of the wings, although it was travelling at a tre-
mendous rate. He believes that the bird was coasting down
the air.1 The ordinary migrating flight of the Loon is swift
and steady, accompanied by rapid, powerful wing beats, and I
have never witnessed anything like the performance described
by Mr. Barnes. When it alights it often shoots spirally down
from a great height, and plunges into the water like an arrow
from a bow. It lands with a splash, and shoots along the
surface until its impetus is arrested by the resistance of the
water.

The Loon is almost unexcelled as a diver. It is supposed
to be able to disappear so suddenly at the flash of a rifle as to
dodge the bullet, unless the shooter is at point-blank range,
but when two or three crack shots surround a small pond in
which a Loon is resting it can usually be secured by good
strategy. I once saw a Loon killed on the water with a shot-

 

1 Osprey, Vol. I, No. 6, February, 1897.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 55

 

gun, but the bird was taken at a disadvantage. It was on the
Banana River, Fla., in January, 1900, and it had followed the
fish (which were then very numerous) into the shallow water
near the shore. Shoals extended out from the shore fully
three hundred yards, so that the bird, in diving and swim-
ming under water, could not use its wings to advantage. It
was much impeded by the shoals and the vegetation on the
bottom, and in swimming was so near the surface that its
course could be followed readily by the ripple that it made.
Two strong rowers were thus enabled to follow and overtake
it. It escaped the first charge of shot, but its pursuers came
so close the second time that the shot went home. In deep
water, where the bird can use its wings and fly under water
like a bolt from a crossbow, it can easily elude a boat. In old
times the gunner used to “toll” the Loon within gunshot by
concealing himself and waving a brightly colored handkerchief,
while imitating the bird’s call. But this will rarely succeed
to-day in luring one within reach of a shotgun.

Loons are rather solitary in the autumn migration. They
leave their northern homes and some begin to move south-
ward in September, but many remain in the northern lakes
until the ice comes. They move south along the larger rivers
of the interior, but most of those near the Atlantic take the
sea as their highway.

The Loon feeds very largely on fish. As it rests lightly on
the surface it frequently thrusts its head into the water and
looks about in search of its prey. When pursuing swift fish
under water it often uses its wings, by means of which it can
overtake the swiftest. This has been repeatedly observed.
It can travel much faster under water in this manner than it
can on the surface by use of the feet alone. Dr. C. W. Town-
send records that he watched a Loon chasing some young
Mergansers. The Ducks swam or fluttered along the surface
while the Loon followed them under water. They made for
the shore in alarm, clambered up on the rocks and escaped.
This suggests that Loons may sometimes prey on young
Ducks. Dr. Warren found the stomachs of two Loons filled
with the roots and seeds of aquatic plants.
56 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

BLACK-THROATED LOON (Gavia arctica).

 

Length. — About 27 inches.

Adult in Summer. — This bird bears a general resemblance to the common
Loon, but is smaller; the upper part of the head and the back of the
neck are bluish gray, gradually fading into black on the throat and
fore neck; the white streaks on the sides of its neck form a lengthwise
patch, and the white spots on its upper parts are more confined to
restricted areas.

Adult in Winter, and Young. — Closely resemble the common Loon, but
the Black-throated Loon has a much wider edging of bluish gray on
the feathers of its upper parts, which gives it a peculiar “reticulated
or scaly appearance.”

Range. — Northern part of northern hemisphere. Breeds from Kotzebue
Sound, Alaska, west along northern coast of Siberia, on islands north
of Europe, and from Cumberland Sound south to Ungava; winters in
the southern Canadian Provinces; casualiy south to Colorado, Ne-
braska, Iowa, northern Ohio and Long Island, N. Y.

History.

Young of the Black-throated Loon have been variously
recorded as occurring in Massachusetts, but none of these
records is considered authentic. It is introduced in this
volume merely because it has been taken on Long Island,
N. Y. The only specimen from that region now known to
exist was killed by Mr. Gus Merritt of City Island, Long
Island, on April 29, 1893, between Sand’s Point Light and
Execution Light. It is recorded by Dutcher in The Auk,
1893, p. 265.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 57

 

RED-THROATED LOON (Gavia stellata).

Common or local New England names: Red-throated Diver; Little Loon; Cape Race;
Cape Racer; Scape-grace.

 

WINTER. SUMMER.

Length. — About 25 inches.

Adult in Summer. — Prevailing color brownish black above, varied by paler
and white markings; middle of crown blackish; nape, back of neck
and sides of breast lined with black and white; head and most of neck
light slate gray, fore neck with a triangular patch of bright chestnut;
under parts silky white; bill and feet blackish; iris red.

Adult and Young in Winter. — Similar to the common Loon in winter, but
top and back of head and neck bluish gray (in the common Loon these
are brownish black); throat without red patch; white of throat ex-
tending farther up on cheeks, and back thickly spotted with whitish;
bill bluish white, darker on top; iris brown.

Field Marks. — Rarely seen in summer plumage; in fall plumage may be
distinguished from the common Loon at close range by the small white
spots on the back and by the slender bill, which is slightly concave
near upper base, giving it a slightly upturned appearance.

Notes. — A harsh gr-rga, gr-r, gr-r-ga, gr-r (Nelson).

Season. — A common fall migrant coastwise; uncommon in late winter and
spring, August to April.

Range. — Northern part of northern hemisphere. In North America breeds
from northern Greenland and northern Alaska south to western Aleutian
Islands, New Brunswick and Newfoundland; winters from southern
British Columbia to southern California, and from Maine and the
Great Lakes to Florida; casual far inland.
58 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

The Red-throated Loon is mainly a salt-water bird while
it sojourns in Massachusetts, although occasionally it is seen
on some lake or river. Thoreau records in his journal that
John Goodwin brought him a Loon on November 11, 1858,
which he had killed on the river at Concord, and the descrip-
tion proves it to be a bird of this species. Probably, like
many other birds, it was oftener seen on fresh water in early
times than now. Dr. John C. Phillips records a specimen in
his collection taken on Wenham Lake in October, 1896.1! It is
still not uncommon on the Great Lakes, and David Bruce of
Brockport, N. Y., stated that he had found it on Lake Ontario
during every month of the year.? In severe weather, when
the lakes freeze, this bird, like the common Loon, is sometimes
taken on the ice, from which it is unable to rise, and is easily
captured. In autumn it may be seen in small parties or flocks
floating and feeding near our coasts. Like Grebes and some
other water-fowl, it often lies on its side or back while afloat,
exposing its white under parts, while engaged in dressing or
preening the plumage. This species migrates mainly along
the coast in autumn, but as it is not so commonly seen there
in spring, some portion of the flight may go north through the
interior.

Its habits are similar to those of the common Loon. It is
perhaps equally difficult to shoot on the water. When sur-
prised on land it seeks to escape by a series of hops or leaps,
using both wings and feet.

MERGANSERS (Subfamily Merginze).

The Ducks, Geese and Swans comprise the family Anatide,
which includes five subfamilies, the Mergansers, the River
Ducks, the Sea Ducks, the Geese and the Swans. In the plan
of classification adopted by the American Ornithologists Union,
the Mergansers or Sheldrakes come first. They are much
hunted, though not regarded highly as game. This family of

 

1 Phillips, John C.: Auk, 1911, p. 197.
2 Haton, Elon Howard: Birds of New York, 1909, Vol. I, p. 104.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 59

 

diving and fish-eating Ducks has the bill constructed especially
for seizing and holding its slippery prey. The bill is long, slim,
rather rounded, with a hooked nail at the end, and its upper
part is provided with
many tooth-like proc-
esses projecting back- ===
ward, like the teeth of =
a shark (Fig.3). These
Ducks otherwise some-

what resemble the Loons, except that their feet are not so far
back and their heads are usually crested. The hind toe has
a flap or lobe, and the feet are broadly webbed, as in all Sea
Ducks (see Fig. 6 on page 111). They are noted for their
strength, vitality and diving power.

The Mergansers are commonly known as Sheldrakes. A
good field glass or telescope will enable the observer to dis- °
tinguish them from all other Ducks, at a considerable distance,
by the long slim bill and the (usually) crested head. They
all show a greater or less white patch on the wing in flight,
and should. not be confounded with the white-winged Scoter
or “‘ Coot,” which is darker below than the Sheldrakes. In
the field it is difficult for the novice to distinguish the females
and young of one species of Merganser from those of another:
but they may be identified, if seen in a good light, by one
who is well acquainted with the peculiarities of the different
species.

 

Fic. 3.— Bill of Merganser.
60 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

MERGANSER (Mergus americanus).

Common or local New England names: Sheldrake; Pond Sheldrake; Freshwater
Sheldrake; Break Horn; Winter Sheldrake (Maine and New Hampshire); Buff-
breasted Merganser; Goosander.

 

FEMALE. MALE.

Length. — 23 to 27 inches.

Adult Male. — Head and upper neck glossy dark green (appearing black
at a distance); scarcely crested; middle of back black; rump and tail
gray; most of neck, sides of upper back and entire under parts white
(tinged below with light buff or salmon); wings white, showing black
quill feathers and a black bar when spread; bill red with black ridge,
and feet red; iris carmine.

Adult Female and Young. — Much smaller than male; chin and throat
white; rest of head and neck, with a long single crest on hind head,
reddish brown; most of upper parts, sides and tail gray; wings largely
black, with a white patch; below white, sometimes with slight salmon
tinge; bill reddish brown; feet reddish orange; iris yellowish.

Field Marks. — Mainly in fresh water. The largest of the Sheldrakes.
Male appears black and white at a distance; the head very slightly
crested in male; more so in female, but without the elongated double
crest of the Red-breasted Merganser.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 6l

 

Nest. — Of leaves, grasses and moss, lined with down, in a hole in a tree
or cliff.

Eggs. — Six to ten, creamy buff, 2.65 by 1.75 (Chapman).

Season. — October to May; rare in summer.

Range. — North America. Breeds from southern Alaska, southern Yukon,
Great Slave Lake, central Keewatin, southern Ungava and Newfound-
land south to central Oregon, southern South Dakota, southern Minne-
sota, central Michigan, Ohio (formerly), northern New York, Vermont,
New Hampshire and Maine; and in mountains, south to northern
California, central Arizona, northern New Mexico and Pennsylvania
(formerly); winters from Aleutian Islands, British Columbia, Idaho,
northern Colorado, southern Wisconsin, southern Ontario, northern
New England and New Brunswick south to northern Lower California,
northern Mexico (Chihuahua), Texas, Louisiana, Florida and Bermuda.

History.

The American Merganser is the largest of the sawbill
Ducks or Mergansers. The adult male is a very handsome
bird with its glossy dark green head and salmon-colored
breast. It is quite distinctively a fresh-water bird, and
though often met with on the bays and estuaries of the
sea, it is less often seen on the sea itself at any great distance
from land. It breeds mainly by the ponds and rivers of the
interior, and throughout the wooded part of its range in the
northern United States and southern Canadian territory;
nests mainly in hollow trees. It apparently prefers fresh
water even in winter, and I have seen it feeding in the
unfrozen waters of the rapids of rivers in Massachusetts and
New Hampshire during the coldest months of the year.
Comparatively few are seen now in most of our waters where
shooting is allowed, but a few sometimes gather in protected
ponds or reservoirs. There is quite a general belief in the
interior that this species has decreased much in recent years.
Mr. Robert O. Morris (1901) records it as the most numerous
Duckinthe Connecticut River from NovembertoMay. Thirty-
nine of my correspondents in 1908, whose average experience
in the field represents nearly thirty years, report it as decreas-
ing, and ten note an increase. These reports cover nearly the
entire State, as the species is noted in every county. Reports
from the coastal States and provinces south to New Jersey
62 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

indicate a greater decrease, except in certain localities n Maine
and New York. Since spring shooting was prohibited this large
Merganser has become more common in our rivers in March
than it was before. Along the sea-shore in fall and spring it
is much less numerous than the Red-breasted Merganser, but
as soon as the ice goes out of some of the ponds near the sea
in the southeastern counties considerable numbers sometimes
frequent such ponds.

According to Audubon this Sheldrake formerly bred in
Massachusetts. It has been occasionally seen here in sum-
mer within the last fifty years, but it is impossible now to
determine with certainty whether the young birds seen in the
breeding season were of this species or of the Red-breasted
Merganser. Howe and Allen regard it as possible that the
bird may still breed here, and Mr. Robert O. Morris states
that he has seen it repeatedly in midsummer in Hampden
County.

The nest is usually made in a hollow tree, but probably
sometimes on the ground, as in treeless arctic regions.
Boardman, who found the first recorded nest in a hollow
tree in Maine, says that the lumbermen told him that the
mother carried the young to the water in her bill. Probably
this species nested here not uncommonly in earlier times, but
has been driven out by the destruction of the forests and
unrestricted shooting. _

Mergansers are tough and hard to kill. A wounded bird
will often elude the most determined pursuit of the sportsman.
It is an excellent diver, and swims so rapidly and so far under
water that it can keep well out of range of its pursuers.

Its food is largely fish, and it sometimes swallows a fish too
large for the stomach, and retains it in the gullet until diges-
tion gradually disintegrates the head and later the entire fish.
Knight states in his Birds of Maine that the adult birds feed
exclusively on fish in the ponds of the interior, preferably, as
far as he has been able to ascertain, on the various chubs and
minnows. In winter on the coast, he says they eat many
mussels and allied mollusks, swallowing the shells, which are
ground up and disintegrated in the stomach and intestines.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 63

 

The opinion seems to be quite general among sportsmen
and anglers that this is a noxious bird, because it eats fish.
Probably, however, when its food is thoroughly investigated
it will be found to feed on the enemies of the fish also.
Minnows destroy the eggs and fry of trout. The fish-eating
birds apparently serve mainly to keep the biologic balance
true among the fishes and other animals on which they prey.

This bird, when cooked in the ordinary way, is about as
palatable as a stewed kerosene lamp wick, but some people on
the coast are able to prepare and eat a Sheldrake now and
then with a clear conscience. There are some hardy gunners
and fishermen whose appetites are so good that it is imma-
terial whether they are eating flesh, fish or finnan haddie, and
I have been credibly informed by some of these enthusiastic
coast gunners that they actually enjoy eating a Sheldrake or
two in the spring after a hard winter.

Since the above was written, my son Lewis E. Forbush
has informed me that he saw a mother Duck with her young
on a pond in Worcester County, Mass., early in June, 1907.
She carried some of the young on her back. He also says
that he and others saw three Ducks flying about in the neigh-
borhood during the summer. From his description, all these
birds must have been Mergansers; but he is not positive
whether they were of this species or the next. Under the
present law, which forbids spring shooting, it is quite prob-
able that Sheldrakes will breed in New England in increasing
numbers.
64 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

RED-BREASTED MERGANSER (Mergus serrator).

Common or local New England names: Sheldrake; Spring-sheldrake; Shelduck; Shell-
bird; Sea Robin; Long Island Sheldrake.

 

FEMALE. MALE.

Length. — 22 to about 24 inches.

Adult Male. — Head dark green (appearing black at a distance); long crest
on hind head; a broad white ring around neck; upper back black,
lower back gray; tail grayish brown; wing mainly white, crossed by
two black bars; a patch of white black-bordered feathers in front of
wing; flanks barred with fine wavy lines of black; lower neck and
upper breast buff or pale cinnamon, streaked with black; below white;
iris, bill, legs and feet red.

Adult Female and Young. — Smaller; throat white; rest of head and most
of neck, with a crest on hind head, reddish brown; back and tail slate
gray; wings darker, when spread showing a white patch; in closed
wing this patch is divided by a black bar and bordered by another in
front; below white; bill, legs and feet reddish.

Field Marks. — The streaked buff breast and the long loose crest on the
green head distinguish the male. The female has less white on throat
and fore neck than the female of the American Merganser; also, more
reddish brown on sides of neck, a double crest and a divided white wing
patch. Difficult to identify at a distance.

Notes. — When alarmed, several low, guttural croaks (Elliot).

Nest. — Of leaves, grasses, mosses, etc., lined with down, on the ground,
near water, among rocks or scrubby bushes.

Eggs. — Six to twelve, creamy buff, 2.55 by 1.75.

Season. — Late September to late May; rare in summer.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 65

 

Range. — Northern part of northern hemisphere. Breeds in North America
from arctic coast of Alaska, northern Mackenzie, Cumberland Sound
and Greenland (latitude 73 degrees) south to southern British Columbia,
southern Alberta, southern Minnesota, central Wisconsin, northern New
York, southern Maine and Sable Island; winters in southern Green-
land, the Commander Islands and from southern British Columbia,
Utah, Colorado, southern Wisconsin, southern Ontario and Maine
south to southern Lower California, Louisiana and Florida; casual in
Bermuda, Cuba and Hawaii.

History.

The Red-breasted Merganser was once numerous through-
out New England, where it formerly bred about many of the
lakes and ponds of the northern portions, while it frequented
the rivers of Massachusetts in fall and spring. It still breeds
to some extent in the wooded interior of Maine, Vermont and
New York, and several gunners about Falmouth on Cape Cod
claim to have seen females there with young Ducklings in
summer.

Nuttall (1834) says that it frequented the fresh waters
even in winter, but in Massachusetts it is now largely con-
fined to the vicinity of the sea-coast; it is still numerous
there in its migrations, particularly in the waters about Cape
Cod. Eighty-two observers reported as follows in 1908 on
the status of this species: fifteen record it as increasing;
seven of these are in Barnstable County; thirty-four report
a decrease. These reports are mainly from the interior, but
the bird is recorded from every county in the State. Reports
from the Maritime Provinces, Maine, Rhode Island and Con-
necticut indicate that the species has fallen off over fifty per
cent. in numbers along the coast.

This bird is a swift and rather silent flier, and an exceed-
ingly expert diver. While swimming on the surface it some-
times raises and lowers its crest. This is more of a marine
species than the American Merganser, but is nevertheless not
uncommon in the interior of the country, particularly in the
lake regions, during migration. In Massachusetts there
appears to be a double migration of this species, the first flight
coming north in February and the second in April.
66 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

In winter, most of the birds of this species which are seen
in Massachusetts appear to be full plumaged males, while in
summer the few which remain with us appear to be females.
Some of them, however, may be males in the “ eclipse”
plumage. I have noticed that practically all the birds seen
in winter in Florida are females or young. This, together
with the fact that most of those seen in Massachusetts in
winter are males, seems to indicate that the hardy males do
not go so far south in winter as do the females and young.

The Red-breasted Mergansers feed largely on fish, diving
and charging through the schools of small fish, which they
seize and hold fast with their saw-toothed bills. Thoreau
notes that he saw Sheldrakes (presumably of this species)
chasing fish by both swimming and flying along the surface.
A few shell-fish are eaten at times.

Since the above was written evidence has been secured
that corroborates the statements of gunners regarding the re-
cent nesting of this species in Massachusetts. Mr. Jonathan
H. Jones of Waquoit states that some years since some gun-
ners there liberated two crippled birds in a pond near the
village, and that a brood of young was raised there that year.
He states that for several years he has seen broods of young
birds along the south shore of Cape Cod, but is inclined to
the belief that their parents were cripples which were left over
from the spring shooting. This year (1911) I saw a female
on the Agawam River at Wareham in June, and the same, or
another, several times in July and August within half a mile
of the spot where she was first seen. No young were seen,
but a collector shot the bird on the last day of August, and
he informed me that the condition of the ovaries showed that
the bird had been breeding. I examined the specimen later,
and it was undoubtedly a breeding bird. It could fly well,
was not crippled in any way, and a careful examination re-
vealed no old shot marks.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 67

 

HOODED MERGANSER (Lophodytes cucullatus) .

Common or local names: Hooded Sheldrake; Hairy Crown; Hairy Head; Wood Shel-
drake; Swamp Sheldrake; Mud Sheldrake; Saw-bill Diver.

 

Maes AnD FEMALE.

Length. — 16.50 to 18 inches.

Adult Male. — Head, neck and back black, a broad white patch extending
from back of eye backward, with a narrow black border, forming a
nearly semicircular crest when erected; if lowered, flattened and ex-
tended backward; two black bands extending from upper back toward
breast before the bend of the wing; flanks grayish brown before, grading
into reddish brown, crossed by fine wavy black lines; rest of under
parts white; fore wing gray; wing patch and some long feathers on
the back white; wing with two black bars, one before the white patch,
the other crossing it; bill black; iris yellow; feet light brown; claws
dusky.

Adult Female. — Chin and throat light; rest of head, with bushy crest, dull
reddish brown, usually paler on cheeks; rest of upper parts sooty
brown, inconspicuously barred; wing with a white patch divided by
a dusky bar; flanks like upper parts; upper breast lighter; rest of
under parts white; bill orange and blackish; feet light brownish.

Young. — Similar; but crest smaller.

Immature Male. —Head and neck light brown or grayish brown; neck
blotched with black; crest brownish white, with brown edge; other-
wise much like female.

Field Marks. — No other Duck except the male Bufflehead has the triangular
white patch on head and crest; but he has no chestnut on sides, which
are white. This Merganser may be distinguished from other Ducks by
its long crest and slim bill; the female is much smaller than other
Mergansers, head and neck darker and crest cinnamon and bushy.
68 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Notes. — A hoarse croak, like a small edition of that of the Red-breasted
Merganser (Elliot). ;

Nest. — In hollow tree, of grass, leaves and feathers.

Eggs. — About six, ivory white, 2.05 by 1.70.

Season. — Rather uncommon or rare migrant; March, October and No-
vember; rare in winter.

Range. — North America. Breeds from central British Columbia and New-
foundland south to southern Oregon, southern Louisiana and central
Florida; winters from southern British Columbia and Massachusetts
‘south to Lower California, the Gulf States and Cuba. Recorded from
Mexico, St. Michael, Alaska, Europe and Bermuda.

History.

The Hooded Merganser was formerly very common in
portions of New England. I believe that it is slowly vanish-
ing from the east. It probably bred formerly throughout a
considerable part of the Atlantic seaboard, but the cutting
down of the primeval forest and unrestricted shooting have
destroyed its nesting places and depleted its numbers. Like
the Wood Duck, it frequents small ponds and woodland
streams, where it is exposed to the gunner at all times. It
bred and perhaps still breeds in Florida (G. B. Grinnell).
It has been known to breed in Georgia (Wayne), and in South
Carolina, Kentucky and Ohio (Audubon). Stone regards it
as apparently much more plentiful formerly than now in New
Jersey. It has been found breeding in New York, not only
in the northern highlands, but in several counties (Eaton).
Boardman found it breeding abundantly in Maine, but now
Knight lists it as a rare breeder. It seems probable that it
once bred in Massachusetts, but there is no record, although
it has been noted here in summer.

My correspondents in 1908 did not report this bird from
Berkshire or Franklin County. From the other counties ten
report an increase and thirty-one a decrease. It is not noted
as common anywhere, except in northern Essex County, where
Mr. E. W. Eaton of Newburyport reports it as not uncommon
in Hampton River near the New Hampshire boundary, and
Dr. John C. Phillips sees it not uncommonly in Wenham Lake,
in the towns of Beverly and Wenham, where he records the
capture of forty-four birds in ten years (only one of which was
 

 

 

 

BEATEsslil

Two Baldpates attracted by tame Mallards on Leverett Pond, Boston.
(Photograph by W. Charlesworth Levey.)

 

 

 

PLATE Ill.—CANVAS-BACK AND BALDPATE.

Attracted by tame Mallards on Leverett Pond, Boston. The pond is
surrounc J by public streets and buildings. (Photograph by
W. Charlesworth Levey.) (See page 571.)
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 69

 

a male, in fine plumage) ; and he states that it is by far the com-
monest Merganser seen about the pond. Dr. Townsend rates
it as a not uncommon transient visitor in Essex County. Mr.
Jonathan Jones states that it was formerly plentiful at
Waquoit, but has become rarer in recent years, and that is
the general belief. Two gunners at Nantucket rate it as
common, but all the others heard from call it rare. Brewster
says that during the past twenty years “it has been steadily
decreasing in numbers throughout New England, and is fast
‘becoming a positively rare visitor to eastern Massachusetts.”
The species should be protected at all times in the New Eng-
land States.

One of my pleasantest recollections is that of the sight of
half a dozen birds of this species disporting themselves in a
diminutive pond in the spring of 1900, while I lay hidden in
the grass, watching the graceful evolutions of their beautiful
forms. The two full-plumaged males raised and lowered their
elegant fan-like crests to show off their plumage to the best
advantage, and all raced swiftly about the little pool, uncon-
scious of my presence. This is one of the swiftest Ducks that
flies, and its progress beneath the water is remarkably rapid.
Its speed even excels that of the swift-running fish, and as it
feeds largely on fish, it is ranked among the enemies of the
finny tribes.

Hon. John E. Thayer assures me that on Currituck Sound,
N. C., this species feeds on the corn that the sportsmen use
to attract other and more palatable Ducks. It appears to be
more at home in the small ponds and streams of the interior
than on the sea-coast; and even on the coast it keeps mainly
to the fresh water.

Like the American Merganser this species seeks a hollow
tree in which to build its nest. Hence it breeds only in the
wooded regions of the continent.

RIVER Ducks (Subfamily Anatinz).

This group contains most of the distinctly fresh-water
Ducks; but they are by no means confined to fresh waters, and
some often associate with the so-called Sea Ducks. The bill
70 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

is more or less broadened and flattened, and provided with
processes through which, with the aid of the flattened, pecul-
larly constructed tongue, these Ducks are able to separate
their food from the mud or muddy water in which it is largely
found. These Ducks differ from both the
Mergansers and Sea Ducks in having no
lobe or flap on the hind toe (Fig. 4).
The plumage, though waterproof, is less
dense than in the Loons, Grebes and
Sheldrakes, and in the males it is often
very beautiful. Both sexes have usually
a glossy, brilliant patch on the wing,
called the mirror or speculum, which is
brightest in the male. The River Ducks might well be called
“ surface-feeding Ducks,” for, although some of them are good
divers, they all feed mainly in shallow water, by either dab-
bling in the surface mud or tipping their bodies forward and
thrusting their heads and necks under water. They feed
largely on succulent water plants and various forms of animal
life. The males of most species appear to undergo a double
molt in summer, during which they take on the “eclipse”
plumage, much resembling that of the female. These Ducks
are in great demand, both for food and sport, and their habit
of feeding near the shore gives the gunner his opportunity.
They need special protection. They have been diminishing
in numbers for years in New England, and all but one or two
have become rather rare in most of this region. Protection
in spring and summer will tend to bring them back to their
former haunts, as they are quick to find places of safety; but,
unless the laws are respected and enforced, we cannot expect
any lasting or permanent increase in the numbers of these
wary birds.

 

Fic. 4.— Foot of River Duck.
,

BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 71

 

MALLARD (Anas platyrhynchos).

Common or local names: Green-head; Gray Duck (female and young).

 

FEMALE. MALE.

Length. — 23 to 24 inches.
Adult Male. — Head and most of neck iridescent green; a white ring almost

entirely around neck, broken only on the nape; lower neck and upper
breast chestnut; center of back brown, graying over shoulders and
blackening toward tail; wings brownish gray; wing patch or speculum
violet, bordered in front and behind with black and white; feathers
under tail black; rest of under parts silver gray, finely cross-lined with
black on the flanks, which end in white; a tuft of up-curled feathers on
tail; bill and legs yellow; feet reddish orange; iris brown.

Adult Female. — Above dark brownish; feathers edged with buff; throat

buff; speculum like that of male; head and neck lighter than body and
finely mottled; top of head dark, as also an inconspicuous line through
eye, and often another from lower part of bill crossing cheek then curv-
ing downward; breast brownish buff, marked with black; below white,
spotted with dusky; bill greenish yellow; feet yellowish or orange.

Field Marks. — Size of the Black Duck; the green head and white ring

around neck identify the male; female similar to the black Duck, but
body lighter in color, with wing markings like those of male; speculum
or wing patch bordered both before and behind with a white bar.
72 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Notes. — The familiar quack of the barnyard Duck.

Nest. — On ground.

Eggs. — Six to ten, about 2.35 by 1.65, yellowish drab, variable.

Season. — An uncommon migrant, very rare in winter; March 27 to May 1;
September 22 to December 1.

Range. — Northern hemisphere. In North America breeds from Pribilof
Islands, northwestern Alaska, northern Mackenzie, central Keewatin
and Greenland south to Lower California, southern New Mexico,
southern Kansas, central Missouri, southern Indiana and Maryland
(rarely); winters from the Aleutian Islands, central Alaska, central
Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska, southern Wisconsin, northern Indiana,
Ohio, Maryland and Nova Scotia (rarely), south to Mexico, the Lesser
Antilles and Panama; casual in Bermuda and Hawaii.

History.

The Mallard is a cosmopolitan species, the wild Duck of
the world. It is well known as the Duck from which nearly
all varieties of the domestic Duck were derived. It is the
common wild Duck over so large a part of the earth’s surface
that it is of greater economic value than any other Duck. It
is exceeded by few, if any, in excellence for the table. The
Mallard was formerly the most abundant wild-fowl on this
hemisphere. Hearne (1795) found it in vast multitudes in
parts of the Hudson Bay country. Now it is no longer
abundant in those regions. Before the settlement of the
west, the prairie sloughs swarmed with Mallards, and in win-
ter the waters of the south were often crowded with them.
Audubon (1832) found them in Florida in such multitudes as
to “darken the air.” He says that a single negro hunter, a
slave of General Hernandez, supplied the latter’s plantation
in east Florida, killing from fifty to one hundred and twenty
birds a day in the season. Mallards are now comparatively
rare there. Prof. W. W. Cooke states that as late as the
winter of 1893-94 a gunner at Big Lake, Ark., sold eight thou-
sand Mallards, and one hundred and twenty thousand were
sent to market during the season from that place alone. Dur-
ing the settlement of the west, hundreds of tons were killed
in the south and west for their feathers, by negroes, Indians,
half-breeds and whites, and the bodies of most of them were
thrown away. In the southwest Mallards are still plentiful
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 73

 

in winter, though decreasing. The Houston, Tex., Post of
January 29, 1908, states that during the previous week five
citizens came upon a small lake into which the birds were
flocking in great numbers. They flushed the game and emptied
their repeating guns, gathering up afterwards one hundred
and seven killed, not counting the wounded or missing; these
were mainly Mallards.

Reports from many parts of the country indicate a decrease
in Mallards of from fifty to ninety per cent. in the last thirty
years. Mr. Edward L. Parker states that they were plentiful in
Texas in 1898, but they have decreased rapidly since then. All
my 1908 reports from every part of the Atlantic and Gulf
coasts, outside of Massachusetts, indicate a decrease in the
birds, except one from Connecticut, which estimates an increase
of ten per cent. in a few years past. As the Mallard’s breeding
grounds in America lie mainly west of the meridian of Hud-
son Bay, and as its place in New England is largely taken up
by the Black Duck, it is not common here. It is a hardy
species, for, although it breeds normally in the United States
and Canada, it goes very far north, and remains all winter in
Alaska and Greenland in places where it can find open water
and good feeding grounds. Judging from my own experience,
I have leaned to the opinion that there had been a recent in-
crease in the numbers of this species in Massachusetts, but the
reports from observers in different parts of the State, received
in 1908, do not support this view. Seventeen observers report
an increase in the number of Mallards in the State, and sixty-
three note a decrease. These reports certainly indicate a
considerable decrease in the State. The reports of increase
come mainly from Plymouth, Bristol and Barnstable counties,
but those reporting decrease in those counties number more
than twice as many as those reporting increase. Mallards
have been rather common for many years in some of the
ponds near Middleborough, Mass., and they are sometimes
seen in considerable numbers locally in various parts of the
six New England States. In years when they breed well, or
possibly when food is more plentiful than usual in New Eng-
land, flights of Mallards are seen. Dr. Townsend notes one
74 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

that occurred in the fall of 1904, when nineteen were shot
October 23 at Hood’s Pond, four at Wenham Lake, one or
two at Chebacco Lake and seven in the creeks near Ipswich
Beach, all in Essex County, Mass. Mr. J. H. Hardy counted
nearly one hundred Mallards in the Boston market, sent there
from Essex County during that week. Mr. John M. Winslow
of Nantucket says that a number of Mallards were killed
there about 1907. One man killed eighteen. A good many
were taken at Tuckernuck. At one stand twenty were killed
in a season. Mr. B. T. Mosely of Newburyport says that
Mallards have remained about the same there for the last
ten or fifteen years; ten or twelve birds killed every year.

The general migratory movement of the Mallard is north
and south, with an easterly trend. It is evident that in
former times, when the birds were so very plentiful in Florida
and the south Atlantic States, a great migration moved to
the southeast, and they are still numerous in some portions
of the Carolinas.

The Mallard is not known to breed in Massachusetts,
although it still breeds in New York State. It has been
reported several times as breeding in Connecticut since spring
shooting was prohibited there, but I am not aware that any
nest has been found, and if Mallards are breeding there it is
quite likely that they are birds that have escaped from con-
finement, as a number of people are breeding wild Mallards
in Massachusetts and Connecticut.

The Mallard is quite omnivorous in regard to its food.
The animal food consists of small frogs, tadpoles, toads, liz-
ards, newts, small fish, fish fry, snails, mussels, leeches, earth-
worms, mice and similar small game that it finds about the
ponds and in the edges of the woods. Its vegetable food
includes grass, many species of seeds and aquatic plants,
grains, nuts, acorns, fruits, etc. It is particularly fond of
wild rice. In the south the Mallard is one of the friends of
the rice farmer, as it destroys the scattered rice or volunteer
rice of the field, which, if left to grow, would greatly reduce
the value of the crop. It is serviceable to the southern
people in another way, as it feeds very largely upon crayfish,
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 75

 

which burrow into and undermine the levees and dikes.
Examinations of one hundred and twenty-six stomachs of
Mallards made at the Biological Survey reveal seventeen
per cent. animal food and eighty-three per cent. vegetable.
The most important items of the animal food were dragon fly
nymphs, fly larve, grasshoppers, beetles and bugs. Mollusks,
earthworms and crustaceans were found. The principal ele-
ments of the vegetable food, as found by the experts of the
Biological Survey, were the seeds of smartweeds (Polygonum),
seeds and tubers of pondweed (Potamogeton) and of sedges.
Other items of importance were the seeds of wild rice (Zizania)
and other grasses, of burr reed (Sparganium), hornwort (Cera-
tophyllum), water shield (Brasenia) and widgeon grass (Ruppia).
A great many vegetable substances of less importance were
included in the Mallard’s diet, of which the following are worthy
of note: wild celery, alge, roots of arrowhead (Sagittarta);
fruits, such as grapes, dogwood, sour gum and bayberries; and
the seeds of such small aquatic plants as millweed (Myrio-
phyllum), horned pondweed (Zannichellia) and mermaid-weed
(Proserpinaca).

The Mallard is proverbially fond of grain of all sizes, from
Indian corn to wheat or barley; hence the ease with which
it may be domesticated, or bred in a semi-wild state for
sporting purposes. This adaptability to man’s uses makes it
economically the most valuable of all Ducks, and a study of
its favorite food plants and animals will materially assist
‘those who wish to propagate this bird on preserves.

When the first edition of this volume was written the
Mallard, as stated upon the opposite page, was not known to
breed in Massachusetts in the wild state, but the prohibition of
spring shooting and the establishment of several game preserves
in recent years have combined to induce Mallards to return
here and breed. At least one pair hatched young in 1913
within the limits of the city of Boston, and Mallards have
bred in Barnstable and Hampden counties. It is impossible
to determine how many of these birds may have escaped from
preserves. In one case a female, crippled by a gunshot wound
and unable to fly, attracted a male, and the pair reared a brood.
76 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

BLACK DUCK (Anas rubripes).

Common or local names: Dusky Duck; Summer Black Duck; Spring Black Duck;
Black Mallard.

ee
he ee
er, ET

SA

 

Length. — 22 to 25 inches.

Adult. — Top of head blackish; sides of head, neck and throat light grayish
buff, finely streaked with dusky; a dusky line through eye; rest of
plumage dusky brown (apparently blackish, except in strong light or
close at hand); speculum iridescent purple or greenish, edged with
velvety black; some show a narrow white edging, as in the cut; under
sides of wings light silvery; bill broad and fairly long, yellowish green or
olive; iris brown; legs and feet of male orange red, with dusky webs;
females and young have legs and feet darker; old drakes have yellower
bills, redder legs and feet, and more distinctly spotted throats.

Field Marks. — Large size, dusky color and silvery white lining under the
wings, which shows in flight. May be distinguished from the female
or young of the Mallard by the absence of white wing-bars.

Notes. — A quack resembling that of the Mallard (Reed). This is the call
of the female; the male has a more reedy cry.

Nest. — On the ground in a wet meadow, on the border of lake or stream, in
the rushes, or sometimes under a bush on a hillside.

Eggs. — Six to about twelve, pale yellowish drab or buff, more or less dingy,
about 2.40 by 1.75.

Season. — Resident the entire year, mainly coastwise in winter. Many
now breed; more winter, and still more migrate through New England
in fall and spring.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 77

 

Range. — Eastern North America. Breeds from central Keewatin and
northern Ungava south to northern Wisconsin, northern Indiana and
southern Maryland; winters from Nova Scotia south to southern Loui-
siana and Colorado; west in migration to Nebraska and central Kansas;
casual in Bermuda; accidental in Jamaica.

History.

The Black Duck, owing to its ability to take care of itself,
is the only fresh-water Duck which still remains common
locally throughout the New England States. Although it has
decreased greatly in numbers since early times, it has avoided
the gunner by feeding mainly at night, and going out on the
salt water or to some large lake during the day, where it is
practically unapproachable. Now and then young or inex-
perienced birds lack some of the caution of the majority, but
these are quickly killed, and only-the suspicious ones survive
to procreate their kind. The following abridged extracts
from authors exhibit the former abundance of the species
and its decrease: The most numerous of all its tribes that
frequent the salt marshes; on the most distant report of a
musket they rise from every quarter of the marsh in prodi-
gious numbers; there are at least ten Black Ducks to one
Goose or Brant, and probably many more (Wilson, 1811).
Abundant winter resident; few breed (Maynard, 1870). Most
abundant of all our fresh-water Ducks (Samuels, 1870).
Abundant resident (Turnbull, 1869). Abundant winter resi-
dent; rare summer, formerly regular resident whole year (J. A.
Allen, 1879). Formerly abundant, but now rare (H. L. Clark,
1887, Amherst, Mass.). Very common transient visitor, not
uncommon summer resident (Brewster, Cambridge region,
1906). Mr. James Henry Rice, Jr., of Summerville, S. C.,
says that Black Ducks and Mallards are decreasing fast, .
although both mass around Georgetown. Market hunting
is wiping them out. He has seen five thousand Mallards
and Black Ducks brought into the Georgetown market in one
day, all killed by the negroes. Forty observers in 1908 report
an increase in Massachusetts, and one hundred and twenty-
six report a decrease. Black Ducks breeding in the State are
78 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

reported on as follows: twenty-seven observers note an
increase and eighty-three a decrease. Mr. Charles E. Ingalls
of East Templeton says that thirty to forty years ago Black
Ducks were very abundant; there were hundreds where one
is now. seen. Bags of ten to fifteen were not uncommon
where birds were merely run into casually. Unnaturalized
foreigners have been hunting them from boats in the summer
time, killing the helpless young and the molting adults, until
they are nearly exterminated there.

The Black Duck responds quickly to protection, and has
increased in numbers in recent years wherever it has been
protected in the spring. Mr. Talbot Denmead of Baltimore,
Md., states that there has been a decided increase in Black
Ducks around Bath, Md., in the last fifteen years. All the
Ducks he gets are in good condition, as they are well baited
with corn. Mr. Benjamin F. Howell of Troy Hills, N. J., says
that sixty years ago Black Ducks were shot the year round
in his section. Since the stoppage of spring shooting, in
1908, ten pairs of Black Ducks breed on the meadows, where
one pair bred before. Mr. Gardiner G. Hammond, who
protects the Ducks along the shore of a pond on Martha’s
Vineyard, states that about two hundred and fifty Black
Ducks are gathered there early in September, which probably
breed there or near by. The old and young Ducks are so
numerous in autumn that they leave evidences of their
movements from one pond to the other in the sheep paths,
where they travel. He never saw any Ducks breeding there
previous to his occupancy of the place.

No Duck is more wary than the Black Duck, or harder
to deceive with wooden decoys. Sometimes on the sea-shore
a few will come to wooden decoys. Gunners along the sea-
coast sometimes attract this bird by putting out lumps of
mud or bunches of seaweed upon some point. The theory is
that the birds, seeing these objects from afar, believe them
to be Ducks; but that on a nearer approach they find them
to be neither wooden decoys nor living birds but harmless
objects, and suspicion being allayed the birds sometimes will
alight on or near the point. They are readily attracted in
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 79

 

this way at night or in the dusk of evening. They are easily
deceived by live decoys of their own kind, and if the gunner
has a well-trained flock of decoys, and is well concealed in a
good location, his chances of success are greatly increased.
I am somewhat skeptical about the alleged extreme keenness
of scent of this bird, for on at least two occasions I have
been able to get within gunshot of a flock by quietly creeping
up to them, although they had the wind in their favor; but
their sight and hearing are remarkably acute. Some Ducks
will swim very close to a man in full sight and in daylight
provided he does not move, but I have never seen a Black
Duck deceived unless the man was concealed in some manner.
This bird, when suddenly alarmed and fearful of ambush,
will spring directly from the water and climb the air almost
perpendicularly, until high out of the reach of the gunner,
when it speeds away to safer quarters.

The great natural breeding ground of this species extends
from Labrador to Pennsylvania, but it breeds to the westward
of Hudson Bay, and seems to be somewhat extending its
range westward in the northern United States. It migrates
south along the Atlantic coast to Florida and even beyond,
and winters about as far north as it can find open fresh water,
sometimes to Nova Scotia. Black Ducks often fly very high
in migration, and sometimes in the interior they may be seen
to fall from far up in the sky into some pond or river, coming
down with a roar of wings, like the Redhead. Often in severe
weather they appear to prefer to sit about on the ice and
starve rather than to go south, if they can find an open spring
where they can get fresh water to drink. Gunners have told
me that they have shot these Ducks at such times and found
them nearly starved, with nothing but black malodorous mud
in their stomachs.

In the interior the food of this species is largely vegetable,
particularly in the fall. In the spring more animal food is
taken. The vegetable food includes grass roots taken from
meadows, roots and shoots of aquatic plants, wild rice, grains,
weed seeds, hazel nuts, acorns and berries. The animal food
includes small frogs and toads, tadpoles, small minnows,
80 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

newts, earthworms, leeches and small shell-fish. The Black
Duck is a gluttonous feeder. Knight tells of one which he
found asleep under some berry bushes, and it was so gorged
with berries that it could not fly. As a destroyer of weed
seed the Black Duck is pre-eminent. Eaton in his Birds
of New York recalls that on the morning of October 26,
1901, he ‘“‘ shot a Black Duck from a flock of 75 birds, which
were returning to Canandaigua Lake from a flooded cornfield.
From its gullet and gizzard,” he says, “I took 23,704 weed
seeds, which, together with a few pebbles, snail shells and
chaff, were the sole contents of its stomach. Of these seeds
13,240 were pigweeds (Chenopodium and Amaranthus), 7,264
were knotgrass (Polygonum), 2,624 were ragweed (Ambrosia)
and 576 were dock (Rumez).’’ The food of the Black Duck
has the same practical interest for the game preserver as has
that of the Mallard, for the Black Duck is closely related to
the Mallard, thrives almost equally well on grain, and, when
grain fed, becomes a very excellent bird for the table. It is
the darker eastern representative of the Mallard, and can be
artificially propagated, though it is somewhat quarrelsome in
disposition, and, therefore, it is not usually profitable to con-
fine it with Ducks of other species.

Nore. — The Red-legged Black Duck (Anas rubripes rubripes) is now
generally regarded as the fully adult male of the Black Duck. The question
of its validity as a subspecies has caused some discussion, and it has been
placed on the hypothetical list.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 81

 

GADWALL (Chaulelasmus streperus).
Common or local names: Gray Duck; Speckle-belly; Creek Duck.

 

FEMALE. Mate.

Length. — About 18 to 22 inches.

Adult Male. — Upper parts and sides brown, so barred and vermiculated
with black and white as to give a general appearance of brownish gray,
passing to dusky on lower back and to black on upper and lower tail
coverts; tail brown, edged with gray; head and neck brown, mottled
with darker; wings largely brown, black, white and gray, in the order
given; wing patch white, bordered in front and below by black; rump
black; lower neck and breast dark gray; belly white, with fine wavy
gray lines; bill lead blue or bluish black; legs and feet dull orange or

_ yellowish, with dark webs.

Female and Young. — Much like a diminutive female Mallard, but wing
similar to that of the male Gadwall; the white wing patch is smaller
than in the male, but bordered similarly by black; lining of wings
whitish, as in Mallard and Black Duck.

Field Marks. — The only river Duck with a pure white, black-bordered
speculum or wing patch. The female resembles a small female Mallard,
but the white wing patch is distinctive.

Notes. — Resemble those of the Mallard, rather more shrill, frequently
repeated (Eaton).

Season. — Very rare or accidental visitant; April (?) and October to
November.
82 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Range. — Nearly cosmopolitan. In North America breeds from southern
British Columbia, central Alberta and central Keewatin south to south-
ern California, southern Colorado, northern Nebraska and southern
Wisconsin; winters from southern British Columbia, Arizona, Arkan-
sas, southern Illinois and North Carolina south to southern Lower Cal-
ifornia, central Mexico and Florida; accidental in Bermuda, Cuba and
Jamaica; rare in migration on the Atlantic coast of the middle and
New England States north to Newfoundland.

History.

In North America this almost cosmopolitan species breeds
mainly, if not entirely, in the western province. There is
reason to believe that the Gadwall was once not uncommon
in New England; but within the last half century not many
specimens are known to have been taken in Massachusetts.
Wilson believed it to be rare in the “northern parts of the
United States,” and it was probably always less common in
the New England States than in the west and south; but I
am convinced, by the statements of the older ornithologists
and by descriptions given me by some of the older gunners,
that the Gadwall was more often seen in the early part of
the last century than it now is, and that some of the so-called
Gray Ducks which were then killed here were of this species.
Mr. Willard C. Whiting, who has consulted with the Plym-
outh gunners and members of the Plymouth Natural His-
tory Society, and has examined the scores of the gunning
stands, believes that the Gadwall was not uncommon there
in the early days. Now, however, the bird is unknown to
most of the present generation of Massachusetts gunners.

De Kay (1844) says that this species breeds in central
New York. Eaton (1910) considers it as not common now
in any part of New York, but states that Mr. Foster
Parker once met a gunner with twenty, which he had
recently killed in the “ponds.” Linsley says that flocks of
the Gray Duck arrived in Connecticut in August, 1842.1 Dr.
C. Hart Merriam, in his Review of the Birds of Connecticut
(1877), regards it as not common. Even now, although it is
very rare here, a few are still taken. Its only known breed-

 

1 Linsley, James H.: A Catalogue of the Birds of Connecticut, Am. Jour. of Sci. and Arts, April,
1843, Vol. XLIV., No. 2, p. 269.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 83

 

ing grounds in the east are on Anticosti Island, Gulf of St.
Lawrence (Knight), where all the water-fowl have been pro-
tected for many years.

The Gadwall is a swift flier, resembling the Baldpate or
Widgeon when in the air. It is quite distinctly a fresh-water
fowl, and gets much of its living along the shores of lakes
and rivers, concealed by' the reeds, grasses and bushes that
grow near the shore or overhang it. It is a good diver at
need, and is seen usually in pairs or small ‘‘ bunches,” often
in company with other Ducks. When approached from. the
land they usually make no attempt at concealment, but swim
toward open water and take wing, making a whistling sound
with their wings that is not so loud as that made by the Bald-
pate. This is an excellent bird for the table, which accounts
largely for its present rarity. It is fond of grain and is easily
domesticated. It breeds naturally in the latitude of Massa-
chusetts, and it might prove a great acquisition to the game
preserve or to the farm-yard if it could be propagated in suf-
ficient numbers. It seems a promising species with which to
experiment with this end in view.

The food of this bird consists of the tender shoots of
grasses, blades and roots of aquatic plants, seeds, nuts,
acorns, insects, mollusks and other small forms of aquatic
life, including small fish.
84 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

EUROPEAN WIDGEON (Mareca penelope).

Length. — About 18 inches.

Adult Male. — Crown creamy buff; throat black; rest of head and neck
chestnut or cinnamon red, mostly without green spots; otherwise similar
to Baldpate.

Female and Young. — Head and neck strongly tinged with cinnamon;
otherwise quite similar to female Baldpate.

Notes. — A shrill, whistled whéé-you or mee-yot, the first note loudest and
prolonged. Female, a low note, like kir-r-r (Chapman).

Range. — Northern part of eastern hemisphere. Occurs occasionally in
winter and in migration from Wisconsin, Michigan, New York, Nova
Scotia, Newfoundland and Greenland south to Nebraska, Missouri,
Indiana, Ohio, North Carolina and Florida; and in Alaska, British
Columbia and California.

History.

The European Widgeon is rated as a wanderer from the
Old World. A statement that the bird has been taken here,
made by Samuels and recorded by Dr. J. A. Allen,! is prob-
ably authentic, and an adult male was taken in Monponsett
Pond, near Halifax, Mass., October 20, 1899.2 There are
seven records for New York State, and another bird, taken
on Long Island, was apparently breeding. Mr. Foster Parker
states that several more have been taken at Cayuga (Eaton).
It is possible that many European Widgeons have been taken
in this country, but have not been recognized as such, and
we may yet have to revise our ideas regarding their breeding
range.

 

Fia. 5.— Axillars of Baldpate. Axillars of European Widgeon. Reduced. (After Phillips.)

Mr. Outram Bangs has called attention to the fact that
the axillars or long feathers under the wings of the Baldpate
are white, while in the European Widgeon these feathers

 

1 Proc. Essex Inst., 1864, p. 88.
2 Brewster, William: Auk, 1901, p. 185.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 85

 

always are gray. This character appears to be constant in
both sexes. Dr. John C. Phillips has published, in Forest
and Stream, a drawing that shows at a glance the appearance
of the axillars in each species, drawn from adult male speci-
mens. These are reproduced herewith. If, with this distinc-
tive mark in view, sportsmen will make careful examination
of the Widgeons or Baldpates taken in this country, it may
prove that the European species is less uncommon than
hitherto has been supposed. Dr. Phillips has found, by com-
paring the axillars, that four birds taken at Wenham Lake
are referable to the European species. The probability is
that this bird is a permanent resident in North America, and
breeds on this continent.

We now (1915) have evidence that increases this probability.

Since the first edition of this book was written the number
of specimens recorded in this country has increased consider-
ably. The following records are from Massachusetts and New
York: —

One was shot November 7, 1902, by Mr. A. C. Dyke, at
Nippinicket Pond, Bridgewater... A young male was taken at
Bridgewater, November 9, 1903, by Mr. J. E. Bassett. It is now
in the collection of Mr. A. C. Bent. Another bird in the same
plumage was taken at Ipswich on October 25, 1909, and was
identified in a Boston market; now in the collection of Mr. F.
Seymour Hersey.” A flock of four was seen at Bridgewater on
October 22, 1910. Two of these were shot by Mr. Harry P.
Sturtevant. A single bird was taken October 23, 1910, at
Bridgewater by Mr. A. C. Dyke.!. Two young males were seen
on Jamaica Pond, Boston, by Mr. Horace W. Wright, on Octo-
ber 24, 1913.3 Two males seen on Jamaica Pond, December
22, 1913, by Messrs. Horace Wright and Rich. Marble.*’ Two
adult males seen at Gardiner’s Island, N. Y., on December 3,
1911.5

1 Dyke, Arthur C.: Auk, 1912, p. 536. 4 Wright, Horace W.: Bird Lore, 1914, p. 28.

2 Hersey, F. Seymour: Auk, 1914, p. 243. 5 Miller, W. deW.: Auk, 1912, p. 235.
3 Wright, Horace W.: Auk, 1914, p. 397.

 
86

GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

BALDPATE (Mareca americana).

Common or local names: American Widgeon; Widgeon; Southern Widgeon; Cali-

fornia Widgeon; White-belly.

 

FEMALE. Mate.

Length. — 18 to 21 inches.
Adult Male. — Forehead and top of head white; sides of head and neck

less purely white or more buffy, speckled with lusterless dusky green-
ish; a broad glossy green patch extending from around eye back to
nape; chin dusky; upper hind neck and back mainly pale brown or
reddish, finely pencilled with black cross lines; fore wing with a broad
white patch, bordered behind with a black band, and a metallic green
speculum, which darkens behind; fore neck, upper breast and sides
light brownish, red or wine red; rest of under parts white; primary
wing quills and tail gray; feet light slaty bluish; bill grayish blue, with
black tip and black edges; iris brown.

Female and Immature Male. — Top of head blackish; rest of head and neck

whitish, spotted with dusky; back buff, barred with dusky; speculum
mainly black; indications of white patch on fore wing, forming a white
or whitish bar; breast and sides reddish brown, with dusky spots on
the breast; rest of under parts white; bill and feet like male, but duller.
There is considerable variation in all plumages of this bird.

Field Marks. — The adult male Baldpate may be distinguished by his pale

neck and head, the latter becoming almost white on the forehead and
crown, by the dark green patch through and behind the eye, by his
wine-colored breast and white abdomen. The females and young,
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 87

 

when swimming, might at a distance be mistaken for female Mallards,
although smaller and darker. When they tip up to feed, however, the
white abdomen is seen; and this is also displayed when they stand up in
the water to flap their wings. In flight, the white abdomen and the
abrupt ending of the brown of the breast are also distinct field marks.
Another point of difference noted when watching the two birds together
on a pond is that the under surface of the wings of the Baldpate is gray,
that of the Mallard snowy white. A white bar is visible on the wing
of the Baldpate, and two are seen on that of the Mallard (C. W. Town-
send),

Notes. —- Male, a shrill whistling whee-you; a soft whistled sweet (Audubon).
Female, a low purring growl (Saunders). The female has a loud cry
like the syllables kaow, kaow (Eaton).

Season. — Uncommon or rare migrant; late February to April; early Sep-
tember to December.

Range. — North America. Breeds from northwestern Alaska south to
Kansas and northern Indiana; winters from British Columbia, Mary-
land and Delaware (casually in Massachusetts and Rhode Island)
south to Lower California and West Indies; rare in migration in north-
ern Ontario and Newfoundland.

History.

The Baldpate is another fresh-water Duck, a valuable food
species once common here, now becoming rare. The early
historians speak of “‘ widgens”’ in abundance, but they possi-
bly included more than one species under this name, as some
of our gunners do to-day. Wilson (1814) regarded it as very
common in winter along the whole Atlantic coast, from
Florida to Rhode Island. It must have been common then
in Massachusetts in spring and fall.

Notes regarding its former and present status follow:
Not uncommon migrant (Maynard, 1870). Uncommon tran-
sient visitor (Townsend, Essex County, 1905). Formerly
not uncommon in autumn; rarely seen during recent years
(Brewster, Cambridge region). The reports of the experi-
ence of observers for an average of twenty-seven years, up
to 1909, read as follows: Baldpate increasing, nine; decreas-
ing, thirty-four. As usual, the shore counties give the greatest
number of reports on this species, Barnstable County leading
with seventeen. Plymouth County comes next, with thirteen,
and Essex next, with seven. Other reports indicate that the
88 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

bird is rare or decreasing along the Atlantic coast from the
Provinces to Maryland and Virginia, where in the winter of
1907-08 it was plentiful. It appears to be decreasing also in
some localities in Connecticut. In Massachusetts it appears
to be least uncommon in Plymouth County, where it occurs
quite regularly in some of the ponds. Dr. Albert H. Tuttle of
Cambridge writes that nineteen were killed in one volley at
Assawompsett in 1906, and that he has seen hundreds at this
lake for several years. They have learned to distrust the
decoys, and so fewer are shot than formerly. Mr. Israel R.
Sheldon of Pawtuxet, R. I., writes me that the opening of the
breach at Point Judith Pond has killed off most of the “ feed,”’
but Baldpates, which were once numerous there, are still com-
mon in the pond. Mr. Howard Remington (1908) of Provi-
dence states that the Baldpate has decreased nearly one
hundred per cent. in ten years’ time, because of shooting from
power boats and spring shooting, but a few still winter in Rhode
Island. Mr. Samuel L. Buffington of Swansea, Mass., near
the Rhode Island line, states that the Baldpate is not un-
common on the coast, but he has never seen it up the river in
his vicinity. Mr. C. O. Zerrahn says that he has observed
but one in Milton, Mass., but that a few are shot at Ponka-
poag Pond, Canton, Mass., every year. Mr. Gardiner G. Ham-
mond says that eight or ten are taken in his vicinity on
Martha’s Vineyard each year. Mr. Robert O. Morris says
that they have decreased ninety per cent. near Springfield,
Mass., in thirty years.

The Baldpate is one of the wariest of all Ducks, and its
whistled alarm notes serve well to warn other and less astute
birds. Elliot says that when speeding high in air the flock
flies in a line nearly abreast, with the leader a little in ad-
vance in the middle, but when moving about ordinarily from
place to place on the marsh they fly like a flock of pigeons.
This bird breeds mainly in the west, and a line drawn from
the western coast of Hudson Bay to the western shore of
Lake Michigan marks approximately the eastern boundary
of its breeding range. In its southeastward migration toward
the Atlantic coast it naturally reaches Chesapeake Bay in
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 89

 

large numbers, and is less common north and east of Mary-
land and Virginia. Nevertheless, a large number of individ-
uals must normally choose a route from the northwestern
British provinces and Alaska to New York and New England.
Knight states that it occurs quite generally along the Maine
coast, but is rare inland; and Eaton finds it still a fairly
common migrant on the shores of Long Island and in western
New York.

This species often attends the Canvas-back and the Red-
head. Asit is rather a poor diver it watches these diving
Ducks, and as one comes up from the bottom with the wild
celery or other favorite root or bud in its bill, the Baldpate
snatches the morsel and makes off. It also feeds much upon
pond weeds and other water plants. It is very alert and
active, and when feeding it is said that its flocks are prone to
keep a sentinel on the watch. It is fond of seeds, the tender
shoots of plants, insects and small aquatic shell-fish and verte-
brates. It feeds in daylight if undisturbed; but where it is
much hunted it feeds mainly at night. In feeding it is not
confined strictly to fresh water, but takes plants growing in
brackish or even salt water. It is fond of grain, and Audubon
says that it eats peas and earthworms, and that it often
alights in the cornfields. It walks well, is not noisy, and
would make a desirable bird for the game preserve could it be
artificially propagated. It has been bred successfully in con-
finement, but, so far as I am aware, this has been accom-
plished only on a very small scale.

The Baldpate is perfectly at home in this latitude and
responds quickly to protection. Since spring shooting was
prohibited in Massachusetts its numbers have been increas-
ing in some localities and Mr. Charles H. Brown informs me
that from five hundred to six hundred frequented Martha’s
Vineyard in 1910-11, coming in November and remaining
until driven out by the ice in February.
90 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

EUROPEAN TEAL (Nettion crecca).

Length. — 14 inches.

Adult Male. — Like Green-winged Teal, but no white crescent before wing;
green band in chestnut of head behind the eye, bordered in front with
yellowish white; barring of sides and upper parts much coarser than in
the American species; long scapulars as well as inner secondaries creamy
white, black-bordered externally; these form a conspicuous white streak
along upper part of wing.

Female. — Like female of the Green-winged Teal; the bars and margins of
the back feathers are of deeper hue; the sides of head, neck and throat
deep buff, and usually darker than those of the American species.

Range. — Northern part of eastern hemisphere. Occasional in North
America; recorded from the Aleutian Islands, California, Greenland,
Labrador, Nova Scotia, Maine, New York, Massachusetts, Connecti-
cut and Virginia.

HIstory.

The European Teal has been rated as a wanderer from the
eastern hemisphere, but since the first edition of this volume was
written, Mr. A. C. Bent, who visited the Aleutian Islands in
1911, has expressed the belief that the common Teal breeding
on those islands is the present species.t_ Teal were collected
on the western and central islands and every male taken was a’
European Teal. The females so closely resemble those of the
Green-winged Teal that it is difficult to separate them. Two
males from these islands, in the National Museum, were found
to be referable to crecca. Mr. Bent failed to find evidence that
the Green-winged Teal, which is common on the Alaskan main-
land, breeds on the Aleutian Islands. In view of this it seems
quite probable that the birds of this species taken in New
England may have come across the continent from the Aleutian
Islands in migration. The following Massachusetts records
seem reliable: About 1855, a specimen, which was killed in
Massachusetts, was sent to Mr. E. A. Samuels. An adult male
was taken, March 17, 1890, on Muskeget Island, and is now.in
the Brewster collection. An adult male was caught in a steel
trap about February 20, 1896, in Sagamore, by Rev. E. E.
Phillips, and is also in the Brewster collection.2. Several speci-
mens have been recorded from New York.

 

1 Smithsonian Misc. Coll., Vol. 56, No. 32, Feb. 12, 1912, pp. 11, 12.
2 Howe, Reginald Heber, and Allen, Glover Morrill: Birds of Massachusetts, 1901, p. 52.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 91

 

GREEN-WINGED TEAL (Neition carolinense).

Common or local names: Green-wing; Mud Teal; Winter Teal.

 

FEMALE. Mate.

Length. — About 14 inches.

Adult Male. — Head and upper neck chiefly chestnut; chin black, a broad
patch from just before the eye to hind head metallic green, running
into black below, bordered by a narrow buff line, and all ending in a
black tuft on hind neck; rest of hind neck, sides of breast, upper back,
scapulars and flanks very light gray, finely barred with black; a white
crescentic band before wing; lower back brown; wings grayish brown
or gray; speculum or wing patch metallic green, edged below with
black, a bar of light chestnut before it; upper breast reddish buff,
with round black spots; rest of lower parts whitish, sometimes tinged
with brown; under tail coverts black, with a triangular patch of white
on each side; bill black; legs and feet dark brown; iris brown.

Adult Female. — Top of head and back dusky brownish, the feathers of
the back edged with buff; throat light buffy; wing much like that of
male, but wing-bar lighter; breast buff, spotted rather finely with
blackish; flanks heavily marked with dusky; rest of under parts whit-
ish; bill brown; legs and feet brown.

Young. — Similar to female; largely white below.

Field Marks. —'The small size, chestnut and green head and the white
crescent before the wing distinguish the male. The flanks of females
and young are more coarsely and heavily marked than those of the Blue-
winged Teal.

Notes. — A peculiar chirping, almost a twittering, as they fly (Seton).
Male, a short mellow whistle; female, a quack like the Black Duck,
but small, high-pitched and oftener repeated (Eaton).

Season. — Uncommon or rare migrant and rare winter resident; early
September to late April.
92 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Range. — North America. Breeds from New Brunswick and Minnesota to
Greenland and Alaska; winters from Virginia, Kansas and British
Columbia to the West Indies and Central America.

History.

This species probably was never as abundant in New Eng-
land as was the Blue-winged Teal, but it was once very
common and at times abundant. Thomas Morton (1632),
who lived at Mount Wollaston, Quincy, Mass., speaks of
both the Green-winged and Blue-winged Teal, and says that
he “had plenty ” in the ponds about his house. Trustworthy.
old. gunners have told me of remarkable flights in Massa-
chusetts and Connecticut up to the middle of the last century.

Possibly its breeding range once extended into New Eng-
land. The following abbreviated extracts from the works of
ornithologists indicate its decrease: In autumn and winter
very common throughout the waters of the United States
(Nuttall, 1834). Have seen individuals breeding on the banks
of the Wabash, Illinois (Audubon, 1835). Breeds along the
Great Lakes and northwardly (De Kay, 1844). Common in
migration (Maynard, eastern Massachusetts, 1870). Quite
abundant in migration in New England; probably breeds in
northern portions (Samuels, 1870). Common spring and
autumn migrant (J. A. Allen, 1879). Quite common in the
east in migrations (Chamberlain, 1891). Has become rare of
late years, except in wilder portions of Maine (Hoffman, New
England and New York, 1904). Uncommon transient visitor
(Townsend, Essex County, 1905). Uncommon transient; met
with regularly in former years; know of but two instances in
last fifteen years (Brewster, Cambridge region, 1906).

My correspondents report upon this species as follows:
six note it as increasing; seventy-one as decreasing. The
species is reported from every county in the State, but is
apparently least rare in the coast counties. The opinion
that it is decreasing is practically unanimous among gunners
of long experience. Similar statements come from the entire
Atlantic seaboard, except from Maryland, where Mr. Talbot
Denmead reports “a great many.” Mr. Clement A. Cahoon
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 93

 

of Harwich says that Teal are seldom seen there now, but
that fifty years ago both species were very plentiful. Mr.
Nathan C. Perry of Pocasset has seen no Teal for about
fifteen years, but used to see large flocks of both species forty-
five years ago. Eaton reports it as not uncommon in western
New York.

To-day the Green-winged Teal is becoming a rare bird in
New England. More are seen near the coast than elsewhere,
but even there not very many are seen or killed. Its scarcity
is easily explained. Mr. W. B. Long states that when a flock
comes to decoys it is usually “cleaned out,” if the blind is
well cared for. While I, with a friend, was watching three
Green-winged Teal feeding on the shore of a pond in Nan-
tucket, in October, 1910, a boy crept up and killed two of
them. The other started to fly, but came back to its dying
companions, and if the boy’s shooting had been as deadly
as his intentions he would have killed all three. These three
were probably all that remained of a little family that had
started south. It is inexplicable how any ever manage to
run the gauntlet of the gunners and return to breed. Now
and then a solitary bird of this species will find the safe
refuge of some of the Boston ponds, where no shooting is
allowed, and will remain about Boston all winter, going down
the harbor when the ponds are frozen over. This species
breeds much farther north than the Blue-winged Teal and
winters oftener in temperate regions. It has been found in
January near Halifax, N. S. (Cooke).

This Teal: is so unsuspicious that it formerly flocked with
domestic Ducks, and often came with them to the barnyard
to be fed. Like the Blue-winged Teal it needs some kind of
special protection. If in the east.it could have a safe refuge
in certain ponds it might be able to maintain itself. Large
numbers still may be met with in the western States. It
normally collects in large flocks, which fly at a tremendous
speed, ordinarily in a direct line, but at times in the most
tortuous and desultory manner. It is a rapid swimmer, feeds
almost entirely in fresh water, and when alarmed springs into
the air suddenly and easily. The flocks swim often so com-
94 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

pactly that a gunner who can choose his time can rake them
terribly upon the water. They like to wade and paddle about
in the shallow water near the shore of some pond, and to
hunt insects in the grass. This bird feeds in daylight where
it is not much disturbed, but otherwise, like all other wild-
fowl, it feeds much at night, particularly on moonlit nights,
when all Ducks appear to be active and often noisy. In the
winter of 1877-78 I camped in a great marsh in Florida,
where Ducks of many species could be heard calling and
feeding throughout the night. Among them the notes of the
Teal could be heard. This species shows good diving powers
in times of danger, and it is almost as active on land as in
the water, for it can run well at need.

This Teal, like the Blue-winged Teal, is of excellent flavor
when it has been feeding on wild rice, wild celery and various
pond weeds, but when it is driven to the seashore in winter
its flesh soon becomes inferior.

It breeds across the entire northern part of the continent,
but few breed now in the United States east of the Rockies.
Its principal breeding grounds now are in west central Canada.

It is fond of wild oats and rice and takes seeds of various
grasses and weeds, also chestnuts, acorns, wild grapes, berries,
insects, crustaceans, worms and small snails. Audubon states
that he never found water lizards, fish or even tadpoles in
stomachs of the Green-winged Teal. He regarded it, when
fed upon soaked rice or wild oats, as far superior to the
Canvas-back, and considered it the most luscious food of any
American Duck. Possibly it might be domesticated to ad-
vantage, as it has been bred in captivity in a small way.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 95

 

BLUE-WINGED TEAL (Querquedula discors).

Common or local names: Blue-wing; Summer Teal.

 

MALE. FEMALE.

Length. — 15 to 16 inches.

Adult Male. — Head dusky, leaden gray; chin, forehead and crown blackish;
a large white black-edged crescent in front of eye; back dark brown,
upper part marked with buff; fore wing when closed shows a light blue
patch, edged with white, which separates it from a greenish patch or
speculum; a narrow white posterior edge to speculum; lower parts buffy,
reddish buff, cinnamon or purplish gray, spotted with black, except
lower flanks, which are sometimes barred in curved lines; tail coverts
black, and a white patch on either side of tail; bill bluish gray, black
on ridge; legs and feet yellow, with dusky webs and claws; iris yellow.

Adult Female. — Top of head blackish; throat whitish; rest of head and
neck pale brownish or brownish white streaked with dusky; no white
crescent; back and wings dusky, with V-shaped buff edgings on back;
breast pinkish buff, marked with black; flanks with dusky V-shaped
marks; belly whitish gray, with obscure markings; wing much as in
male, but with less blue and little white; bill greenish black.

Young. — Like female, but with white belly and gray speculum.

Field Marks. —In spring or fall the broad white crescent in front of the
eye distinguishes the adult male. The blue wing area is conspicuous
in flight in both sexes, but is not so readily seen on the water. Female
and young may be distinguished from those of the Shoveller, which
also has a blue fore wing, by the comparatively narrow bill.

Notes. — The Drake, a whistling peep, repeated five or six times (Eaton);
the Duck, a low quack.

Nest. — On ground in meadow or marsh, of fine soft grasses lined with down.

Eggs. — Six to fifteen, usually buffy white, about 1.75 to 1.90 by 1.30 to 1.40.

Season. — Late August and September mainly, rare in spring (April);
August 16 to November 25 (C. W. Townsend).
96 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Range. — Western hemisphere. Breeds from. central British Columbia,
Great Slave Lake, central Ungava and Newfoundland south to central
Oregon, northern Nevada, northern New Mexico, central Missouri,
southern Indiana, northern Ohio, western New York (occasionally
Rhode Island) and Maine; winters from southern British Columbia,
Arizona, southern Illinois, Maryland and Delaware south to the West
Indies and South America as far as Brazil and Chile; accidental in
Bermuda and Europe.

History.

This Teal was formerly one of the most numerous Ducks
of New England and nested here. Mr. Louis Agassiz Fuertes
says that it formerly bred abundantly at Cayuga, N. Y. Mr.
Lawrence Horton of Canton, Mass., says that he believes it
used to breed in the Neponset meadows as late as about the
year 1888. It still breeds in the marshes of Seneca, Cayuga,
Wayne and Oswego counties, New York, and in many cther
localities (Eaton). It is now becoming rare, and does not
breed at all in the New England States, so far as I am aware,
except in small numbers in Vermont and Maine. The species
is recorded as nesting formerly in Rhode Island, and even as
far south as North Carolina and Cuba.

The following abridged extracts from the writings of well-
known ornithologists indicate its former abundance and recent
diminution: Appears with us in September, when it is abun-
dant on the Hudson, and soon leaves for the south (De Kay,
New York, 1844). Common spring and autumn migrant
(Maynard, eastern Massachusetts, 1870). Rather common
spring and autumn migrant; formerly doubtless summer resi-
dent (J. A. Allen, Massachusetts, 1879). Uncommon in New
England (Chamberlain, 1891). Have killed good bags of
these birds on the fowl meadows lying between Canton and
Dedham; it is also pretty abundant in the ponds and streams
of Plymouth county (Samuels, 1897). Has become scarcer
of late years; can hardly be called common except in wilder
portions of Maine (Hoffman, New England and New York,
1904). Formerly one of the most abundant of the water
birds: that visited the region about Cambridge in autumn;
now comparatively seldom met with (Brewster, 1906). Mr.
Robert O. Morris of Springfield states that formerly large
flocks appeared at Springfield. Mr. Lewis W. Hill states
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 97

 

that Teal were formerly more numerous than now at Edgar-
town, and that the old gunners have told him that the birds
were once very abundant there. Mr. John M. Winslow of
Nantucket writes that Blue-winged Teal were plentiful there
many years ago. He saw one man kill an entire flock of eight
birds at one shot, and fifty years ago Mr. D. N. Edwards
killed thirty-five at one shot. Mr. Henry B. Bigelow states
that they were common at Cohasset when he was a boy, but
are now rare.

My correspondents, on whose reports this volume is based,
are nearly unanimous in noting this bird as rare or decreasing
in every county in Massachusetts. The reports on this species
are voluminous and convincing, eight showing an increase and
one hundred a decrease. This exhibits the growing scarcity
of a bird that was abundant no longer ago than the middle of
the last century. ,

Occasionally there are still some considerable flights.
There was one in September, 1907, that was reported from
Essex County to the Cape. Flights were noted also each
year from 1904 to 1910. These flights were mostly early in
September, and in most cases the birds are reported to have
passed on without stopping. Possibly they are learning wis-
dom by experience. During my early boyhood large flocks
were common in the ponds of Massachusetts in September,
and they were so tame that when once they had alighted in
a pond it was difficult to drive them out. An experienced
gunner would get all or nearly all insuch acase. Mr. William
B. Long writes that flocks of twenty or so have been extermi-
nated at Ipswich.

As this Teal is one of the best of Ducks on the table the
reason for the reduction of its numbers is but too plainly
evident. Although many formerly came south in the fall,
few returned in the spring; but the species is so prolific that
if protected in spring throughout the United States it might
hold its own for a long time to come. Mr. E. T. Carbonnell
of Prince Edward Island says that both Blue-winged and
Green-winged Teal were very plentiful in 1898, owing to
protection during a close season and the stoppage of spring
shooting. Teal respond quickly to protection.
98 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Blue-winged Teal are still numerous in the west, where
most of them now breed, and the species is not, like the
Wood Duck, in any immediate danger of extinction; but
most of those which once bred in the northeast, or migrated
through this region, have been exterminated, and we are now
probably dependent mainly on the overflow from the great
northwest for such flights of Teal as come to us in good
breeding years. The Blue-winged Teal is such a compara-
tively tame and unsuspicious bird that it now needs special
protection in the east. Elliot says that it begins to leave
its southern feeding grounds in February, and that, like all
Ducks at this season, it is poor in flesh and should never
be shot. This Duck flies with terrific speed. In the fall
the flocks frequent the wild rice marshes along the borders
of rivers. When coming in to alight they seem very sus-
picious. They sweep up and down the river, not far above
the water, as if reconnoitering, sometimes quacking as if in
alarm, turning swiftly in concert, rolling from side to side,
first showing the blue of their wings and then their backs.
The flocks are seldom seen on the large, deep lakes, but fre-
quent small ponds, marshes and shallow, sluggish streams.
They like to alight in small ponds or sloughs among the wild
rice, where they feed greedily on the seed that hangs down or
that which has fallen off in the mud. Now they become
very fat and are excellent eating, in great contrast to their
condition in the spring. This Teal rests lightly upon the
water, and the male in spring plumage is one of the hand-
somest of the Duck tribe.

Its food in the ponds includes much vegetable matter,
seeds, grasses, pondweeds, etc. It also at times destroys
snails, tadpoles and many insects.

Norte. — The Cinnamon Teal (Querquedula cyanoptera) might be included
in a list of the birds of Massachusetts and adjacent States as a single speci-
men was taken on the shore of Seneca Lake, Yates County, N. Y., about the
middle of April, 1886, and is now in the collection of James Flahive, Penn
Yan, N. Y. (Eaton); but as this is a neotropical bird, which occurs in the
southwestern United States and west of the Rocky Mountains, is merely
accidental in the east and is not recorded from Massachusetts, it is
omitted from the present list.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 99

 

SHOVELLER (Spatula clypeata).

Common or local names: Spoonbill; Spoonbill Teal.

FEMALE.

 

Length. — 17 to 21 inches.

Adult Male. — Back dark brown, the feathers paler on the edges; wing
coverts light sky blue; a green patch on the dark wing preceded by a
white bar and bordered above by black; rump and upper tail coverts
black; tail white; head and upper neck dark glossy green; shoulders,
lower neck, breast, a patch on each side of tail, and vent white; belly
and flanks rich chestnut; under tail coverts black; bill long, widened
at the end and dark leaden blue; iris orange or yellow; legs and feet
vermilion or orange red.

Female. — Dark and duller; plumage varied with brownish yellow and
dusky; bill dull greenish above, orange below; iris yellow; legs and feet
orange; head and neck mottled with two shades of brown and speckled
with dusky; under parts pale brown or buff; traces of chestnut on
belly; wing markings similar to those of male, but imperfect.

Young. — Similar, but fore wing more gray than blue. Immature males
vary greatly.

Field Marks. — Smaller than Black Duck, male with white breast and rich
chestnut belly. Female and young much like Blue-winged Teal, but
recognizable by the long clumsy bill much broadened at tip.
100 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Notes. — Generally a silent bird, but its note in breeding season is said to
be took, took. A few feeble quacks (Elliot). May be compared to the
sound of a rattle turned by short jerks (Eaton).

Nest. — On ground.

Eggs. — Seven to nine, sometimes more, 2.10 by 1.50; smooth, dull, pale
greenish gray or buffy olive.

Season. — Formerly probably a summer resident; later a spring and fall
migrant; now almost accidental in fall, from the middle of September
to November.

Range. — Northern hemisphere. In North America breeds from north-
western Alaska, northwestern Mackenzie and southern Keewatin south
to southern California, central New Mexico, northern Texas, northern
Missouri and northern Indiana; winters from southern British Colum-
bia, Arizona, New Mexico, southern Missouri, southern Illinois, Mary-
land and Delaware south to the West Indies, Colombia and Hawaii;
in migration, occasional in Bermuda, and north to Nova Scotia and
Newfoundland.

History.

The Shoveller, though a cosmopolitan species, is rare in
New England, but, like most of the Ducks, is more common
in the west and south. It is fairly common in western New
York, and was probably much more numerous in New Eng-
land in the early days of settlement than it now is, as it is men-
tioned by several of the old chroniclers. In Archer’s account
of Gosnold’s voyage the ‘‘Shovler” is noted as among the
water-fowl breeding on an island called Martha’s Vineyard
(No Man’s Land), off the Massachusetts coast, on May 22,
1602. It was well known to the English settlers and voyagers.
Its long broad bill is unmistakable, and as it still breeds in
this latitude this record seems worthy of credence.

Dr. J. A. Allen (1879) says that it is rare in spring and
autumn. Formerly, judging from its present breeding in
interior, a frequent summer resident. But the only recent
record we have of its breeding near Massachusetts is in the
Montezuma marshes in New York (Eaton).

It is not a large Duck nor a swift flyer, and is rather an
easy prey to the skilful gunner. I once shot one, however,
which went past me, before a strong north wind, at such a
rate of speed that, though it was stricken dead in mid air
about thirty yards from my position, it struck the ground
ninety paces away. It comes readily to decoys and offers a
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 101

 

fair mark. Audubon considered it one of the best of all
Ducks on the table, and so it is when feeding on vegetable
matter along fresh-water streams. Its flight is often peculiar
and characteristic, —a kind of irresolute hovering motion, as
if it were undecided regarding its destination.

The Shoveller is now a rare breeder in the northeast, and
is scarcely common as far east as Hudson Bay. Its principal
summer home in North America now is from the northern
United States north to the Saskatchewan. As it is a cos-
mopolitan bird its scarcity now in the northeast may be
accounted for in part by that overshooting which always
follows settlement and civilization. Its abundance in the
west, and the fact that it is still common on the Atlantic
coast in winter from Chesapeake Bay southward, are also
due in part to the fact that overshooting in the west began
more than two hundred years later than on the Atlantic
coast. Western-bred birds of this species reach the coast
mainly south of the Chesapeake.

This Duck breeds mainly in habitable regions, and as it
is the equal of the famed Canvas-back on the table, it will
become extinct in North America unless rigidly protected.

Audubon states that repeated inspections of stomachs of
this species disclosed leeches, small fish, earthworms and
snails. It feeds also on aquatic plants, grasses, grass seeds
and bulbs, which it procures along the shores of small ponds
which it frequents. It often feeds by wading and dabbling
in the mud, straining mud and water through its peculiarly
constructed bill.

Dr. Hatch states that it feeds on aquatic insects, larvee,
tadpoles, worms, etc., which it finds in shallow, muddy waters:
also crustaceans, small mollusks and snails.
102 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

PINTAIL (Dafila acuta).

Common or local names: Gray Duck; Sprigtail; Picket-tail; Pheasant Duck.

 

Mate.

Length. — Variable; 20 to 30 inches.

Adult Male. — Head, throat and upper part of fore neck rich dark brown;
hind neck black, passing into gray of back and separated from fore
neck by a white stripe, which extends upward from the white lower
fore neck and under parts; speculum or wing patch bronze, with green-
ish reflections, deepening into black behind; speculum bordered by a
bar of cinnamon before it and a white bar behind; long black feathers,
edged with light silvery gray, extending from shoulder down the wing;
narrow wavy dark cross lines extend over most of the gray of flanks
and back; tail pointed; middle tail-feathers, five to nine inches long,
and black; feathers under tail black; bill and feet slate; iris brown.

Adult Female. — Top and sides of head, and back and sides of neck light
brownish, speckled and streaked with dusky; back brown, the feathers
with dark centers and light edges; wing having the two bars but only
a trace of the bright speculum seen in the male; under parts whitish,
spotted with dusky, darkest on neck; bill and feet slate; tail pointed
but not elongated.

Young Male. — Similar to female, but with speculum as in adult male.

Field Marks. — Long middle tail-feathers, pure white front neck and under
parts, and the dark head distinguish the male in spring, but he is rarely
seen in Massachusetts at that season. The long slender neck, small
head and bill, and pointed tail distinguish the species.

Notes. — Rather a silent bird by day, but utters a low-toned hoarse quack
at night. A loud quack, a low mellow whistle and a harsh rolling note
(Nelson). Have heard a Pintail Drake utter a note when on the wing
that resembled a quack, but was not as loud as that of the Mallard Drake,
resembling the syllables qua, qua (Benjamin F. Howell). A low chatter-
ing note as the flock moves along the water (Hatch). The whistle noted
above is usually attributed to the Drake and the quack to the Duck.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 103

 

Season. — Very rare in spring; late February to April. Uncommon or rare
in fall; early September to December. Very rarely winters.

Range. — Northern hemisphere. In North America breeds on the Arctic
coast from Alaska to Keewatin and south to southern California,
southern Colorado, northern Nebraska, northern Iowa and northern
Illinois; winters from southern British Columbia, Nevada, Arizona,
southern Missouri, southern Wisconsin, southern Ohio, Pennsylvania
(rarely) and Delaware south to Porto Rico and Panama, and in Hawaii;
in migration occasional on the Atlantic coast to northern Ungava,
Greenland and Newfoundland, and in Bermuda.

History.

The Pintail is a large Duck of slim and graceful form.
The striking colors of the male make his identification easy,
but the female resembles somewhat the same sex of the Bald-
pate or the Gadwall. The females and young of the Gadwall,
Baldpate and Pintail are all commonly called Gray Ducks.

The Pintail is no longer common in Massachusetts, where
it is known mainly as a fall migrant. It usually appears in
small parties, in pairs or singly, during late September or
October.

The following notes indicate its former status and its
decrease: More common in interior than along the coast
(De Kay, 1844). Pretty common on our shores (Samuels,
1870). Rare winter resident on coast (Maynard, 1870).
Uncommon transient, especially in spring; have seen this
bird only once in Essex County (Townsend, 1905). Observ-
ers, representing all Massachusetts counties except Berkshire
and Hampshire, report as follows: increasing, six; decreasing,
thirty. Most of the reports come from the coast counties,
and five of the six recording increase come from those coun-
ties; but the great majority of reports indicate that a consid-
erable decrease in the species in Massachusetts has occurred
within the thirty years prior to 1909, and that it is becoming
rare except in localities on or near the coast and on the Con-
necticut River.

Mr. Alfred S. Swan states that at North Eastham the
bird is practically gone, “ gunned to death.” He is told that
forty years ago it was abundant. Rev. E. E. Phillips has but
104 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

one record in ten years, —a bird killed at Eastham in 1900.
Mr. Vinal B. Edwards of Wood’s Hole says that one was
killed in 1875 and none have been seen since. Mr. Robert O.
Morris of Springfield says that in the autumn of 1892 the
Pintail was the most numerous Duck on the Connecticut
River near Springfield. Mr. Israel R. Sheldon of Pawtuxet,

 

FEMALE.

R. L., states that it has been seen in small flocks near Narra-
gansett Bay, and he thinks that it is increasing. Mr. Charles
W. Hallett records flights of Pintails at Barnstable in 1907 and
1908. Mr. Benjamin F. Howell of Troy Hills, N. J., writes
that Pintails began breeding on the meadows in his vicinity
in the year 1908 after spring shooting was stopped there.

This bird feeds mainly near the surface, as it is not an
expert diver. It flies very swiftly, and is capable of many
tricks to upset the calculations of the hunter. In case of an
alarm among a flock when settling to the decoys, the individ-
uals spring high in air so suddenly that the hunter often
misses his chance or shoots below them. Elliot tells of a
performance given by the males in spring that resembles the
drumming of the Snipe.

As the lakes and rivers of the interior freeze, the Pintail
moves on southward. Its principal breeding grounds lie
between North Dakota, Alaska and the west coast of Hudson
Bay, but it is found in Greenland. It winters mainly in the
southern States, and some go to the West Indies. It appears
to go north mainly by the inland route.

Audubon says that the Pintail is an expert flycatcher and
that it eats tadpoles, leeches, mice and insects.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 105°

 

WOOD DUCK (Aiz sponsa).

Common or local name: Summer Duck.

 

FEMALE. MALE.

Length. — 18 to 20 inches.
Adult Male. — Head profusely crested, metallic green and blue, ending in

a long crest of purple and marked with two lines of narrow white
feathers; sides of head deepening to purplish black below eye; throat
white, the white running « spur up side of head and another across
upper neck; upper body rich greenish brown, bronze green and purple;
wings show velvety black, purple and white; tail long and dark; upper
breast rich reddish chestnut, with small white markings, a white band
edged with black before bend of wing; flanks light buffy brown, finely
lined, and bordered above and behind by black and white: rest of
under parts white, except under tail coverts, which are dusky; bill
pinkish white, red and black; iris and eyelids red; feet orange with black
claws.

Adult Female. — Less crest; head grayish; chin, throat, line about base of

bill, ring around eye and patch behind it white; rest of upper parts
brownish, dark or grayish brown; wings somewhat as in the male; neck,
upper breast and flanks streaked and mottled with gray or brown and
106 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

buff; belly white, with here and there a dusky spot; bill dusky, with a
large white spot on each side; legs and feet yellowish brown.

Young. — Similar to female.

Field Marks. —No other common summer Duck in Massachusetts has
white under parts. The male is unmistakable; the female shows a
rather conspicuous white eye ring, the white extending in a streak
behind eye.

Notes. — A frightened plaintive whistle, 00-eek, oo-eek (Chapman). A note
of the Drake is pect, peet, uttered at intervals; the Duck when startled,
cr-r-e-ek, cr-r-e-ek, cr-r-e-ek (Eaton).

Nest. — In a hollow tree or nesting box.

Eggs. — Hight to fifteen; pale buff, cream or ivory white, about 2 by 1.50.

Season. — Early April to the middle of November; seen rarely in December.

Range. — Temperate North America. Breeding nearly throughout its range
which extends from southern Labrador and British Columbia to Florida
and Cuba; winters from British Columbia, southern Illinois and south-
ern New Jersey to southern California and Cuba; accidental in Ber-
muda, Mexico, Jamaica and Europe.

History.

This species is the loveliest of all wild-fowl. Even the
Mandarin Duck of China is not so strikingly beautiful. The
female is a fitting bride for her lord. Her plumage is not so
bright, but the colors and patterns are neat and modest,
and her form and carriage are remarkably attractive. Nature
presents no more delightful sight than a flock of these beau-
tiful birds at play on the surface of a pellucid woodland
stream, their elegant forms floating as lightly as a drifting
leaf and mirrored in the element that they love. The display
of their wonderful plumage among the flashing lights and
deep shadows of such a secluded nook forms a picture, framed
by the umbrageous foliage of the forest, that, once seen by
the lover of nature, is indelibly imprinted on his memory as
one of the episodes of a lifetime. I have taken more pleasure
in watching a flock of these exquisite birds in such surround-
ings than I can imagine any one could take in shooting into
the flock. But there are men who will watch a family of
Wood Ducks through the summer, until the young are grown,
and then hunt and exterminate them; or who will shoot them
ruthlessly in spring, even after the nests are made and the
eggs are laid.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 107

 

Many years ago the Wood Duck was the most abundant
of all wild-fowl in many well-wooded regions of the United
States. Hundreds flocked along the wooded streams and
about the woodland ponds. Even within the past fifty years
this splendid Duck has been very numerous in the forested
regions of some of the States east of the Mississippi. There
are men now living who remember when it afforded the best
Duck shooting to be had in the interior of Maine, and when
Wood Ducks flying to and from their nests were familiar sights,
comparable to robins and blackbirds. Mr. Edward F. Staples
of Taunton, who has hunted in the vicinity of Lakeville,
Mass., for nearly fifty years, states that the Wood Duck was
plentiful up to about 1878, and that the sport was glorious. He
has known one man to shoot sixty in a morning, but he now
sees only one small flock ina summer. Mr. Charles E. Ingalls
of East Templeton, Mass., says that thirty years ago the
Wood Duck was very common everywhere in that region.
He has seen three hundred to five hundred come into the
swamp at the head of the reservoir in East Templeton in an
evening many times, night after night, during the fall, but
they are now among the rarest of game birds. They were shot
at any time, spring or fall, whenever they exposed themselves.
William Dutcher, in an investigation of the status of this bird
in the United States in 1907, obtained similar reports through-
out the country, and Dr. A. K. Fisher has called special atten-
tion to its threatened extinction in a bulletin of the Biological
Survey. Within my own recollection it bred commonly over
a considerable part of Massachusetts, but at the beginning of
this century the species was evidently in danger of extinction.

The following notes exhibit something of its former abund-
ance and recent decrease: Rather abundant at Boston; have
seen hundreds in a flock (Audubon, 1835). Sometimes taken
in nets; a Mr. Burns, thirty miles west of Albany, sends a
large number to the New York market annually, taken in
this way (Giraud, 1844). Rare on the sea-coast, but abso-
lutely swarms during the month of September among the lily-
pads of the western swamps (B. Roosevelt, 1866). Plentiful
(Turnbull, eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 1869).
108 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Abundantly distributed through New England in the breed-
ing season (Samuels, 1870). Common summer resident (J.
A. Allen, Massachusetts, 1879). Less abundant, and has
held its own because of ability to hide in the smallest bits of
cover (Abbott, New Jersey, 1895). Thirty years ago Wood
Ducks were killed by wagon-loads every spring (Dawson,
Ohio, 1903). Now very rare (Hoffman, 1904). Uncommon
summer resident; common transient visitor; formerly more
common; decreasing (Townsend, Essex County, Mass., 1905).
Formerly very common visitor and not uncommon summer
resident; now seen only in migration and in no great num-
bers (Brewster, Cambridge region, 1906). Formerly common,
breeding in every county; at present only a rare local breed-
ing bird (Knight, Maine, 1908). Formerly common, but be-
coming rapidly reduced in numbers (Stone, New Jersey, 1908).

My correspondents at the close of 1908, when protection
had begun to increase its numbers, report as follows on this
bird in Massachusetts: Increasing, thirteen; decreasing, one
hundred and four. This is convincing testimony of the
decrease of this species in the past thirty years. All other
reports from Nova Scotia to Texas agree that the species has
diminished from twenty to one hundred per cent.

The fate of the Wood Duck is determined by its breeding
and migration range. This lies mostly within the United
States, where, for centuries, spring shooting has been allowed.
Had it been able to breed in the far north, where few white
men ever go, it would have been better able to maintain
itself, or had it bred mainly in southern Canada even, where
spring shooting is prohibited and where the law is respected,
and had it been able to pass over the United States in its
migrations without stopping, it might have avoided destruc-
tion; but it lives mainly within the United States. It fre-
quents small streams and ponds only a gunshot in width or
less, in wooded regions where it is easily ambushed by the
hunter, and our people have ruthlessly destroyed this, one
of the most beautiful objects of creation, and will yet eradi-
cate it unless laws are enacted and enforced in all the States,
protecting it at all times. This bird is better appreciated
BIRDS, HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 109

 

abroad than here. In Belgium large numbers are reared in
captivity, and they are in great demand as ornamental water-
fowl. It may be that the bird can be saved from extinction
only by rearing it upon preserves and large estates, and re-
taining enough in confinement each winter to perpetuate the
species. It is now (1911) protected by law at all times in
New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
Vermont and Maine.

Since the law protecting it went into effect in Massa-
chusetts, New Hampshire and Connecticut, the Wood Duck,
which had become rare, has increased in numbers consider-
ably in the two latter States and somewhat in Massachusetts,
particularly during the past year (1910), when spring shooting
was prohibited. One hundred and five Massachusetts corre-
spondents in 1908 report it as breeding in the State. These
reports come from every county except Nantucket, although
no Ducks breed in Suffolk County, the center of popula-
tion. Formerly the spring duck shooters often killed breeding
Wood Ducks, either by mistake or intention, but in 1910, as
a result of spring protection, the species nested in many local-
ities where it had not been seen before for years. Some States
do not protect this bird at all; many others allow shooting
for a part of the spring. Wood Ducks begin mating in the
south in December, January or February, and are mostly
mated when they arrive in the north. If all the eastern
States would enact laws forbidding spring shooting, and pro-
tecting the Wood Duck at all times, a few years would suffice
to repopulate the country with this beautiful bird.

In flight the Wood Duck is swift and direct when in the
open, but it can penetrate among the many branches of the
woods as swiftly and surely as a Ruffed Grouse or a Passenger
Pigeon, twisting and turning rapidly in avoiding the many
obstacles in its way. It nests usually near the water; but
if no hollow tree or stump is to be found near its chosen
feeding grounds, it will find one farther away, in an old
orchard, a hollow elm overhanging a farm-house or some
old tree by the roadside. I have been informed that the
eggs of the Wood Duck are sometimes laid on the ground
110 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

where no better site can be found, but have never seen one
so situated. The height of the nesting site above the ground
or water varies from three feet, or even less, to forty or more.
The bird is able to so compress her body that she can squeeze
into a very small hole, but when the entrance is of a size to
accommodate her easily, she appears to fly directly into it,
striking the plumage of her breast against the lower edge of
the entrance to break the force and speed of her descent.
When the young are hatched they are soon pushed out or
fall out, and if the nest is favorably situated they drop upon
the water. If the nest is some distance from the water the
process of getting the young to it varies with individual birds.
I have questioned people who claim to have seen the opera-
tion, and am convinced that the mother usually takes the
young in her bill and flies with them to the water. Thirteen
Massachusetts correspondents state that she carries them.
In one instance a bird, presumably a Wood Duck, was seen
to push her young out of a nest. They dropped about forty
feet to the grass, apparently unharmed, and she then led them
to the river. In another case a Maine guide reports that he
saw a Wood Duck fly down and alight in the water, and that
several young, which seemed to be clinging to her back, all
fell off into the water as she alighted on the surface. Mr.
Lyman Pearson of Newbury, Mass., says that he saw a Wood
Duck once carry her young to the water. He thought that
she carried them on her feathers. The destruction of the
large and heavy timber does away with many a hollow limb,
and the wood-cutter has been one factor in the decrease of
the Wood Duck. Mr. J. J. Coburn of Worcester told me
years ago that he once found a female of this species dead in
a stovepipe leading from a stove in his boat-building estab-
lishment at Lake Quinsigamond. The bird had entered the
pipe easily when looking for a nesting site, but could not get
out, and I have heard of other similar cases. Dr. John C.
Phillips of Wenham, Mass., says that a female Wood Duck
came down a chimney of his camp at Wenham and was found
dead inside, and he has heard of another instance of the same
sort. A few nesting boxes put up in the trees about a pond
‘el 4 ‘yorog wed 3 gor ‘y yequay Aq ydesBojoyug
‘STIIG-GVONS YO S111IG3N1a S¥ NMONY AINOWWOD ‘SxONG AVa 4O dNOYS—'Al 3Ll¥Id

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. lll

 

may induce Wood Ducks to nest there. This device is often
successful, and I have seen a Wood Duck family: that was
reared in a nest of this kind. Where they are unmolested
they become tame. A family once frequented a small pond
within a hundred yards of my house, and a pair bred in a city
park several seasons.

The Wood Duck is a surface feeder. Most of its food is
obtained in shallow water or on shore. It takes both vege-
table and animal food, insects, chestnuts, acorns, etc.

BAY AND SEA Ducks (Subfamily Fuligulinz).

The Ducks of this subfamily may be distinguished from
the Mergansers by the broad bill, and from the River Ducks
by the lobe or flap on the hind toe
(Fig. 6), and the habit of diving for
their food. This habit will not distin-
guish them from the Mergansers nor
from the Grebes, Loons or other diving
birds. To identify Ducks in the field a
strong field glass or a small telescope is
necessary, particularly with the Bay and
Sea Ducks, which frequent large open
waters, and often cannot be approached under cover. Most of
the species breed on fresh water in the interior, but a few, par-
ticularly the Eider, nest mainly on the coasts and islands of the
sea. After the breeding season they all make toward the sea or
the larger bodies of fresh water, where, with few exceptions, they
feed largely on shell-fish and crustaceans, which give them a
rank and fishy flavor. Many of these Ducks are rather heavy
and unwieldy in rising from the water, but all fly swiftly and
well. There is a wide variation in appearance not only in the
different species but often between different members of the
same species. Descriptions of a species by different authors
rarely agree, unless copied one from the other. This is in
part due to individual variation among the Ducks and in
part to individual variation among authors. In the Scoters,
commonly called Coots, for example, the young in passing to
maturity (a process which occupies two or more years) not

 

Fig. 6. — Foot of Sea Duck,
[2 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

only change the shades of the plumage more than once, but
often change the color and shape of the bill, the color of the
feet and that of the eye. The immature male may be any-
where in shape and color between the young of the first year
and the mature male. One specimen of a species may be
grayish brown and another brownish gray; or a bird may be
grayish brown before death and change to brownish gray after
death. The salmon-colored breast of a Merganser may, after
death, change to plain buff, and then fade several shades
after the specimen is mounted.

In most of the Ducks of this group, and probably in all, the
male puts on an “‘eclipse’’ plumage in summer, similar in many
respects to that of the female. The bright metallic speculum
is rare among these Ducks, but a white or gray wing patch
sometimes takes its place. There is so much variation in the
forms and plumages of individuals of the same species, and so
many changes take place soon after death in the colors of the
naked. parts and even in the tints of some feathers, that no
description can be fully adequate that does not include all the
many changes in plumage and colors of parts, taken from life,
in the various individuals of different ages and sexes. Careful
notes taken from a large series of specimens freshly killed might
enable one to give fairly accurate descriptions, but when
dependence is placed on dried skins, as it often is, many errors
must occur. All that is attempted here is to try to give in each
case such an incomplete description of the adult male and
female as will serve, when used in connection with the cuts, to
identify the adults of each species, and also to indicate in a
general way how the young of the first year differ from or
resemble the parents.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 113

 

REDHEAD (Marila americana).

 

Mate.

Length. — 19 to 23 inches.

Adult Male. — Head and upper neck reddish chestnut or brick red, glossed
sometimes with reddish purple or coppery reflections; rest of neck,
breast and upper back black to bend of wing; rest of back, other upper
parts and flanks mainly light gray, with very narrow wavy cross pen-
cillings of black; speculum or wing patch gray; rump and tail dark or
blackish; belly white; feathers under tail blackish; iris orange; bill pale
blue, black-tipped; feet grayish blue, webs dusky.

Adult Female. — Head and upper neck dull or pale reddish brown or gray-
ish brown, darkest on top of head, paler on cheeks and behind eye,
sometimes whitish about base of bill, meeting white on chin; back
brownish gray; neck, breast and sides brown; middle of belly white,
lower belly brown; bill obscure pale blue with black tip; legs and feet
grayish blue; iris yellow.

Young Male. — Somewhere between adult male and female.

Young Female. — Similar to adult female.

Field Marks. — The male can be mistaken for no other bird, except the
female Golden-eye or Whistler and the Canvas-back, both of which
have reddish heads; its body is darker than that of male Canvas-back
and it has a higher forehead; the female Whistler has a snuffy brown
head and a patch of white on wing. The female Redhead may be dis-
tinguished from female Canvas-back by the shape of head and bill,
which resemble those of the male Redhead; she resembles a female
Scaup, but has less white on her face about the bill; she still more
closely resembles the female Ringneck, which also has a black tip on
bill, but is considerably smaller.

Notes. — A hoarse, guttural rolling sound (Elliot). A hollow, rapid croak-

ing (Chapman).
114 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Season. — From the middle of September to about the first week in April;
comparatively few winter.

Range. — North America. Breeds from southern British Columbia and the
Hudson Bay country to southern California and southern Wisconsin;
winters from southern British Columbia, Maryland, Delaware and
Massachusetts south to southern Lower California and Florida. In
migration casual in Alaska and regular on the Atlantic coast north to
southern Labrador.

History.

The Redhead somewhat resembles the Canvas-back,
though smaller, and when it has been feeding on wild celery
it is often sold under the name of Canvas-back. Elltot in
his Wild Fowl of North America (1898) states that the Red-
head was once very abundant in many parts of the continent,
but that constant persecution and indiscriminate slaughter
have greatly reduced its numbers throughout the land, and
that in many places where it was formerly abundant in winter
it no longer appears. All but three of my correspondents
(outside of Massachusetts) on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts
state that the Redhead is decreasing. The percentage of
decrease given varies from fifty to one hundred. The follow-
ing notes from authors seem to indicate a decrease of the
species in New England: Pretty abundant on our shores;
several individuals, both sexes, seen on Lake Umbagog in
June; not impossible it breeds in northern New England;
seen in various localities until first week in June (Samuels,
1870). Uncommon or rare in New England and adjacent °
coast States (Chamberlain, 1891). Rare transient visitor
(Townsend, Essex County, 1905). Rather rare transient
visitor in autumn (Brewster, Cambridge region, 1906). The
Redhead seems never to have been very abundant generally
in Massachusetts. Audubon never saw it farther eastward,
and it is now found in considerable numbers in this State
mainly on the ponds of Martha’s Vineyard, where the wild
celery and the redhead grass grow, or in a few of the land-
locked bays and the ponds of Cape Cod and Nantucket.
Observers report to me its presence in all the counties of
Massachusetts except Berkshire and Hampshire, but it is
generally regarded as rare and decreasing everywhere, except
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 115

 

as above. Mr. Robert O. Morris has seen it formerly on the
Connecticut River in large flocks, but that was unusual.
The reports of increase in this species come as follows by
counties: Barnstable, five; Dukes, five; Bristol, one; Plym-
outh, one; but only in Dukes County are they unanimous
as to increase. Fifteen Massachusetts observers all told
report an increase; thirty-four, a decrease.

Mr. John M. Winslow says that Redheads remain about
the same in Nantucket, —not over a thousand on the island.
Mr. Lewis W. Hill of Jamaica Plain says that Redheads and
Bluebills are very plentiful at Edgartown, and that Bluebills
have increased slightly in the “last five years.’ He believes
that there are from five thousand to eight thousand Ducks
every year in Edgartown Great Pond. A party of four men
got one hundred and ten Redheads and Bluebills in five
hours, and many bags of twenty to fifty were made in the
fall of 1908. In that year, he says, there were many more
Bluebills than Redheads; in the last three or four years
the reverse has been true. Mr. Henry V. Greenough of
Brookline says that about twenty-five hundred Redheads and
Bluebills come into the Edgartown and Tisbury great ponds
in the fall from October 1 to 15; rarely more come and seldom
many less. At daybreak every day they leave Edgartown
Great Pond and fly to Tisbury Pond, where the “feed” is
more to their liking, spend the day there and return toward
night to Edgartown. Some stop over at Fresh Pond and
Oyster Pond. The number has not decreased and about the
same number of birds are killed each year. Mr. Charles H.
Brown of Vineyard Haven stated before the legislative com-
mittee on Fisheries and Game, in 1910, that the ponds on the
south side of Martha’s Vineyard were broken open by the sea
in 1815 and flooded with salt water, so that they remained
salt for years. This changed the character of the vegetable
growth in those ponds. Some of them remained salt longer
than others which earlier became fresh or brackish. From
1872 to about 1878 Edgartown Great Pond was salt as a result
of artificial opening. Redhead grass (probably Navas flexilis
and Potamogeton perfoliatus) grows in Great Pond. Various
116 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

pond grasses also grow in the ponds. More than twenty
years ago Mr. Herman Strater introduced the so-called wild
celery (Vallisneria spiralis). About six or eight years ago it
became plentiful there. Since that time the number of Ducks
on the island has increased slowly, and the increase of Red-
heads has been particularly noticeable. Mr. Brown says that
two thousand Redheads remained in Antires Pond during the
coldest weather of January and February, 1910, and that he
has seen more than ten thousand Ducks in Edgartown Great
Pond at one time, and perhaps two thousand in the other
ponds in the same period.

Mr. A. C. Bent of Taunton helieves that the Redheads
have increased fifty per cent. in the region with which he is
familiar. Dr. L. C. Sanford states that thirty or forty thou-
sand spent the fall of 1908 near Watch Hill, R. I. Mr.
Israel R. Sheldon writes that they were formerly plentiful at
Point Judith, but are now “scattering” there. The birds
appear every year on their feeding grounds in October and
remain for the rest of the fall, if not all winter. In migration
the flocks fly high in air, with whistling wings, usually in a
wide, V-shaped formation. Each flock, as it first comes in,
passes and repasses over a favorite resting place, until, satis-
fied that peace and safety are assured, the birds settle on the
water. Sometimes, when a large flock is already assembled,
members of the incoming migrating flock will fall with roaring
wings, zigzagging down from the sky like thunderbolts thrown
by a giant hand, crossing one another and merging in inde-
scribable confusion, until, having nearly reached the water,
they set their pinions and sail down to join their kindred.
While they are on their winter feeding grounds they keep in
good training by flying about early in the morning and late
in the afternoon. On such occasions they generally fly high
and in irregular lines.

The greater number of all the Ducks of this species appear
to breed in western Manitoba, Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Comparatively few now nest in the northern United States.
A few may nest east of Hudson Bay, as they have been re-
ported from James Bay, Labrador and Maine. It seems
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 117

 

probable that most of the thousands of Redheads which reach
southeastern Massachusetts come here from western Canada
by way of the Great Lakes, and return by the same route.
We know that many individuals come east by this route, and
they are so rare northeast of us on the Atlantic coast that
this seems the only tenable theory that will account for the
number that visit Massachusetts. A sudden freeze, closing
up the ponds, is likely to send the birds south.

The Redhead seems to be quite as fond of wild celery as is
the Canvas-back, and is quite as capable of procuring the
submerged buds and root stocks as is its more celebrated con-
gener, but it is believed to feed less on the buds and more on
the leaves. Its resemblance in appearance and flavor to the
celery-fed Canvas-back makes it a desirable bird for the
market, and it is highly prized by the gunner.

The Redhead, though classed among the Bay and Sea
Ducks, feeds mainly in large fresh-water lakes on aquatic
plants. It is a good diver, and usually keeps well away from
shore, where it dives to the bottom to pull up the wild celery
and other vegetation on which it feeds. Sometimes it feeds
in the mud and marsh along the shore, where it takes insects
and other forms of animal life. Audubon says that he has
found stomachs of this species crammed with tadpoles, young
water lizards and blades of the grasses growing about the
bank, also acorns, beechnuts, snails and shells of small fresh-
water clams. It feeds by night as well as by day, is usually
not shy and is readily decoyed. If wounded it will dive and
hide among the marsh grass, or sometimes even cling to the
vegetation on the bottom, like a Scoter, until life is extinct.
118 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

CANVAS-BACK (Marila valisineria).

 

Length. — About 21 inches.

Adult Male. — Mantle and sides all silvery white, daintily pencilled with
fine, wavy lines of dusky; head and nearly all of neck brownish red,
darkening on crown and fore face; lower neck all round, a little of upper
back, most of breast, rump and tail coverts brownish black; wings and
tail gray; below white; legs leaden gray; iris red; bill blackish; feet
grayish blue.

Adult Female. — Head, neck and breast dull amber brown or brownish tan,
darkest on top of head, grayish on throat; above grayish brown; belly
white or yellowish white; iris reddish brown; bill and feet as in male.

Field Marks. — The white mantle of the male, the flattened forehead and
the long, peculiarly shaped beak of both sexes, and the brown head,
neck and fore body of the female, contrasting with the grayish back
and flanks, serve to identify this bird.

Notes. — A harsh, guttural croak (Elliot). The female, a loud quack and a
screaming curr-row when startled (Eaton).

Season. — Rare in spring; in fall from the last week in October to the mid-
dle of December; occasionally winters.

Range.— North America. Breeds from central British Columbia, Fort
Yukon, Great Slave Lake and southwestern Keewatin south to Ore-
gon, northern Nevada, Colorado (rarely), Nebraska and southern
Minnesota; winters from southern British Columbia, Nevada, Colo-
rado, Illinois, Pennsylvania and western New York south to central
Mexico (Jalisco) and the Gulf coast; in winter formerly abundant,
now less so, in Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina; occasional
south to Florida, and casual in the West Indies, Bermuda and Guate-
mala; in migration north rarely to New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 119

 

History.

This Duck is considered to have no superior upon the
table. It once fed in countless multitudes along the Atlantic
coast, particularly in the Chesapeake Bay region. It has
now been greatly reduced in numbers in the south. Even
so long ago as 1832 Dr. J. J. Sharples, in the Cabinet of
Natural History, states that the number of fowl on Chesa-
peake Bay was then decidedly less than in years past.

In my early experience the Canvas-back was regarded as
little more than a straggler in New England, though occasion-
ally a few were taken. The number has been increasing, how-
ever, within recent years, and last year (1910) many were
seen in the ponds on Martha’s Vineyard, a lesser number in
Barnstable, Bristol and Plymouth counties and a few strag-
glers wintered in or near Boston. Mr. Lewis W. Hill says
that his brother saw a “bunch” of twelve at Martha’s
Vineyard (1908), and ‘‘last year’? (1907) he himself killed
three out of a group of ten. Mr. Louis Agassiz Fuertes of
Ithaca, N. Y., says that Canvas-backs are far more numerous
there than formerly. About fifteen years ago they began to
appear about November 1, and since then larger numbers
come each year. In 1908 a ‘“‘bed”’ of about five hundred
wintered. They are still-considered rather rare in eastern
New York. Whether this increase is due to better spring
protection on their Canadian breeding grounds, or whether
more of the species than usual are now breeding to the north-
ward of New England, it is impossible to determine. Possibly
the introduction and increase of the wild celery (Vallisneria)
into several ponds in Massachusetts may have attracted
more of these birds than came here formerly. They are rare
to the north and east. There are not many records from
Essex County, Mass., and they are rated as very rare in
Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine. A good supply of
favorite food is the main attraction to Ducks as well as all
other birds, and only constant persecution will drive them
from it. The following observations may furnish another
clew to the recent increase of Canvas-backs in New York and
120 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Massachusetts: Dr. L. C. Sanford writes me that about 1890
there was a sudden and nearly total disappearance of Canvas-
backs in Chesapeake Bay, and that in the fall of 1891 they
appeared in large numbers for the first time (so far as the
memory of man goes back) at Port Rowan Bay, on the north
side of Lake Erie. The gunners state that wild celery was
noticed there about that time. In the latter part of Novem-
ber of that year Dr. Sanford passed through scattered flocks
of Canvas-backs at Port Rowan Bay that extended for about
seven miles, and must have numbered a hundred thousand
birds. The Chesapeake Bay Ducks probably stopped on
Lake Erie.

The great breeding grounds of the Canvas-back lie in the
Canadian northwest. To reach Massachusetts they must
travel a little south of east, and as numbers are seen in migra-
tion on the Great Lakes, and as the lakes lie in a direct line
between their breeding grounds and their fall and winter
haunts in this State, it seems probable that our birds come
from the northwest. The Canvas-back is a good diver, and
is able to reach its food in twenty to twenty-five feet of
water. It is said to be more successful than any other bird
in pulling up the roots of the wild celery. The wings are the
chief propelling power in diving, as is the case with many
other water birds. The Canvas-back is of high food value
only when it has been feeding on wild celery; otherwise it is
often thin, and usually poor and fishy in flavor when taken
on the Atlantic coast. As it finds its favorite food in some
of the ponds on Martha’s Vineyard, this may account for
the fact that it is more common there than elsewhere in
Massachusetts. From its northwestern breeding grounds it
migrates south and southeast, reaching the Atlantic and Gulf
coasts. Only the most northerly edge of the great fan-shaped
migrating movement reaches New England.

The Canvas-back is not by any means confined to the
Vallisneria in feeding, but takes the seeds of wild rice, water
lilies, pondweeds and other vegetable matter, as well as fish,
tadpoles, leeches, mollusks and insects.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 121

 

SCAUP (Marila marila).

Common or local names: Bluebill, Blue-billed Widgeon; Widgeon; Troop-fowl; Broad-
bill; Black-head.

 

Length. — 17.50 to 20.75 inches.

Adult Male. — Head, neck, upper back and breast black, the head and
upper neck showing greenish reflections; back black, saddled with
white, which is crossed with narrow wavy black lines; wing patch
white; a white stripe along wing when spread; belly and flanks pure
white, with more or less faint fine black cross lines; hinder parts black;
bill dull blue or pale blue gray, with black nail; legs and feet lead color;
iris yellow.

Adult Female. — Black of male replaced by dusky or snuffy brown; region
around base of bill white; wings brown; speculum and stripe in ex-
tended wing white; under parts not so pure white; bill and feet some-
what duller than in male.

Young. — Resembles female.

Field Marks. — The conspicuous white mask of the female distinguishes it
from all others except the female of the Lesser Scaup and the female
Ring-neck. At close range or in a good light the head of the male is
greenish rather than purplish, as in the case of the Lesser Scaup, and
the full-plumaged male has the flanks much whiter and less lined than
the male of the Lesser Scaup. In flight the front third of the body of
a male Scaup appears black, and the hinder two-thirds of the body and
the secondary wing quills appear white, only the tail showing dark.
122 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Notes. — Call a discordant scaup, scaup. Similar to the guttural sounds
made by the Canvas-back, Redhead and other diving Ducks (Elliot).
Also a soft purring whistle (Eaton).

Season. — Common migrant coastwise; September rarely, common October
to April.

Range. — Northern parts of northern hemisphere. Breeds in America from
Minnesota, North Dakota and British Columbia to central Keewatin,
Great Slave Lake and the Aleutian Islands; has bred casually on Mag-
dalen Islands in Ontario and Michigan; winters from Maine to the
Bahama Islands and from the Aleutian Islands, Nevada, Colorado
and Lake Ontario to southern California and the Gulf coast; rare mi-
grant in Central Ungava, Labrador, Newfoundland and Nova Scotia.

-History.

This bird was formerly known as the American Scaup,
but it is indistinguishable from European specimens. Com-
monly as this Duck is seen on our coasts in fall, winter and
spring its habits and food are not as yet very well known.
Its numbers seem to have decreased much in the past.
It was formerly taken in numbers in some of the interior
ponds and lakes of Massachusetts, where it commonly asso-
ciated with the Black Ducks, but reports from all the interior
counties of the State indicate that it had decreased from fifty
to ninety per cent. in the twenty-seven years prior to 1908.
Only two observers in the coast counties put the decrease as
low as twenty-five per cent. within that period, but many
record a recent increase. Sixteen Massachusetts reports on
the species note it as increasing; forty-three show a decrease.
This was one of the first Ducks to respond to spring protec-
tion in Canada and New England, and has been increasing
along the New England coast now for several years. Unlike
the Lesser Scaup it appears to be fond of salt-water bays,
and lives and feeds much in such localities along our coast in
winter. Long Island Sound, the great South Bay, the waters
about Cape Cod and Massachusetts Bay all attract this
species in fall, winter and spring, but it rarely winters in
numbers much farther north on the coast of New England.
A few years ago it was seen mainly in small flocks, but now
flocks of thousands may sometimes be observed along the
New England coast. As they have not increased so much
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 123

 

farther south, it is probable that the protection that they
now receive here in winter and spring has induced many of
them to remain here instead of going south.

The Scaup breeds from the northern United States north-
ward to Alaska and the Aleutian Islands. It is rather rare
in Greenland, where it probably breeds, but we have no
means of knowing whether the Greenland birds come here in
migration. It summers mainly in the northern part of the
western province of North America, and it migrates south-
east in fall to reach southern New England and the Middle
States. Its center of abundance in winter is along the Atlan-
tic coast. It returns by a similar route, though it sometimes
pushes farther north along the coast in spring than the region
included in its normal winter range. The regular southeast-
ward migration of the species is usually finished in November,
and they winter wherever December finds them; but in
severe winters they are driven away from the open lakes and
marshes by the ice, and at such times they fly to the coast
in January, when they sometimes arrive in considerable num-
bers on Long Island Sound. In January and February the
northward movement along the Atlantic coast begins, and as
soon as the lakes of the interior are partly freed from ice, in
March, the Broad-bills are seen on their way to their summer
homes. Mr. Louis Agassiz Fuertes of Ithaca, N. Y., says that
the Greater Scaup is a common bird there in winter on open
marshes. Mr. John M. Winslow of Nantucket says that there
are some fifteen hundred to two thousand Scaup around the
island. The numbers do not change much.

On the Maine coast its food seems to consist largely of
surface-swimming crustaceans and mussels (Knight). Fish
fry, insects and the buds, stems and roots of aquatic plants
are eaten by this bird in fresh water. It is fond of the buds
and root stocks of the wild celery, and, in company with the
Lesser Scaup, the Canvas-back and the Redhead, frequents
waters where this plant grows, and, by diving, brings up the
buds from the bottom.
124 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

LESSER SCAUP (Marila affinis).

Common or local names: Little Bluebill; River Broad-bill; Creek Broad-bill; Raft
Duck; and other names that are also applied to the Greater Scaup.

 

FEMALE. MALE.

Length. —'15 to 17 inches.

Adult. — Similar to Greater Scaup but smaller, head and neck of male
showing purplish instead of greenish reflections; full-plumaged males
have the fine black wavy lines on the flanks much more numerous and
more distinct than those of Greater Scaup.

Field Marks. — The full-plumaged male may be distinguished from Greater
Scaup at close range with a glass by the purplish gloss of the head.
The female is indistinguishable from that of Greater Scaup except by
measurement.

Notes. — Some shrill, others low and guttural; heard mostly at night.

Season. — Rather uncommon, or rare migrant, in New England; most
common in fall; early October to May; rare winter resident in Massa-
chusetts.

Range. — North America. Breeds from the Yukon valley, Alaska, and
Fort Anderson, Mackenzie, south to central British Columbia, south-
ern Montana, Colorado (casually), northern Iowa, northern Indiana
and western Lake Erie; winters from southern British Columbia,
Nevada, Colorado, Lake Erie and New Jersey south to the Bahamas,
Lesser Antilles and Panama; rare in migration in Newfoundland, New
Brunswick and Nova Scotia; accidental in Greenland and Bermuda.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 125

 

History.

Little is known about the history of the little Scaup Black-
head or Bluebill, for it was formerly confused with the larger
species and is not now distinguished from it by many gunners.
Therefore all statements regarding its distribution, migrations,
increase or decrease in localities that are frequented by both
species must be received with some caution. There is little
to be learned about its former status in New England from
ornithological writers. Brewster (1907) states that it formerly
came into Fresh Pond, Cambridge, in small flocks, but recently
it seems to have grown rarer there. Mr. Robert O. Morris
of Springfield says (1901) that years ago he has seen five
hundred of this species on the Connecticut River at one time,
but they were driven away by gunners in boats. This species
responds to protection readily, however, and is seen now in
small numbers in the ponds about Boston where no shooting
is allowed, particularly in Jamaica Pond. It frequents small
fresh-water ponds, rivers and creeks and brackish waters,
while the Greater Scaup appears to prefer large lakes and
the salt water. For this reason the decrease of the Lesser
Scaup in New England probably has been much more rapid
than that of the Greater Scaup, which finds more safety in
the larger ponds and salt-water bays that it frequents. Dr.
John C. Phillips finds that in three years at Wenham Lake
the number of Greater Scaup killed was only about twenty
per cent. of the number of Scaup taken. Probably the re-
verse would be true on salt water.

Fifty-two of those who reported to me in 1908 gave infor-
mation about this species, and thirty-two expressed an opinion
that its numbers had changed. Only four reported an
increase; twenty-seven a decrease. Reports all along the
Atlantic coast indicate a great decrease in the numbers of
.this species. I have observed this diminution myself in the
south. In January, 1878, on Lake George, Fla., Raft Ducks
were scattered over the water as far as the eye could see, and
on Indian River they were gathered in great rafts a mile or
more in length, but by the year 1900 only a few hundred, or
126 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

at most a few thousand, could be seen, and Mr. William C.
Peterson of Canaveral, Fla., says that they are still decreas-
ing. Within the past five years there has been an increase
in many localities, which may be attributed, as in the case
of the larger species, to spring protection. While this bird is
uncommon on our coast, compared to the Greater Scaup, it
is more numerous in central New York, and outnumbers its
larger namesake in the more southern States. As it is not
known to breed east of western Lake Ontario, its migration
from the northwest in fall must have a strong easterly trend.
Non-breeding individuals are sometimes seen in New England
in summer.

In winter the Scaup often passes the night upon the water.
On moonlit nights individuals of a flock will feed and play.
On still nights large flocks can sleep on the water, with little
danger of being disturbed by their natural enemies, although
in the south alligators probably pick up a few birds, and in
the north the Great Horned Owl may occasionally get one.
If a breeze blows it sometimes drifts the whole flock upon
a lee shore, where the lynx or the fox lies in wait for them.
One morning in January, 1900, I crept down at daylight
to the shore of the Banana River in East Florida, expecting
to find a flock of Bluebills drifted inshore by the wind, but
before I reached the shore I saw a creeping lynx stealing
down the beach on a similar errand, oblivious to all but the
Ducks, on which he also wished to breakfast. He has killed
no Ducks since that day.

The food of this species differs from that of the preceding
much as its preference for smaller bodies of water and fresh
water would indicate. It takes the larvee of insects, worms,
crustaceans, snails, etc. Mr. Robert O. Morris (1901) says
that it is not uncommon near Springfield in autumn, and that
pond snails appear to be its favorite food while there.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 127

 

RING-NECKED DUCK (Marila collaris).

Common or local names: Ring-neck; Ring-necked Scaup; Ring-billed Duck.

 

Mate.

Length. — About 17.50 inches.

Adult Male. — Upper parts, breast and under tail coverts black, deepest on
head, which shows green, violet and purple iridescences at close range;
a more or less inconspicuous orange brown collar on neck; triangular
white spot on chin; wings slate gray; wing patch bluish gray; below
white; flanks and lower belly marked with fine waved lines of black;
bill dark leaden bluish, tipped with black, and with subterminal and
basal bands of pale blue; iris yellow; feet dusky blue.

Adult Female. — Lacks the neck ring and the waved lines on flanks, which
are barred; a well-marked band of grayish white around base of bill,
shading to pure white on chin; general tints brownish; top of head,
back of neck, back and wings dark brown; speculum or wing patch
dark grayish blue, much like that of male; flanks coarsely barred with
two shades of brown; below white; bill slate, black-tipped, with pale
blue subterminal band and light basal band, as in male; eye dark, with
white ring around it.

Field Marks. — The black back distinguishes male from other male Scaups,
and female may be distinguished from other female Scaups by white
eye ring and bands about bill. (See Fig. 7.) Its white face resembles
those of other female Scaups, but it is lighter on cheeks. The grayish
blue wing patch of both sexes is shown when the bird flaps its wings.
This distinguishes this species from all other Ducks, except the Red-
head, which is much larger.

Season. — Rather rare spring and fall migrant; very rare in spring on the
New England coast; seen in autumn from about the middle of October
to the first of December.

Range. — North America. Breeds from southern British Columbia to
northern California, and from northern Alberta and Lake Winnipeg
128 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

south to North Dakota, northern Iowa, and southern Wisconsin; win-
ters from southern British Columbia, New Mexico, northern Texas,
southern Illinois, and New Jersey south to Porto Rico and Guatemala;
occurs in migration north to Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, and Quebec;
recorded from Bermuda and England.

History.

The Ring-necked Duck apparently is not recorded as very
common anywhere and is certainly rare now, if not very rare,
in Massachusetts, except in the southeastern counties, where
it occurs more commonly in some localities. To the north
and east it grows rarer. Dr. Townsend gives one record
for Essex County, and Dr.
Phillips records three later
at Wenham Lake. Rich says
that probably not more than
one specimen is killed dur-
ing the year in Maine, and
Knight regards it as a very
rare migrant there, although
he says that Boardman once
found it breeding in Wash-
ington County.' It resembles the Lesser Scaup in appearance,
size and habits. Like that species it is very swift on the wing.
As it springs from the water it may be recognized by the dis-
tinct whistling sounds made by its wings in its sudden effort
to escape danger. The only specimen I ever killed was one of
a pair which passed me on a high wind at such speed that the
second bird was beyond gunshot before I could cover it and
discharge the second barrel. It associates with the Lesser
Scaup and feeds on similar food. Minnows, snails, tadpoles,
frogs, crayfish, the roots of aquatic plants and many seeds are
eaten.

 

Fic. 7.— Head of female.

 

1 It should be noted, however, that Boardman states in his Catalogue of the Birds found in the
vicinity of Calais, Me., and about the islands in the Bay of Fundy, that the Ring-necked Duck
does not breed in that region; but Mr. Knight writes me that he visited Mr. Boardman twice and
that the statement as it appears in The Birds of Maine was taken from Boardman’s last revision of
his own field notes.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 129

 

GOLDEN-EYE (Clangula clangula americana).

Common or local names: Whistler; Greathead.

 

FEMALE. MALE.

Length. — 17 to 20 inches.

Adult Male. -— Head and upper neck dark green (appearing black in the
field except at close range in good light); slightly crested; a roundish
spot below and in front of eye white; middle of back and tail black;
entire under parts (except throat), neck all round and sides of upper
back white; wing quills black, much of them covered with white of
fore wing when closed, wing showing a broad patch of white when
spread; iris yellow; bill blackish, tipped with orange; feet orange or yel-
low, with dusky webs.

Adult Female. — Head and upper neck cinnamon brown, with no white spot;
back and wide band across breast dark grayish brown; ring around
neck whitish, also rest of under parts; wing showing considerable
white, both when closed and when open; iris yellow; bill brown, yellow
or orange toward tip; feet yellowish, webs dusky.

Young Male. —Less gray on breast and indications of a white spot before eye.

Field Marks. — Male, conspicuous black and white, stocky; the dark, large,
fluffy head, with rounded white spot before eye, distinguishes it.
Female, a snuff colored head, unmarked; readily distinguished from
the Redhead by the white on wing and yellow tip of bill. The sharp,
high, whistling sound of their flight is characteristic.

Notes. — A low croak (Chapman). The male, when startled or lost, a
sharp cur-r-rew (Eaton). The female a single whistling peep; a low-
pitched quack to call young (Knight).

Nest. — In hollow tree or stump.
130 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Eggs. — From five to twelve, glossy greenish, measuring about 2.35 by 1.70.

Season. — Common migrant locally, November to April; often locally abun-
dant coastwise.

Range. — North America. Breeds from Central Alaska, northern Mac-
kenzie, central Keewatin, northern Ungava and Newfoundland south
to southern British Columbia, southern Montana, northern North
Dakota, Michigan, New York and northern New England; winters
from the Aleutian Islands, Utah, Nebraska, Minnesota, Lake Erie,
Maine and New Brunswick south to southern California, central Mex-
ico and Florida; occurs in Bermuda.

History.

I can well remember when this bird was a common and
familiar sight on the ponds of Worcester County and was
abundant on the Connecticut, Concord and Sudbury rivers;
but it has become comparatively rare in inland Massachusetts
in recent years, and like all our Ducks has been driven from
its former haunts in the interior by incessant persecution.
On the Charles River in the Back Bay district in Boston,
and on some of the reservoirs where no shooting is allowed,
this species has increased recently in numbers, which shows
that it is not much afraid of people, buildings or boats, but
is driven away mainly by shooting. My correspondence
with over three hundred gunners and other observers seems
to show conclusively that the species has decreased greatly
throughout the State within the thirty years prior to 1909.
Only ten correspondents note an increase in the species, and
sixty-two note a decrease. Even in Barnstable County,
where five observers report an increase, eighteen report a
decrease. Mr. Clement A. Cahoon of Harwich states that
fifty-five to sixty years ago Whistlers came into a large pond
there by hundreds. People came five miles or more to shoot
them. Now (1908) he says that he would “ about as much
expect to see a bullfrog flying over the narrows to that
pond as to see Whistlers.” Mr. Samuel L. Buffington of
Touisset says that Bluebills, Whistlers and Sheldrakes have
decreased at least seventy-five per cent. in the river near his
home. Where there were formerly flocks of one hundred to
two hundred they now see flocks of two or four to a dozen.
On the other hand, Mr. George Spencer Morris writes me
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 131

 

that this species, formerly not very common near Cape
Charles, Va., is now abundant there. I hear of no increase
elsewhere along the Atlantic coast except at Prince Edward
Island (where Mr. E. T. Carbonnel says that nearly all wild-
‘fowl have increased under recent protection) and locally in
Massachusetts, where Whistlers have increased since spring
shooting was abolished.

The Golden-eye is commonly known as the Whistler be-
cause of the peculiar penetrating whistle made by its wings
in flight. There are times when these cutting strokes can be
heard even before the bird itself can be clearly made out.
The Whistler breeds from just above the latitude of Massa-
chusetts northward to the limit of trees, making its nest in
a hollow tree near some fresh-water pond or river. It breeds
in the interior of Alaska, but is very rarely seen on the coast.
Barnum mentioned a case of its breeding in Onondaga County,
N. Y., and Merriam, Ralph and Bagg record it as breeding in
the Adirondack region.!_ It formerly bred abundantly in the
Maine woods, and still breeds there and probably in northern
Vermont and New Hampshire to some extent. Boardman
states that in Maine he has seen the female Whistler pick up
two of her ducklings, one at a time, and carry them across a
lake, making a trip for each young one, and he was told by his
companion that the mother birds often took their young from
one lake to another when they thought the little ones were
in danger. The bird appeared to carry the young by her
feet pressed close to the body. When his companion shouted
and threw up his hat the bird dropped the young one, but
came back for it at once. Boardman’s companion told him
that the young were usually carried from the nest to the
water in the bill of the parent, but to go any distance the
feet were used in carrying them. The Golden-eye is found
almost throughout the interior of North America, and is dis-
tinctly a fresh-water bird until the frosts of winter begin to
close the ponds and rivers, when most of the Whistlers in
New England go to the salt water. Some, however, still
remain in the unfrozen fresh waters of the north, south and

 

1 Eaton, E. H.: Birds of New York, 1910, p. 209.
132 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

west. Eaton says that it inhabits the open waters of every
portion of New York State throughout the winter. Samuels
(1870) says that it is often seen in the lakes and ponds of the
interior of New England when they are open in winter. The
average date of its appearance at Wood’s Hole, Mass., is
November 15, as given by Professor Cooke. It returns north-
ward early, arriving in Canada in February, March or April,
according to the season. Nuttall (1834) states that the
natives of Lapland make nesting places for this bird by
attaching hollowed pieces of wood to the stunted pine trees
in which it ordinarily breeds. He says also that in its native
haunts it is by no means shy; but this statement no longer
applies to the Whistler of New England.

The Whistler is a remarkably active bird, dives like a
flash and rarely comes well to decoys. It has learned to
be extremely wary and cautious, but in stormy weather it
often keeps close to shore, which gives the shore gunner his
chance. It does not always dive for its food, but sometimes
dabbles in the mud along the shore with Bluebills or other
Ducks. Offshore it feeds largely on mussels, which it dis-
lodges and brings up from the bottom. Audubon found it
feeding on crayfish on the Ohio River. Wayne says that in
South Carolina a small mussel of salt or brackish water is
its favorite food. Knight has observed it feeding on these
and also some vegetable substance. He states that it eats
small fish and fry also, and along the coast it feeds on mussels
and other mollusks; but Elliot believes that in the interior
the Whistler feeds on vegetable matter, such as grasses and
roots. When feeding there and when it first comes to the
salt water in autumn the young are fairly tender and well
flavored, being about on a par with the Bluebill as a table
delicacy. Some of the residents of Cape Cod consider it
superior to the Scoters. Nuttall says that it eats fresh-water
vegetation, such as the roots of Equisetums and the seeds of
some species of Polygonums.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 133

 

BARROW’S GOLDEN-EYE (Clangula islandica).

Length. — 20 to 22.50 inches.

Adult Male. — Similar to Golden-eye; head moderately puffy, with feathers
lengthening into a slight crest; gloss of head chiefly purple and violet;
a large wedge-shaped, triangular or crescentic white spot between bill
and eye, running up vertically to a point and extending along the whole
side of base of bill; a white stripe on the black shoulder; white area on
wing more or less divided by a dark bar.

Adult Female and Young. — Similar to female of Golden-eye; indistinguish-
able, except by a dark bar on white of wing, which is not always pres-
ent, head usually darker in color, and this color extends farther down
on neck, making the white collar narrower than in the Golden-eye;
gray belt on breast is broader and the bill relatively shorter, deeper and
wider in proportion to its length; sometimes nearly all yellow.

Field Marks. — In male, white spot at base of bill is triangular, not round,
as in Golden-eye. (See Fig. 8.) Female and young almost indistinguish-
able in the field from Golden-eye, but the bill is smaller and more yellow.

Notes. — Probably a low croaking sound, similar to that produced by the
Golden-eye (Chapman).

Season. — Very rare winter visitor.

Range. — Northern North America. Breeds from south central Alaska and
northwestern Mackenzie to southern Oregon and southern Colorado,
and from northern Ungava to central Quebec; winters from southeast-
ern Alaska, central Montana, the Great Lakes and Gulf of St. Law-
rence south to central California, southern Colorado, Nebraska and
New England; accidental in Europe; breeds commonly in Iceland and a
rare visitor to Greenland.

History.

The Barrow’s Golden-eye is a northern bird and has prob-
ably always been very rare in
Massachusetts within historic
times. Mr. Boardman asserts
that it formerly bred in Maine,
but although a few birds may
have summered in that State
there is no record of the actual
discovery of anest. Itis some-
times common in our markets,
but most of the specimens pro-

cured there probably came
from the west. ‘The records of its occurrence here are not

many, and Brewster doubts the authenticity of some. Never-

 

Fic. 8.— Male.
134 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

theless, a few evidently are authentic, and it is highly prob-
able that the females and young come here in larger numbers
than the males, but are overlooked on account of their close
resemblance to those of the Whistler, as they make a similar
whistling noise with their wings in flight and are indistin-
guishable from the Whistler, except by an expert. This bird
seems to prefer the west or the interior of the continent to
our coast. It is, or formerly was, not uncommon in north-
eastern Maine, and on the St. Lawrence River in northern
New York.

In the Vermont Agricultural Report published in the year
1901, Dr. George H. Perkins and Mr. C. D. Howe give a
preliminary list of the birds of Vermont, in which they include
this species and note that there is a specimen in the museum
at St. Johnsbury which was taken in the State. Brewster
(1909) gives but three authentic records for Massachusetts.

Since the above was written I have come to doubt whether
it is possible for any one to distinguish with certainty the
females and young of americana in all cases from those of
islandica. The differences between the males may be seen
at a glance; but such authorities as Brewster and Ridgway
have both been somewhat puzzled in determining females.
The typical shapes of the bill in each species are illustrated
in Eaton’s Birds of New York, but these vary, and not even
the measurements of the wing can be depended upon. Any
one who is in doubt regarding the identity of a specimen
should consult an excellent article on Barrow’s Golden-eye in
Massachusetts by Brewster in the Auk,! and, if still undecided,
should refer the matter of identification to some expert who
has access to a large series of skins of both species.

 

1 Brewster, William: Barrow’s Golden-eye in Massachusetts, Auk, 1909, pp. 153-164.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 135

 

BUFFLE-HEAD (Charitonetta albeola).

Common or local names: Dipper Duck; Dapper; Dopper; Robin Dipper; Butter
Ball; Bumblebee Duck.

 

FrMALeE. MALE.

Length. — 12.25 to 15 inches.

Adult Male. — A snow-white patch from back of and below eye over top
and back of head to other eye; rest of head and a little of neck appar-
ently black, crested, and puffed out at sides (at close range showing
glossy purple, violet and green); nearly all of neck, flanks and under
parts pure white, turning to dusky white on belly, vent and tail coverts;
back black; wings largely black, but most of fore wing and shoulders
white; tail and upper coverts dark grayish; iris brown; bill dark gray;
feet flesh color.

Adult Female and Young. — Head, neck and upper parts sooty brown; head
and wings darkest; usually a patch back of and below eye whitish;
wings brown, showing some white when spread; under parts (except
throat and upper foreneck) white; bill bluish gray tinged with lavender.

Field Marks. — Size of Teal or smaller. Only the Hooded Merganser has
a somewhat similar dark head with a triangular white patch when
crest is raised, like male of this species. Female may be known by
small size, white patch back of and below eye and white wing patch,
when this can be seen.

Notes. — A single guttural note like a small edition of the Canvas-back’s
roll (Elliot). A guttural croak (Chapman). A short quack (Wilson).
Resembles croak of Golden-eye but feebler (Brewer).

Season. — Rather uncommon spring and autumn migrant; formerly com-
mon, wintering occasionally on the coast; late September to early May.

Range. — North America. Breeds from the Yukon to central Keewatin and
south to Newfoundland, British Columbia, Montana and Ontario;
winters from the Aleutian Islands, southern Michigan, western New
York and New Brunswick south to northern Lower California, central
Mexico and Florida; recorded from Hawaii, Greenland, Newfound-
land, Nova Scotia, Bermuda and Great Britain.
136 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

This little Duck is widely known on fresh waters, for it
is by nature a fresh-water bird, which in autumn and winter
frequents the sea-shore. It was named Buffle-head (or Buffalo-
head) because of its large fluffy head, which looks particularly
big when the feathers are erected. The Buffle-head was not
much sought by gunners until within recent years. Its great
weakness is a fondness for decoys. Mr. George Spencer
Morris writes me (1908) regarding the region about Cape
Charles, Va., where he says that twenty-five years ago great
flocks of this species were constantly seen and their notes
were continually heard. He states the belief that they are
not one-fourth as numerous now, yet about the same number
as formerly are taken in a day’s bag. He believes that the
Dipper’s infatuation for wooden Ducks will lead to its extinc-
tion. Mr. A. C. Bent of Taunton, Mass., says that it was
formerly fairly common there but is now very rare. Mr.
Israel R. Sheldon says that it was formerly very common but
is now rare in upper Narragansett Bay, and that it frequents
coves where it is easily taken. Mr. Lewis W. Hill says that it
is usually common at Edgartown, Mass.; one man got fifteen
intwodays. The following brief extracts from authors indicate
a decrease: Abundant October and May (Turmbull, east Penn-
sylvania and New Jersey, 1869). Abundant on our coast spring
and autumn (Samuels, New England, 1870). Common winter
visitor (Merriam, Connecticut, 1877). Uncommon migrant
on coast, wintering rarely; not uncommon inland (Howe and
Allen, Massachusetts, 1901). Not uncommon transient; rare
in winter (Townsend, Essex County, 1905). Of late its
autumn visits appear to have been becoming less and less
frequent (Brewster, Cambridge region, 1906). Uncommon
migrant and rare winter resident in New Hampshire, Massa-
chusetts. Rhode Island and Connecticut, and uncommon
migrant in Vermont (G. M. Allen, 1909).

Observers from all parts of Massachusetts, except Hamp-
shire County (where none report it), are nearly unanimous
in the opinion that this species is decreasing. Six think that
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 137

 

they have recently seen a slight increase, and one sees an
increase of ninety per cent.; fifty-three report a decrease.
As with all the water-fowl, the great majority of the reports
are from the coast counties, which shows that this Duck, like
many of the fresh-water fowl, has been driven from the in-
terior, where it was formerly common, to the coast, where it
is steadily decreasing in numbers. It is believed that this
species formerly bred in Washington County, Me., and it
may do so still, but there is no recent record of its nesting
within the United States.

The male is a handsome bird; its bright contrasting tints
are highly ornamental, but, as is usual among Ducks, the
female is dull and inconspicuous in color and much smaller.
My youthful experience with the Dipper Duck convinced me
at the time that it could dive quickly enough to dodge a
charge of shot; but its immunity from danger probably was
due more to my inexperience and to the inferior quality of the
gun and ammunition used than to the quickness of the bird.
However, it dives like a flash, and is very likely to escape
unless the gunner, warned by experience, uses a close shooting
gun, judges well his distance and holds exactly right. When
a few are together one usually keeps watch when the others
are under water and warns them of danger by its short quack.
In flight it hurls itself through the air with tremendous speed,
its rapidly moving wings almost forming a haze about its
glancing form, which buzzes straight away as if bound for
the other end of the world. It alights on the water with a
tumultuous splash, sliding along for a little distance over the
surface. When it has once alighted it seems to prefer the
water to the air, and will often dive, rather than fly, to escape
danger. It is sometimes so fat that in the middle States it is
known as the Butter-box or Butter-ball, but the flesh is not
usually of a very good quality. Mr. F. A. Bates says that
he prefers to hunger rather than to eat a Dipper. Others
will agree with him, but I have never found any Duck that
was not fairly good if properly handled and prepared. As
with all Ducks the quality of its flesh depends largely on the
character of the food it has recently eaten, and this species,
138 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

like others, is much more palatable when killed in the interior
than when taken on the sea-coast. In February the males
begin their mating antics, when they have a habit of stretch-
ing forth the neck and erecting the glossy feathers of the
head as it is moved back and forth, so as to display their
beauties to the best advantage in the sunlight. They are
quite quarrelsome in the mating season and fight furiously
for the possession of favored females.

Nuttall says that the Buffle-head feeds principally upon
fresh-water and submerged vegetation, and that it sometimes
visits the salt marshes “‘in quest of the laver (Ulva lactuca),”
as well as crustacea and small shell-fish. Audubon states
that it feeds on shrimps, small fry and bivalves in salt water,
and on crayfish, leeches, snails and grasses in fresh water.
Dr. Warren found small shells and coleopterous insects in
stomachs of this species. Knight says that it eats young
chubs, shiners and other small fish. It also takes locusts,
grasshoppers and many other insects.

When it is considered that the minnows on which the
Buffle-head feeds to a considerable extent eat the eggs of
trout and other food fishes, it seems probable that it is a
useful bird, and certainly it is a very interesting one. Its
diminution on the Atlantic sea-board has been deplorably
rapid. In 1870 Samuels regarded it as a “very common
and well known bird” in New England and abundant in
migration. At its present rate of decrease, another century
will see its extinction as surely as the last century saw that
of the Great Auk and the Labrador Duck. Its rate of decrease
should be watched, and, if necessary, a close season should be
declared for several years in every State and province where
it breeds or which it visits in its annual migrations. It is
unsafe to procrastinate in matters of this kind.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 139

 

OLD-SQUAW (Harelda hyemalis).

Common or local names: Old Injun; Old Wife; Long-tail; South Southerly; Cockawee;
Scoldenore; Scolder; Quandy.

 

Mates.
WINTER. SPRING.

Length. — Male, variable up to 23 inches; female, about 16 inches.

Adult Male in Winter. — Patch on side of head and neck blackish brown
(occasionally nearly absent); side of head elsewhere light gray, some-
times extending to forehead; rest of head, including eyelids, neck and
upper breast, white; back, wings and tail dark brown or blackish; two
light pearl gray patches extending back over shoulders and scapulars;
lower breast and upper belly brown, rest of belly white; two middle
tail feathers black, very long and narrow; outer tail feathers white;
base and extreme tip of bill black, the rest pink and yellow; feet pale
slate.

Adult Male in Late Spring. — Sides of head gray and white; rest of head, neck,
back, breast, and upper belly dark brown or brownish black; feathers
of the upper back and shoulders margined with reddish brown; most of
belly white; tail feathers and feet as in winter.

Adult Female in Winter. — Head, neck and lower parts mostly white; top
and back of head, throat and a variable spot on side of head dusky;
other upper parts and upper breast mainly dusky brown; shoulders
lighter; middle tail feathers not elongated.

Adult Female in Spring. — Similar to female in winter, but sides of head
and neck largely dusky; feathers of the back margined with brown.
Young in Winter. — Similar to adult female in winter, or with head and
neck chiefly grayish; sides of head whitish; breast streaked with dusky;

-often lacking much of the white of the adults. ;
140 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Field Marks. — In winter plumage head mostly white; ashy or dusky patch
on side of head and upper neck, which is conspicuous in old and young.

Notes. — Those most commonly uttered resemble the words, sduth séuth
southérly or old soiith sotithérly (Elliot). O-one-o-onc-ough-egh-ough-egh
(Mackay). Owly owly owly (Packard).

Season. —Common to abundant migrant and winter resident, mainly
coastwise; October to May.

Range. — Northern hemisphere. In North America breeds from islands of
Bering Sea, Arctic coast of Alaska, Melville Island, Wellington Chan-
nel, Grinnell Land and northern Greenland south to Aleutian Islands,
east central Mackenzie, northern Hudson Bay and southeastern Ungava;
winters from the Aleutian Islands south regularly to Washington,
rarely to San Diego Bay, Cal., and in southern Greenland, and from
Gulf of St. Lawrence south regularly to the Great Lakes and North
Carolina, and rarely to Colorado, Texas, Louisiana and Florida.

 

FEMALE (WINTER).

History.

This species is beautiful in plumage and elegant in form,
but is pursued mainly for sport as it is no table delicacy.
Thousands of these handsome Ducks are shot annually along
the New England coast, and the dead and wounded allowed
to drift away on the tide or picked up merely to be shown as
trophies and afterward left on the wharf or thrown away.
Rich says that he has seen twenty boats at a time, each con-
taining from two to four shooters, all killmg and wounding
Old-squaws, and half of them never stopping to pick up even
one bird. ‘It is at the hands of such butchers,” he says,
“that the myriads of sea-fowl that once lined our coasts have
been reduced to the hundredth part of their former numbers.” 4
No species, however numerous, could stand forever such deci-

 

1 Rich, Walter E.: Feathered Game of the Northeast, 1907, pp. 360, 361.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 141

 

mation; and to make the matter worse, the greater part of
them are killed on the way north to their breeding grounds.
He has had every opportunity to observe the effect of this
shooting on the Maine coast and note its results. It would
seem from the descriptions of earlier writers that this species
was formerly much more numerous than now. Peabody
(Birds of Massachusetts, 1839) states that “‘ the caravans of
this species that pass along our coasts are large, and their
noise can be heard at a great distance.’ De Kay (Birds of
New York, 1844) says “they appear on our coast in autumn
in immense flocks, and almost cover the surface of our bays
in the coldest and severest weather of the winter.”” Merriam
(Connecticut, 1877) tells of hundreds of thousands on the
sound, covering the water as far as the eye can reach. Mr.
Israel R. Sheldon of Pawtuxet, R. I., says that they are driven
out of Narragansett Bay, where they were formerly very com-
mon. Mr. Willard W. Robbins of Medfield, Mass., says (1910)
that he has known the occupants of six boats to kill as many
as two hundred in one tide eight years ago. Mr. John M.
Winslow of Nantucket says that he used to kill one hundred
in a morning; but now gets very few. Eaton states in his
Birds of New York (1910) that Old-squaws are far less abun-
dant than thirty years ago.

It is probable that the continual harassing that this bird
has received on the Maine coast has caused its decrease there
by driving many south to the shoals off Cape Cod, so keeping
up the Cape Cod supply. Notwithstanding the fact that the
species has probably decreased somewhat even in our waters,
the great breeding grounds of the far north still provide large
numbers, and it is abundant on our coasts.

It is a very hardy bird, stiff set, strongly boned and
muscled, covered with a coat of thick down and tough feath-
ers, and rarely leaves its arctic home until fairly driven out
by the ice. It is commonly seen in numbers on the New Eng-
land coast from late November to late March. It is perhaps
as swift on wing as any North American Duck. Sometimes
a flock flying low over the water will plunge quickly down at
the sound of a gun and pitch into the water, only to fly off
142 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

again. It often circles high in the air, apparently in play,
and its flight is so erratic that I have seen individuals which
were shot in the back when flying high over the shooter. If
wounded it will dive deep and swim far, and often under such
circumstances one will go to the bottom, seize some object
with the bill and hang on until drowned rather than risk
capture. Its swift movements, strong build, great vitality
and thick plumage make it difficult to kill, and it is among
the most expert of divers. It disappears so quickly at the
flash of a gun that it seems almost impossible to kill one on
the water. Gov. W. D. Hoard of Wisconsin assured me that
the lake fishermen there take Ducks, presumably of this
species, in their fishing nets, at a depth of fifty to one hun-
dred feet, and I have heard similar tales told by Atlantic
coast fishermen. Eaton in his Birds of New York (page 214)
states that this bird is frequently taken in the Great Lakes
in gill nets at a depth of fifteen fathoms, and sometimes at
twenty-seven fathoms, or one hundred and sixty-two feet.
He also quotes the statement that at Dunkirk, N. Y., between
five and seven thousand of these birds were thus taken at
one haul of a net.! It is evident that nets are very destruc-
tive to this species. People who have been accustomed to
regard this as a salt-water bird may be surprised to learn that
it resorts in numbers to the lakes in the interior, and breeds
about little fresh-water ponds in the arctic regions. Never-
theless, the majority of the species spend a large part of their
lives on the sea.

When wintry winds Jash the dark water into foam and
send it roaring upon our rocky coast, when the shore birds
have gone and the Geese have flown, the Old-squaws still ride
the waves just outside the breakers. They seem filled with
abundant vigor and playfulness. Rising against the wind,
they speed away and back again, splashing down into the sea.
Their calls and cries are heard particularly at morning and
late in the afternoon, when they are often very vociferous.
It is hard to imitate these calls by printed words, but they
are among the most musical cries uttered by wild-fowl.

 

1 See Bacon, Samuel E., Jr.: Ornithologist and Odlogist, 1892, Vol. 17, p. 45.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 143

 

Their gabbling somewhat resembles the cry of a pack of
hounds, and has given the name “hounds” to the bird in
some localities.

As spring approaches, whole flocks of Old-squaws may
be seen to leave the water and “tower” to the regions of the
upper air, swinging in wide circles, surmounting height after
height, until almost lost to view, when they turn and plunge
downward, hurtling through the air in arrowy flight, sometimes
straight downward, sometimes zigzagging wildly, until they
rest again on the surface of the sea.

Latham states that the down which the female takes from
her breast to line her nest is equally valuable for commercial
purposes with that of the Eider. As the Old-squaw still breeds
in Ungava, it is not improbable that this Duck was one of the
species formerly breeding farther south on the Labrador coast,
where feather hunters, eggers and fishermen successively have
destroyed thousands and tens of thousands of wild-fowl and
sea birds. But most of the Old-Squaws breed in the far
north, where they are safe from molestation by civilized man
during the breeding season.

The Old-squaw feeds on small crustacea and mussels, fish
fry, insects, etc., fresh-water or marine, according to the
locality where it may happen to feed. Mackay says that
they eat a small shell-fish resembling a diminutive quahog.
They also eat sand fleas, razor shells (Szliqua costata), fresh-
water clams, small white perch, penny shells (Astarte castanea),
red whale bait, shrimps, mussels, small crabs and pond grass.
In the severe winter of 1888 he has known them to go to the
uplands of Nantucket in flocks and feed on the dried fine-top
grass (Anthoxanthum odoratum).
144 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

HARLEQUIN DUCK (Histrionicus histrionicus).

Common or local names: Lord and Lady; Sea Mouse; Squealer.

 

FEMALE. MALE.

Length. — 15 to 17.50 inches.

Adult Male in Winter. — General color leaden blue, changing to blackish
at edges of white markings, blue black on lower back and bluish gray
on belly; peculiar crescent-shaped patch in front of eye, extending from
chin up to crown and alongside it, round spot near ear, narrow stripe
from back of this down upper neck, narrow collar around lower part of
neck, broad bar across side of breast to shoulder, other markings on
wing and shoulders and a round spot on either side at base of tail white;
lower and front neck, throat and bar on side of breast, center of fore-
head, crown and hind neck black or blackish; flanks and a stripe ex-
tending back above eye reddish brown; bill dusky or slate; feet slate,
with dusky webs and pale claws; iris brown or reddish.

Immature Males. — Vary for two or three years between this plumage and
that of the young, which is similar to that of adult female.

Adult Male in Summer. — Resembles female in plumage, except that non-
breeding males retain their winter dress.

Adult Female. — Head, neck and back dark grayish brown; a white spot
back of ear; sides of head marked with dull white mainly before or
below the eye; flanks grayish brown; bill dusky; feet slate; iris brown.

Field Marks. — The male is unmistakable. Female smaller and duller, but
resembling male in shape of head and short, slightly upturned bill.

Notes. — A confusion of low gabbling and chattering notes (Nelson). A
peculiar whistle, generally by male in efforts to secure a mate (Elliot).

Season. — Rare winter visitant.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR GAME. 145

 

Range. — Northern North America and eastern Asia. Breeds in Alaska, on
Arctic coast, Newfoundland, northeastern Asia, Greenland and Ice-
land, and south in the mountains to central California and Colorado;
winters on Pacific coast from the Aleutian Islands to California, in the
interior to Colorado and western New York, and on Atlantic coast from
Gulf of St. Lawrence regularly to Maine, rarely to New Jersey and
accidentally to Florida; accidental in Europe.

History.

The Harlequin Duck was formerly more common on the
coast of New England than it is to-day. It formerly was
noted as a summer resident on the coast of Maine, and this
may have been authentic, as I found it in flocks in 1889 on
Puget Sound in the height of the breeding season, in nearly
the same latitude as the coast of Maine and in a milder
climate. It is now a rare visitor to Massachusetts in early
winter, and even in Maine it is considered uncommon.
Knight says that the days of this little Duck are fast pass-
ing, and that it is likely soon to be shelved with other species
as “formerly occurring along our coast.’”’ He states that it
was once common on the Maine coast from November until
April, but now occurs only in the extreme winter months
along the outer islands, and that it seems very likely that
two hundred would be a liberal estimate of those which now
visit the entire Maine coast in winter.! Dr. Brewer states
that specimens were occasionally seen in the Boston markets,
but that after 1840 it became comparatively rare.

All the adult male specimens that I have seen taken in
New England had only a stripe of white on the scapulars and
no large patch of white there, and as this seems to be the
common winter plumage here, the male is thus figured. I
always have regarded the Harlequin as second only to the
Wood Duck in beauty. On one occasion a small flock of
these elegant birds visited my lonely camp on a little harbor
of a small island near the Strait of Fuca, at the entrance of
Puget Sound. JI sat motionless on the shore until they came
almost to my feet, playing about like children at tag, or
dressing their plumage, entirely at ease, like so many domesti-

 

1 Knight, Ora W.: Birds of Maine, 1908, pp. 105; 106.
146 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

cated birds in a duck pond. Apparently they considered me
a part of the scenery, and gave me such an intimate view of
their artless and graceful evolutions as falls to the lot of few
persons in a lifetime. Evidently having fed well outside,
they came in to the little rock-bound harbor of this uninhab-
ited island to rest in the still waters and to dress their spot-
less plumage, and there disported themselves, as have their
forebears for centuries, until, at my first movement, they
lashed the calm surface into spray in their efforts to escape.
Strangely, they did not attempt to dive but all took wing.

On the shores of New England the Harlequin is seen mostly
along the outer surf-washed ledges. It is not esteemed by the
epicure, and, aside from its beauty as a specimen of its kind,
is of little value, but it is closely pursued. Sometimes a flock,
when shot at in air, will plunge under water in such a way as
to lead the eager sportsman to believe that he has killed them
all; but soon they reappear at a distance as lively as ever.
The Harlequin is now so shy and rare on the New England
coast that it is almost never seen except by hardy fishermen
and gunners who ply their calling off shore in the dead of
winter.

This species feeds largely on mussels, which it obtains by
diving, mainly along rocky shores. In New England it is a
sea bird, but in the west it breeds in the interior on mountain
streams, and nests either on the ground or in holes of trees
or cliffs. In the streams it eats many insects.

Since the Harlequin has become rare on the southern New
England coast the following records of its occurrence in Rhode
Island are of interest : — :

A bunch of twelve was seen by Mr. C. B. Clark in Decem-
ber, 1904, near Cormorant Rock, Newport, R. I. He shot two
immature males on December 17, 1905, at the same locality.
Mr. C. M. Hughes reports an adult male, two immature females
and an adult female shot at Cormorant Rock, Newport, on
February 9, 1911. The adult male is in the collection of Mr.
Harry S. Hathaway.!

1 Hathaway, Harry S.: Auk, 1913, p. 548.

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 147

 

NORTHERN EIDER (Somateria mollissima borealis).

Length. — 23 inches.

Adult. — Almost similar in size and coloration to Eider; less greenish on
sides of head along border of black cap; frontal processes narrower and
more acute than in the Eider; general upper outline of bill more nearly
straight; when in hand the male may be distinguished from that of
our Eider by the solid black cap which, in the Eider, is divided behind
in the center by a white line; the breast is sometimes tinted with pink.
The female differs as much from the male as does that of the Eider
which it resembles (see Eider p. 148), but like the female of the King
Eider it has two white wing-bars.

Season. — A rare straggler in winter; latter part of October to April.

Range. — Northeastern North America. Breeds from Ellesmere Land and
both coasts of Greenland south to northwestern Hudson Bay and
southern Ungava; winters in southern Greenland and south rarely to
Massachusetts.

History.
This is a North American race of the common Eider of

Europe (S. mollissima) and _ is
almost identical with it. Prob-
ably it formerly occurred not un-
commonly off our coast, and may
yet appear here very rarely, as it
nests on islands off the northern

coast of Labrador and is a rare
visitor on the.Maine coast. It is
rated as rare at Nantucket (Howe Oana EE
and Allen), which is believed to
be about its southern limit. It

may be readily distinguished from _©@ =

ee

 
    

So

 
 

the common Eider when in hand
by a difference in shape of the

processes of the bill, as shown Ms Fy, 9.—Bills of Eiders, one-quarter

Fig. 9, natural size, viewed from above and in
‘ i 2 profile. Upper right hand and middle
This bird furni shes much of figure represent the Eider; the others the

the eiderdown that is gathered by Neher Biter (siter Sharpe).

the Greenlanders, and it is not improbable that it was one
of the species sought by the feather hunters on the coast of
Labrador in the eighteenth century.
148 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

4

EIDER (Somateria dresseri).

Common or local names: Sea Duck; Isles of Shoals Duck; Wamp; Squam Duck;
Canvas-back.

 

MALE. FEMALE.

Length. — About 23 to 26 inches.

Adult Male. — Top of head black, divided behind by a white stripe on
crown; rest of head white, tinged behind and on the sides to below eye
with green; neck, breast and most of back white; breast tinged more or
less with pale creamy brown; middle of lower back, wing quills, tail
and belly mainly black; iris brown; bill varying from gray to green and
flesh color, tip lighter; feet olive green, webs dusky. —

Adult Female and Young. — Top of head blackish; rest of plumage buffy
and brown, lightest on throat and neck, barred everywhere with
black, except head and upper neck, which are streaked; bill pale green;
eyes and feet as in male. Young more buffy than female.

Field Marks. — Almost impossible to distinguish females and young of this
species, out of hand, from those of other Eiders. The difference in proc-
esses of bill are readily seen when bird is in hand.

Notes. — Male, a raucous and moaning voice, he ho, ha ho, or a-o-wah-a-o-wah
(Knight); female, a cry like that of domestic Duck.

Nest. — On ground, generally sheltered by rocks.

Eggs. — Five to eight, pale bluish or greenish, tinged with olive, about 3
by 2.

Season. — A not uncommon winter visitor off the coast; formerly abundant;
late November to April.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 149

 

Range. — Northeastern North America. Breeds from southern Ungava and
Newfoundland to southeastern Maine, and on the southern half of
Hudson Bay; winters from Newfoundland and Gulf of St. Lawrence
south on Atlantic coast, regularly to Massachusetts, rarely to Virginia,
and in interior rarely to Colorado, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio and western
New York.

History.

The Eider Duck formerly was abundant along the coast
of New England as far south and west as Martha’s Vineyard.
The subjoined abridged extracts from standard authors indi-
cate its decrease; October, 1832, seen in considerable num-
bers in Boston Bay; twenty-one killed about the Rocky Isles
in one day by two gunners (a father and son); breeds in con-
siderable numbers from Boston to the Bay of Fundy; Wilson
saw them as far south as the capes of the Delaware; at present
day an extremely rare occurrence, as Jersey fishermen know
nothing of this Duck (Audubon). Formerly they bred in
considerable numbers from Boston eastward (Peabody, 1838).
Very abundant in the bays and inlets of our coast (Samuels,
1870). Uncommon winter visitor (Townsend, Essex County,
Mass. 1905). It disappeared long ago from Massachusetts
as a breeding bird, if it ever bred here, and probably not many
more than twenty pairs now (1910) nest on the Maine coast,
where they are protected from extinction during the breeding
season by the wardens of the National Association of Audu-
bon Societies. Thirty-seven Massachusetts observers report
the Eider as decreasing, and but two report it on the in-
crease. The decrease reported varies from twenty-five to
ninety per cent. Mr. John M. Winslow of Nantucket says
that with two other men he killed at Muskeget Island over
two hundred in a morning about 1872. He secured and saved
one hundred and fifty, and got fifty cents a pair for them. Mr.
H. G. Worth of Nantucket says that he has killed thirty in
three hours. Reports from Maine and Nova Scotia place
their decrease at fifty per cent. within the memory of the
observers, and this Duck seems to have nearly disappeared
from Rhode Island in recent years. On the other hand, Rich
regards this as the only Sea Duck that is holding its own on
the Maine coast in winter.
150 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The difference in the treatment received by Eider Ducks
here and in Iceland is worthy of some notice. This bird, like
other Ducks, lines its nest with soft down from its own breast,
and before leaving the nest to feed covers the eggs with
a blanket of this down, which it seems to have matted to-
gether for the purpose. Other species have similar habits.
The covering sometimes is attached at one side to the nest
itself, and can be removed from the eggs and spread over
them again as a blanket is thrown off or spread over a bed.
This gray down protects the eggs from the cold and hides
them from their enemies. It (with the down of other Ducks)
forms the eider down of commerce, and the natives of Iceland
get a considerable revenue by collecting it. They make holes
in the sod near their houses and even prepare holes in their
sod roofs to induce the Ducks to breed there. The birds are
absolutely protected and are as tame as domestic fowls.
When the first downy lining is removed from the nest the
female plucks her breast again to renew it, and if the second
lining is taken it is said that the male then contributes the
down from his own: breast. The people never disturb the
nest after this, and the birds are always allowed to raise a

brood.
The treatment they receive on the Atlantic coast of the
United States and the Canadian provinces is in sharp contrast
to this. They have escaped extinction only because many of
them breed in the far north, where white men rarely go, and
because these northern birds are so hardy that they seek a
temperate climate only in the depth of winter, when cold and
storms make their pursuit a hardship. While here they usually
keep well out to sea. Their food consists largely of mussels,
which they can secure in ten fathoms or more of water, and
they are so hardy, and so much at home in astorm at sea, that
they are rarely seen in Massachusetts, except on salt water.
They are rather rarely taken on some of the larger inland lakes.
of New York. They fully merit the name Sea Duck which is
given them by the gunners. .
 

 

 

 

PLATE V —NEST OF EIDER DUCK,

From a photograph by T. Gilbert Pearson.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 151

 

KING EIDER (Somateria spectabilis).

Length. — 20 to 25 inches.

Adult Male. — Top of head beautiful pearl gray, shading to deeper on the
nape; a glossy black line bordering the base of the upper part of bill,
which is reddish orange and formed like a shield for the forehead;
cheeks pale sea green; small spot under eye, eyelid and V-shaped mark
on throat black; rest of head, neck, upper back and shoulders creamy
white; lower back, sides and under parts black; wings and tail dark
brown; a large white patch on fore wing; two narrow white wing-bars;
breast creamy buff; iris yellow; bill orange and yellow, with white tip;
feet reddish orange, webs dusky.

Adult Female. — Nearly the entire plumage of two shades of buff, streaked
and barred with dark brown; head, chin and throat dark buff, streaked
conspicuously on head, faintly on sides; breast and flanks light buff,
with irregular black bars on tips of feathers; under parts deep brown,
more or less barred; tail black; iris brown; feet dull yellow, webs dusky.

Field Marks. — The male is distinguished by his peculiarly shaped head
and its markings. The female in winter has two rather narrow but
distinct white wing-bars.

Season. — Very rare winter visitor; November to April.

Range. — Northern part of northern hemisphere. Breeds along the whole
coast of northern Siberia, Bering Sea (St. Lawrence Island) and Arctic
coast of America from Icy Cape east to Melville Island, Wellington
Channel, northern Greenland, northwestern Hudson Bay and northern
Ungava; winters on Pacific coast from Aleutian Islands to Kadiak
Island; in the interior rarely to the Great Lakes, and from southern
Greenland and Gulf of St. Lawrence south regularly to Long Island,
rarely to Georgia; accidental in California and Iowa.

History.

The King Eider is an arctic species and its habits resemble
those of the common Eider. It is sometimes seen off the
Massachusetts coast, and is usually rare on the Maine coast.
It is a deep-water Duck, feeding mostly on mussels, according
to Eaton, who states that it is taken sometimes in the deep-
water gill nets of the lake fishermen in more than one hun-
dred and fifty feet of water, where it is said to find its food.
The female lines her nest with down, as do the other species,
and it forms part of the eider down of commerce, which is
gathered by the natives in Greenland. Knight found this
species eating great quantities of mussels on the Maine coast,
152 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

and states that Mr. A. H. Norton found it subsisting on sea
clams, sea cucumbers (Pentacta frondosa), and very little else.

Fig. 10 gives a very inadequate idea of the peculiar head
of the male and no idea whatever of its beautiful and delicate
coloring. The raised fron-
tal processes at the base of
the bill, which adorn the
head, develop immensely in
the breeding season, bulging
high above the rest of the
bill. These processes are
soft, and are supported upon
a mass of fatty substance.
They shrink and become
more depressed in winter,
when the general formation
of the beak is not much different from that of other Eiders.
The female, however, does not resemble the male, and is not
easily distinguished in the field from that of the American
Eider. When in hand, the general resemblance of the bill and
the head feathering to that of the male may be noted. As the
males do not migrate so far south as do the females and young,
it is not improbable that the latter are less rare in this latitude
than they are generally believed to be. Since the first edition
of this book was written Mr: W. Sprague Brooks has recorded
the taking of many specimens of this species in Massachusetts,
and others are noted as “seen.” The dates run from “about
1850” to 1911, when four were seen and two taken.!

 

Fic. 10.— Male.

 

1 Auk, 1913, p. 107.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 153

 

SCOTER (Oidemia americana).

Common or local names: American Scoter; Black Coot; Butter-bill; Black Butter-
bill; Yellowbill; Butter-nose; Copper-nose; Copper-bill; Pumpkin-blossom Coot;
Whistling Coot; Little Gray Coot; Smutty Coot; Fizzy; Broad-billed Coot.

 

FEMALE. MALE,

Length. — 17 to 20 inches.

Adult Male. — General plumage black; bill black, except most of the swollen
base, which is vermilion or orange on the sides, changing to yellow
above and in front; iris brown; feet brownish black, webs black.

Adult Female. — Much smaller than adult male; bill without hump at base;
top of head to eye dark brown; sides of head below eye, chin, throat and
upper fore neck grayish; rest of plumage sooty brown, lighter or gray-
ish below; bill black, often marked or streaked with yellow; legs and
feet brownish gray or olive brown, webs black. Young and female
birds not feathered down on top of bill to near nostril, as in the other
“Coots.”

Young. — Similar to female; usually lighter below, sometimes whitish.

Field Marks. — The uniform black plumage of male and orange spot at
base of bill distinguish it. This species has no white marks in either sex.
The male is readily distinguished from the Black Duck by its habit of
diving and by the absence of the whitish wing linings, which in the
Black Duck are conspicuous in flight. The female and young closely
resemble those of the Surf Scoter, but the sides of head and throat are
distinctly gray where the Surf Scoter has indistinct white patches.

Notes. — A long musical whistle (Elliot).

Season. — Common migrant coastwise; late August or September to late
May; non-breeding birds sometimes summer.
154 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Range. — Northern North America and eastern Asia. Breeds in north-
eastern Asia and from Kotzebue Sound to Aleutian Islands, including
Near Islands; also on west shore of Hudson Bay, Ungava and New-
foundland; winters on Asiatic coast to Japan, and from islands of
Bering Sea south rarely to Santa Catalina Island, Cal.; in the interior
not rare on the Great Lakes, and casual or accidental in Missouri,
Louisiana, Nebraska, Colorado and Wyoming; on the Atlantic coast
abundant during migration from Newfoundland and Maine south
(rarely to Florida).

History.

We have no means of knowing the early history of any
one of the Scoters as they all were generally grouped together
as “ Coots” or “‘ Black Ducks” by the early historians. The
Scoters or ‘‘ Coots,’ as they are called by the gunners and
fishermen, are typical diving Ducks. They are very muscular
and powerful in build. The bony framework is strong, the
skin tough, and the feathers strong, coarse and very firmly
attached to the skin. The whole structure seems to be formed
to resist the tremendous water pressure that they encounter
while diving at great depths. Fishermen, both along the
Massachusetts coast and in the lake region of Wisconsin, have
told me that they have taken these diving Ducks in nets set
from fifty to one hundred feet below the service. This may
be an exaggeration, but Mackay says that they feed to a
depth of forty feet. Under water they use both legs and
wings for propulsion, and are even more at home there than
in the air. If threatened with danger they are as likely to
dive as to fly, and sometimes, when in full flight, they have
been seen to dive. The Scoters are universally known as
Coots along the New England coast, a name derived probably
from the French fishermen who first established the fishing
industry on the banks of Newfoundland. The true Coot,
however, is a lobe-footed fresh-water bird (see page 221).
The American Scoter and the two other New England species
appear on our shores early in the fall, and usually congregate
in greater or less numbers all winter on the shoals south of
Cape Cod, where they remain in greater numbers than any-
where else along our coast. In the shoal waters near Cape
Cod, Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard they find an abundant
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 155

 

supply of their favorite food. There, also, the influence of the
gulf stream is felt. The sounds are rarely frozen, and as the
waters are comparatively shallow the birds can feed at con-
siderable distances from the shore; therefore they find some
degree of safety there, as they are not so accessible to boats
or gunners as are the birds which remain about Massachusetts
Bay. Another advantage that they have about Cape Cod
is that whatever wind blows they always can find a sheltered
spot under the lee of the Cape, or somewhere about Nantucket,
Martha’s Vineyard or some of the other islands.

The “Coots” are rarely shot in the south, where more
valuable. Ducks abound, but their flocks form a principal
object of sport on the New England coast, where most fresh-
water Ducks have become rare. They are naturally rather
stupid birds, easily approached or decoyed, and their own
hardiness and thick, tough coat of feathers form their principal
protection. They are so hard to kill that ‘“‘ Coot shooting”
usually cripples a large percentage of the birds, which escape,
either to meet a lingering death or recover, as the case may
be. Since the law went into effect prohibiting Duck shooting
from January 1 to September 15 unusually large “‘ beds”’ of
“Coots”’ have been observed in Ipswich and Massachusetts
bays, but previous to that time these Ducks had decreased
more or less along most of the New England coast.

Walter Rich, in his Feathered Game of the Northeast, says,
the Scoters have decreased fifty per cent. Capt. Herbert L.
Spinney, an old “‘ Coot” shooter, published an excellent ac-
count of the sport in the Maine Sportsman for May, 1897, in
which he says that twenty years before that time, both in
the spring and fall migrations, these birds could be found all
along the coast of Maine in great flocks or beds. Now he
says “perhaps not a shoal for. miles is occupied, and if at
all, with only a few stragglers, and the flight consists of
small flocks of which you may see a dozen or fifty in a day,
and if the wind is favorable the birds will not stop at all.”
Very little decrease has been noticed in recent years on the
Massachusetts coast south of Cape Cod, because the birds
which have been driven from other parts of the coast have
156 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

concentrated there, until their numbers sometimes appear
larger than ever; but Thoreau, who traversed the shores of
Cape Cod on foot in 1864, states that he found practically
a continuous flock of Coots just outside the breakers along
the whole shore. Mr. George H. Mackay, who has published
in The Auk an excellent account of the Scoters, and whose
experience extends over fifty years, states that on March 18,
1875, while returning to Nantucket from a shooting trip to
Muskeget Island, he saw a body of Scoters which his party
estimated to contain twenty-five thousand birds. They were
accompanied by about twelve thousand Eiders, forming alto-
gether the largest body of wild-fowl that he ever saw. It isa
well-known fact that Scoters feed largely on shell-fish of no
great value to mankind, such as the mussel (Mytilus edulis);
and it is stated by the fishermen that where a bed of these
mussels near Cuttyhunk was destroyed, presumably by a storm,
the ‘‘ Coots” which were formerly very plentiful there de-
serted that shoal. Mackay states that these birds feed on
small sea clams (Spisula solidissima), scallops (Pecten trradi-
ans), short razor-shells (Stliqua costata) and quahogs (Venus
mercenaria). Fishermen and gunners sometimes assert that
these Ducks are very destructive to valuable shell-fish, but I
have noticed that scallops and quahogs decrease most rapidly
in our inner bays, where these birds are fewest. We have no
knowledge that would warrant us in failing to protect the
birds. In fact, they are of some service in destroying enemies
of the shell-fish, and they sometimes point out to the fisher-
men the location of beds of scallops.

As food, Ducks of this genus are regarded as nourishing
but not very appetizing. Some writers have gone so far as to
stigmatize them as abominable; but the people of Cape Cod
are able, by parboiling, etc., to make a dish of even the old
birds, which, though it may “ taste a little like crow” to the
uninitiated, serves as an agreeable variant to a diet of salt
fish.

Mr. Frank A. Bates says, in his Game Birds of North
America (pages 33, 34), that an old bird is simply infamous in
flavor, and that he never saw a bird so young as to equal
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 157

 

a stew of old boots flavored with fish oil. ‘Pardon me,” he
says, “friends, devotees of the wily coot, my education has
been sadly neglected. I can eat sculpin, but do not ask me
to eat Coot.”

A cultured Boston lady assures me that when she attempted
to cook a Coot it drove everybody out of the house, and that
she had to throw away the kettle that it was cooked in.
Nevertheless, I have found the young palatable if properly
prepared, though hardly equal to the celery-fed Canvas-back.
Many Scoters are shot for food and sold in the markets, but
large numbers are killed merely for sport, and either left to
lie where they fall or drift away on the tide.

The American Scoter, Black Coot or Little Gray Coot, as
it is commonly called, while a common bird, is the least nu-
merous of the three Scoters which visit the New England coast.
It often reaches Massachusetts in some numbers in September,
rather earlier than the other species of the genus, and while at
times it keeps by itself it is quite as likely to mix with flocks
of the other Scoters. The flight of the Scoters is swift. I
have heard it estimated at two hundred miles an hour with a
strong wind, but this is probably exaggerated. They may pos-
sibly fly at a rate of over one hundred miles an hour under
favorable conditions, but this is a high rate of speed for any
bird. A flight consisting of this species and the Surf Scoter
passes up Buzzards Bay late in May and crosses Cape Cod at
the head of the bay, going over into Cape Cod Bay. Earlier
in the season there is a considerable flight eastward through
Vineyard Sound and around or over Cape Cod. This bird
usually flies in lines at some distance from the shore, and the
flocks are often led by an old experienced male, who will lead
his following high in air while passing over the boats where
gunners lie in wait.

This species, while mainly a salt-water bird in Massa-
chusetts, formerly came into some of the fresh-water ponds
in large numbers during northeast storms, and is still common
in large bodies of fresh water in migration. According to
Brewster it has been seen or taken on Spy Pond in Arlington,
Fresh Pond in Cambridge and the Mystic ponds in Medford
158 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

and Winchester, and the older gunners had a tradition that
large flocks of ‘‘ Coots” used to come into Fresh Pond, and
many were killed there.1 Eaton says that at times it is
abundant on the Hudson and is a common fall migrant on
lakes Erie, Ontario and Champlain. Mr. James Savage refers
to great flights of this species and the White-winged Scoter on
Lake Erie, where they are abundant in October. He says that
great numbers are killed there. In the fall flight of 1899 one
gunner is said to have killed one hundred and nine in one
forenoon, desisting for want of ammunition. On October 9,
1900, two brothers are said to have killed one hundred and
five on Lake Erie, near Angola, Erie County, N. Y.? Mr.
Charles E. Ingalls of East Templeton, Mass., says that the
Scoter is seldom seen there, but was formerly common in fall
after easterly storms. Mr. Lawrence Horton of Canton, Mass.,
says that all the Scoters formerly came to the ponds there in
heavy northeast weather. Only a few come now, and, as a
rule, they grow less each year. Mr. Herbert F. Chase of
Amesbury says that the Scoters have decreased fifty per cent.
in the last ten years in his vicinity. He has stopped shooting
them now, as they are practically of no use, and he does not
care to kill them for sport. He says, ‘I may be hungry
enough sometime to relish Coot, but I hope not.”

Reports received regarding the increase or decrease of this
species come mainly from the coast counties, as it is now rare
elsewhere. Seven observers report it as increasing in their
localities, in Bristol and Barnstable counties, and forty-three
as decreasing. These reports extend over an average period
of nearly thirty years.

In migration this bird is often seen in flocks of one hun-
dred or more, and in smaller groups at other times, but it
associates with the other two species. Little is known about
its early abundance, but it is probable that on the Atlantic it
has decreased more in proportion to its former numbers than
the other two common species. It is far more numerous now
on the Pacific coast than on the Atlantic. So little is known

 

1 Brewster, William: Birds of the Cambridge Region, 1906, p. 123.
2 Eaton, E. H.: Birds of New York, 1910, p. 222.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 159

 

of its breeding grounds in northeastern North America, that
Professor Cooke is obliged to reason, by exclusion, that as
we have no record of its breeding west of Hudson Bay until
we reach the Yukon valley, nor in Labrador south of about
latitude 52 degrees, the multitudes seen in winter on the
Atlantic coast must breed east of Hudson Bay, in northern
Ungava. As this is one of the least explored regions of the
world it is quite possible that vast numbers of Scoters and
Mergansers breed there. It breeds mainly in fresh-water
marshes and ponds in the north and also upon islands in the
sea. It is a very expert diver, and is often able to get so
nearly under water at the flash of a gun that the shot injures
it very little if at all.

Its food consists largely of mussels, and when feeding on
fresh water it prefers the Unios or fresh-water clams to most
other foods. Thirteen Massachusetts specimens were found
to have eaten nearly ninety-five per cent. of mussels; the
remaining five per cent. of the stomach contents was composed
of starfish and periwinkles. It is a common belief that all
Scoters feed entirely upon animal food, but this is not a fact.
Along the Atlantic coast they appear to subsist mostly on
marine animals, but, in the interior, vegetable food also is
taken. Mr. W. L. McAtee found the Scoters in a Wisconsin
lake living almost exclusively for a time on the wild celery,
but he does not state definitely what species of Scoter was
represented there.!

Since the appearance of the first edition, some of my Cape
Cod friends have reproached me for decrying the Coot as a
table delicacy. I wish therefore to call attention to what ap-
pears in regard to the palatability of the young on page 157.
Perhaps there is no bird that cannot be so prepared as to be
eatable, but unless the Coot is treated by an adept in Coot
cookery, it is likely to prove a disappointment on the table.
I have known a part of an old Scoter not so prepared to
“sadden’”’ a whole potpie.

 

1McAtee, W. L.: Three Important Wild Duck Foods, Bureau of Biol. Surv., Circular No. 81.
160 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

WHITE-WINGED SCOTER (Oidemia deglandi).

Common or local names: Male: Black White-wing. Female and young: Gray White-
wing. Both sexes: White-winged Coot; May White-wing; Eastern White-wing;
Pied-winged Coot; Uncle Sam Coot.

 

FEMALE, MALE.

Length. — 19.60 to 22.75 inches.

Adult Male. — Small patch below and behind eye, and wing patch white; rest of
plumage black or brownish black; iris white: bill pinkish purple, reddish,
orange, black and white; feet orange red or coral red and wine purple.

Adult Female. — Sides of head more or less flecked with whitish; wing
patch white; rest of upper parts sooty brown or dirty gray; below
grayish brown; iris deep brown; bill grayish black; feet brownish red.
Trumbull! states that the adult female has a pink patch on the side of
bill, but other authors disagree.

Young. — Similar, but no pink on bill; sides of head more or less whitish,
divided sometimes, but not always, into two large spots by an exten-
sion of brown of neck up to eye.

Field Marks. — Size of Black Duck, black or dark brown. Hardly two
authors agree in describing this bird. Some state that the female has
two white patches on the side of the head, one near base of bill and the
other behind eye; others say that only the young have these; others
attribute them only to the young male, which usually has them. The
descriptions of the coloration of the bill are widely different. The
truth of the matter is that the individuals of the species vary so
much in shape of fore part of head and bill, and in the distribution
of the colors of bill and plumage, that the only safe field mark is the
white wing patch, which no other New England Scoter has.

 

+ Auk, 1893, p. 170.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 161

 

Season. — Abundant migrant coastwise; September to June; a few summer;
rare or absent in interior where formerly more common in migrations.

Range. — North America and eastern Asia. Breeds from the coast of north-
eastern Siberia, northern Alaska, northern Mackenzie and northern
Ungava south to central British Columbia, Alberta, northern North
Dakota and southern Quebec; winters on the Asiatic coast to Bering
Island, Japan and China, and in North America from Unalaska Island
to San Quintin Bay, Lower California, the Great Lakes (casually to
Colorado, Nebraska and Louisiana), and the Atlantic coast from the
Gulf of St. Lawrence south (rarely) to Florida; non-breeding birds
occur in summer as far south as Rhode Island and Monterey, Cal.

History.

The White-wing is one of the species which was once found
in enormous numbers in most of our harbors and bays and all
along our coasts, and as it was more of a fresh-water bird
than the other Scoters it was more common in inland ponds
and. rivers. Mr. Israel R. Sheldon of Pawtuxet, R. I., says
that hundreds of White-winged Scoters are shot from power
boats and are put to no use. Ordinarily great numbers spend
the fall, winter and spring about Cape Cod, or in the sounds
and on the shallows to the southward, and in Connecticut,
Rhode Island and New York waters. Many of these birds in
fall come down the coast from the eastward, while others
apparently reach Long Island Sound from the far northwest,
and from there pass eastward to the vicinity of Cape Cod.
Vineyard and Nantucket sounds are favorite feeding grounds.
In April large flights of this species pass to the eastward along
the coast on the way to their breeding grounds in Labrador
and on the shores of the Arctic Sea. Later, usually about the
middle of May, flocks may be seen toward night moving in a
westerly direction. They appear, from the lateness of their
migration, to be birds that breed in the far north or north-
west, possibly in the ponds of the Barren Grounds in the
arctic tundra or on the islands of the Arctic Sea. They are
large, heavy, fully adult birds, and are called May White-
wings by the gunners of Westport and Dartmouth. They are
then mated and on the way to their breeding grounds. When
migrating overland they start late in the day or at night,
flying very high and due northwest, and probably do not
162 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

stop until they reach the Hudson River or the Great Lakes.
Mackay says that this flight rarely begins before the second
week in May; that the birds start at 3 o’clock p.m. or later
and pass westward along the shore or over the sounds, often
as far as Noank, Conn., before they begin to cross the country.

The White-winged Coot is the only Scoter that is usually
abundant on the lakes of the interior in spring. There it
seeks mainly fresh-water mussels. It gathers in large flocks
over the beds of these mollusks in the Great Lakes, both in
fall and spring, and even in winter when the lakes are open.!
It breeds about ponds and lakes in the interior of the country
from the northern United States northward. Though now
rarely seen in the inland ponds and lakes of Massachusetts it
was not very rare in certain ponds, lakes and rivers as late as
the first part of the last quarter of the nineteenth century,
and may still occur occasionally. Nuttall (1834) mentions
this bird as “‘seen in Fresh Pond, Cambridge.” Brewster
says he can remember (1867 to 1872) when birds of this
species used to alight there every autumn at daybreak, in
both clear and stormy weather.?. Mr. John H. Hardy, Jr.,
says that they still visit Spy and Mystic ponds. A flight is
recorded in the autumn of 1895 at Cheshire Reservoir in
Berkshire County.? Apparently this abundant bird has de-
creased somewhat in numbers even on our coasts within thirty
years. Only twelve Massachusetts observers report an in-
crease in the numbers of this species and fifty-two report a
decrease. As their reports cover an average period of about
twenty-seven years, they deserve some consideration.

The stomachs of nine White-winged Scoters from Massa-
chusetts waters, examined by Mr. W. L. McAtee, of the
Biological Survey, contained of mussels, about forty-four per
cent.; quahogs, twenty-two per cent.; periwinkles, nineteen
per cent.; hermit crabs, nine per cent.; the remainder was
caddis larve and alge and other vegetable matter. Three

birds from Nantucket had eaten only the common mussel
(Mytilus edulis).

1 Eaton, E. H.: Birds of New York, 1910, p. 223.
2 Brewster, William: Birds of the Cambridge Region, 1906, p. 123.
3 Howe and Allen: Birds of Massachusetts, 1901, p. 56.

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 163

 

SURF SCOTER (Oidemia perspicillata).

Common or local names: Gray Coot; Horsehead; Skunkbill; Skunkhead; Skunk-top;
Surfer; Google-nose; Patchhead; Patchpolled Coot; Pictured-bill; Plaster-bill;
Snuff-taker; Butterboat-billed Coot; Butterboat-bill; Hollow-billed Coot; Brown
Coot. ,

 

FEMALE. Mate.

Length. — 18 to 21 inches.

Adult Male. — Triangular patch on forehead and longer one on hind neck
white; rest of plumage glossy black, duller below; bill showing crim-
son, orange, scarlet, yellow, black and white; feet crimson and reddish
orange; iris pearl white or pale cream.

Adult Female. — Top of head blackish, usually more or less grayish white
on side of head below level of eye, sometimes divided into two patches;
rest of plumage sooty brown, silvery gray below; feet, bill and iris dark.

Young. — Similar to female. Young males and possibly females have two
patches of grayish white below level of eye, one before and the other
behind it. :

Field Marks. — Male distinguished from other Scoters by patch of white on
hind neck. Female and young distinguished from White-winged Scoter
by lack of white on wing, and from American Scoter by grayish white
on side of head, sometimes but not always divided into two patches.

Season. — Abundant migrant coastwise; common to abundant in winter,
rare in summer.

Range. — North America. Breeds on the Pacific coast from Kotzebue
Sound to Sitka, and from northwestern Mackenzie and Hudson Strait
to Great Slave Lake, central Keewatin and northern Quebec; non-
breeding birds occur in summer in northeastern Siberia and south on
the Pacific coast to Lower California, and in Greenland and south
on the Atlantic coast to Long Island; winters on the Pacific coast
from the Aleutian Islands south to San Quintin Bay, Lower California,
164 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

on the Great Lakes, and south casually to Colorado, Kansas, Iowa,
Illinois and Louisiana, and on the Atlantic coast from Nova Scotia
to North Carolina, rarely to Florida; casual in Bermuda; frequent
in Europe.

History.

The Surf Duck is possibly the most numerous of all the
Bay and Sea Ducks which frequent the New England coast,
although the White-wing is a close second. These birds are
even more plentiful on the Pacific coast, where until recent
years they were rarely hunted. Nelson records a flock near
Stewart Island, Alaska, which formed a continuous bed, sit-
ting closely on the water all around the outer end of the island
for about ten miles in length and from one-half to three-
fourths of a mile in width. This was late in the breeding
season, and the birds were apparently all males of this species.
When they arose from the water the roar of their wings was
like that of a mighty cataract. This was a remarkable host
of birds, especially as they were all adult males, which, each
fall, form a very small minority of the numbers of wild-fowl.
Nothing like this is ever seen now on the Atlantic coast of the
United States, and probably never will be seen again. Eleven
observers in 1908 report an increase of this species in their
localities in Massachusetts, while forty-six, mainly gunners of
long experience, note a decrease. The few reports of increase
come from all the coast counties except Dukes and Nantucket,
but those of decrease come from all the shore counties. They
cover an average period of nearly thirty years.

Early in September the adult birds of this species begin
to appear in Massachusetts Bay on their southern journey.
About the middle of the month the flight increases, and if
the weather is favorable a good migration occurs during the
latter third of the month. Near the last of the month young
birds begin to appear, and large numbers may usually be
seen on our coast before October 15. The main flight comes
between the 8th and 20th, and they continue to pass on down
the coast until near the latter part of December.

Mackay says that an easterly storm in the middle of
August is likely to bring them along, but he has seldom seen
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 165

 

many at that time in fair weather. In migration this species
ordinarily flies high, but, like others, it flies close to the water
in strong, adverse winds. All Scoters often fly rather low in
their daily flights on the feeding grounds. The great north-
ward flight of this species begins rarely as early as the second
week in April, but usually during the latter half of the month.
Adverse weather sometimes delays it. The majority go east
toward Nova Scotia, and these probably breed on the islands
in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and on the coasts and islands of
Labrador and Hudson Bay, as well as in the fresh-water ponds
of the Labrador peninsula, where they are said to nest in
larger numbers than the so-called fresh-water Ducks. Ap-
parently there is a small flight of this species which leaves its
winter resort south of Cape Cod in May and flies northwest
overland. The birds composing this flight probably breed in
the far north to the west of Hudson Bay, in the lakes and
ponds of the interior or on the shores and islands of the
Arctic Sea.

The “‘ Coots” mate early, before the spring migration com-
mences, and after they are mated if one be shot the other will
follow it down to the water, and if frightened away will come
back again. Therefore the gunner who understands their
habits seldom fails to bag both. Mackay states that between
April 15 and April 25 he has taken “eggs” from the ovary
of the female that varied in size from that of a cherry stone
to that of a robin’s egg. This Scoter is an expert diver, and
can swim such a long distance under water that it is easy for
it to escape a gunner in a sailboat by constantly changing the
direction of its flight under water. All the Scoters are hard
to kill, and many a man has shot several times at a wounded
bird before he has taken it. Sometimes a cripple, if pursued,
will dive to the bottom, and seizing some marine plant with
its bill will hold on and commit suicide by drowning rather
than submit to capture by its greatest and most persistent
enemy.

Nine Surf Scoters dissected by Mr. W. L. McAtee of the
Biological Survey had eaten mussels, 79.6 per cent.; peri-
winkles, 13.8 per cent.; algze and eelgrass, 6.6 per cent.
166 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

RUDDY DUCK (Erismatura jamaicensis).

Commonorlocalnames: Toughhead; Stiff-tailed Widgeon; Dipper; Dapper; Dopper;
Bluebill; Broad-bill; Broad-bill Dipper; Hard-headed Broad-bill; Bumblebee
Coot; Creek Coot; Spoonbill; Sleepyhead; Dunbird; Dumb-bird.

 

FEMALE, MALE.

Length. — About 15 inches.

Adult Male in Breeding Plumage. — (Rarely seen in Massachusetts.) Cap
black; cheeks and chin white; upper parts, throat and fore neck bright
reddish brown; upper part of breast tinged with reddish brown; rest of
under parts light silvery gray; tail brownish black, the quill feathers
stiff and pointed; no white on wing; legs and feet ash; bill light blue
and broad.

Adult Female and Male. — (As commonly seen in fall.) Top of head dark
brown; a dusky stripe through whitish cheek (males have plain white
cheeks in winter, Eaton); back grayish brown, with fine buffy bars;
below silvery ash; bill dusky or bluish.

Young. — Resemble female; some specimens lack the stripe on cheek.
Authorities differ as to whether these are adult males, females or young.

Field Marks. — Size of Teal; figure short, plump, squatty; rather low fore-
head, thick neck; long broad bill curves upward. Prefers to dive rather
than fly. Sometimes carries tail erect, but Scoters occasionally do so.

Notes. — A rather silent species, possibly hence the name Dumb-bird.

Nest. — In a slough or marshy place, generally on a mass of floating vege-
tation.

Eggs. — Six to ten, creamy or buffy white, about 2.50 by 1.80.

Season. — Rather common locally in autumn, late September to December;
rarer in spring; a few summer; possibly some winter.

Range. — North America. Breeds from central British Columbia, Great
Slave Lake, southern Keewatin and northern Ungava south to north-
ern Lower California, central Arizona, northern New Mexico, north-
western Nebraska, southern Minnesota, southern Michigan, southern
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 167

 

Ontario and Maine, and rarely and locally in southern Lower California,
Kansas, Massachusetts, valley of Mexico, Guatemala, Cuba, Porto Rico
and Carriacou; winters from southern British Columbia, Arizona, New
Mexico, southern Illinois, Maine, Pennsylvania and south to the
Lesser Antilles and Costa Rica; rare in migration to Newfoundland
and Bermuda.

History.

As long ago as the time of Nuttall the Ruddy Duck was
much sought after for the markets of Boston, but no great
decrease in its annual numbers was noted until within the
past thirty years, when it began to be demanded by the mar-
kets of other parts of the country. In Wilson’s time and
until recent years it was almost never shot for market in the
middle or southern States, and Wilson considered it rare
because he never found a specimen in the markets. It came
in numbers and fed unmolested among the decoy Ducks at
the shooting stands; but during the latter part of the nine-
teenth century, when the bird came in fashion for the table,
it became the custom for southern gunners to form a line of
boats across a pond, river or inlet in which the Ruddy Ducks
had gathered, and, advancing, drive out or kill most of them.
As late as 1885 these Ducks were so numerous that Cape
Cod gunners got from twenty to thirty a day, and twenty-five
to thirty was the average bag to a boat near Chester, Pa.
(Trumbuil). Great quantities of these birds have been killed
for food during the last twenty-five years along the Atlantic
coast. Only nine Massachusetts observers (1908) report an
increase in the numbers of this species, and fifty-five a
decrease. Dr. John C. Phillips of Wenham says that the
Ruddy Duck has decreased sixty per cent. in fifteen years on
account of heavy market shooting in the south. The species
has been decreasing steadily, and is in danger of extinction
unless better protected.

The Ruddy Duck is an active, comical little fellow, with a
broad bill and huge paddles. It is often addicted to the habit
of carrying its tail cocked up, and when it swims low in the
water, with the head well drawn back, tail spread and point-
ing in the general direction of its head, its appearance is any-
thing but dignified. It is an interesting sight to see a large
168 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

flock disporting in a little pond. They are remarkably quick,
and are at least as difficult to shoot on the water as the
Buffle-head. In my boyhood days, when these birds were
abundant, I fired at the members of a flock in a little pond
until my gun-barrels were hot and my shells exhausted, with-
out inflicting much damage to the Ducks. They will often
remain in a pond until killed or so harassed that they are
forced to fly, when they patter and splash along the water for
a few feet before they can rise, although they rise readily from
the shore. Sometimes when frightened or wounded they dive
and hide in the water grass or sedge. The Ruddy Duck
breeds normally in Massachusetts. Young birds, not able to
fly, have been shot on Cape Cod,! and the bird has been taken
in the breeding season at Cohasset, Wakefield and on the
Charles River near Watertown. It has been taken in New
Hampshire, also, in breeding plumage. It has been reported
with young in the breeding season in New York, and as breed-
ing in Washington County, Me.

It feeds largely on the roots and bulbs of aquatic plants.
On the salt marsh it takes small univalve shell-fish.

 

1 Miller, G. S., Jr.: Auk, 1891, p. 117. See also Deane, Ruthven Am. Nat., 1874, Vol. VIII,
pp. 483, 434. ;
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 169

 

MASKED DUCK (Nomonyz dominicus).

Length. — 13 to 14.50 inches.

Adult Male. — Chin, throat, front and sides of head to behind eye black;
behind this mask chestnut red all round, brightest on back and light-
ening on belly to rusty yellowish; often more or less marked with
darker above and below; white wing patch; bill mainly blue, black-
tipped; feet dusky; iris brown, with a bluish ring; tail feathers long
(4.50), narrow, stiff and pointed.

Adult Female and Young. — Sides of head buffy, turning to whitish on chin
and fore throat; top of head, a broad streak from upper base of bill
through eye (and sometimes another from lower base of bill through
cheek) dark brown or blackish; back blackish, regularly barred with
buff; plumage generally rusty dappled with dusky; a white wing patch
as in male, but smaller; below washed with rusty.

Range. — Central and South America and the West Indies north to the Rio
Grande or Mexican boundary of the United States. Accidental in this
country; recorded from Texas, Wisconsin, Massachusetts, Vermont and
Maryland.

History.

This bird is a mere straggler in Massachusetts. There is
but one record; a male in full plumage taken August 27, 1889,
in Malden. It was shot in a small pond of less than one acre,
where it had been seen for more than a week, and is now in
the C. B. Cory collection.*

GEESE.

The Geese and the so-called tree Ducks (genus Dendro-
cygna) comprise the subfamily Anserine. The Geese are con-
siderably larger than the Ducks; the legs and neck are longer
and the body not so much flattened, and they are more at
home upon land. They feed very largely upon grasses, grains
and vegetable matter, and are valued for the table.

The Geese have no wing patch or speculum, and the sexes
resemble each other closely. In size and length of neck they
come between the Ducks and the Swans. They molt but
once a year. With some few exceptions the plumage is not
so varied as that of the Ducks.

 

1 Cory, C. B.: Auk, 1889, p. 336.
170 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

SNOW GOOSE (Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus).

4 :
Common or local names: White Goose; Mexican Goose.

  

    
 
 

Ape

a Ma
| i ‘ ial te i lf
LAG

Length. — 23 to 28 inches.

Adult. — Plumage white; head and fore parts sometimes rusty; primaries
black; bill dark red or salmon pink, black-edged; iris dark brown; feet
red.

Young. — Head, neck and upper parts grayish; rump paler; under parts
white; bill and feet dark.

Field Marks. —In the field this species is indistinguishable from the suc-
ceeding species. Both are white, showing black wing tips. The young
appear white below, with grayish heads and necks. When flying high
in migration the movement of the wings is often barely perceptible.

Notes. — A solitary softened honk (Elliot).

Season. — Usually a rare or accidental fall migrant; early October to De-
cember.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 171

 

Range. — North America. Breeds from mouth of the Mackenzie east
probably to Coronation Gulf and Melville Island; occurs on the arctic
coast of northeastern Asia, but not known to breed there; winters from
southern British Columbia, southern Colorado, and southern Illinois
south to northern Lower California, central Mexico (Jalisco), Texas
and Louisiana, and on the Asiatic coast south to Japan; generally rare
in eastern United States.

History.

White Geese once visited the coasts of New England in
enormous numbers. Hearne (1795) found them the most
numerous of all birds that frequented the northern parts
of Hudson Bay, and said that some of the Indians killed
. upwards of one hundred in a day. The early chroniclers of
Massachusetts mentioned White Geese with the Gray Geese,
and implied that they came in equal numbers. Wood (1629-
34) says ‘“‘the second kind is a White Goose, almost as big
as an English tame Goose, these come in great flockes about
Michelmasse, sometimes there will be two or three thousand
in a flocke, those continue six weekes, and so flye to the south-
ward returning in March and staying six weekes more, re-
turning againe to the Northward.” From what is known of
the distribution of the Snow Goose it is probable that these
birds were mainly the Greater Snow Goose, which has a more
eastward range than the Snow Goose. The Snow Goose must
have mostly disappeared from Massachusetts during the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, for Audubon (1838)
states that Snow Geese are rare both in Massachusetts and
South Carolina, although they pass over those States in con-
siderable numbers. De Kay (1844) speaks of them as rather
rare in New York. Turnbull (1869) says that they are rather
rare in spring and autumn in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
Samuels (1870) states that they are rare on the New England
sea-coast, and Allen (1879) records them as rare winter visit-
ants. To-day the Snow Goose is rarely taken in Massa-
chusetts waters; but White Geese have been seen in recent
years in practically every county of the State, and still migrate
in small numbers along our shores or across the State.

Mr. Sigmund Klaiber states that one or two flocks of forty
or fifty are seen every year in Franklin County. Mr. Robert
172 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

O. Morris states that he has seen a Snow Goose twice near
Springfield. Mr. Edwin Leonard says that one was taken
several years ago and put with a flock of domestic Geese.
Mr. William P. Milner of Concord, Middlesex County, says
that there are a few left, and he believes that they are increas-
ing. Mr. Charles J. Paine, Jr., has seen a large flock within
a year. Mr. Alfred E. Gould of Malden has seen twenty in
twenty years. Mr. Charles L. Perkins of Newburyport
records one killed in December, 1908, and Mr. Herbert F.
Chase of Amesbury states that they have been shot there
three or four times within thirty years. Mr. Rockwell F.
Coffin of Norfolk County saw them at Chatham in 1905.
The species is reported in Plymouth County by Mr. B. T.
Williamson, who says that he saw a flock six years ago, and
by Mr. Wiley S. Damon, who has seen them but has not
taken any. Mr. A. C. Bent and Mr. Horace Tinkham regard
them as stragglers in Bristol County. Five observers report
them as rare in Barnstable County. Mr. Isaac Hills of Nan-
tucket says that he has not known of any killed there in
twenty-five years. All these notes may refer to either this or
the succeeding species. Dr. C. W. Townsend gives specific
instances of the occurrence of this species in Essex County,
and it is recorded in recent years from all the New England
States and New York. Several flocks of White Geese have
been seen and recorded by others in Massachusetts in recent
years (see Bird-Lore). This species is still plentiful in some
parts of the west and southwest, although Mr. J. D. Mitchell
reports from Texas that he formerly saw great numbers in
flocks on the prairie and now sees but from five to ten in the
average flock, and Mr. A. S. Eldredge states that he “ used
to see great numbers there, but only saw one in 1908.”

The bird is so conspicuous and receives so little protection
that its chances for extinction are good, unless it is better
protected. Also, it is often destructive to grain and grass in
the west, and for this reason where it is numerous it incurs
the enmity of the farmers, who welcome any one who will
shoot it. It feeds more or less on berries and green vegetation.

 

1 See Appendix A for more recent New England records.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 173

 

GREATER SNOW GOOSE (Chen hyperboreus nivalis).

Length. — 30 to 38 inches.

Adult and Young. — Similar in color to the Snow Goose, but larger.

Season. — Formerly probably an abundant migrant in spring and fall; now
only an accidental straggler, mainly in fall or winter.

Range. — Eastern North America. Arctic America in summer; full breed-
ing range not known; but breeds in North Greenland, Ellesmere Land
and on Whale Sound; winters from southern Illinois, Chesapeake Bay
and Massachusetts (rarely) south to Louisiana, Florida, and in West
Indies to Porto Rico; in migration rarely west to Colorado and east to
New England.

History.

The earlier writers record White Geese in great numbers
on the Atlantic coast from New England to the Carolinas,
and from what we know of the present distribution of the
Greater Snow Goose it is fair to assume that they were
mainly of this species, as it is normally of the region east of the
Mississippi, and not a far western migrant, like the preceding
species. Morton (1632), who made a practice of hunting
Geese at Wollaston, Mass., states that the White Geese were
bigger than the Brant, and as Wood says that they were
almost as big as tame Geese, the Greater Snow Goose prob-
ably made up the majority of those once so numerous in New
England. Audubon says that he met with the Snow Goose
in fall and winter in every part of the United States that he
visited. What a change has occurred since his day! This
Goose still appears in large flocks near Cape Hatteras and
along Albemarle Sound (Elliot, 1898); but it is now merely
accidental in New England, and there is no definite record of
its capture in Massachusetts. It is less rare in New York
than here; but Eaton gives only seventeen records of its
occurrence there (1875-1910). It is not difficult to account
for its decrease. When it is well fed no wild Goose can excel
it in richness of flavor as a table fowl. (See Appendix A.)

The Lesser Snow Goose, being usually strong or rank in
flavor and more western in distribution, has not decreased so
much. The conspicuousness of the larger species, its eastern
range and its superior flavor account for its scarcity here.
174 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

BLUE GOOSE (Chen caerulescens).

 

Length. — About 25 to 28 inches.

Adult. — Back grayish brown; head, upper part of neck and rump bluish
gray; wings same, shading to black at ends; flanks grayish brown;
feathers tipped with pale brown; tail dusky, edged with white; under
parts white; bill and feet purplish red.

Young. — Like adult, except head and neck dark grayish brown; chin only
white.

Range. — Eastern North America. Breeding range unknown, but proba-
bly interior of northern Ungava; winters from Nebraska and southern
Illinois south to coasts of Texas and Louisiana; rare or casual in migra-
tion in California, and from New Hampshire to Florida, Cuba and the
Bahamas.

History.

There is no reason to believe that this western species was
ever more than casual here. A young female, shot at Gloucester,
October 20, 1876, is now in the collection of the Boston Society
of Natural History.1

 

1 Jeffries, Wm. A.: Auk, 1889, p. 68.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 175

 

WHITE-FRONTED GOOSE (Anser albifrons gambeli).

   

_.asnl\ cia ~~ ‘

wee wh

nes

Length. — 27 to 30 inches.

Adult in Fall and Winter. — Above brownish gray, the feathers paler on
edges; forehead, fore face and after parts white; wings and tail dark;
tail tipped and edged with white; under parts, except white ventral
parts, brownish gray, with large blotches of black; a white or whitish
line on upper edge of flank; bill pale carmine or pink, with white nail
(the bill turns yellow in the breeding season); feet yellow; iris dark
brown.

Young. — Similar but browner; markings more suffused, and without black
blotches below or white on face; bill, eyes and feet as in adult, but bill
has no white on tip.

Range. — Central and western North America and Pacific coast of Asia.
Breeds on and near the Arctic coast from northeastern Siberia east to
northeastern Mackenzie and south to lower Yukon valley; winters
commonly from southern British Columbia to southern Lower Cali-
fornia and Jalisco, and rarely from southern Illinois, southern Ohio and
New Jersey south to northeastern Mexico, southern Texas and Cuba,
and on the Asiatic coast to China and Japan; rare in migration on the
Atlantic coast north to Ungava.
176 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

The White-fronted Goose was formerly an uncommon
spring and autumn migrant on our coast (Howe and Allen).
Dr. J. A. Allen (1879) gives it as a rare migrant, spring and
fall, and says that Dr. Brewer states that it was more common
thirty or forty years ago, as was the case with many of our
other Ducks and Geese. It is now regarded as a mere strag-
gler on the entire Atlantic coast. There are but five definite
records of its occurrence in Massachusetts. A male is recorded
as having been shot in Quincy and presented to the Boston
Society of Natural History (1849).1. In Plymouth an adult
male was shot November 26, 1897, by Mr. Paul W. Gifford;
this specimen is now in the Brewster collection.’ Since the first
edition of this book was written the following additional Massa-
chusetts records of the occurrence of this species have been
published. Mr. Benjamin F. Damsell records two that were
killed on the Salisbury marshes, October 5, 1888.2 An adult
bird which had been wounded was captured on Great Neck,
Ipswich, by Mr. A. B. Clark in August, 1907. This bird
lived several years, and several unsuccessful attempts were
made to cross it with a wild Canada Goose.* There are five
New York records substantiated by specimens (Eaton).

It is known as a Brant in some of our western States,
where it is abundant in migration. Formerly it was common
as far east as the Ohio River, and specimens are likely to
occur in Massachusetts.

The flight of the White-fronted Goose is similar to that of
the Canada Goose. There is the same V-shaped formation,
and at a distance it readily might be mistaken for that of the
Canada Goose.

Audubon says that in Kentucky this Goose feeds on beech
nuts, acorns, grain, young blades of grass and snails.

 

1 Cabot, Samuel: Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist. 1851, Vol. III, p. 136.
2 Brewster, William: Auk, 1901, p. 135.

3 Allen, Glover M.: Auk, Jan., 1918, p. 22.

4 Fay, S. Prescott: Auk, 1911, p. 120.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 177

 

CANADA GOOSE (Branta canadensis canadensis).

Common or local names: Wild Goose; Big Gray Goose; Honker.

 

Length. — 35 to 43 inches.

Adult. — Head and neck black; the white of throat extends up and back on
sides of head; the body feathers with paler edges generally; back and
wings brown; under parts ashy gray mainly; lower belly and under tail
coverts white; tail black, base white.

Field Marks. — Black head and neck, with white cheek patches; great size
distinctive.

Notes. — Sonorous, varied honks.

Nest. — Usually in marsh, rarely in trees.

Eggs. — Five to nine, dull pale greenish or whitish, about 3.50 by 2.50.

Season. — Common spring and fall migrant; rare in winter; a few recently
have summered; early March to late May; late September to late
December or early January.

Range. — North America. Breeds from Alaska and Labrador south to
southern Oregon, northern Colorado, Nebraska and Indiana; formerly
south to New Mexico, Kansas, Tennessee and Massachusetts; winters
from New Jersey (rarely Newfoundland and Ontario) and British
Columbia to southern California, Texas and Louisiana.
178 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

There is no sound in nature more stimulating to the mind
of the hunter than the call of the Wild Goose in the spring.
When the returning sun has burst the icy bonds of our lakes
and streams, and nature shows some signs of spring awaken-
ing; when the wood frogs begin to croak in the cheerless
sodden pool, —then we hear far away in the twilight the free
chorus of the Geese as they come coursing on the pathless air
and steering toward the pole. The baseless triangle drifting
across the sky stirs the blood of every beholder. The wild
and solemn clamor ringing down the air turns the mind of
the weary worker hemmed in by city walls to memories of
open marsh, sounding shore, winding river and placid, land-
locked bay. On they go, carrying their message to village
and city, town and farm, all over this broad land.

Never shall I forget my first curious observation of their
flight, when a little child at school. The great flocks came
sweeping across the sky, and all the children welcomed them
by pointing toward the zenith and calling ‘‘ Geese! Geese!”’
as hour by hour the birds crossed our field of view from
horizon. to horizon. In those days, and for some time after-
ward, Geese were numerous in the migrations in most parts
of the State, and sometimes flew very low. Now they are
fewer in all except the eastern portions, and usually fly high
out of gunshot; but even then they rarely alighted in our
ponds and streams in daylight unless decoyed. The flocks
of Geese which used to alight in the fields in early days were
then a thing of the past, and no one could say, as Morton
said (1637), ‘ I have often had one thousand Geese before the
muzzle of my gun.” Wood (1634) states that the Geese came
about “ Michelmasse”’ in the fall, and sometimes two or three
thousand gathered in a flock. They remained about six weeks
and again about six weeks in spring.

Of all the observers reporting to me in 1908, only one man
outside of the coast counties had seen any perceptible increase
of Wild Geese in the last thirty years. Eighteen in the coast
counties note an increase (recent in most cases) and eighty-
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 179

 

one report a fluctuating or continuous decrease in the numbers
of this species. Other reports along the Atlantic coast, from
Nova Scotia to South Carolina, also indicate a decrease; but
locally, at least, reports of increase come from the latter State.
Dr. J. C. Phillips, in a carefully prepared article on the
autumn migration of the Canada Goose in Massachusetts,!
computes the width of the coast autumnal flight at thirty-six
miles, and the number of birds passing in this belt at thirty-
four thousand three hundred and forty. The direction of the
flight here seems to parallel the coast between Boston and
Portland. He reckons the number of Geese shot at the vari-
ous shooting stands in Massachusetts at nineteen hundred
birds in 1908. This is not excessive shooting as compared
with the score of a club in Currituck Sound, N. C., where over
one thousand Geese were killed in the season of 1909-10.

Dr. A. S. Packard describes the decrease of Geese in
Labrador, where Captain French saw Geese in enormous
numbers in Old Man’s Bight. Packard twelve years later
(1890) did not see a Goose on the whole coast. The fact
that the Geese have been holding their own so well along the
Atlantic coast of Massachusetts for the past two decades may
perhaps be explained partly by the betterment of conditions
on one of their breeding grounds, the island of Anticosti in
the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Formerly the island, which is
about one hundred miles in length and larger than Long
Island, N. Y., was inhabited by squatters and wreckers, who
killed every Goose they could find during the breeding season.
This island has many swamps, ponds and marshes, with little
islands in them where Geese can breed nearly unmolested if
not troubled by man. For years it was owned by Meunier,
the French chocolate king, who evicted the squatters and
maintained a colony of his own servants at every accessible
landing or harbor. The island is now one vast protected
nursery for water-fowl, and Geese have increased greatly
there. The Geese bred on this island appear to cross the
neck of the peninsula of Nova Scotia in their southward
migration, whence, in company with flocks from farther

 

1 Auk, 1910, pp. 267, 268.
180 GAME BIRDS, WILD-~FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

north, they steer for the Massachusetts coast, usually cross-
ing Cape Cod or Plymouth County. These flights are some-
times deflected out of their course by the wind, and thus the
Goose shooting of Plymouth and Barnstable counties fluctuates
from year to year. Practically all the Geese which come
directly south across country to the Maine coast turn south-
west and join this flight, which goes down along the coast of
Massachusetts, and furnishes the Goose shooting of Essex,
Norfolk, Plymouth, Barnstable, Dukes and Nantucket coun-
ties. The increase of Geese on Anticosti for the last twenty
years probably accounts in part for the widespread belief
along our coast that Geese are not decreasing. The sports-
men of Massachusetts owe much to the Meunier family for
maintaining this great reservation for wild-fowl. It will be
interesting to see what the effect will be when in the course
of time this island passes into other hands. Another factor
in maintaining the numbers of the coast flight may be the
tendency of the birds to avoid danger in the interior by mov-
ing toward the coast. This would tend to decrease the interior
flight and increase the coastal migration.

Many speculations have been offered by writers regarding
the utility of the flock formation of this species. It is com-
monly held that the old gander, leading, breasts the air and
overcomes its resistance, carrying it along with him, thus
assuming the heaviest of the labor, and breaking, as it were,
a way, like the foremost man treading out a path in the snow
for his companions to follow, and those behind, each spreading
a little to the right or left of the one preceding, have an
easier task because of the work of the leader. The form of
the Goose flight has one obvious advantage. Every bird in
the flock, flying in a line parallel with the leader, can see what
lies ahead, as there is no other bird directly before him, and
this may be one reason why these wary birds almost always
assume their “ flying wedge’”’ formation.

Geese evidently travel by well-known landmarks, and I
believe they are never lost except in thick weather. I have
known a flock to become utterly confused at night in a fog,
and to wander about over a city square for a long time before
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 181

 

deciding where to go next. When Geese go south across the
country they seem to use some hill or mountain near the shore
for a landmark which they round, and then turn off and follow
the coast. I believe they rarely if ever intentionally travel
out of sight of land. Certain sea birds and shore birds can
cross the sea even in fog without any landmark to guide them,
but this seems to be beyond the power of Geese.

The autumnal migratory movements of this Goose seem to
have less of a southeasterly trend than those of many Ducks.
This species breeds throughout the northern parts of the
continent to the tree limit, and even beyond in Labrador,
where it nests on.the arctic tundra. The flocks rush south
in autumn until they reach unfrozen waters. In the spring
they appear to follow the same route on their return.

The Canada Goose formerly nested in Massachusetts.
The earlier explorers state that they found Geese nesting on
islands along the coast. Samuels states that Wild Geese have
bred several times on Martha’s Vineyard and also near Lex-
ington, Mass. They normally breed in this latitude, but only
after they have attained the third year. The male does not
incubate, but stays by the female and with her defends the
nest against all assailants. The young are strong enough to
eat, walk and swim as soon as they have hatched, and dried
their plumage.

So much has been written about the habits of this bird
that more would be superfluous. They feed largely on vege-
table matter, the roots of rushes, weeds, grasses, etc., grass
and many seeds and berries, and swallow quantities of sand
as an aid to digestion. Geese feed either on shore, where they
pluck up grass and other vegetation, or they bring up food
from the bottom in shoal water by thrusting their heads and
necks down as they float on the surface. Like the Brant, they
feed on eelgrass (Zostera marina), which grows on the flats in
salt or brackish water, in tidal streams and marshy ponds.
Sometimes they are destructive to young grass and grain.
182 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

HUTCHINS’S GOOSE (Branta canadensis hutchinsi).
Common or local names: Little Gray Goose; Mud Goose; Short-necked Goose;
Southern Goose (?).

Length. — Averaging about 30 inches.

Adult and Young. — Almost exactly similar to the Canada Goose but much
smaller; occasionally a white spot on chin at base of bill and rarely a
white ring on neck just below the black; tail of fourteen to sixteen
feathers; the Canada Goose has eighteen to twenty.

Field Marks. — Like Canada Goose, but much smaller.

Notes. — Similar to those of Canada Goose.

Season. — A rare or casual migrant at the same time as Canada Goose.

Range. — Western North America, mainly. Breeds on Arctic coasts and
Islands from Alaska to northwestern coast of Hudson Bay and north to
latitude 70 degrees; winters from British Columbia, Nevada, Colorado
and Missouri south to Lower California, Texas and Louisiana; acci-
dental in Vera Cruz; rare migrant east of the Mississippi valley region,
but recorded on the Atlantic coast from Maine to Virginia.

History.

This is a smaller western race of the Canada Goose. It is
generally regarded as a mere straggler here, and there are no
definite records. It is not improbable, however, that it was
formerly irregularly common here in times when water-fowl
were generally plentiful. Dr. Brewer says that it was abun-
dant in Massachusetts in the winter of 1836-37. He states also,
in the Water Birds of North America, that at some seasons it
has been found not uncommon in the neighborhood of Boston,
and that numbers have been brought to market from Cape
Cod. As it is so similar to the Canada Goose, and associates
with it, it is no doubt usually regarded as merely a small
specimen of that species. Some eastern gunners distinguish
between the ‘“long-necked Geese”? and the ‘“short-necked
Geese.” Rich asserts that he examined four of these “short-
necked Geese,” of which three were undoubtedly Hutchins’s
Geese. Howe and Allen do not include it in their list of
Massachusetts birds. Since the first edition of this book was
written a specimen of Hutchins’s Goose was shot by Messrs.
Frank C. Drake and Irving A. Hall, at Nippinicket Pond,
Bridgewater, Mass., October 8, 1910.?

1 Rich, Walter H.: Feathered Game of the Northeast, 1997, p. 270.
2 Dyke, Arthur C.: Auk, 1912, p. 536.

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 183

 

BRANT (Branta bernicla glaucogastra).

 

Length. — 23 to 26 inches.

Adult. — Head, neck and a little of fore part of body black; streaks of
white in a small patch on the side of upper neck; back and wings brown;
breast and flanks light ashy gray or brownish gray; belly white back
of legs; tail black; upper tail coverts white; bill, feet and claws black;
iris brown.

Field Marks. — Very small for a Goose; sooty black on head and neck,
with small but conspicuous white patch on neck which can be seen at
a distance with a glass. It flies in a more compact body than the Can-
ada Goose or in irregular formation, with seemingly no chosen leader.

Notes. — A guttural car-r-rup or r-r-r-ronk (Elliot). Ruk-ruk (Hapgood).

Season. — Abundant locally off the coast in migration, elsewhere rare or
uncommon; March to early May, sometimes later; early September
to early December. Some remain south of Cape Cod in winter, also
off Long Island, N. Y.
184 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Range. — Northern hemisphere. Breeds on arctic islands north of lati-
tude 74 degrees and west to about longitude 100 degrees, and on the
whole west coast of Greenland; winters on the Atlantic Coast from
Massachusetts south to North Carolina; rarely to Florida; has been
recorded in the interior from Manitoba, Ontario, Colorado, Nebraska,
Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana and Louisiana; accidental in British
Columbia and Barbados.

History.

The Brant was formerly one of the most abundant of all
the sea-fowl. The early historians mention it among the
Geese which swarmed on the coast of Massachusetts when
the colony was first settled. It found rest and shelter in
every bay, harbor and estuary along our coast, where its
principal food, the eelgrass (Zostera marina), grows upon the
flats. The following notes from many authors will give some
idea of its former status: Rare in New Hampshire, but
in the Bay of Massachusetts found in great abundance
(Belknap, 1793). Early in October they are seen to arrive
about Ipswich, Cape Ann and Cape Cod in great numbers,
continuing to come until November, and in hazy weather
“they fly and diverge into bays and inlets” (Nuttall, Massa-
chusetts, 1834). Early in October they arrive in large num-
bers; flocks continue to follow each other in long succession,
and the gunners secure considerable numbers (Peabody,
Massachusetts, 1838). Appears in great numbers on the
coast of New York the first or second week in October; con-
tinues passing through until December (De Kay, 1844). In
spring and autumn very numerous on our coasts, exceeding
in number the Canada Geese and dusky Ducks (Giraud, Long.
Island, N. Y., 1844). Abundant (Turnbull, Eastern Penn-
sylvania and New Jersey, 1869). Found on coast abun-
dantly (Samuels, New England, 1870). Common spring and
autumn on coast (Maynard, Massachusetts, 1870). Not un-
common spring and autumn (J. A. Allen, 1879). “‘In former
years were quite abundant at Montauk and in Gardiner’s
Bay on the west shore of Long Island, N. Y., and now they
are much more scarce” (Leffingwell, 1890). Formerly very
abundant along our eastern coast; have seen many large
flocks in the bays of Long Island, but the persistent shooting
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 185

 

has diminished their numbers (Huntington, 1893). There is
evidence that long before this time Geese and Brant had
decreased in those waters. Prime (1845) makes the follow-
ing statement in his history of Long Island. ‘‘Upon the re-
turn of cold weather, these [the wild-fowl] with the numerous
progeny which they have reared, return and bespeckle the
harbours and bays, which constantly resound with their
untiring cackle. There is reason, however, to believe that
some of these species, particularly the wild-goose, are greatly
diminished in number, from what they were formerly.
Many persons now living, can distinctly recollect the time
when, both spring and fall, the passage of large flocks of
geese over the island, at almost any point, was a matter of
daily, and sometimes hourly occurrence. But now, it is a
sight that is rarely witnessed. The same remark is applica-
ble to a smaller species of fowl, though larger than the duck,
commonly distinguished by the name of Brant. All the
larger kinds of wild fowl are evidently scarcer, than they were
formerly. The increased population of the country, and the
improved skill and implements of gunning, probably account
for the fact.””!

Old gunners have told me that Brant were very plenti-
ful all along our shores sixty to seventy-five years ago. Mr.
William C. Peterson, formerly of Marshfield, Mass., says that
about the year 1855, during a southeasterly storm in the fall,
myriads of Brant came in from seaward and flew up across
Plymouth beach to Duxbury Bay. He has never seen such a
flight since, but used to see more in fall than in spring. About
Thanksgiving time in 1872, or thereabouts, more than one
hundred big flocks came in during a storm; as near as he
could estimate there were about ten thousand birds. He has
not seen so large a flight since, and says they rarely see very
many there now. Mr. Elbridge Gerry, a respected citizen
of Stoneham, Mass, who hunted along the coast from 1835
to 1900, said (1904) that Brant were few of late years, even
at Chatham, as compared with their former numbers. Dr.
L. C. Jones of Malden says that Brant used to be common in

 

1 Prime, Nathaniel S.: History of Long Island, 1845, Part 1, p. 21.
186 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

fall, flying at the same time with the Scoters. Now they are
uncommon where he shoots. He saw a flock of about fifty
at Sandwich in the fall of 1907, and a small flock in 1908.
Daniel Giraud Elliot, author of standard works on wild-
fowl, shore birds and game birds, who has had perhaps as
long and varied experience with the wild-fowl as any man
now living, says (1898) that constant warfare against the
Brant has greatly depleted their numbers, and in many places
where they were once numerous they are now seen in small
bodies or are absent altogether.

Comparatively few observers reported to me in 1908 on
the Brant, as it is commonly seen in but few localities.
Fifteen noted the species as increasing in numbers and forty-
one reported it as decreasing. Thirteen of the fifteen reports
of increase came from Barnstable County. The reports
point to the well-known fact that on the New England coast
the Brant has concentrated now at a few outlying points,
such as Chatham, Monomoy, Nantucket, Muskeget, and Point
Judith. Many years ago they were abundant in the waters
about Cape Ann, in Boston harbor, on the south shore, in Buz-
zards Bay, and, in fact, all along our coast. They were for-
merly plentiful at Brant Point on Waquoit Bay. A point of
the same name in Nantucket harbor and Brant Rock on the
south shore are said by old residents to have been famous for
the Brant that frequented them in olden times. Mr. Henry V.
Greenough of Brookline says that he judges that the Brant
have decreased about Monomoy perhaps one-third in his time.
He says that perhaps the reduction in the birds may be laid to
the great increase in power boats, which frighten the birds away
to a long distance, and they are less prone to stay several
weeks, as they used to. Dr. Henry B. Bigelow of the Museum
of Comparative Zodlogy says, “formerly Brant were very
abundant in winter in all the salt broad-waters from Chinco-
teague, Md., to Cape Hatteras. On the eastern shore of Vir-
ginia, Brant have been very much reduced in numbers. We
might suppose that this reduction was due to the increased
oyster business and to other disturbances of their feeding
grounds. Were this true, we should expect to find their num-
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 187

 

bers increased in Pamlico Sound; but this is not the case.
Here, again, Brant, which were formerly among the most plen-
tiful water fowl have decreased noticeably in the last five years,
especially in the northern part of the sound. So true is it that
at the Pea Island Club, of which I am a member, it is now
hardly worth while to set out for Brant, although a few years
ago we regularly had excellent Brant shooting. We might
explain the decrease as due to some change in natural con-
ditions, but, within a radius of forty miles of Ocracoke Inlet,
probably the main wintering ground for Brant to-day, no
increase in numbers is noted. On the contrary, all my in-
quiry among sportsmen, market gunners and club superin-
tendents, gets but one answer, — a serious decrease.”

All the above seems to indicate that Brant, which were
once so numerous that they were obliged to scatter along
the coast to find sufficient suitable feeding grounds for their
wants, have now been so reduced in numbers that a few
isolated localities give ample accommodation for all that are
left; and as practically all the Brant in North America visit
these few localities in migration, they crowd them so that
the impression is given there that they have not decreased in
number, and have even increased. This is a condition analo-
gous to that of the Passenger Pigeon, when in 1888 a great
part of the species seemed to have concentrated in a few
localities in Michigan. There they seemed at that time more
numerous than ever, yet now the species is believed to be
extinct.

On the other hand, we have the testimony of many of
the Chatham and Monomoy Brant shooters, who follow
Warren Hapgood in the belief that Brant are as plentiful
as ever. While Hapgood did not deny that the Brant had
probably decreased since the settlement of the country, he
insisted that his experience of thirty-five years at Monomoy
and Chatham convinced him that the birds had not decreased
in his time, although he had seen a great decrease in Black
Ducks during those years. Mr. Orville D. Lovell quotes
arctic explorers and statements made to them by the Eski-
mos as proof that Brant are as numerous as ever in the arctic
188 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

seas, and he assures me that they are as plentiful as ever in
Long Island waters. It is quite beyond the limits of proba-
bility, however, that the Brant could have maintained their
numbers during the centuries of settlement without any pro-
tection whatever, — and they never have had any along their
route of migration until quite recently. From the time that
they reached Hudson Bay on their journey southward until
they returned again to the Arctic Ocean they were pursued
by the whites wherever they stopped to rest, and Eskimos
hunted them during their breeding season in the north.

A glance at their line of migration will explain their ap-
pearance in numbers at points on the Atlantic coast. The
breeding range of the White-bellied Brant is not well known,
but it is believed that it breeds mainly if not entirely in the
easterly portions of the northern part of the North American
arctic archipelago. The Brant arrive late in May or in early
June on the northwest coast of Greenland, and breed north-
ward probably as far as land extends. In these remote re-
gions ice begins to make late in August or early September,
and in September the Brant move southward, passing down
the Boothia peninsula and the west coast of Hudson Bay,
from whence they apparently cross the Canadian wilderness
to the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Reaching the shore of the
gulf, they turn eastward toward Anticosti and Prince Edward
islands. They then proceed across the neck of the penin-
sula of Nova Scotia, down the Bay of Fundy, and steer direct
for the outer shore of Cape Cod. Sometimes they are de-
flected by the wind and run on to the Massachusetts coast,
but they usually round the cape and pass Nantucket, touch-
ing afterward only at outlying points on the coast until they
reach Virginia and North Carolina, where most of them
winter, although many winter at points farther north and
some in Massachusetts waters. The spring migration begins
here about the last week in February or the first of March,
and continues on the average six weeks or more. In April
large numbers have reached the Gulf of St. Lawrence, cross-
ing Prince Edward Island. Mr. E. T. Carbonnell writes me
that the Brant arrive at Prince Edward Island in spring,
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 189

 

nearly always in the night, and that the dates when the large
flocks leave Cape Cod coincide with the dates of their arrival
at the island. About June 1, those in the district around
Charlottetown (which probably comprise a great part of the
Atlantic coast flight) begin to assemble in Hillsborough Bay,
outside of Charlottetown harbor, on the south side of the
island. Here they gather between St. Peters and Governor’s
islands, in preparation for their northern journey. From June
10 to 15 they leave in large flocks. Sometimes four or five
such flocks follow one another, about a mile apart. They
start northward, enter Charlottetown harbor, proceeding
about two miles toward the city, then turn to the westward
up West River, which they follow to near its head, when they
wheel to the northwest and cross the island heading for the
Gulf of St. Lawrence. Mr. Carbonnell is informed that they
sometimes turn eastward and go up East River until near Mt.
Stewart, when they turn northward and cross a neck of land
to Tracadie Bay, on the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Possibly the
choice of routes may depend on the direction of the wind.

Here observers agree that they fly to the west or south-
west and go up the Gulf of St. Lawrence, finally turning
overland on its northern shore. How the Brant reach the
Arctic Ocean from this point is still their own secret. They
are never seen in spring on the west shore of Hudson Bay.
Possibly they may go up the east shore of the bay or cross
the peninsula to the shores of Ungava. The average date on
which the flocks reach the Gulf of St. Lawrence (latitude 46
degrees) is March 23, and they reach latitude 79 degrees
about May 30, — an average speed of thirty-four miles per
day (Cooke).

The most northern record of the Brant according to the
same authority, is latitude 82 degrees 33 minutes, on the north
coast of Grinnell Land. In this route of migration we have
an explanation of the great apparent numbers of the Brant.
Practically all the individuals of the species collect from a
great area beyond the arctic circle and concentrate upon one
line of flight along the Atlantic coast. The individuals of the
Black Brant collect in a similar manner for a similar flight
190 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

down the Pacific coast. On this line of flight each of these
species when so concentrated will always appear very numer-
ous until they approach extinction, and particularly so when
they are driven away from all but a comparatively few feed-
ing grounds. If, during the recent scarcity of the Ruffed
Grouse, all the Grouse of the species in North America had
been collected and concentrated off Monomoy, the natives
there would have been convinced that Grouse had increased
rather than diminished in numbers. There are practically no
Brant in North America during the migrations except on these
two coasts. A few stragglers are met with rarely on ponds
near the sea-shore, but Brant are rare always except on salt
water. The so-called Brant seen in the middle west are other
species of Geese. After the flight of Brant passes Nova Scotia
on the southward journey, they rarely fly over any extent of
land, but keep off the coast, avoiding even the points as much
as possible.

While formerly tame and unsuspicious, this bird has
learned wisdom by experience, and by keeping off shore and
avoiding the vicinity of mankind it succeeds in holding its
own much better than most edible water-fowl. It seeks
isolated and extensive flats where the eelgrass grows, and
where, although the water is shallow enough to enable it to
feed by thrusting its head to the bottom and pulling up the
roots of this plant, it can still find sufficient food at a long
distance from the dangers of the shore. Floating batteries
and decoys are still used in some States for its destruction,
and in the south it is hunted by jack light at night, although
this method is illegal in most States.

The Brant has one weakness —its fondness for sand.
Large quantities of sand seem to be absolutely necessary for
the proper digestion of its food, and the gunners assert that
before attempting a long migratory flight the Brant alights
on beach or bar and “‘takes in ballast” for the trip. This is
the gunner’s opportunity, and a sunken box on a sand bar or
point, surrounded with decoys, is the favorite shooting stand
for Brant in Massachusetts. Hapgood gives a record of forty-
four birds killed from one of these boxes aé one shot, and states
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 19]

 

that one thousand or fifteen hundred were killed in a season.
This was many years ago, before the formation of the Brant
clubs. No such number has been killed in recent years. The
average number killed by the members of the Monomoy
Branting Club for thirty-four years, during the Hapgood
régime, is a trifle over two hundred and sixty-six birds per
year. The members of the branting clubs state that only a
few Brant (less than five hundred) have been killed annually
in recent years in Massachusetts under a law which denied
the birds protection, and that therefore no protection should
be given them; but Mr. John M. Winslow of Nantucket
says that under the policy of no protection probably four
hundred or five hundred Brant were killed annually on Mus-
keget Island. The official figures of the Commissioners on
Fisheries and Game show that two hundred and sixty-three
Brant were killed on Nantucket in 1907, but probably the
average number killed would be less than one hundred per
year. Including those taken on Martha’s Vineyard, Cape
Cod and the entire Massachusetts coast, the number taken
yearly is not excessive in the autumnal flight. Quite a
number of Brant are now killed in the fall; but spring pro-
tection protects. In spring more Brant usually stop on the
Massachusetts coast than in fall. They stay longer, the
weather for shooting is better and the birds are not so much
disturbed by scallop fishermen, ete. On the other hand, the
experienced birds in spring are more shy and more difficult
to take than the inexperienced young in fall.

Brant are well protected in summer by the inaccessi-
bility of their breeding grounds. Few white men have ever
seen them there. On the other hand, the very remoteness of
their nesting places in the far north exposes their young to
destruction. The adults have but three months at most to
nest, deposit their eggs and hatch and rear their broods;
the actual period in which they can rear the young after
hatching is often not much, if any, over six weeks. Severe
and unseasonable storms which occur in the polar summer
or early fall sometimes must destroy the increase of the sea-
son, or force the parents to fly south, leaving the young to
192 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

their fate. In some seasons practically no young birds ap-
pear. A succession of such seasons with unchecked shooting
might reduce the Brant to the verge of extinction.

When it is considered that the Brant has been hunted for
centuries little seems to be recorded about its food and habits.
Hapgood says that in confinement it eats dead wood and feeds
readily upon corn, but it never has been known to breed.
It does not dive for its food, but will dive well when wounded,
and swim under water. At low water it tears up eelgrass,
and after the tide rises continues feeding on what it has torn
up. In the north it is said to feed on grass and berries, and
at times it takes mollusks and other small marine animals.
Its flesh is considered excellent, but its quality depends on
the season and its food.

BLACK BRANT (Branta nigricans).

Length. — About 25 inches.

Adult. — Similar to Brant but darker; black of head and neck not ending
abruptly on breast, but extending in a wash over flanks and much of
belly; broad white collar on neck, interrupted behind; lower parts
white behind.

Range. — Western North America. Breeds on arctic coast and islands
from Point Barrow near mouth of Anderson River north to Melville
Island; common on Siberian coast; winters on Pacific coast from Brit-
ish Columbia to Lower California; in interior to Nevada and on Asiatic
coast to Japan; recorded as a straggler to Massachusetts, New York
and New Jersey.

History.

The Black Brant is a Pacific coast species which breeds
on the coast of northeastern Siberia, northern Alaska and
in the western part of the North American arctic archipel-
ago,’ and’ migrates south in vast numbers along the Pacific
coast. It is accidental here. There are two Massachusetts
records. One bird was taken at Chatham in the spring of 1883.1
A Black Brant was taken at Chatham on April 15, 1902, by
Mr. W. A. Carey. This one was of a flock of seven.” There
are three New York records (Eaton). The eastern Brant is
sometimes erroneously called the Black Brant.

 

1Cory, C.B.: Auk, 1884, p. 96.
2 Fay, S. Prescott: Auk, 1910, p. 336.
 

 

   

 

W.E.Free mai.

 

 

PLATE VI.— BARNACLE GOOSE.

From a photograph by W. E, Freeman, made from his painting of the only
specimen recorded from Massachusetts.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 193

 

BARNACLE GOOSE (Brania leucopsis).

Length. — About 28 inches.

Adult Female. — Front and sides of head, chin and throat white; dark
line from base of bill running back to eye; rest of head and neck black,
the black extending on upper back and fore breast; shoulders and
wing coverts gray, feathers tipped with black and white; rump and
tail black; upper and under tail coverts, sides of rump, belly and lower
breast white or whitish, the flanks shaded with gray; quills dusky.

Adult Male. — Duller than female; iris hazel brown; bill, feet and claws
black.

Young. — White face, speckled with black; general plumage suffused with
rufous brown, more or less marked, according to age.

Range. — Northern part of Old World. Breeds in northern part of eastern
hemisphere as far north as Spitzbergen; winters in Great Britain and
western Europe, occurring south to Spain; occurs in Iceland, and in
migration on both coasts of Greenland; recorded from Ungava, Onta-
rio, Quebec, Vermont, Massachusetts, New York and North Caro-
lina.

History.

The Barnacle Goose is a wanderer from the Old World.
One is recorded as having been killed at North Chatham,
November 1, 1885, and mounted by N. Vickary.! Mr. J. A.
Farley informs me that this specimen was shot at North
Eastham, out of a “bunch of three or four presumably of the
same species,” by Joseph Dill. It is now in the Brewster
collection.

Mr. Warren E. Freeman, who secured this specimen for the
collection, made a painting of the bird, from which the plate
facing this page is taken.

SWANS.

The Swans comprise the subfamily Cygnine. They are
among the largest of all water-fowl. They are distinguished
by the long neck, the bare space from bill to eye and the
exact similarity in color of the two sexes. They are less at
home on land than the Geese, but are very graceful and
elegant upon the water. Some Swans have resonant voices,
while others are mute. In New England we have now but
one species, which has nearly disappeared.

 

1 Ornithologist and Odlogist, January, 1886, Vol. 11, p. 16.
194 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

WHISTLING SWAN (Olor columbianus).

 

Length. — 50 to 55 inches.

Adult. — Bill as long as head; feathers on forehead end in semicircular
outline; nostrils extend forward beyond basal half of bill; plumage
pure white, sometimes with rusty spots on head, neck and body; beak
white; feet black; lores black, with orange or yellow spot before eye.

Young. — Gray; sometimes lead color first year; bill reddish. Second
year, plumage lighter; bill white. Third year, plumage white, gray
mottled; bill black. Plumage all white about fifth year.

Notes. — Principally a high “ flageolet-like” note; very different from the
trombone-like tones of the Trumpeter. Varied murmurings from high
to low, but with less volume than those of the Trumpeter Swan; the
leader of the flock calls whé-whd-whéd in a very high key, and in re-
sponse comes a chorus of weird sounds (Elliot).

Season. — Rare straggler in spring, autumn and winter; formerly abundant.

Range. — Formerly North America, from the latitude of Georgia to the
coasts and islands of the Arctic seas; now rare or absent on the At-
lantic seaboard north of Chesapeake Bay; breeds in Alaska and on
Arctic islands from about latitude 74 degrees south to northern Mac-
kenzie and northwestern Hudson Bay; winters to Louisiana, Texas
and South Carolina, rarely to Florida; casual in northern Mexico;
accidental in Scotland and Bermuda.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 195

 

History.

The Swans, which once in great numbers frequented the
rivers and estuaries along the Atlantic coast, from New Eng-
land to Georgia, probably were mainly of this species, for it
lives in preference nearer the sea than does the Trumpeter,
which breeds mainly near the fresh marshes and about the lakes
of the interior, while the Whistling Swan nests upon the shores
and islands of the Arctic Ocean. Perhaps this species bred
in early times on the northern coasts of Labrador or on Baf-
fin’s land and other lands to the northward, and the “greate
store of swans” which Morton and other writers speak of as
frequenting New England may have been recruited partly
from this source; but by the middle of the nineteenth cen-
tury man’s persecution had either killed them off or driven
them away, so that they had become rare in New England.
Up to that time, however, flocks of this species were seen
occasionally on the coast of Massachusetts, and though they
are now so rarely seen as to be ranked as accidental or casual
visitors, a few still pass over the State or along our coasts.
They are almost never taken here now, unless driven by
severe storms to alight.

Fleming (1906) states that this species is rare now in
Ontario, Can., and probably only accidental. He has seen
only two dead birds and two specimens in the collection at
Trinity University which were probably taken in Ontario.!

In the early days Swans wintered much farther north
than they do now. They were seen in winter about Lake
Ontario, as well as on the New England coast. Mr. J. F.
Lebaron, a well-known sportsman, stated (1879) that Swans
were seen occasionally at Ipswich in former years. Maynard
records them as rare in winter.? They sometimes wintered
on the Island of Nantucket. Now they rarely are seen in
the northern States in winter. They are decreasing in the
Chesapeake, but are increasing in Currituck Sound, N. C.
This increase of the Swans in southern waters has given rise

 

1 Fleming, James H.: Auk, 1906, p. 446.
2 Maynard, C. J.: The Naturalist’s Guide, with a complete catalogue of the birds of eastern
Massachusetts, 1870, p. 146.
196 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

to the mistaken idea, now held by many intelligent gunners
and sportsmen, that the numbers of Swans are increasing.
The Whistling Swan has been driven farther south year by
year, until all its flocks are crowded into a region perhaps
not one-tenth as large as the one formerly occupied by them,
and in consequence they seem to be increasing there. In
reality the species is decreasing steadily in numbers. Every
year the increase of population in the southwest tends to render
that region more unsafe for the Swan. Mr. J. D. Mitchell
writes from Victoria, Tex., that forty years ago the bays and
estuaries were full of Swans, and that he has seen more than
a thousand at a time, not only in one locality but in several
counties. He has not seen one now in more than ten years.
Preble (1908) says that this species formerly was abundant
in the Athabasca-Mackenzie region, where it bred. Now, he
says, it passes through the region in small numbers, breeding
only in the far north.

The records of the traffic in swan’s-down tell the story.
Sixty or seventy years ago, while the birds were still abun-
dant in the fur countries, about five hundred skins were
traded annually at the Hudson Bay Company’s post at Isle
& la Crosse, and about three hundred annually were taken at
Fort Anderson during the five years of its existence. Mac-
Farlane states that between 1853 and 1877 the company
sold seventeen thousand six hundred and seventy-one Swan
skins. The number sold annually went from one thousand
three hundred and twelve in 1854 down to one hundred and
twenty-two in 1877. From 1858 to 1884, inclusive, Atha-
basca district sent out two thousand seven hundred and five
Swan skins, nearly all from Fort Chipewyan. Mackenzie
River district furnished twenty-five hundred skins from 1863
to 1883. In 1853 Athabasca turned out two hundred and
fifty-one; in 1889 the output had dwindled to thirty-three.
In 1889 and 1890 Isle 4 la Crosse sent out but two skins for
each outfit. The rapid decrease of those birds, says Preble,
is well illustrated by these figures.?-

 

‘ Preble, E. A.: North American Fauna, Bureau of Biol. Surv., Dept. of Agr., 1908, No. 27,
pp. 309, 310.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 197

 

These skins were taken from both species, but Nuttall says
that the Trumpeter furnished the bulk of them. When it
is considered that from all this vast region the Hudson Bay
Company collected in the best year given only one thousand
three hundred and twelve Swan skins, and that in the old
days thousands of Swans were seen in a flock, it is plain that
this traffic cannot be held entirely responsible for the de-
crease of Swans; it could have been but a small factor in
producing that result. The killing of Swans by Eskimos and
Indians in August, when the birds are unable to fly, is a drain
on their numbers; but that has been customary from time
immemorial, yet there were multitudes of Swans when the
white man came.

We cannot, if we would, evade the fact that the white
man and his gun are the chief factors in the destruction of
the Swan. The Trumpeter suffered first and most, because
it bred in the United States and Canada, directly in the path
of settlement. The Whistling Swan suffered less, because it
nested mainly on the shores of the Arctic Sea, and in the great
lands in that sea where white men rarely go. The only safety
for the Swans in passing over the settled regions in their
flight to the south is to rise high in the air, with favoring
winds, and never rest until they have flown twelve hundred
or fifteen hundred miles, passed over the teeming villages
and cities of the north and reached the more secluded and
safer waters of the south. Unfortunately for them, however,
they are still prone to alight to rest in isolated lakes and
ponds, where often they are waylaid by the hunter. If a
storm overtakes them and they have to fly below the clouds
to see their way the wearied birds are sometimes beaten to
earth by sleet, or are forced to alight in some stream. In
such cases they are hardly accorded the hospitality usually
extended to storm-beaten travellers; instead, the people
turn out to slaughter them.

Sennett describes an occurrence of this kind which took
place in northwestern Pennsylvania, March 22, 1879. The
Swans, overweighted with sleet and snow, came down in
many places in Crawford, Mercer, Venango and Warren
198 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

counties. They settled in ponds, streams, fields or villages
in an almost helpless condition. Guns, rifles and clubs were
brought into play; a large number of the birds were killed
and many were captured alive (twenty-five in one village),
but all were killed later for their feathers and flesh. Most
of the Swans which alighted within sight of human habita-
tions were slaughtered, only a few escaping.!

Occasionally they find safety during a storm by alighting
on the great lakes, under the lee of some point or island.
Rarely, a wearied, storm-beaten flock alights in Niagara River
and is swept over the falls, where it meets with the usual
reception.

There was a great slaughter of Swans at Niagara Falls,
March 15, 1908; one hundred and twenty-eight birds were
taken out of a flock that had been swept over the falls. On
the morning of March 14 a flock of three hundred or four
hundred Swans alighted in the upper Niagara River. All day
Swans were seen floating down the river with the current,
till danger of being swept into the Canadian Rapids caused
them to rise and fly back to their starting point. Below
Horseshoe Falls the water was breasted by a struggling mass
of swans. The majority of them were carried by the current
to the ice bridge, and either cast up or ground against it by
masses of floating ice. Some were already dead, many were
injured and the rest stunned and unable to help themselves.
People came in crowds and killed all that could be reached
with clubs, and the rest were shot. At least one hundred
birds were slaughtered or picked up dead between the falls and
the ice bridge; none escaped alive. On the 18th, three more
Swans were taken, and on the 22d, twelve more came over
the falls, eleven of which were taken. Others were taken in
1906 and 1907.?

There is little safety for a Swan in America unless it is
high in the air or has a mile of open water all around it. When
the shotgun will not carry far enough the long-range rifle is
brought into play. If the Swan alights on a game preserve

 

1 Sennett, George B.: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1880, pp. 125, 126.
2 Fleming, James H.: Auk, 1908, pp. 306-308.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT 199

 

in the north it is shot because it is rare, and is wanted for
a ‘“‘specimen;” if it alights in New England, and is seen,
it rarely gets away.

The great Swan shooting ground now is Currituck Sound.
Here the birds find open water, food is plentiful and they
are far less harried than on Chesapeake Bay. This is the
secret of their increase there, and they will probably continue
to maintain their numbers there for years, provided the con-
ditions remain favorable.

There are a good many records of the occurrence of
Swans in New England. Mr. Robert O. Morris of Spring-
field, Mass., saw one at Longmeadow “more than twenty
years ago.” Mr. John Daland, Jr., of Salem says that one
was seen at Plum Island about 1885. About 1888 Mr. George
Linder saw a flock of over twenty Swans flying very high
over Newton, Mass. A small flock was seen on the Charles
River in 1891." A Whistling Swan was killed at Flatlands,
within the limits of Greater New York, by Asher White,
December 24, 1901.2. Six were seen on November 28, 1902, and
one shot on December 1 by Mr. W. H. Vivian of Gloucester,
Mass.* Mr. E. W. Eaton writes that he shot at a “bunch”
of seven Swans near the mouth of the Merrimac River in
November, 1902, wounding one; one of these was shot afterwards
by Mr. George F. Thurlow (November 28). The Rev. Albert E.
Hylan states that one was seen by the captain of a towboat on
Long Island Sound in 1906. Dr. L. C. Sanford writes that he
saw a Swan flying near Watch Hill, R. I., September 19, 1908.
Mr. Talbot Denmead of Baltimore writes (1908) that about five
hundred still winter near Carroll’s Island in Chesapeake Bay,
on a club preserve where few are shot; and Col. L. R. Cheney
of Hartford says that he has seen as many as five hundred
in a single day off Virginia beach, about eight miles north of
the North Carolina line. Several correspondents assert that
three fine specimens of this species were taken on Nantucket,
Mass., November 29, 1906.4 Two were shot on Squibnocket

 

1 Chamberlain, Montague: Nuttall’s Manual, 1891, Vol. II, p. 298.
2 Braislin, William C.: Auk, 1903, p. 52.

2? Townsend, C. W.: Birds of Essex County, 1905, p. 151

4Bent, A. C.: Auk, 1907, p. 212.
200 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Pond, Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., by Mr. Gardiner Hammond,
one on November 28, 1906, and the other on the next day.
These are now in the Thayer collection at Lancaster, Mass.*
John Burroughs has seen Swans passing in migration on the
Hudson at a great height. It is easy for them to fly at such a
height as to be above the notice of ordinary observers, and if
any of the descendants of the Swans which once followed a
flightway over New England are still living, they probably
pursue the same line that was followed by their ancestors.
Possibly a few still may breed in Ungava and migrate down
the Atlantic seaboard. Mr. E. T. Carbonnell records several
flocks, seen in Charlottetown, P. E. I., in recent years. One
flew over the city in 1909. (See Appendix A.)

In moving from their arctic homes in autumn the Swans
seemingly divide their forces; part going toward the Pacific
coast, part southeastward toward the south Atlantic States
and part south through the region of the Mississippi valley.
They seem to fly undeviatingly across the country, crossing
river valleys or mountain ranges, steering a course straight
for their distant goal. When they arrive at their destination
they pay little attention to decoys, but busy themselves by
plunging their heads to the bottom in shallow water and
digging up the bottom grass with their beaks. When they
find the favorite morsels they often dig large holes in the
bottom. The Swan does not dive, but can readily reach bot-
tom in about three feet of water by standing on its head on
the bottom and paddling with its feet to keep its balance.
When undisturbed it is a noisy bird, though silent when
alarmed. When a flock is at ease, their weird, high-keyed
calls and deeper tones may be heard in chorus. Dawson
says that the bass horns “‘of tin rather than brass” are blown
by the old fellows, while varied notes, like those of the clari-
net, come from the cygnets or young birds.? Nevertheless,
the old males often give utterance to very high shrill notes
when leading the flock in flight.

One of the supposed myths of antiquity is the song of

 

1 Thayer, John E.: Auk, 1907, p. 212.
2 Dawson, William Leon, and Jones, Lyndes: Birds of Ohio, 1903, Vol. II, p. 572.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 201

 

the dying Swan, so often the theme of the poet. Elliot says
that he has killed many Swans which never uttered a sound;
but once on Currituck Sound, N. C., he and Mr. F. W. Leg-
gett fired at some Swans passing high over head, and one of
them, mortally wounded, set its wings and began its death
song, “which was continued until the water was reached,
nearly half a mile away.”’ The song was plaintive and musi-
cal, and at times sounded like “‘the soft running of the notes
in an octave.” Dr. Elliot found upon inquiry among the
gunners that others had heard somewhat similar tones from
dying Swans. Thus another myth of the olden time becomes
a reality.

With the first signs of spring the Swans marshal their
depleted lines, and, rising high in air, set out for the shores
of the Arctic Sea, where lies their only hope of safety and
security.

Note. — The Whooper Swan (Olor cygnus) of Europe is noted by
Knight in his Birds of Maine (page 124). This is a bird of the northern
parts of the Old World, but occasionally visits Greenland. Knight refers
to the taking of a specimen in Washington County, Me., by Charles S.
Hunnewell. This was recorded by C. H. Clark (Jour. Me. Orn. Soc., 1905,
p. 23), but the record is not mentioned in the third edition of the Ameri-
can-Ornithologists’ Union Check-List.

RAILS, CRAKES, GALLINULES AND COOTS.

This family of marsh birds, known to naturalists as the
Rallide, is a large and important one, which occupies a posi-
tion between the Herons and the shore birds. The members
of the family are of small or medium size, with rather long
narrow bodies and large strong legs and thighs, which prob-
ably have been developed by the effort of wading in mud
and pushing the body through the tall grass, reeds, canes
and water plants among which these birds find refuge. The
feet usually are formed for walking, and the toes are long
enough to support the body in passing over mud or floating
water plants. The Coots, however, have the foot peculiarly
adapted for swimming. It is intermediate between that of a
Grebe and that of a Phalarope. Each toe is provided with
202 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

a membranous flap or lobe, thus making a folding paddle
of the foot. (Fig. 11.) The wings of this family are not
long and pointed, as in the shore birds, but short, rounded

, and concave. The flight is rather weak
and not long sustained, except in migra-
tion; and some of the species, living on
islands in the sea, do not migrate and have
lost the use of their wings, except, per-
haps, in diving and swimming under water.
Many species are very abundant, but they
are such adepts at hiding that their very
existence is unknown to the casual observer. The plumage
usually is subdued in tint to facilitate concealment; but some
of the Gallinules are rather brilliant in color; nevertheless,
their colors may be so adapted to their surroundings as to be
protective. America furnishes many excellent examples of this
family.

Two species of Rail breed rather commonly in New York
and New England along wet runs, in river meadows and in
large swamps of grass, reeds and cat-tails. The Coot, which
somewhat resembles a Duck in appearance, is not so common,
and may be seen mainly on marsh-bordered ponds in autumn,
while the Florida Gallinule is a rare summer resident of south-
ern New York and New England.

 

Fie. 11.— Foot of Coot.

KING RAIL (Rallus elegans).

Length. — 17 to 19 inches.

Adult. — Above rich olive brown, distinctly streaked with black and olive
gray, sometimes with a yellow tinge; crown dark brown; a brownish
white line over eye, turning to brownish gray behind eye, and a broad
dusky streak through and below it; wings brown of varying shades;
under parts deep cinnamon, darkest on breast, fading to dull white
on throat, belly and under tail coverts; sides and flanks dark brown,
dusky or black, with white bars.

Downy Young. — Glossy black.

Field Marks. — Much larger than Virginia Rail; closely resembling it,
but sides of head less gray; size of Clapper Rail, but much brighter in
color; olive brown above rather than gray, and breast cinnamon rather
than buff, as in the Clapper.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 203

 

Notes. — A loud bup, bup, bup, bup, bup, increasing in rapidity to a roll,
then ending somewhat as it began, occupying about five seconds (Chap-
man). A grunting umph, umph, umph, umph; notes on same key and
separated by rather wide intervals, deep and guttural, sometimes harsh
and vibrant (Brewster). Eaton says that so far as he is aware no one
has actually seen the bird uttering its notes.

Nest. — Of grasses, on the ground in fresh-water marshes.

Eggs. — Seven to twelve, buffy white, more heavily spotted and speckled
with rufous brown than those of the Clapper Rail, about 1.68 by 1.20.

Season. — Has been taken rarely in New England or New York at all
seasons.

Range. — Eastern North America. Breeds from Nebraska, southern Min-
nesota, Ontario, New York and Connecticut south to Texas, Florida
and Cuba; winters mainly in the southern part of its breeding range;
casual north to South Dakota and Maine.

History.

This large and handsome Rail closely resembles the Vir-
ginia Rail except in size. It is regarded as an accidental
visitor to New England from the south. Following are all
the Massachusetts records known to me: Mr. George O.
Welch had, in 1877, a mounted specimen shot at Nahant,
November 21, 1875.!_ In 1878 there was a specimen in the
collection of Mr. George E. Browne of Dedham; killed, some
years before, in Sudbury.?, A male was taken at Chatham,
September 24, 1884; it was preserved in the collection of
Mr. Foster H. Brackett; the head and legs are now in the
Brewster collection.? A specimen was caught in a muskrat
trap at North Truro, ‘early in February, 1892.”4 An adult
female was taken by Mr. J. H. Bowles at Readville, Septem-
ber 9, 1893.2 A male in the Peabody Academy collection
was caught in a garden in Salem, on July 10, 1894.5 Another,
a young bird, was taken by Mr. Bowles at Readville, August
27, 1894, and is now in the Brewster collection.? A male was
taken at Longmeadow, near Springfield, October 19, 1895, by

 

1 Purdie, H. A.: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1877, p. 22.

2 [bid., 1878, p. 146.

3 Brewster, William: Memoirs, Nuttall Orn. Club, No. IV, Birds of the Cambridge Region of
Massachusetts, 1906, p. 144.

4 Miller, G.S., Jr.: Auk, 1892, p. 396. ;

5 Townsend, C. W.: Memoirs, Nuttall Orn. Club, No. III, Birds of Essex County, Mass., 1905,

p. 159.
204 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

W. C. Pease.! A male, taken at Cambridge, December 30,
1896, is now in the collection of Mr. Alfred Hill of Belmont.’
Mr. George Patterson shot a specimen at Ipswich, in October,
1901; it was placed in the Peabody Academy collection.*
At Ellisville, Plymouth County, January 20, 1903, an adult
female was shot by Mr. Clarence Chandler. A male is
recorded by Mr. F. H. Kennard as taken at Needham, October
10, 1907.5 An adult male was taken at Chatham, October
31, 1909, by Mr. Russell Bearse.6 (See also Appendix A.)

As this Rail has been known to breed in Connecticut and
near Buffalo, N. Y.; as it has been taken in New York in
November, and is recorded from Maine and Massachusetts
in winter; and as one of the birds taken by Mr. Bowles was
very young, it possibly breeds in Massachusetts, and very
likely is less rare than it is rated. Its retiring habits probably
account for our lack of knowledge regarding it. Little seems
to be known of it except that it appears to prefer fresh marshes
to salt marshes. I have never seen it alive.

Dr. Bachman, in South Carolina, seems to have had a
better opportunity of observing its habits than any one else
who has written about it. He states that he found twenty
pairs breeding within a space having a diameter of thirty
yards, and that the nests were placed on the ground, being
raised up six or eight inches by means of withered weeds and
grasses; but Wayne, who has also found numerous nests,
finds them in rushes or buttonwood bushes, from eight to
eighteen inches over water. He noted that the female laid
an egg each day after 11 a.m., and on laying the twelfth
began at once to incubate. This Rail frequents the swampy
borders of rivers and fresh-water ponds overgrown with vege-
tation. The stomach of one specimen was filled with seeds
of Arundo tecta; that of another contained a quantity of oats.

 

1 Morris, Robert O.: Auk, 1896, p. 86.

2 Farley, J. A.: Auk, 1905, p. 409.

3 Townsend, C. W.: Memoirs, Nuttall Orn. Club, No. III, Birds of Essex County, Mass., 1905,
p. 159.

4 Reagh, A. L.: Auk, 1903, p. 304.

5’ Kennard, F. H.: Auk, 1908, p. 218.

6 Fay, S. Prescott: Auk, 1910, p. 220.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 205

 

CLAPPER RAIL (Rallus crepitans crepitans).

 

Length. — 13.50 to 16 inches.

Adult. — Above ashy olive gray striped with olive brown, but not as dis-
tinctly as the King Rail; wings and tail brown; crown and nape brown
or dusky; a white stripe from bill to above eye; sides of head, neck,
breast and flanks ashy olive gray, turning to white on throat and chin
and to pale brownish yellow or buffy on breast; flanks darker, barred
with white; general tone subdued gray with subdued brown tints; bill
long, slender and down curved.

Field Marks. — Resembles the Virginia Rail and the King Rail in form, but
is much larger and grayer or paler than our common Rails; salt-water
marshes mainly.

Notes. — Gkak, gkak, gkak, at first loud and rapid, ending lower and slower
(Chapman).

Nest. — A pile of dead rushes, grasses, etc., in the salt marsh.

Eggs. — Seven to twelve, about 1.70 by 1.20, buffy or whitish, rather spar-
ingly spotted with reddish brown and obscure purplish.

Range. — Salt marshes of the Atlantic coast. Breeds from Connecticut to
North Carolina; winters mainly south of New Jersey; casual north to
Maine.

History.

This large Rail is regarded as an accidental visitor to
Massachusetts from New York or farther south, where it
lives mainly in the salt marshes. Linsley (1848) found it
206 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

breeding abundantly near Stratford, Conn. It was formerly
very numerous on Long Island, and still breeds along the
southern coast of that island (Eaton) and on the coast of
Connecticut. It has been reported from Rhode Island. It
may have been more common in Massachusetts in early times
than now, but there is no actual evidence that it ever bred
here. A few specimens have been taken in Maine.

There are eleven definite records of its occurrence in Mas-
sachusetts, and two of these are in the neighborhood of Spring-
field, far away from its usual range in the salt marsh. The
records follow: A specimen was presented by Theodore Lyman
to the Boston Society of Natural History, August 7, 1850.1
An adult was taken by Mr. G. E. Browne, at Dedham, in
1863.2, One was shot by Mr. C. L. Blood, at Taunton,
October 9, 1864.3 Mr. J. F. LeBaron informed Maynard
that he shot one “some years ago,”’ at Ipswich (prior to
1870).4 One flew aboard a vessel and was captured, May 4,
1875, and was placed in the mounted collection of the Boston
Society of Natural History.6 Mr. Arthur Smith shot a
Clapper Rail late in October, 1879, at Gurnet Point, Plym-
outh.6 A specimen was taken at Rocky Nook, Kingston,
on December 29, 1885.’ Two instances of its occurrence are
given at Northampton and Hadley Meadows by Mr. R. O.
Morris.2 A male was taken at East Orleans, November 30,
1895, by John G. Rodgers, and is now in the Brewster col-
lection. In Ipswich, September 15, 1908, Mr. William P.
Wharton picked up, on the beach at Plum Island, near the
mouth of the Ipswich River, a dead Clapper Rail.? A
young male was shot October 20, 1910, by T. C. Wilson,
and recorded by Dr. John C. Phillips.*°

1 Cabot, Dr. §., Jr.: Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., 1851, Vol. IIT, p. 326.

2 Wakefield, J. R.: Birds of Dedham, 1891, p. 71.

3 Howe, R. H., and Allen, Glover M.: Birds of Massachusetts, 1901, p. 17.
4 Maynard, C. J.: Nat. Guide, 1870, p. 145.

5 Purdie, H. A.t Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1877, p. 22.

6 Brewster, William: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1880, pp. 62, 63.

7 Browne, F. C.: Auk, 1887, p. 344.

8 Brewster, William: Auk, 1901, p. 136.

8 Auk, 1909, pp. 76, 77.
10 Jbid., 1911, p. 119.

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 207

 

VIRGINIA RAIL (Rallus virginianus).

Common or local names: Long-billed Rail; Fresh-water Marsh-hen.

 

Length. — 8.50 to 10.50 inches; bill 1.50.

Adult. — Top of head, back of neck and back rich olive brown, streaked
with blackish; feathers sometimes bordered with pale grayish; sides
of head ash gray; line from bill to above eye white; below it a blackish
stripe from bill through eye; chin and throat white; wings and tail
dark grayish brown; wing coverts rich reddish brown; below a warm
brown; lower belly and flanks black, barred with white; bill long,
slightly curved.

Young. — Above much as in adult but darker; throat and line down the
middle of the under parts whitish; rest of under parts blackish.

Downy Young. — Sooty black, with yellowish bill.

Field Marks. — Size of Bob-white; long reddish bill and rich brown breast
distinguish this bird from the Sora.

Notes. — Call, kep, kik or kip; song, a grunting sound, wak-wak-wak, and
cut, ciitta-ciitta-ciitta (Brewster). Female, when anxious, ki-ki-ki or Inu,
like a Flicker (Eaton). :

Nest. — Of grasses jn marshy land.

Eggs. — Six to twelve, pale grayish or buffy white, spotted and speckled
with reddish brown and lilac, about 1.26 by .96.

Season. — Common local summer resident; early April to middle of October;
a few winter in southeastern Massachusetts.
208 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Range. — North America. Breeds from British Columbia, southern Sas-
katchewan, southern Keewatin, Ontario, southern Quebec and New
Brunswick south to southern California, Utah, Kansas, Missouri, Illi-
nois, New Jersey and eastern North Carolina, and in Toluca valley,
Mexico; winters from Oregon, Utah and Colorado to Lower California
and Guatemala; also in the lower Mississippi States, and from North
Carolina (casually Massachusetts) to Florida; occurs casually north
to northern Quebec and Newfoundland.

History.

It is difficult to obtain accurate data regarding the former
numbers of this species, as it hides away in fresh-water marshes
and is little known. It is reported, however, from every
county in the State, and may breed in all. It is found on
Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket in winter, but
probably the birds which summer there pass farther south.
So little of the bird is known to the gunners among my cor-
respondents that only thirty-four report it. Four mention
an increase in its numbers in their localities and thirty a
decrease.

One of the wonders of my early boyhood was a Rail’s
nest, discovered by a boy companion on the edge of a swampy
run within the present limits of Boston. We got a glimpse
of the long curved bill of the mother Rail, which proved it
to be a Virginia. Great was our rejoicing over the eleven
glossy, buffy eggs, with their lovely brown and lilac spots.
The nest was built among the driftwood and grasses under
an alder bush at the edge of the run.

A little water, lots of mud, a lonely bog with a wilderness
of cat-tails and sedge make an ideal home for Rails. ‘Thin
as a Rail” they have to be to pass between the stems of the
reeds and water plants under cover of which they live. An
inch is ample space for a Rail to pass, for it can compress
the narrow body until it takes less room than that. Much
of the Rails’ life is spent in running and sneaking about
under cover of the rank vegetation of the marsh and meadow,
for Rails have many enemies. When forced to fly they
flutter feebly along, only a few feet from the grass tops, with
legs dangling loosely, and soon drop back into cover. Little
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 209

 

is known about their habits and food.. They walk or run
rapidly over half-submerged vegetation, swim as lightly as
a Duck in passing across from one cover to another, and slip
easily through their covered ways, even in the night, for they
are abroad more or less at night as well as by day. The hesi-
tating, heavy flight of this Rail would seem to make a long
migration difficult, if not impossible; nevertheless, long flights
are taken yearly to the south. Rails in migration appear
to fly very low, and many are killed by flying against tele-
graph wires. They cross large rivers and bays in their flights,
which are made under cover of night.

This Rail feeds on beetles and other insects, and its food
also includes caterpillars, earthworms, slugs, snails and such
small forms of animal life as it finds on fresh marshes, for
it rarely appears on salt marshes. As autumn approaches,
seeds of various kinds are added to the bill of fare.

Mr. Cahn of the University of Wisconsin fed a Virginia
Rail for nine days. The food appears in the following table: —

 

 

 

 

Novemeser, 1913.
2 & | & |e | s 7% | & | 9 | 1
Caterpillars, 2 1 1 1 -
Sticklebacks, a 1 1 - = - - 1 -
Sunfish, i Q - 2 2 3 5 2 - 2 2
Water-bugs, Zaitha, ‘ 2 4 11 3 - 1 3 3 2
Meal worms, i 20 11 12 18 50 30 25 22 12
Grasshoppers, ‘ 2 1 12 3 3 - - 4 2
Amphipods, 3 45 144 85 95 95 80 85 38 60
Crayfish, . 5 - - - 1 1 - - - 1
Snake (De Kay), - 1 -
Snake (Garter), - 1 - -
Br eh Se ae
g (R. pipiens), . - - - - - - -
Hornets (V. maculata), 1 3 5 2 1 - 4 2
Bullheads, . - - - 1 2 1 - -
Caddice-worms, 22 15 6 32 10 14 12
Snails, - 2 4 3 - 5 -
“Water scorpions, = 3 - 2 2 = - -
Earthworms, 6 6 11 5 6 8 - 4
House-flies, - 1 5 5 = 7 1 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This table indicates the remarkable quantity of animal
food consumed. One of the snakes was 7} inches in length,
the other 12 inches. Two hours after the Rail began to swal-
low this snake it was all stowed within. The bird never
appeared fully satisfied with the quantity of the food given
it except when it had killed and swallowed a snake.!

 

1 Cahn, Alvin R.: Notes on a Captive Virginia Rail, Auk, 1915, pp. 91-95.
210 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

SORA (Porzana carolina).

Common or local names: Rail-bird; Meadow Chicken; Chicken-bill; Carolina Rail.

 

Length. — 8 to 9 inches; bill .75.

Adult. — Top of head and back of neck olive brown; a blackish stripe
through the center of crown; back, wings and tail olive brown, streaked
with black and a little white; sides of head and neck, line over eye,
and breast ash gray; forehead, region about base of bill and a streak
down middle of throat and breast black; lower belly white; flanks
brown and grayish, barred with white and blackish; bill short, yellow.

Young. — Similar, but no black about bill or on throat, which is whitish;
breast washed with cinnamon; darker above than adult.

Field Marks. — Nearly as large as Bob-white, but slimmer; short yellow
bill distinguishes it from long-billed Virginia Rail.

Notes. — Kuk or peep; song, ker-wee; and a high, rolling whinny (Chap-
man). Ca-weep-eep, ca-weep-eep-eep-ip-tp-ip (Hatch). Also a variety
of other notes.

Nest. — Of grasses, on ground in marshes.

Eggs. — Eight to fifteen, buffy white or buff, sparsely spotted and speckled
with brown and purplish gray, 1.24 by .90.

Season. — Common to abundant migrant, and less common local summer
resident; early April to early November.

Range. — North America. Breeds from central British Columbia, southern
Mackenzie, central Keewatin and Gulf of St. Lawrence south to south-
ern California, Utah, Colorado, Kansas, Illinois and New Jersey;
winters from northern California, Illinois and South Carolina through
the West Indies and Central America to Venezuela and Peru; acci-
dental in Bermuda, Greenland and England.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 2il

 

History.

The Sora Rail inhabits the same localities as the Virginia
Rail, but it also frequents the salt or brackish marshes near
the mouths of rivers, and the bays and estuaries of the sea.
It resorts to these situations in such numbers in Connecticut
and the middle and southern States that gunners are enabled
to take advantage of its predicament when the tide rises,
and by pursuing it in boats they slaughter multitudes. The
high water drives the Rails to the highest points on the marsh,
and as the gunner in his skiff approaches they take wing.
Their flight is so slow and direct that a good shot rarely misses *
one. Audubon states that he saw a gunner kill fifty Clapper
Rails without a miss, and he was assured that another had
killed one hundred “straight,”

Dr. Lewis gives a record of the bags of Sora Rails killed
by a few men on the Delaware River, below Philadelphia,
in 1846. The thirty-four records of consecutive days show
an average of about one hundred Rails per man per day.
He states that over one thousand Rails were brought into
Chester in one day. Dr. Brewer (1884) says that it is not
uncommon for an expert marksman to kill from one hundred
to one hundred and fifty Rails per day; and such scores were
made on the Connecticut River in Connecticut in olden times,
when there was no legal limit to the bag. This slaughter has
made some inroads on the numbers of the birds in Massa-
chusetts. Mr. Robert O. Morris writes that it is said that
about one thousand were killed at Longmeadow, near Spring-
field, in 1908.

Five Massachusetts correspondents report the species as
increasing in their localities, and forty note a decrease. Mr.
Morris is very positive that there has been a great and con-
tinuous decrease of Rails along the Connecticut River near
Springfield, and I have noticed a similar diminution in fresh-
water meadows in eastern Massachusetts.

The Sora is inclined to nest in more watery portions of
the marsh or morass than the Virginia Rail. It is a good
swimmer and diver at need, and the young will take to the
212 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

water as soon as they leave the egg-shell, if necessary to
escape danger. The little ones are black, with a tuft of yellow
feathers on the throat and a red protuberance at the upper
base of the bill. Although this bird has the reputation of
being very shy, I have come upon a single bird occasionally,
while canoeing, in August, running along the muddy margin
of a river or resting upon the bank. In such a situation it is
easy to go very close to the bird without alarming it. Some-
times its curiosity is so strong that a small flock will surround
a recumbent duck hunter and even peck at his clothing; but
a sudden movement is enough to send them scampering into
the reeds.

In September, when the wild rice is falling, these birds
gather in our marshes to feed upon it, and at that season a
stone thrown into the cat-tails or a paddle struck flat on the
surface of the water will often start a chorus of their cries.
I believe that individuals of this species have wonderful vocal
powers. One moonlit evening on the Concord River I was
entertained for more than an hour by a curious jumble of
sounds from the marshy border of the river, that could be
attributed only to this Rail. Many of the notes were recog-
nizable as belonging to the Sora, but there were imitations of
the Flicker, the Bob-white and several other species. It was
a performance that would have done credit to many a bird
regarded as a songster. The next morning a search along the
river shore was carried on in vain, until finally, about 8 o’clock,
the song was heard again. I was able, by careful stalking, to
get within a few feet of the bird; but never saw it distinctly.
At the first appearance of my head above the greenery of the
shore the bird plunged in among the water plants, and I
have never seen it since or heard a similar song. This was
one of the unique experiences of a lifetime.

The Sora apparently possesses greater powers of flight than
most other Rails, as Dr. Brewer states that large flights have
landed in the Bermudas on southwest winds.

The food of this species apparently does not differ much
from that of the Virginia Rail, but it seems to feed more
largely on seeds and vegetation.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 213

 

YELLOW RAIL (Coturnicops noveboracensis).

 

Length. — 6 to 7.50 inches.

Adult. — Above streaked with blackish and brownish yellow, with fine cross
lines and bars of white; a dusky streak from bill across cheek to ear;
sides of head, neck and under parts pale brownish yellow, fading on
belly, with rows of darker marks on flanks and numerous narrow white
bars; bill yellow; legs and feet pale brownish yellow.

Field Marks. — Small size, yellowish color; the wing in flight shows much
white.

Notes. — An abrupt cackling, ’krek, ’krek, ’krek, krek, kik, ’I’kh (Nuttall).
Kik-kik-kik-kik-queah, or, more rarely, kik-kik-kik-kik-kik-kik-hik-kik-ki-
queah (J. H. Ames).

Season. — A rare migrant, April and May, September to November; re-
corded in December and June.

Range. — Chiefly eastern North America. Breeds from southern Macken-
zie and southern Ungava south to Minnesota and Maine; winters in the
Gulf States, rarely in California, Illinois and North Carolina; casual in
Nevada, Utah and Bermuda.

History.

This little Rail is seen rather rarely in Massachusetts.
Nuttall (1834) says that according to a Mr. Ives the bird is
frequently found in marshes near Salem, Mass. I have met
with it alive only once, but have seen a considerable number
of specimens taken in Massachusetts, several of which were
killed by the Boston taxidermist, Mr. C. I. Goodale, in Wake-
field, Mass. It probably is more common in migration than
is believed generally, as it is very small and its habits are
214 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

secretive. As it was found nesting in Maine by Boardman, it
is not improbable that it may yet be known to breed in other
New England States. It is even more reluctant than the
other Rails to take wing; hence it is seen rarely, but is some-
times caught by dogs and cats. When forced to take wing it
flies in the same hesitating, fluttering manner as the other
Rails, but rather swifter and sometimes to a considerable
distance. It can swim and dive well in case of necessity.

A Rail which was not seen, but often heard, near Cam-
bridge, Mass., in 1889,! was believed to be the Black Rail.
This peculiar note was heard by Brewster and other orni-
thologists in Concord, Sudbury, Falmouth and other localities
at dates between 1889 and 1901, and the bird was believed to
have bred in Cambridge in 1889. It was locally known as the
“kicker,” and, according to Brewster, it commonly cried kik,
kik, kik, quéeah; kik-kik-kik-ki-quéeah; kik-ki-ki-ki, ki-quéeah;
kic-kic, kic-kic, kic-kic-ki-quéeah. This does not agree with the
notes given by Wayne, who actually saw and took both the
male and female Black Rail in South Carolina, and listened
to their cries for more than an hour. The notes given by Mr.
J. H. Ames for the Yellow Rail rather closely resemble those
credited to that ornithological mystery the “kicker.’’ As Mr.
Ames kept his Rail alive and saw it utter its notes, he cannot
well be mistaken.

Wayne states that in South Carolina he found it nearly
impossible to flush these birds with a dog when their only
cover was short dead grass. His dog caught nine and flushed
but one. Fresh-water snails were found in their stomachs.

 

1 Brewster, William: Auk, 1901, pp. 321-328.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 215

 

BLACK RAIL (Creciscus jamaicensis).

Common or local name: Little Black Rail.

 

Length. — About 5 inches.

Adult. — Head, chin, throat, fore and side neck, and lower parts dark slate
or dusky; head darkest on top and nape, where it meets the brown of
hind neck; back and hinder parts mainly rich brown; wings and tail
brownish black, marked with white; back, wings, belly, flanks, tail
coverts and tail barred with white.

Field Marks. — Smallest of all Rails and very dark; must not be confounded
with the young of other Rails, which also are small and black.

Notes. — Probably kik-kik-kik, queéah, or Iik-ki-ki-li, Ii, queéah, or vari-
ants (Brewster). Chi-chi-cro-croo-croo several times repeated in a sharp
high tone, audible to a considerable distance (Marsh). Female, Croo-
croo-croo-o repeated like the commencement of the song of the Yellow-
bellied Cuckoo; male, Kth-hik-kik-kik or Kuk-kuk-kuk-kuk (Wayne).

Nest. — Of grasses, on ground in marsh.

Eggs. — Six to ten, 1.05 by .80, white speckled with rich reddish brown dots,
more numerous at large end.

Range. — Eastern North America. Breeds ‘from southern Ontario and
Massachusetts south to Kansas, Illinois and South Carolina; winters
through the Gulf States and south to Jamaica and Guatemala; casual
in Bermuda.

History.
The Black Rail, the smallest Rail in America, is believed
to be a very rare bird in New England, where it has been
recorded only from Maine, Connecticut and Massachusetts.
216 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

It breeds rarely in Connecticut. So far as our present in-
formation goes, Massachusetts appears to be near the northern
limit of its breeding range on the Atlantic coast, but it may go
farther north. Eaton gives only five records of specimens
actually taken in New York, and six more have been reported
as seen at close range; but such records are received with
caution, as the black, downy, young of larger Rails are mis-
taken for Black Rails. Wayne appears to be the first observer
who has actually seen the female Black Rail on her nest in the
United States, and recorded it. The nest was in an oat field,
and the standing grain where the nest was had been cut. The
bird is so secretive that, as related by Wayne, two men and a
dog searched four hours for the male in the oat field before it
could be secured, although it was calling incessantly. This
bird may not be as rare as it is rated.

The Black Rail runs swiftly, like a mouse, through the
herbage, and seldom flies, although in migration it has reached
the Bermuda Islands. Gosse quotes a Mr. Robinson who says
that in Jamaica it is so foolish as to hide its head and cock up
its tail, thinking itself safe, when it is easily taken alive. The
Massachusetts records given by Howe and Allen follow: A
specimen was picked up dead in August, 1869, on Clark’s
Island in Plymouth harbor.! Another was found on the
streets of Boston, by D. T. Curtis, September 20, 1874.2 This
record may not be authentic. Mr. Curtis evidently did not
know the Rail, and he states that the bird was black and had
long yellow legs. It might have been the young of some other
Rail or Gallinule, as, so far as can be determined from the
article in Forest and Stream, no ornithologist saw it. It was
kept for a while and afterwards liberated. A pair was found
with young at Chatham in July, 1884, and a nest with eggs in
May, 1885.3 Howe and Allen also quote Mr. Robert O. Morris
to the effect that the species:bred in Hazardville, according to
J. H. Batty.4 The latter record, however, should be credited
to Connecticut, as Hazardville is near Enfield, Conn. A male
was taken by Mr. Stanley Cobb at Milton, May 16, 1904.

1 Purdie, H. A.: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1877, p. 22.

2 Curtis, D. T.: Forest and Stream, Apr. 5, 1877, Vol. VIII, p. 129.
3 Allen, J. A.: Revised List of the Birds of Mass., 1886, p. 236.

4 Morris, Robert O.: Birds of Springfield and Vicinity, 1901, p. 13.

r

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 217

 

PURPLE GALLINULE (lonornis martinicus).

o

 

Length. — About 13.50 inches.

Adult. — Back bright shining olive green; wings deeper green, shaded with
blue; head, neck and breast rich bluish purple; belly darker; frontal
shield on forehead blue; under tail coverts white; bill carmine, tipped
with yellow; feet yellow.

Young. — Browner above; mostly white below; no red on bill.

Notes. — Resemble the delicate whistling of the Blue-winged Teal (Audubon).

Range. — Tropical and subtropical America. Breeds from Texas, Tennessee,
and South Carolina south to Ecuador and Paraguay; winters from
Texas, Louisiana and Florida southward; irregularly north in summer
to Arizona, Nebraska, Wisconsin, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and
New Brunswick; accidental in England and Bermuda.

History.
This elegant Gallinule is a wanderer from the south, and
probably straggles into all the New England States occasion-
ally. Col. Nicolas Pike states that it was “formerly very
218 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

plentiful” on Long Island, but is “slowly passing away,” and
that he has not seen one for many years. He collected birds
on Long Island during the 30’s and 40’s of the last century.
Giraud (1848) rates it as extremely rare there in his day.
Eaton gives but three records of the species in New York, and
Knight gives but three definite records for Maine. Howe and
Allen give the following for Massachusetts: One was seen at
Stoneham, November 27, 1837.2, A specimen was taken at
Swampscott, by 8. Jillson, April 22, 1852.3 Another was ob-
tained from Cape Cod by William Brewster, in April, 1870.‘
One was killed at Hummock Pond, Nantucket, in October,
1872.5 One was shot at Rockport by Robert Wendel, April
12, 1875.6 One was sent to Faneuil Hall Market, Boston, in
April, 1890, which had been caught in a trap.’ A female was
taken at Plymouth, April 9, 1892 (C. C. Wood). One was
caught in June, 1897, at Boxford; “another, supposed to be
of the same species, and the mate were seen at the pond.’’”
Dr. Townsend gives the following additional records in his
Birds of Essex County: A male, now in the Peabody Academy
Collection, was taken at Saugus, May 10, 1875. A specimen
in possession of Mrs. W. S. Horner, at Georgetown, was taken
about 1891 at Byfield; reported by Mr. J. A. Farley.° One
was taken in West Newbury, in October, 1893, by J. W. Pray,
and is now in the Peabody Academy Collection.'®

This bird feeds on insects, worms, mollusks, snails and
other small aquatic animals, and on fruit, seeds and other
vegetable productions.

 

1 Dutcher, William: Auk, 1893, p. 272.

2 Peabody, W. B. O.: Report on the Ornithology of Mass., 1839, p. 258.

3 Putnam, F. W.: Proc. Essex Inst., 1856, Vol. 1, p. 224.

4 Baird, S. F., Brewer, T. M., and Ridgeway, R.: Water Birds, 1884, Vol. 1, p. 385.

5 Brewer, T.M.: Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., 1879, Vol. XX, p. 105.

6 Whitman, G. P.: Amer. Nat., October, 1875, Vol. LX., No. 10, p. 573.

7 Farley, J. A.: Auk, 1901, p. 190.

8 Ornithologist and Odlogist, May, 1892, Vol. XVII, No. 5, p. 72.

9 Auk, 1901, p. 398.

10 Townsend, C. W.: Memoirs of the Nuttall Orn. Club, the Birds of Essex County, Mass., No. 3,
p. 161.
BIRDS: HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 219

 

FLORIDA GALLINULE (Gallinula galeata).
Common or local names: Mud-hen; Red-billed Mud-hen; Water-chicken.

 

Length. — 13.50 inches.

Adult. — Head and neck blackish slate; body slate gray, brownish on the
back and washed on the belly with whitish; under tail coverts white;
bill and plate on forehead bright red, the former tipped with greenish
yellow; edge of wing and a stripe on flank white; toes not lobed.

Young. — Similar, but duller; whitish below; throat sometimes wholly white;
bill and forehead brownish.

Field Marks. — The plate of bright red on front of head, the red bill and a
white stripe on flank (sometimes covered or wanting) distinguish it
from the Coot. ‘Tail, when carried erect, shows a patch of white be-
neath it.

Notes. — Chuck, and many loud calls, suggesting a hen brooding or squawking.

Nest. — Like that of the Coot.

Eggs. — Eight to fourteen, 1.75 by 1.20, buff or brown, variable, spotted
with dark brown.

Season. — Rare migrant and local summer resident; late April to early
November.

Range. — Tropical and temperate America. Breeds from central California
Arizona, Nebraska, Minnesota, Ontario, New York and Vermont south
to Chile and Argentina, and in Bermuda; winters from southern Cali-
fornia, Arizona, Texas and Georgia southward; casual in Colorado,
Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Maine.
220 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

The name Florida Gallinule is rather a misnomer for this
species, as it is a bird of temperate and tropical America
generally. Josselyn in his two voyages to New England (1672)
mentions Duckers or Moor-hens among the birds he found
here; and Brewster opines that, as Josselyn also mentions the
Coot, and as the Moor-hen of England closely resembles our
Florida Gallinule, there can be little or no question that he
referred to the latter. Peabody (1839) records a specimen
shot in Fresh Pond, Cambridge. Since 1891 birds of this
species have been seen frequently in Cambridge, one nest at
least has been found there, and the bird has been reported from
Nantucket, Norfolk, Essex, Worcester and Hampden coun-
ties, Mass. It is a fairly common summer resident in the larger
marshes of central and western New York, and in the Ontario
and St. Lawrence valleys, but apparently it is rather rare or
local near the coast of New England and in the Hudson and
Connecticut valleys. .It seems to be rare now in New Eng-
land generally, except in some favored localities. In habits
and appearance, this Gallinule somewhat resembles the Coot.
It keeps well out of sight, usually among the reeds and cat-
tails, but at early morning and after sundown it sometimes
may be seen moving about in open water, where it swims and
dives well. This bird, like the Coot, is commonly known as the
Mud-hen or Water-hen, and many of the hen-like clucks and
calls that are heard in fresh marshes may be attributed to it.

Wayne says that the eggs of this species and those of the
preceding always are in different stages of incubation in the
nest, and that consequently the young are hatched and take
to the water while eggs still remain unhatched in the nest.
Some of the young from one nest, he says, are from seven to
twelve days older than others. Brewster has given in The
Auk an excellent account of this species and its nesting habits
in Massachusetts.?

The Florida Gallinule feeds mainly on aquatic insects and
other water animals, succulent water plants and seeds.

 

1 Brewster, William: Auk, 1891, pp. 1-7.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 221

 

COOT (Fulica americana).

Common or local names: White-billed Mud-hen; Mud-hen; Meadow-hen; Water-hen;
Marsh-hen; Pond-hen; Crow-bill; Pond-crow; Blue Peter; Sea-crow; Pelick;
Water-chicken.

 

Length. — 14 to 16 inches.

Adult. — Head and neck blackish; body, wings and tail slaty, paler below;
wing when spread shows a narrow white edging; bill whitish marked
with two dark spots near tip; frontal shield brown; feet rather livid
or bright yellowish green, each toe with a broad membranous flap;
claws black; iris carmine.

Young. — Similar, but much lighter below; bill dull flesh color.

Field Marks. —'The white bill; size of Teal or larger. Nearly uniform slate
color, and blackish head.

Notes. — A cuckoo-like call, coo-coo-coo-coo, the first note prolonged and on
a much higher key (Hatch). Also, at intervals, a squawk somewhat
resembling the quack of a duck, and other explosive and cackling
notes.

Nest. — A hollowed heap of dead reeds, sometimes in the water.
222 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Eggs. — Eight to sixteen, 1.75 to 2 by 1.20 i 1.35, glossy, clay color, spotted
and dotted with dark brown and neutral tints.

Season. — Uncommon migrant; early April to mid May, mid September to
December; a few breed.

Range. — North America. Breeds from central British Columbia, southern
Mackenzie, Manitoba, Quebec and New Brunswick south to northern
Lower California, Texas, Tennessee and New Jersey, and also in south-
ern Mexico, southern West Indies and Guatemala; winters from south-
ern British Columbia and Virginia south to Colombia; casual in Alaska,
Greenland, Labrador and Bermuda.

History.

This is not one of the birds commonly called Coots in New
England, which are really Scoters or Surf Ducks; neverthe-
less, it is the real Coot, — the only bird entitled to the name.
This species was formerly one of the most abundant water-
fowl on the fresh waters of North America.. When Coots are
feeding on the wild celery or on the rice fields of the south
they are by no means despicable as a table delicacy; but ordi-
narily they are not considered fit to eat. Nevertheless, they
have been slaughtered without mercy. Audubon says that a
hunter on Lake Barataria killed eighty at one shot. It was
not uncommon in the old days in Florida to see a sportsman
shoot into a mass of Coots, killing and wounding from twenty
to forty birds, just to see the effect of the shot; not a bird was
even picked up. As the supply of wild-fowl was depleted, the
settlers began potting Coots for food in this manner wherever
these birds were numerous, and “fried Coot” soon became a
common dish on the settlers’ table. The demand for them
now has decreased their numbers until, where they were
formerly exceedingly abundant, they are now only common,
and where they were formerly common, as in southern New
England, they are becoming rare. Mr. Robert O. Morris
records the species as common at Springfield, Mass. (1901).
Dr. Glover M. Allen, in his list of the Aves (1909), gives it as
an uncommon migrant in Maine, New Hampshire and Ver-
mont; a rare spring and uncommon fall migrant in Massa-
chusetts; and a common migrant, mainly in fall, in Rhode
Island and Connecticut. It is, as he states, occasionally
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 223

 

seen in summer in Massachusetts and Vermont, and may
breed. Reports from Massachusetts observers for an average
of about twenty-seven years, previous to 1909, representing
every county in the State, show apparently that ten observers
believe that this species has increased in their localities and
that sixty-seven believe that it has decreased. Six of the ten
who have seen an increase apparently are mistaken in the
name, and refer to the Surf Ducks or Scoters, which are
commonly known as Coots on our coast.

The Coot quite closely resembles the common or Florida
Gallinule, but has not the red bill of that species, and its feet
are lobed somewhat like those of the Grebes. Nevertheless,
it is not so distinctly formed for swimming as the Grebes; its
legs are rather long and placed well forward, and it seems to
be a sort of connecting link between the land birds and the
swimmers. It walks and runs on land as easily as a Rail, and
yet it spends much of its time on the water. The French
name, Poule D’eau, and the American name, Water-hen, give
the general impression regarding this species. It is a good
swimmer, but usually when swimming it moves its head for-
ward with each stroke, as a hen often hitches her head forward
when walking. It is a fine diver, and sometimes almost equals
the famous Canvas-back in diving for the roots of the wild
celery. It is fond of flooded meadows and savannas, sloughs,
swamps, morasses, and swamp-bordered ponds, where, when
danger threatens, it can flee to the shelter of the reeds or cat-
tails, where it is as much at home as a Rail or a Gallinule. It
is naturally a most innocent and unsuspicious bird. When
wading waist deep in the flooded lands of Florida, for want of
a more genteel method of Duck hunting, I often have been
amused at the unsophisticated and foolish expression of the
Coots which swam around me, often within easy gunshot,
hitching forward on the water as if anxious to see what kind
of an amphibious creature kept them company. In my boy-
hood I have seen ponds apparently entirely covered with a
black mass of these birds. A sudden alarm would cause a
tremendous uproar of flapping wings and splashing feet as the
members of the vast flock hastened to cover, but in a few
224 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

minutes all alarm was past, and they gradually covered the
surface of the pond again. The body of the Coot is narrow,
and can be compressed so that, like a Rail, the bird can pass
between reeds and the rigid stems of water plants, where a
Duck with its wide flat body could not go. It can wade
readily also in much deeper water than the Rails. It rises
heavily, with much flapping of wings and paddling of feet,
but when once well in the air it flies rather better than the
Rails, rarely going far, however, except when migrating.

The Coot feeds very largely on succulent vegetable matter
and seeds, as well as insects and other small forms of animal

life.

PHALAROPES.

The great order Limicole comprises what are commonly
called the shore birds, to distinguish them from the Ibises,
Storks, Herons, Cranes, Rails, etc., which are collectively
known as marsh birds. Such a distinction is merely arbitrary,
however, as some of the Limicole rarely are seen on shore or
marsh, and others commonly frequent the marsh.
In our present system of classification the Phal-
aropes (family Phalaropodide) come first, for
their feet are lobed (Fig. 12), somewhat like
those of the Coot but not so broadly. The
membrane attached to the toes is sometimes
Tae scalloped along the edge, and the tarsus (that

portion of the foot or so-called leg which con-
nects the toes with the next joint above) is flattened, like that
of the Grebes. They are small birds, with dense, Duck-like
plumage. In this family the female is much the larger and
handsomer, and does most of the wooing, while the male is
more modest and retiring, and is said to incubate the eggs
and rear the young. Two species migrate in numbers off the
New England coast, sometimes near shore, but usually many
miles from Jand, where they may be seen floating or swim-
ming like little Ducks, and feeding among floating sea-weed.

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 225

 

RED PHALAROPE (Phalaropus fulicarius).

Common or local names: Bank-bird; Brown Bank-bird; Gulf-bird; Sea-goose;
Whale-bird.

 

SUMMER. WINTER.

Length. — 7.50 to 8.25 inches.

Adult Female in Summer. — Above mottled and striped with black and
pale brown or buff; chin, region all around base of bill, forehead, top
of head, nape and much of hind neck black; wing dark ash, with a
white patch; cheeks and space above eye to black crown white; bill
orange; sides and front of neck and other under parts reddish chestnut
or wine red; tail black, gray and buff; legs and feet yellow.

Adult Male. — Duller; white on cheek less pure and defined, and top of

head streaked with rufous or buff.

Fall and Winter Plumage. — Above mainly gray; head largely white; lower
parts white; wings more or less black and white; bill blackish.

Field Marks. — Easily distinguished in breeding plumage, but in fall is
known by its dagger-shaped bill, deep at base and tapering to near tip.
The other species have slim bills.

Notes. — A musical clink, clink (Nelson).

Range. — Northern and southern hemispheres. In North America breeds
from northern Alaska, Melville Island and northern Ellesmere Land
south to mouth of the Yukon, northern Mackenzie, central Keewatin,
Hudson Strait and southern’ Greenland; winter home unknown, but
probably on the oceans, at least as far south as Falkland Islands; mi-
grates along both coasts of United States; casual in the interior south
to Colorado, Kansas, Illinois and, Maryland.

History.
This species is probably a regular spring and fall migrant
off the coast of Massachusetts, but on account of its habit of
keeping well off shore it is noted only irregularly. It is called
226 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

the Brown Bank-bird by the fishermen, because of its color and
the fact that it is found on the fishing banks, miles from shore.

In 1831, while about sixty miles off Nantucket, Audubon
saw hundreds of this species feeding on a bank of floating
seaweed. This is its common habit off our coasts. When seen
on our shores it is common and sometimes abundant. It is
met with occasionally in the Connecticut valley. In May,
1892, a remarkable flight was seen at Cape Cod and Nan-
tucket.!

The flight of the Phalarope resembles that of the Red-
backed Sandpiper or the Sanderling. In winter plumage it
resembles the Sanderling, being quite white in appearance.
When it first appears in the spring it still retains its winter
plumage, but begins to assume the summer or red plumage in
May.

Sometimes this bird is seen just outside the surf, where it
flies to and fro alighting on any temporary smooth spot amid
the waves, and begins to feed. In such situations it is obliged
to rise on the wing often, to avoid the curling waves which
threaten to overwhelm it. Like the Northern Phalarope, it
sometimes spins around as on a pivot when in pursuit of food.
At such times the head and neck are carried erect to the fullest
extent.

Individuals of this species are taken sometimes about inland
lakes in New England. More commonly the flocks migrate
at sea at a long distance from land. If the sea is calm they
rest upon the water, and sometimes prefer to escape from the
intruder by swimming rather than by flying. The habit of
rising often, flying about and alighting on the water to feed
is characteristic of these birds and distinguishes them from the
Sandpipers. Sometimes in the interior they get their food by
wading about in the shallow water.

Elliot says that in the northern seas it feeds on the “ani-
malcule” which form the food of the right whale, and so
it follows that the whalers give it the name of whale-bird,
because the presence of large numbers of these birds at sea
usually signifies that whales may be expected.

i

 

1 Mackay, George H.: Auk, 1892, pp. 294-298. See also Gerrit Miller, same page.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 227

 

NORTHERN PHALAROPE (Lobipes lobatus).

Common or local names: Sea-goose; Mackerel Goose; Web-footed Peep; Bank-bird;
White Bank-bird; Sea-snipe; Whale-bird.

 

Length. — 7 to about 8 inches; bill rather short (.80 to .88), very slender.

Adult Female in Breeding Plumage. — Above dark slaty gray streaked with
yellowish brown on back; small crescents above and below eye white;
wing dusky, marked with white; throat white; neck rich rust red or
chestnut nearly all round; below white, marked on sides with slaty
gray.

Adult Male in Breeding Plumage. — Similar but duller; more brown above;
less chestnut on neck, which is more or less streaked; forehead largely
white; crown marked with yellowish brown.

Adult Female and Male in Winter. — Forehead white; crown and other upper
parts mainly gray, streaked with white; hind neck grayish; sides of
head, throat and under parts white; a slate patch, surrounding the eye
and its incomplete white ring, extends back over ear.

Young. — Similar, but with more black and yellowish brown on back.

Field Marks. — Difficult to distinguish from the Red Phalarope in winter
plumage, but its bill is much more slender and needle-like.

Notes. — A low, chippering, clicking note (Chapman). A sharp metallic
tweet or twick (Elliot).

Season. — Irregularly common migrant off shore spring and fall; April and
May and August to November.

Range. — Northern and southern hemispheres. In North America breeds
from northern Alaska, Melville Island and central Greenland south to
Aleutian Islands (including Near Islands), valley of the Upper Yukon,
northern Mackenzie, central Keewatin, southern James Bay and north-
ern Ungava; winter home unknown, but probably the oceans south of
the equator; in migration occurs nearly throughout the United States
and in Mexico, Central America, Bermuda and Hawaii.
228 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

The Northern Phalarope is the most numerous of the Phal-
aropes seen in autumn off our coast, but seldom comes ashore in
any numbers, though it is not rare on occasion in some of the lakes
and rivers of the interior when driven by storms to alight there.

On May 21, 1894, Mr. C. J. Smith, one of the drawtenders
at the Craigie bridge over the Charles River between Boston
and Cambridge, brought three freshly killed North-
ern Phalaropes to Mr. M. Abbott Frazar, the Bos-
ton taxidermist. These birds were in full breeding
plumage. Mr. Smith stated that on the day pre-
vious to his visit fully one thousand of these birds
Fic. 13.—Foos Were Swimming in the Charles River between the

of Northern Crajgie and the West Boston bridges. The weather
Phalarope. : :
was very foggy and the birds stayed until noon,
when they flew away seaward (Brewster).

This bird is in full plumage probably for less than two
months in the summer, and usually is seen off our coasts,
sometimes in company with the Red Phalarope, feeding on
floating seaweed. I have seen numbers of this beautiful
species off the coast of British Columbia. When driven by
storms at sea, or lost in the fog, it takes refuge sometimes in
shallow ponds. It has a habit of spinning round in a circle.
Chapman, who has observed it, says that it gives a rotary
motion to the water that brings to the surface small forms of
aquatic life, which the bird seizes, darting its bill into the
water two or three times with each revolution.

Northern Phalaropes fly rapidly and often erratically, like
the Wilson’s Snipe. On the water they rest as lightly as a
gull, and swim about alertly, with quick motions of the head,
but are unsuspicious and easily approached.

Dr. Townsend gives some records made by Mr. A. F. Tarr,
the head keeper of Cape Ann lights, the twin lighthouses on
Thatcher’s Island. Among them it is stated that on the night
of September 2, 1899, an immense flock dashed against the
light. One man picked up eight hundred dead, and Mr.
Tarr estimated that one thousand were destroyed.

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT, 229

 

WILSON’S PHALAROPE (Steganopus tricolor).

 

SUMMER. WINTER.

Length. — 8.25 to 9.50 inches.

Adult Female in Spring. — Above dark ashy gray, paler on the crown and
rump and whitening on back of neck; throat, cheeks, line over eye
and small crescent below it white; a dusky stripe from bill through and
below eye, becoming black behind and extending down side of upper
neck, where it changes to chestnut or dark wine red, widening there
and extending down over side of neck, shoulders and back; a similar
chestnut stripe below it just above wing; wings grayish brown; outer
feathers (primaries) dusky; below white, the fore neck and breast
tinged with pale chestnut, the latter slightly clouded on sides; bill
long, slender, acute and black; legs, feet and iris dark.

Adult Male. — Similar, but smaller, duller, paler and not so strikingly
marked; less black, light ash, white and chestnut; back and wings
mainly brown, streaked with black.

Adult and Young in Fall. — General tone of plumage like that of the fall
Sanderling; light ashy gray above, darkening on wings and tail; occa-
sionally a few blackish feathers; upper tail coverts white; sides of head
and neck white, with a dusky line from eye changing to cloudiness on
sides of neck; below white; bill and eye dark; legs dull yellow. In
summer the young are brownish black above, which soon gives way to
fall plumage.

Notes. — A soft, trumpeting yna, yna (Chapman).

Season. — A rare transient in May, August, September and October.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from central Washington,
Central Alberta and Lake Winnipeg south to eastern California and
northwestern Indiana; winters from central Chile and central Argen-
tina south to Falkland Islands; casual in migration on Pacific coast
from southern British Columbia to Lower California, and on Atlantic
coast from Maine to New Jersey,
230 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

Wilson’s Phalarope is mainly an inland species, and always
was considered a very rare migrant on our coast. Audubon
records the capture of one near Boston, in the winter, but
does not give the date. One was taken by Mr. George O.
Welch at Nahant, on May 2, 1874, and is now in the collec-
tion of the Boston Society of Natural History."
Another was taken by Mackay, August 31, 1889,
on Nantucket.? I have seen several specimens
that were said to have been taken on the Mas-
sachusetts coast, but could not verify this.
g This species has been taken in Maine, Rhode
Fie. 14.—Foot of Wil- _Island, Connecticut and New York. (See

son's Phalarope. .

Appendix A.)

This bird, when on land or wading in water, moves about
much in the manner of the Yellow-legs. It is more a wader
and less a swimmer than the other two, and keeps mainly to
the interior of the continent. Audubon killed several speci-
mens near Lake Erie, and found their stomachs filled “with
small worms and fragments of very delicate shells.”

 

AVOCETS AND STILTS.

These birds comprise the singular family Recurvirostride,
so named because of the peculiar, flattened, upturned beaks
of the Avocets. This is a small family in which the front toes
are webbed or partly webbed and the legs, particularly in the
Stilts, are exceedingly long and slender, but nevertheless the |
birds are handsome and graceful. The Avocets have the body
flattened and the plumage thick and Duck-like.

The bills of Avocets seem to vary somewhat in form, if we
may judge from dried skins and the drawings of ornithologists.
Some have a clean upward curve; others have a slight double
curve, as is represented in the illustration of the Avocet on
the next page. Some Stilts have the bill nearly straight,
while others show a distinct upward curve. The birds of this
family have the feet more or less webbed, and swim well.

 

1 Baird, S. F., Brewer, T. M., and Ridgway, R.: Water Birds, 1884, Vol. I, p. 338.
2 Mackay, George H.: Auk, 1891, p. 120.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 231

 

AVOCET (Recurvirostra americana).

 

Length. — Very variable, 16 to 20 inches; front toes webbed.

Adult. — Back and most of wings black; remainder of plumage white,
excepting head and neck, which are mainly cinnamon brown in summer
and pale gray in winter, and tail, which is pearl gray; legs blue, much
of webs flesh color; bill black, long and upcurved; iris red or brown.

Young. — Similar to winter plumage of adult.

Notes. —A musical, loud pléé-éék, hurriedly repeated (Chapman). Click-
click-click (Brewer).

Range. — North America. Breeds from eastern Oregon, central Alberta
and southern Manitoba (rarely north to Great Slave Lake) south to
southern California, southern New Mexico, northwestern Texas, north-
ern Iowa and central Wisconsin; winters from southern California and
southern Texas to southern Guatemala; casual from Ontario and New
Brunswick to Florida and the West Indies, but rare east of Mississippi
River.

History.

In the first years of the nineteenth century the Avocet was
not uncommon on the Atlantic coast, where Wilson found it
breeding in small numbers as far north at least as the salt
marshes of New Jersey. Turnbull (1868) says that George
Ord informed him that during his excursions to the coast with
232 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Alexander Wilson, the Avocet, Stilt and other waders, “which
are becoming rare in our days were then quite plentiful.”
De Kay (1844) rates the Avocet as quite rare in New York
State, and it is probable that it was never very common in
New England, although it has been recorded north to the
Bay of Fundy. Its large size, confiding nature and striking
plumage made it a shining mark for the gunner, and it has
long since disappeared as a breeder on the Atlantic coast, and
now is regarded in New England as a rare straggler from the
west. Two are said to have been taken years ago on the
Lynn marshes.! One was taken at Lake Cochituate, Natick,
October 19, 1880.2. Three were shot at Ipswich, September
13, 1896, by Mr. A. B. Clark.*? An adult female was taken
May 23, 1887, doubtless on the Salisbury marshes. The skin
was made up by Mr. Benjamin F. Damsell, and is now in the
collection of the Boston Society of Natural History.* There is
one Maine record (Knight, 1878), and one for Connecticut (Mer-
riam, 1871). There are some museum specimens credited to
New York, and one definite record. A single adult male Avocet
was seen in company with other shore birds at Ithaca, N. Y.
The bird was first seen on September 15, 1909, and was taken
on the following day. The skin is now in the collection of
Cornell University.®

The long legs of the Avocet enable it to wade in deeper
water than most birds, and its webbed feet fit it for swimming
whenever it gets out of its depth. On the Atlantic coast it
was found usually about salt marshes, and bred there. It
feeds by immersing head and neck and probing in the ooze
of the bottom with its curious bill. Its food while here was
snails, marine worms and insects, according to Wilson. Elliot
says that its food consists of insects, small crustaceans, etc.
Henshaw found the larve of water insects in the crops of
those examined.

The passing of this curious, large and showy wader from
the Atlantic coast is a matter of regret to all lovers of nature.

 

1 Osgood, Fletcher: Shooting and Fishing, 1890, p. 11.

2 Purdie, Henry A.: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1881, p. 123.
3 Kennard, F. H.: Auk, 1897, p. 212.

4 Allen, Glover M.: Auk, 1913, p. 23.

5 Allen, Arthur A.: Auk, 1910, p. 344.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 233

 

BLACK-NECKED STILT (Himantopus mexicanus).

 

Length. — About 15 inches; front toes half-webbed.

Adult Male. — Crown, back of head and neck, most of back and wings black;
forehead, patch over eye, chin, throat, rump, tail and under parts
white; eyes carmine; legs bright carmine, exceedingly long; bill black,
slender and longer than head.

Adult Female. — Similar, but browner above.

Young. — Mantle ashy brown; feathers pale-edged.

Field Marks. — Large size, exceedingly long red legs and black or blackish
upper parts distinguish it from all other shore birds.

Notes. — A sharp, rapid ip-ip-ip when flying; a hoarse k-r-r-r-r-ing note
when on the ground (Chapman).

Range. — Temperate North America and northern South America. Breeds
from central Oregon, northern Utah and southern Colorado to southern
California, southern New Mexico, southern Texas, coast of Louisiana
and in Mexico, and from central Florida and Bahamas to northern
Brazil and Peru; formerly north to New Jersey; winters from southern
Lower California, southern Texas, southern Louisiana and southern
Florida south through Central America and the West Indies to north-
ern Brazil, Peru and the Galapagos; casual north in migration to
Nebraska, Wisconsin and New Brunswick.
234 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

Wilson says that the Stilt arrives on the coast of New
Jersey about the 25th of April, in flocks of twenty or thirty,
and that six or eight pairs breed together. No doubt this was
true in the early part of the nineteenth century, but it long
ago ceased to be so. Audubon (1838) did not find it abundant
anywhere, and said that it seldom was seen to the eastward of
Long Island. De Kay (1844) said that the bird was then not
a very common visitor to New York, and that it still bred in
New Jersey and “possibly in New York [Long Island],” but
appeared everywhere to be rare. Since then it nearly has dis-
appeared from the Atlantic coast north of southern Georgia
and Florida. C. J. Maynard (Massachusetts, 1870) says on
the authority of gunners that it occasionally is seen along
sandy beaches. This evidence may be taken for what it is
worth. There is no record that the bird ever bred in Mas-
sachusetts, and possibly it never was much more than a wan-
derer to these shores from the middle States. Mr. Boardman
states that it was seen occasionally but rarely at Calais, Me.,
and Dr. Brewer. (1884) asserts that several specimens have
been taken at Grand Manan, N. B., and that “occasional
instances of its capture near Boston are known.” There is
but one record of the capture of a specimen in Maine. Dr.
Allen records two specimens as taken in Massachusetts, which
were found in Boston market.1. There is a specimen in the
Museum of Comparative Zodlogy at Cambridge, Mass.,
labeled Lynn.? There are no New York records for the past
fifty years.

This large, handsome and striking wader has been brought
to the verge of extermination along the Atlantic coast by
spring and summer shooting, as have all the larger waders
that once bred there.

 

1 Allen, J. A.: Amer. Nat., 1870, p. 638.
2 Howe, R. H., and Allen, G. M.: Birds of Mass., p. 34.
 

LM ks er Bw a ; /
‘1 NECA La AX:
=
4

Bres*

 

S a

an Rel
om
p Ni as
S. WAH
ra} 3 Oy \ \
Tas
Ke oN

ip
>,
‘
i

De /
y/
.
v
Ih
ie

 

 

“Sow,
ma ~,

 

 

PLATE VIIl.—WOODCOCK ON NEST.

From a photograph obtained through the courtesy of the National Association of Audubon Societies.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 235

 

SNIPES, SANDPIPERS, ETC.

This great family (Scolopacide). contains birds widely
different in size, shape and color, but they are mainly of small
or medium size, never reaching the average size of the Herons.
The bill usually is long and soft skinned in life, generally
straight, roundish and slim, but sometimes curved up or
down, and in one genus the end is spoon-shaped. The head is
feathered to the bill; excepting a few species, they frequent
moist lands or the shores of bodies of water. They inhabit
all habitable lands.

WOODCOCK (Philohela minor).

Length. — 10 to 12 inches; bill nearly 3 inches.

Adult. — Upper parts brown and russet or buff, mixed with gray and marked
with blackish; back of head black, barred with buff; dark line from eye
to bill; under parts pale, warm brown, varying in intensity; tail black,
tipped with white; eye large, well back and high.

Field Marks. — Larger than a Robin. The long bill and the whistling sound
made by the wings in starting from the ground will identify the bird.
It is rarely found in the open meadow or marsh where Snipe congregate,
but rather in swampy woods or upland gardens and corn-fields.

Notes. — A nasal peent or paip, and a twittering whistle (Chapman). A
curious p’tul (Hoffmann). Chip-per, chip-per chip (Samuels).

Nest. — On ground in moist land.

Eggs. — Three or four; large, averaging about 1.60 by 1.14, ash gray to light
buff, with reddish brown or chocolate and stone gray markings.

Season. — March to November; rare in winter.

Range. — Eastern North America. Breeds from northeastern North Dakota,
southern Manitoba, northern Michigan, southern Quebec and Nova
Scotia south to southern Kansas, southern Louisiana and northern
Florida; winters from southern Missouri, the Ohio valley and New
Jersey (rarely Massachusetts) south to Texas and southern Florida;
ranges casually to Saskatchewan, Keewatin, Colorado, Newfoundland
and Bermuda.

History.

Dr. D. G. Elliot (1895), in his work on North American
Shore Birds, states that the Woodcock is “gradually becoming
scarcer within our limits.”” Dr. A. K. Fisher of the Biological
Survey, in his report on Two Vanishing Game Birds, specifies
the Woodcock and the Wood Duck as the species particularly

wae
236 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

in danger of extinction. Writers on ornithology and sports-
manship generally agree in the belief that the Woodcock is
diminishing in numbers, particularly near centers of population;
but the danger of extirpating it is not now nearly as great as
that which menaces several other species of migratory birds;
as, owing to the writings of such men as Dr. Elliot and Dr.
Fisher, the sportsmen of the United States have moved to
secure better protective laws for Woodcock in many States,
and this has helped to stay the destruction of the species.

Summer shooting, which formerly was legalized in many
States where the Woodcock bred, almost exterminated the
breeding birds in many regions. Winter shooting in the
south was very destructive, and still is so in some States.
Summer shooting in the north has been given up largely, and
the fall shooting season has been so shortened that the birds
are holding their own in many localities, and occasionally good
fall flights are seen in New England. -

Early in the last century Woodcock are said to have been
so plentiful within twenty-five miles of Boston that during
the long open season a good shot would average about fifty
birds a day; but to one knowing present conditions this
seems highly improbable. We have some records, however,
which prove that sixty or seventy years ago very large bags
were made in summer. Within my own lifetime the breeding
Woodcock have been absolutely extirpated from alder swamps
and runs which formerly harbored many pairs, but this has
been done by excessive August and early September gunning,
which is now prohibited. As one result of the shorter open
season, Woodcock are now coming back to breed in localities
from which they were absent for years.

The flights of birds from the north have not diminished in
number so much as have the native birds. Occasionally a
large flight stops here, as in early November, 1908, when
Woodcock were plentiful here, and when some gunners in
Connecticut secured from twenty to forty birds each in a day.
This flight did not denote such an increase in the number of
these birds, however, as generally was believed. The explana-
tion is that they all came at once. The birds in Maine and the
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 237

 

provinces had a good breeding season, and they must have had
a plentiful supply of food, for the autumn weather was mild
and they mostly remained in their northern homes until
nearly the first of November. Flight birds were rare in Mas-
sachusetts up to that time and the bags were small. The fall
had been warm and dry; but on October 29 and 30 New
England and the provinces experienced a severe northeast
storm along the seaboard, followed by a cold northwest wind,
which probably froze up the northern feeding grounds, if the
storm had not already buried them in snow. Either or both
of these conditions drove the Woodcock into southern New
England. My correspondence shows that this flight landed in
every county in Massachusetts, except Dukes and Nantucket.
As usual, comparatively few were seen in Barnstable County.
Connecticut covers harbored many Woodcock from about
November 12 to November 20. There were many in Rhode
Island, and the flight was noted as far south as Delaware.

My correspondence regarding the present status of the
Woodcock in Massachusetts is interesting. Thirty-five Mas-
sachusetts correspondents report Woodcock, which breed here,
as increasing, and one hundred and fifty note a decrease.
Those who note an increase have observed it in recent years.
These reports of increase are scattered over every county in
the State excepting Nantucket, Dukes and Barnstable. The
greatest number reporting an increase in one county is five,
from Plymouth. The reports of decrease come from every
county in the State, except Nantucket, where Woodcock
rarely are found. They are distributed as follows: Dukes,
one; Barnstable, eight; Bristol, thirteen; Plymouth, twenty-
one; Norfolk, eight; Essex, twenty; Middlesex, twenty-
four; Worcester, sixteen; Hampden, nine; Hampshire, six;
Franklin, fourteen; Berkshire, four. Seven, including Boston
residents, who hunt in the eastern counties, reported a decrease
for eastern Massachusetts generally. From these reports it
is safe to conclude that breeding Woodcock have decreased
largely in the State, except in some favored localities, where
formerly they were decimated, but under improved laws are
now increasing.
238 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Only twenty-seven correspondents report an increase of
migrating Woodcock or flight birds, and one hundred and
thirty-six note a diminution. Several of the former base their
statements on the great flight of 1908, while the latter prac-
tically all speak from years of experience. Those who see an
increase are mostly in the counties where the flight of 1908
was most marked, while those who record a decrease are
scattered over the State, as follows: Dukes, one; Barnstable,
seven; Bristol, nine; Plymouth, twenty; Norfolk, seven;
Essex, seventeen; Middlesex, twenty-three; Worcester, ten;
Hampden, nine; Hampshire, six; Franklin, twelve; Berk-
shire, six, and eastern Massachusetts generally, nine.

While the decrease of native Woodcock is regarded on
the whole as larger than that of flight birds, on the other
hand, a recent accession of breeding birds has been noted by
more correspondents than those recording an increase of flight
birds. Better laws and better law enforcement in the States
south of us will help to increase our native Woodcock.

We have now gone very near to the limit in protecting
Woodcock in Massachusetts; our open season of one month
comes so late that our own gunners get little chance to kill
native birds legally, and a month in which to shoot migratory
birds is about as short a season as most gunners will be content
with. There is nothing more that we can do for the Wood¢ock
in Massachusetts, unless we limit by law the number of birds
which the sportsman may take legally in a day, and still
further reduce the shooting season.

The sportsmen’s organizations of Massachusetts might
have some influence upon legislation in the southern States if
a limit to the size of the daily bag were required here. If the
stories of sportsmen who hunt Woodcock in the south in winter
are to be believed, the slaughter of these birds in certain sec-
tions is enormous. At times incalculable numbers of these
birds from the north are closely crowded into a limited region,
and may be killed by scores and hundreds. Mr. James J.
Pringle gives a record of fifty-five Woodcock killed from 9 a.m.
to 2 p.m. in Louisiana to his own gun. To prevent this the
season there should be shortened and the bag limited.
BIRDS. HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 239

 

A large part of this shooting is done by northerners, who
never know when they have enough, and southern market
hunters, black and white, who shoot mainly for the northern
markets. If we of the north who prate about the great slaugh-
ter of Woodcock in the south would close our markets effect-
ively against these southern birds, and uphold the efforts
of those who are trying to better the laws of the southern
States, southern shooting might be restricted within reasonable
limits. Ever since the civil war we have been inclined to blame
the south unjustly for both her deficiencies and our own.
It is true that in Audubon’s time, and for many years after-
ward, many Woodcock were killed in Louisiana by both negroes
and whites. ‘‘Firelighting’’ was the usual method, but
Louisiana now has better game laws and better enforcement
than in the past.

Mr. I. N. De Haven of Ardmore, Pa., writes me that
Woodcock are killed in great numbers near Cape Charles, Va.
Tf there is a heavy snowstorm in December a gunner will get
from four to seven dozen in a few hours. ‘The shooting,” he
says, “sounds like a fourth of July to us out on the bay shooting
ducks. They are shipped to New York and Boston.” Are we
enforcing our non-sale laws in the north?

The northern Woodcock are hardy birds and do not go
very far south unless forced to do so by the freezing up of their
feeding grounds. A sudden freeze in the south deprives them
of food, and if this is followed by a severe snowstorm they are
obliged to seek warmer quarters or perish. Great flights
appear in the south at such times, and many birds are starved
or frozen. Such a catastrophe occurred in 1892, another in
1895 and still another in 1899. Wayne records that on
February 13 and 14, 1899, countless thousands of Woodcock
came to the region about Mount Pleasant, $. C. Tens of
thousands, he says, were killed by would-be sportsmen and
thousands died of starvation and cold. Most of them were
much emaciated and were unable to withstand the cold. One
man killed four hundred in a few hours.!. Mr. James Henry
Rice, Jr., secretary of the Audubon Society of South Carolina,

 

1 Wayne, Arthur T.: Auk, 1899, p. 197.
240 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

tells me that at that time he saw in Georgetown a line of
wheelbarrows, loaded with Woodcock, brought into the
market by negroes, but the birds were so emaciated that the
dealers refused to purchase them. The Woodcock were so
weak and bewildered that some were chased and caught,
others were knocked down with sticks. They probably came
to the sea-coast from higher or more northern lands, seeking
food. Laws prohibiting the killing and sale of these birds in
the south after January 1 would save many which now are
slaughtered needlessly.

Some of my correspondents give no reason for the decrease
of Woodcock, but the majority of the gunners attribute it to
man, and mainly to overshooting; many of them, however,
are inclined to blame their brothers of the north and south for
the diminution of the birds. Mr. C. A. Clark, the Lynn natural-
ist, says “fifteen years ago woodcock were quite common in
my locality, but have been falling off very fast since that time,
and I have scarcely seen one here the past three or four years.
They need a close season for at least five years.” Mr. Lawton
W. Lane of Lynn writes: “The woodcock is getting to be a
bird of the past. In 1907 I kept a record of the birds which I
started. I started forty-one, of which I killed thirty-eight.
I write this not to tell of my great shooting, but to show the
cause of the decrease of this bird. It is gunned all over the
country in the same way, and is not a very hard bird to shoot,
with a good dog.” Dr. L. C. Jones of Malden writes that
three men from Malden, on a trip to Maine, killed one hundred
and eight, and that a gunner in Nova Scotia had killed two
hundred and seventy-five. The sportsmen and gunners of
southern New England and the middle States probably kill
as many Woodcock north and south as any one; they cer-
tainly get their share. North Carolina now (1910) has a law
limiting the bag of Woodcock to twelve a day.

The draining of swamps and swales, both north and south,
is slowly but steadily decreasing the natural breeding places
and cover for the Woodcock. Mr. Howard M. Douglas of
Plymouth thinks that perhaps the making into cranberry
bogs of many bog holes in Plymouth County where Woodcock
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 24l

 

used to feed has a tendency to drive them away. Similar
conditions now exist in Barnstable and Bristol counties. Mr.
John S. Nicholson of Hyannis notes this fact; but as the
Woodcock feeds on the worms and insects on cultivated lands
not all its feeding grounds ever will be destroyed. Many good
Woodcock grounds have been flowed in making reservoirs for
water supply. Forest fires drive out or destroy breeding birds.
In some cases they do not return for years after a fire. A
deal of Woodcock cover has been cut off in recent years in
eastern Massachusetts, and has not been allowed to grow up
again; but, on the contrary, many isolated, abandoned farms
in western Massachusetts have grown up to brush, and alders
have been allowed to grow along the runs in the pastures,
therefore the cutting of cover has affected the birds little
except locally, mainly in eastern Massachusetts. The vast
network of telephone, telegraph and trolley wires that is now
stretched over the country is perhaps a greater menace to the
Woodcock than to any other bird. Many years ago Audubon
observed that the Woodcock migrated at night, and flew very
low. Few birds, perhaps, except Rails and Cuckoos, habitually
fly at so low a level. These birds fly at night and strike the
wires. Probably, in time, those which barely touch these wires
learn to avoid them, but those which strike them with the
breast, neck or head never see daylight again; many hundreds
of these birds have been picked up under the wires. Thousands
of Woodcock undoubtedly perish in this way annually. Many
correspondents speak of this. I have talked with old gunners,
who have followed the wires in the marshes and picked up a
number of birds; some have been brought to me dead, with
characteristic wounds on head, neck or breast. One corre-
spondent records that a friend saw a Woodcock strike a wire
and fall dead. Let us hope that the Woodcock may learn in
time to avoid these wires.

All these causes for the depletion of Woodcock have very
little effect, however, compared with the continual hunting
and combing out of the covers by sportsmen and gunners with
dogs. I have killed Woodcock without a dog, but a man
without a first-class dog will have difficulty in finding more
242 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

than a small proportion of the birds in a cover. So long as
there is no bag limit the sportsman is inclined to shoot every
bird he starts if possible. If he does not or cannot, the next
man will if he can, and so the birds are wiped out.

So much has been written on the habits of this bird and its
pursuit that there remains little to be added here. I have
given some notes on its habits in Useful Birds and their Protec-
tion, but a few remarks that may be new to the general reader
are appended.

The mother Woodcock’s habit of flying off, when disturbed,
with her young held in her feet, or between her thighs, has
been noticed and recorded more than once; but Mr. William
H. Leonard of East Foxborough informs me that Mr. George
Hawes, when fishing in Trap Hole Brook, saw a Woodcock
carry her three young across the brook, one at a time, by:
means of her toes and claws.

My experience in rearing young Woodcock on bread and
milk, with a few worms and insects, which was finally ended
by an accident, leads me to believe that these birds might be
reared artificially, and experiments to this end should be made.
The Woodcock, however, lays so few eggs that only the most
rigid protection can prevent its decimation, and the hope of
increasing its numbers artificially is not great.

A few notes about the migration of the Woodcock will be
necessary to a proper understanding of the considerations
which should govern legislation for its protection in Massa-
chusetts. We do not know precisely when the native-breeding
birds start on their southern migration, but gunners from
some of the hill towns west of the Connecticut River claim that
in the present open season (October 15 to November 15) they
get no Woodcock shooting whatever, for the native birds all
leave their localities: in the Berkshire hills and go south or to
the lower land by early October, and that the later flight
birds (probably finding these hills cold and uninviting) do
not stop there; but there are some towns favorably situated
among the hills which are visited by the later flights, which
come down the Connecticut valley. At the opposite end of
the State the coast-line, always a highway of migration, offers
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 243

 

a chance to gain some knowledge of the flight. As Maine
and the provinces lie well to the eastward, we might expect
many of the southward-moving birds to follow the coast, or
even to cross Ipswich Bay and the Bay of Fundy on their
way, as other land birds do. But Woodcock fly largely on
moonlit nights, and so low that it is probable that they do not
often purposely start out to cross large bodies of water. They
may be blown off shore occasionally by sudden gales, and this
may account for a bag of Woodcock brought into a hotel in
Provincetown in 1868, and reported to me by Mr. Alfred S.
Swan. These birds probably were blown off the land by
some northwesterly gale, and, being unable to make land
anywhere else, reached the end of Cape Cod. Woodcock are
not common there and probably rarely breed on that sandy
soil. Those flight birds which follow the coast probably mostly
cross Cape Cod below Plymouth, and turn westward into
Rhode Island or Connecticut, or follow down the west shore of
Buzzards Bay. Possibly some of them keep on down the shore
of Cape Cod Bay as long as it trends southward, and thus
land in Sandwich and even in Barnstable, crossing the Cape, as
many birds do, at the most southerly indentation of its north-
ern shore, that forms the entrance to Barnstable harbor, —
the narrowest point of the arm of Cape Cod, where the towns
of Barnstable and Yarmouth meet. Here at Yarmouthport
Mr. Stephen W. Fuller reports that flight Woodcock pass
through in August.

Counting Provincetown as the hand of Cape Cod, Truro
forms the wrist. Mr. Willard M. Small states that a few flight
Woodcock come there each year. This seems to indicate that
a few are blown off the coast annually and find rest near the
end of the Cape. Correspondents in all the other Cape towns,
down the forearm to the elbow at Chatham, and from there
to the middle of the arm at Yarmouth, report the Woodcock
as very rare. From Yarmouth until we reach the mainland
at Plymouth similar reports prevail, but at Hyannis, nearly
south from Yarmouth on the south side of the Cape, two
gunners, Mr. John 8. Nicholson and Mr. Frank G. Thacher,
report flight birds. Mr. Nicholson, who has had over fifty
244 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

years’ experience, says that in some years quite a flight goes
over in the evening. Some stop, but no large numbers. He
says that he shot four or five in the fall of 1908, that several
were shot in the fall of 1909 and that there was quite a flight
in November, all of which seems to indicate that a part of
the flight of Woodcock comes down the coast, crosses from the
entrance of Barnstable harbor over Yarmouthport, steers
southward to Hyannis and then follows the south coast of the
Cape Cod peninsula westward. Those which come down from
the outer arm of the Cape may cross here also. This seems to
indicate that the movement of native Woodcock southward
begins there in August, and the experience of western Mas-
sachusetts gunners indicates that the native birds have left
there by early October, although some may remain later in
the milder climate of the coast region.

Our present law protects our own birds fairly well here,
except from lawbreakers who hunt before “the law is off.”
Probably most of the Woodcock shooting that our gunners get
now is furnished by birds from farther north and northeast.

The fate of the Woodcock rests largely with the people of
the United States, in which mainly it lives. Its range includes
part of southern Canada, but it is chiefly a bird of the eastern
United States. It is not disturbed by agriculture, and thrives
well on rich and cultivated farms, provided there are a few
boggy runs or small swamps where it can nest. Gardens and
cornfields are favorite hunting grounds of this bird.

The food of the Woodcock consists largely of earthworms
and insects. The long sensitive bill is provided with nerves
and muscles and forms a very effective tool for exploring soft
ground or searching beneath the leaves, for in such situations
the bird gets most of its food.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 245

 

WILSON’S SNIPE (Gallinago delicata).

Common or local names: Snipe; English Snipe; Jack Snipe.

 

Length. — 11.25 inches; bill (average), 2.50.

Adult. — Crown dark brown or blackish, split along center by a light buffy
line, and separated by a buffy stripe from a blackish line running from
bill through eye; back and wings a mixture of dark brown or blackish
and reddish brown, tan or buff, striped longitudinally with light buffy
or whitish; wings brown and dusky, with light buffy markings on coverts;
tail ending in a broad bar of reddish brown crossed near tip with black-
ish and tipped with whitish; outer tail feathers pale buff or whitish,
barred with black; tail coverts barred; throat gray; neck and upper
breast pale brown, mottled and streaked with blackish; flanks gray,
barred with black; lower breast and belly white; legs and feet very
pale ashy green.

Field Marks. — A bird of fresh-water marshes mainly; may be known by
its long bill and erratic flight.

Notes. — Call, heard when bird is startled and springs into flight, an un-
musical squeak resembling the syllables ’scape! ’scape! Kuk-kuk-kuk
uttered on the ground (Knight).

Nest. — A depression in grass or bog.

Figgs. —- Usually four, pointed, olive brown, spotted and blotched with
reddish brown mainly near larger end, about 1.55 by 1.08.

Season. — A common spring and fall migrant in April and early May,
September, October and even November; a few breed and probably
fewer still winter.

Range.— North America and northern South America. Breeds from
northwestern Alaska, northern Mackenzie, central Keewatin and
northern Ungava south to northern California, southern Colorado,
northern Iowa, northern Illinois, Pennsylvania and New Jersey; winters
246 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

from northern California, New Mexico, Arkansas and North Carolina
through Central America and West Indies to Colombia and southern
Brazil; remains in winter casually and locally north to Washington,
Montana, Nebraska, Illinois and Nova Scotia; accidental in Hawaii,
Bermuda and Great Britain.

History.

The Snipe was very abundant formerly in the fresh-water
meadows of New York and New England. There was excellent
Snipe shooting from five to twenty miles out of Boston in the
early years of the last century. Some of the tales and legends
regarding it, told years ago by the older gunners, would receive
little credit in the light of present conditions; but a good many
Snipe are seen now in our meadows and good bags sometimes
are made. Undoubtedly the general decrease in these birds
and the destruction of the local breeders are due mainly to the
increase of population, accompanied by spring shooting and
excessive hunting.

Until recently the Snipe has been pursued at all seasons,
and such pursuit was regarded as legitimate because the bird
bred mainly in the north, beyond our limits. Each gunner or
sportsman killed as many as he could while they were here.
The destruction of Snipe in the south was phenomenal. Mr.
James J. Pringle, a southern gentleman, has published the
most painstaking record of Snipe shooting that I have ever
seen. He was not a market hunter, but hunted for pleasure,
and used his own birds, giving away the surplus to his friends
and owners of the land over which he shot. His shooting was
done in Attakapas County in the southwestern part of Louisi-
ana, near Bayou Teche. As he did not make a business of
Snipe shooting he did not shoot every day during the season,
but only when it suited his convenience, and he kept a journal
in which every bird that he shot was recorded, after all had
been counted carefully by others as well as himself. No birds
shot by his companions were counted, and the record is one
that he could swear to in court. In shooting he used two
men as beaters, one as a marker, and one or two dogs (kept
at heel and used only to find dead birds), and a wagon and
driver to help wherever it would be useful. He rarely was able
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 247

 

to kill more than one Snipe at one shot, but the record shows
that in twenty years he killed sixty-nine thousand and eighty-
seven Snipe and two thousand seven hundred and seventy-two
other birds which were shot incidentally. At the end of the
twenty years, 1867-68 to 1886-87, the shooting began to fail.
On March 2, 1869, he killed sixty-nine Snipe in seventy-five
minutes. In November, 1874, he killed one thousand four
hundred and fourteen Snipe in six shooting days. In Decem-
ber, 1877, he killed one thousand nine hundred and forty-five
in seven shooting days. His maximum days’ score was three
hundred and sixty-six Snipe in six hours.1 Very likely no
gentleman sportsman ever killed so many Snipe in twenty
years as did Mr. Pringle, but others have exceeded many of
his daily scores. Market hunters followed the sport as a
business, day after day, wherever Snipe were numerous. I
talked with one such expert, who had killed scores in one day
in Massachusetts, who stated that he had yet to find the man
who was willing to stop shooting while the “birds were plenty.”

Mr. Edmund Blood of East Groton, Mass., says that the
Snipe bred commonly there fifty years ago. Undoubtedly
they once bred in some numbers in Massachusetts. Nuttall
states that his friend Mr. Ives of Salem told him that a few
pairs bred in that vicinity. Samuels (1870) says the Snipe
has been known to breed here. There are now several instances
on record where young Snipe have been shot here or old birds
taken in the breeding season. Mr. A. W. Sugden of Hartford
writes me that when he was a boy Fairfield swamp and its
vicinity and the meadows in Weathersfield and Rocky Hill,
Conn., were alive with Snipe, and many nested there. ‘Since
the prohibition of spring shooting in this State,” he says, “a
few Snipe remain here in summer and probably breed in some
of our meadows.”

Mr. George M. Bubier of Lynn saw a Snipe on a telegraph
pole in Lynnfield on May 22, 1907, evidently apprehensive
for the safety of her eggs or young, for she continued to
utter cries of alarm. The habit of alighting, during the
nesting season, on trees, fences and other objects above

 

1 Pringle, James J.: Twenty Years of Snipe Shooting, 1899, p. 301.
248 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

ground is common to several species of this order. Mr. D. T.
Cowing of Hadley writes that quite a flock was raised in 1906
on the Oxbow, a tributary of the Connecticut River; that one
man killed one hundred and thirty birds there, and that a few
have been seen since (1908).

About one-half my correspondents in Massachusetts have
either not seen or recognized the Snipe in their localities. Nine
report it as increasing in number in their neighborhoods, — one
each in Hampden, Worcester and Plymouth counties and six
in Barnstable County. One hundred and nine report it as
decreasing: two in Hampshire County, two in Hampden, six
in Worcester, twenty-one in Middlesex, twenty-one in Essex,
six in Norfolk, eighteen in Plymouth, six in Bristol, sixteen in
Barnstable, two in Dukes and four in Nantucket. Five report
it rare in eastern Massachusetts generally. Wemust make some
allowance for the fact that most gunners do not now watch the
spring flights, when the larger numbers appear, for spring shoot-
ing is prohibited. In some of the localities where I shot Snipe
thirty to forty years ago not one is ever seen now. This may
be owing in part to the building up of the region; but I be-
lieve that along the Charles River meadows, where I shot as a
boy, the birds have decreased since about one-half.

The reports seem to show that there are very few Snipe in
Berkshire, Hampshire and Hampden counties, except along
the Connecticut River or its tributaries. Near Springfield
Mr. Robert O. Morris does not see any great decrease. Much
of the territory of the western counties is not fit for the Snipe,
and it probably never was very common anywhere there,
except along the river valleys. Several correspondents, how-
ever, regard the bird as having decreased ninety per cent.
Throughout Worcester County the same condition exists.
The Snipe is almost unknown in the wooded hill towns where
the Woodcock is common, but here and there it crops up,
though mainly in decreasing numbers.

The tales of the decimation of this bird that come from
many parts of the State are rather pathetic. We would not
expect to find many Snipe among the hills of northern Worces-
ter County; but in the valley of the Blackstone, south of
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 249

 

Worcester, we might reasonably look for a few. Nevertheless,
Mr. Henry T. Whitin of Northbridge says, “practically extinct;
have not seen one in years.” One might anticipate finding
them common east of Worcester, on the meadows near the
sources of the Sudbury and the Assabet, but Hon. Joseph S.
Gates of Westborough says laconically, “‘very few left.”” Mr.
Elmer M. Macker of North Grafton says, “a few years ago
one was shot occasionally but for the last four or five years
not one has been seen.” In the eastern counties, as we approach
the sea-coast and the fresh-water marshes and meadows
along the rivers, the numbers of Snipe increase a little, but even
there many people find them rapidly disappearing. On Cape
Cod, where Woodcock generally are rare, Snipe sometimes are
common, though usually decreasing and never very abundant.
The Snipe naturally supplements the Woodcock by occupying
the country where the Woodcock is absent. The Woodcock
is a bird of timbered runs on the hills and wooded swamps in
the valleys, while the Snipe occupies mainly open meadows
and marshes.

On Nantucket, where there are practically no Woodcock,
Snipe sometimes are found in some numbers, although the
island is far out in the Atlantic. In one day recently one man
killed sixty Snipe on Nantucket, all in one meadow or marsh.
He was an old hunter, an excellent Snipe shot, knew the ground
perfectly and killed every bird that he could. It will probably
be some time before any one will kill sixty birds in a day again
on that island. This shows the necessity of a daily bag limit.
Had he been obliged to go six days, or even three, to that spot
to kill an allowance of ten or twenty birds per day, some of
them would have gotten safely away, — or some other gunner
would have had a chance.

In scanning my reports from other regions it would seem
that while Snipe still are plentiful in many parts of the south
their numbers are decreasing from Canada to Texas, and in
many States the depletion appears to be about as steady as in
New England. Wayne, in his Birds of South Carolina, just
published (1910), says that he doubts if there is a State in the
Union where the Snipe is found in larger numbers. This looks
250 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

hopeful. But Mr. James Henry Rice, Jr., who is in charge of
game preservation in that State, says that while Snipe still are
plentiful, they have decreased 75 per cent. within his recollec-
tion. Mr. A. S. Eldredge tells me that Snipe are holding their
own fairly well in southeastern Texas; but Mr. J. D. Mitchell,
whose experience over southern Texas is much wider and
longer, says that they have decreased seventy-five per cent. in
forty-four years.

That great Snipe shooter, Mr. James J. Pringle, states that
for the first twenty years of his shooting in Louisiana he gen-
erally saw every day on the marshes not only great numbers
of Snipe but also great flocks of Ducks, and many otters, alli-
gators, raccoons, deer and birds and game of all kinds peculiar
to that locality. The diminution in the number of Snipe after
twenty years’ shooting was accompanied also by a similar de-
crease in game of all kinds, and a few years later the shooting
broke down altogether and was given up. This falling off of
the shooting, and its final complete failure on these grounds,
he says was due to various causes. He believes that the dis-
appearance of the birds was due largely to the enclosure and
draining of the grounds, also to the improvements in and
cheapness of firearms; to the extension of railroads, which
brought the grounds within reach of the markets, and to the
increase of gunners, not only in this region, but all through
the continent, so that there were not so many Snipe nor other
game birds in the world at the end of the twenty years as at
the beginning. Altogether, there was a sad decrease of all
kinds of birds and beasts, and the Attakapas country, which
was a great game region when he first began to shoot over it,
had lost the game which once formed its chief attraction for
him and his friends. During the last years of his shooting,
the Ducks, raccoons, otters and alligators disappeared, and
he seldom saw any.

The cause given by most correspondents for the depletion
of the Snipe is overshooting or spring shooting. In four cases
the draining of meadows or the drawing off of water for man-
ufacturing purposes is spoken of, and at Scituate the breaking
in of the ocean at North River by a storm is noted, changing
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 251

 

the character of the feeding ground by flooding the meadows
with salt water. The diminution of the Snipe may have been
exaggerated, but such reports have been coming in for many
years from all over its range. They cannot be ignored. What
are we going to do about it? Birds like the Snipe and Wood-
cock, which rear small broods, cannot recover so rapidly from
overshooting as can Grouse, Bob-whites or Ducks, all of which
rear large broods. The very least that should be done is to
stop the spring shooting of Snipe in every State within its
range, and forbid summer shooting wherever it breeds. In
co-operation with Canada and Mexico we can readily protect
and increase this valuable bird.

The fact that flights of this Snipe frequently land near
the tip of Cape Cod and all along its outer arm, and also at
Nantucket, indicates that it strikes boldly out to sea in migra-
tion, thus taking a short cut to the south. Snipe land on Ber-
muda in considerable numbers, and some winter on the Antilles.
This leads to the inference that there is a regular fall flight of
Snipe from regions north of us, which put out to sea like some
of the well-known shore birds, and steer directly to the West
Indies, some stopping at Bermuda on the way. Thus we may
account for the fact that the fall flight of Snipe, in eastern
Massachusetts and Rhode Island at least, is much smaller ordi-
narily than the spring flight. Most of the fall birds from the
north possibly land here only when driven in by storms, and
the spring birds come back by land; otherwise, considering the
effect of shooting, etc., the spring flight would be the smaller.
Prof. W. W. Cooke speaks of a hunter near Newport, R. I.,
who secured scarcely a third as many birds in the fall, for a
period of eight years, as he did in the spring.

It is noted often that during easterly storms numbers of
Snipe are seen on our meadows, and that fewer are seen in
fine weather. This is due no doubt in part to their being blown
inshore by adverse winds, but it is partly due also to the
fact that the Snipe feed largely at night, or in dull, cloudy or
foggy weather, which often is the best for Snipe shooting, and
like to hide in some chosen retreat to sleep away the best
hours of a sunny day. The Snipe migrate at night. I have
252 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

heard Snipe flying about the meadows on moonlit nights,
and have heard them apparently coming in during a storm at
night. Wet weather which soaks the marshes makes favorable
conditions for Snipe; hence they are not likely to appear in
such numbers during a dry September as in a wet one. Dry
seasons make favorable conditions in the interior for shore
birds generally, but not for Snipe and Woodcock. Like the
Woodcock, Snipe cannot live long where the ground is frozen,
and, therefore, sudden drops in autumn temperature north of
us start them along. Like the Woodcock, also, a few birds
remain in winter in Massachusetts near unfrozen springs. I
have found the Snipe in January near Worcester, and several
instances are known where they have wintered near Lynn and
on Cape Cod; but most of the birds seen here are migrants.

The habits of this bird are too well and widely known to
need much mention here. Snipe are attracted to burnt ground
or to meadows where the grass has been mowed. In the south
they sometimes frequent plowed lands, and even seem to
follow the plow in search of worms and grubs. They fre-
quent meadows also where hogs have rooted, and sometimes in
the north large numbers are seen about market gardens, all
of which indicates that they prefer land where worms and
insects are abundant and easily accessible. Wherever they
find a liberal supply of food they congregate, and many may
be found in such spots, while few will be seen on ground
apparently equally attractive but not supplied with food.
The birds continue feeding in light rains, and congregate
together, but when the rains continue heavily, and the grounds
become flooded, they fly to higher land, where they are very
restless and wild. A meadow with deep, moist, black loam or
mold, with very little sand, seems to be most attractive to the
Snipe. Their food consists largely of insects, including grass-
hoppers, locusts, cutworms and beetles, with such others as
may be picked up from cultivated fields and marshes. Earth-
worms, leeches, seeds of smartweed and other plants, together
with roots and other vegetable matter, have been found in
their stomachs. Enough is known of their food habits to
place them among the beneficial species.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 253

 

DOWITCHER (Macrorhamphus griseus griseus).

Common or local names: Brown-back; Driver; Robin-snipe; Red-breasted Snipe.

 

Fay. SPRING.

Length. — 10 to 11 inches; bill 2.05 to 2.55.

Adult Male in Spring. — Upper parts mixed black and buffy or cinnamon;
lower back, rump and tail white; rump spotted and tail barred with
black and light tan or pale buff; general tone of closed wing brownish
gray, in contrast to reddish tone of body, blackening toward tip; two
whitish wing bands; sides of head and under parts reddish buff or pale
cinnamon, finely marked and sparsely spotted (and barred on flanks)
with black, becoming white on belly; bill greenish black; legs and feet
greenish brown; iris very dark.

Adult Male in Fall. — Head and upper back feathers slate gray, with dark
centers and lighter edges; wings dark gray, spotted and marked with
dusky and whitish; sides of head, throat and breast whitish; a dusky
line from bill through eye; sides of breast clouded with brownish
gray, with which the neck and head are more or less mottled; below
white, spotted behind with black; rump and tail white spotted with
black.

Adult Female. — Paler and lighter.

Young. — Hinder parts spotted above and below; similar to winter adult
above; below washed with buff and indistinctly speckled with dusky.

Field Marks. — Size of Wilson’s Snipe, but its dark back and the whitish
appearance of its lower back, rump and tail distinguish it. The rump
does not appear so white in flight as that of the Yellow-legs. Frequents
sand bars and mud flats.

Notes. — A shrill quivering whistle, similar to that of the Yellow-legs, some-
thing like *té-té-te, té-té-te- (Nuttall).

Season. — Rather uncommon fall migrant; rare in spring, late May and
early June; early July to late September.
254 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Range. — Eastern North and South America. Breeding range unknown, but
probably northern Ungava; winters from Florida south to northern
Brazil; in migration regularly on the Atlantic coast and occasionally
in Illinois, Indiana and Ontario; accidental in Greenland, Bermuda,
Great Britain and France.

History.

The Brown-back, as the Dowitcher is called on Cape Cod,
is one of the most interesting of all waders. Unsuspecting and
gentle, it may be approached easily and closely studied. It
was one of the birds which was found on the Atlantic coast in
enormous numbers when the country was first settled, and
which possibly summered in small numbers all along the coast.
Scott found it not rare in summer on the coast of Florida,
MclIlhenny notes it the year round in Louisiana, and Wayne
rates it as a resident in South Carolina, where he finds non-
breeding birds in June.

Its breeding range is not well known. Many writers
describe its nest and eggs, but the probability is that those
described belong to the next species. Howe in his Study of
Macrorhamphus gives the breeding range of this bird as
extending on all sides of Hudson Bay, except to the south,
and reaching across Melville Peninsula, Ungava and about
half way up Baffin Land.! W. W. Cooke? says that the nest
and eggs are unknown to science, nor has the species been
seen in summer at any place where it was probably breeding.
He finds by a study of the records of arctic explorers and
naturalists that all known arctic regions are eliminated as
breeding places for this bird, except the eastern coast of Hud-
son Bay and the interior of Ungava, in the northern part of
the peninsula of Labrador, — regions which hardly have been
explored by naturalists. It does not seem probable, at first
sight, that a species which formerly appeared on our coasts in
such great numbers could have had so limited a breeding
ground. Nevertheless, Professor Cooke says that there are
no records of the occurrence of this bird north of Ungava,
except one in Greenland, and if the species breeds in Baffin

 

1 Howe, Reginald Heber: Auk, 1901, pp. 157-162.
2 Distribution and Migration of North American Shore Birds, 1910, pp. 26, 27.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 255

 

Land or any of the islands in the northern ocean it has escaped
his notice. He gives but one record for Prince Edward Island
and but one for Nova Scotia. Mr. E. T.Carbonnell and Prof.
S. N. Earle write that although this bird is not seen now on
Prince Edward Island, it ‘‘used to be plentiful’ there; and
Mr. Harold F. Tufts writes from Wolfville, N. S., that it has
decreased there fifty per cent. in fifteen years, indicating that
some still remain. The early arrival of this species on our
coast gives color to the belief that it nests in the Labrador
Peninsula. In this it agrees closely with the Least and Semi-
palmated Sandpipers, both of which have been found breeding
in Labrador. Alexander Wilson, the father of American orni-
thology, believed that this bird bred not far north of the
United States, judging by the lateness of the season when it
leaves in the spring, the development of the eggs in the ovaries
of the females at that time and the early arrival of the birds
on their return.

Individual Dowitchers are seen returning southward in
migration early in July all along the coast, from Massachusetts
to South Carolina. The bird crosses the Provinces of Ontario
and Quebec in a direct line from its summer home to New
England. Formerly it was plentiful along the Atlantic coast,
and is still not uncommon in New Jersey, common in Virginia
and abundant on the coast of South Carolina. Some indi-
viduals apparently reach South America by way of Florida
and the Antilles, though many winter on the south Atlantic
and Gulf coasts. It is not impossible that individuals of
this species which winter in South America take the long
flight from Nova Scotia to the West Indies; of this, however,
I have seen no reliable evidence, and am inclined to believe
that this bird habitually migrates up and down the Atlantic
seaboard. It does not come up the Mississippi valley in the
spring. A part of the flight seems, however, to leave the coast
of the Carolinas in the fall and fly direct to the Lesser Antilles.
There seem to be good reasons to believe that the majority
of this species migrate directly south and perhaps a little east
of south until they reach the coast, and if, as seems probable,
they breed along the eastern coast of Hudson Bay and in the
256 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

territory between that coast and the east coast of Ungava,
between the 70th and 80th parallel, those in the eastern part
of its breeding range would thus reach Nova Scotia, New Eng-
land and New York, where we now find it in its southern
migration. ‘Those in the western part of its range, travelling
directly south overland, would thus reach the coast of South
Carolina. One would. naturally expect the South Carolina
migrants to return along the Atlantic coast, but apparently
they do not, for Wayne says that between May 1 and 15,
when the tide is low in the afternoon, in a light southerly
wind, flock after flock may be seen migrating to the north-
west. He says that he never saw a flock migrating northward
along the coast. The northwest direction may be taken to
allow for an eastward drift of the wind (as all birds allow for the
deflection of the wind), their course being due north for Hud-
son Bay. These birds do not stop on the coasts of New Eng-
land, as accounts generally agree that fewer Brown-backs are
seen here in the spring than in the fall. The above remarks
on the migration of this species are preliminary to what fol-
lows regarding its decrease in New England.

The following brief extracts from the writings of New York
and New England ornithologists indicate the Dowitcher’s
reduction in numbers in this region: As they often settle
near each other great numbers are shot down (Peabody, 1839).
About the middle of July they return in great numbers to our
coast (De Kay, 1844). Congregate in immense flocks in salt
marshes (Lewis, 1850). Found in small numbers in marshes
along our coast spring and autumn (Samuels, 1870). Not
uncommon during migration (Maynard, 1870). Rather com-
mon spring and autumn (J. A. Allen, 1879). The birds will
come back at call and alight among the decoys, until the last
survivor is shot (Samuels, 1897). At present, flocks along the
Atlantic coast are few and far between (Sanford, Bishop and
Van Dyke, 1903). Rare spring and uncommon fall migrant
(G. M. Allen, Massachusetts, 1910).

Only two correspondents in Massachusetts report the Dow-
itcher as increasing, and they are both in Dukes County.
Sixty-one say that it is decreasing. Most of the correspond-
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 251

 

ents never see the bird now, and practically all the older
gunners state that the bird is “nearing extinction,” “almost
gone” or “a bird of the past.”” Apparently the species has
disappeared from the inland lakes and ponds, where it for-
merly was seen occasionally, and is not now common on the
Massachusetts coast, except in a few favored localities. Mr.
E. W. Eaton of Newburyport says he believes that it has
decreased ninety per cent. in thirty years; twenty years ago
the first of the season he could see sometimes four to eight
flocks a day, with from five to twenty-five in a flock; he has
not seen a flock in 1908 or 1909; shot a single bird in 1907.
Mr. William P. Wharton of Groton has seen very few in sev-
eral years. His uncle tells of its abundance at Ipswich thirty
years ago. Mr. Neil Casey of Melrose says, “I think this
bird has decreased faster than any other shore bird.” Notes of
others in brief follow: “Decreasing eighty to ninety per cent.”
(Ralph C. Ewell, Marshfield). “Only one seen occasionally”
(Francis B. Osborn, Hingham). “‘Have seen a few; they
decrease rapidly’’ (H. M. Douglas, Plymouth). ‘Decreased
ninety per cent. in last ten years”’ (H. W. Bartlett, Plymouth).
“Twenty-five years ago one hundred or more of these birds
was not considered remarkable on Cape Cod; I heard of one
bag this summer (1908) of eighteen or twenty, which was
considered exceptional” (Dr. L. C. Jones, Malden). “A steady
and marked decrease the past fifteen years” (George L. Haines,
Sandwich). Mr. Carl Zerrahn of Milton says, “my records at
Chatham show a small but steady decrease each year.”

My correspondents from Maine, New Hampshire, Ver-
mont, Rhode Island and Connecticut find similar conditions.
I get no reports of this bird as common except from Chatham,
Cohasset and Yarmouthport. Mr. Alfred Swan says that he
shot “quite a lot” at Chatham in 1908. The shooting record
at Chatham Beach Hotel shows that there were but three
days, while it was kept (from 1897 to 1904, inclusive), when
the number of Dowitchers shot by all hands neared a score.
July 15, 1897, nineteen were killed; August 8, 1901, twenty
were killed; and on August 9 twenty-six were taken, with
thirteen men shooting. In 1897 one hundred and seven were
258 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

taken during the season; in 1898, fifty-seven; in 1899, fifty-
eight; in 1900, fifty; in 1901, one hundred and thirty; in
1902, fifty-four; in 1903, seventy-two; in 1904, forty-five.
The number of men shooting each day varied from one to
twenty-six. In 1909 I frequented the haunts of this bird but
saw only three during the summer.

The conclusions resulting from the foregoing may be
summed up in three propositions, thus: (a) The Dowitcher,
formerly numerous in New England, is now growing rare. (6)
It is numerous still in the southern States. (c) The present
main flight to the southern States does not touch New England.

Practically all correspondents who assign a cause for the
decrease of this bird attribute it to spring shooting or over-
shooting. The Dowitcher is naturally so unsuspicious that it
is about the last shore bird to fly from an approaching gunner.
There are some “educated” birds, but the above statement is _
true in the main. It will come readily to the call of the con-
cealed gunner and alight to his decoys, leaving him to shoot
whenever he can get the birds at the greatest disadvantage.
The survivors will fly when the flock is shot into, but often
can be called back to their killed and wounded comrades, until
in many cases a single expert market gunner or sportsman has
killed the whole flock. When spring shooting was allowed
those of this species which reached the Atlantic coast in New
England had little chance ever to return, and thus most of the
individuals which regularly migrated down this coast were
killed off annually. Probably we now get but a few stragglers
from the stream of migration which normally passes west of
us, without stopping on this coast. It is probable, also, that
our shooting has cleaned up most of the birds in the eastern
section of their breeding grounds, and that others spreading
into the unoccupied ground from the westward take the old
migration route, and so continue to straggle along our coasts,
but this is merely conjecture.

Something must be done to protect this species or it will
join the Dodo and the Great Auk, and will be known only by
specimens in museums. Its comparative abundance in the
south will save it for a time, for sportsmen will hardly go
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 259

 

south to shoot it in July and August. But winter shooting
will follow it there. Absolute protection in the north, or the
abolition of all summer shooting for a series of years, is the
only possible chance for its salvation.

The Dowitcher is a bird of the inner beach and still waters,
the tidal flat and the salt marsh; it frequents margins of fresh-
water ponds near the coast when the water is low, and fresh
marshes, where the mud flats are bare. It formerly flew,
and sometimes alighted, in immense compact flocks, thereby
exposing itself needlessly to the deadly discharge of the scatter-
gun. These flocks when startled often rose high in air and
circled about rapidly, with loud whistled cries, performing
startling aerial evolutions with the precision of drilled sol-
diery. This species sometimes mingles with flocks of Summer
Yellow-legs, whose notes slightly resemble its own, but it
readily may be distinguished by the shorter legs, longer bill
and the less amount of white on the rump and upper tail
coverts. It is fond of sea-worms and other forms of marine
life, for which it probes with its long bill.

LONG-BILLED DOWITCHER (Macrorhamphus griseus scolopaceus).

Length. — 10.75 to 12.05 inches; bill 2.20 to 3.25.

Adult in Spring. — Very similar to the Dowitcher, but slightly larger; bill
longer; more rufous below, and sides more heavily barred.

Adult in Fall, and Young. — Indistinguishable from the Dowitcher, “except
those surpassing the maximum size of the latter.”

Notes. — A lisping, energetic, musical peet-peet; pée-ter-wée-too, wée-too, re-
peated (Nelson).

Range. — Western North America and South America. Breeds from Arctic
coast to Yukon mouth and east to northwestern Mackenzie; winters
from Louisiana, Florida and Mexico south, probably to South America;
in migration most abundant in western Mississippi valley; casual on
Atlantic coast from Massachusetts southward and on northern coast
of eastern Siberia.

History. So

The Long-billed Dowitcher is supposed to be a western
sub-species. It occurs regularly in New York, but is rated
as a mere straggler in Massachusetts; in fact, we know very
little about it here, as it requires an expert to distinguish it.
260 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

STILT SANDPIPER (Micropalama himantopus).

Common or local names: Bastard Yellow-leg; Stilt; Mongrel.

 

 

 

 

 

Length. — 8.25 inches; bill 1.55; fore toes webbed at base.

Adult in Breeding Plumage. — Above tawny or bay, streaked and blotched
with black or blackish, feathers more or less white edged; wings and
tail grayish; side of head below eye and over ear and faint line at back
of head chestnut; upper tail coverts white, barred with dusky; line
over eye and lower parts white, often tinged with reddish; fore neck
spotted and streaked with dusky, lower parts elsewhere barred with
dusky; bill, long slender legs and feet greenish; legs and feet lighter
and more yellowish than bill.

Adult in Fall and Winter. — Upper parts brownish gray or ash gray; dusky
streak from bill through eye; wide line over eye and under parts white;
neck streaked with brownish gray; barred below as in spring but not
so strongly; tail and upper tail coverts white, marked with dusky; bill,
legs and feet darker than in spring.

Young. — Similar, but upper parts more blackish, the feathers bordered with
buff; below white; legs and feet greenish yellow.

Field Marks. — Long, slim, greenish legs; long, slim, slightly curved bill.

Notes. — When disturbed it utters a sharp tweet tweet before flying (Nuttall).
A double or triple whistle (C. W. Townsend’.

Season. — A rather rare or local irregular fall migrant coastwise, sometimes
not uncommon; very rare in spring, usually in May; early July to
early October.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds near coast of Mackenzie and
probably south to central Keewatin; winters in South America south to
Chile; casual in winter in southern Texas and Mexico; occurs in migra-
tion in western Mississippi valley, West Indies and Central America;
less common on Atlantic coast; casual in British Columbia, New-
foundland and Bermuda.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR-SPORT. 261

 

History.

Little seems to be known of the history of the Stilt Sand-
piper in New England before the last quarter of the nineteenth
century. Since then it has been rated as a rare or uncommon
migrant in the coastal States of New England. Coues early
predicted that it would be found here. Brewster secured two
specimens at Rye Beach, N. H., in 1868 and 1869. Since then
the bird has been taken and seen with more or less regularity
and frequency, and as the numbers of ornithologists have
increased in New England, and the means of publishing their
records have multiplied, our knowledge of this species has
increased until records of its occurrence are no longer considered
unusual. It seems not uncommon at times on Cape Cod.
The Chatham Beach Hotel record shows two hundred and
fifteen birds shot in seven years, but one hundred and three
of these were taken in 1901. In Giraud’s time the bird was
common enough on Long Island to be known to the gunners
there as the Bastard Yellow-leg. It resembles the Yellow-legs
so much that it probably was overlooked in New England until
Brewster “discovered” it. From what we know of the his-
tory of this bird it is safe to assume that it always has occurred
in New England since the settlement of the country, and that
it was more common in the early part of the history of these
States than it is to-day.

The Stilt Sandpiper easily is mistaken for the small Yellow-
legs, particularly in fall, when its gray plumage, long legs and
the whitish look of rump and tail present a similar appear-
ance to that of the Yellow-legs. But the legs always have a
greenish tint, and are never as bright yellow as those of the
Yellow-legs. It has a habit of immersing its bill in the sand
and holding it there for some time, as if sucking up some-
thing. Sometimes the head also is immersed when the bird
is feeding in the mud at the bottom. Its habits otherwise
resemble those of the Yellow-legs. Audubon found small
worms, small shell-fish and vegetable matter in the stomachs
of several birds of this species.
262 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

KNOT (Tringa canutus).

Common or local names: Red-breast; Red-breasted Plover; Buff-breast; Blue Plover;
Silver Plover; Silverback; Grayback; Robin-snipe.

 

Fa. SPRING.

Length. — About 10.50 inches; bill about 1.50.

Adult in Spring. — Above light gray, marked with black and reddish brown;.
rump and upper tail coverts lighter; tail gray, edged with whitish; sides
of head, fore neck and under. parts brownish red, to lower belly, which
is white; dark line through eye; iris hazel; bill dark; legs and feet dull
yellowish green.

Adult in Fall. — Above ashy gray, feathers margined with black and cream
white; rump and base of tail white, marked with dusky or black; below
white marked with dusky.

Young and Immature. — Upper parts as in fall adult; under parts white;
throat, breast and flanks clouded with grayish and streaked with dusky.
Several years are required to reach full plumage; all plumages have a
dusky line through eye. (Judging from descriptions, the colors of the
legs and feet vary from greenish yellow to black.)

Field Marks. — Distinguished from the Dowitcher by its shorter bill. Upper
parts usually light gray; hinder parts whitish, but not conspicuous.

Notes. — Like the soft whit whit one uses in whistling a dog back (Hoffmann).
A soft wah-quott and a little honk (Mackay). Waguit (Knight).

Season. — A rather common migrant coastwise, rare inland; mid May to
June 10; mid July to mid October.

Range. — Northern and southern hemispheres. Breeds from northern Elles-
mere Land south to Melville Peninsula and Iceland, also in Siberia;
winters south to southern Patagonia, and in Africa, India, Australia and
New Zealand; casual in winter on Atlantic coast of United States; in mi-
gration occurs on Atlantic coast of North America and over most of east-
ern hemisphere; rare in interior of North America and on Pacific coast.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 263

 

History.

This is the largest of the beach Sandpipers. Its breeding
grounds almost encircle the pole, and it is known on the shores
of every continent. No bird undertakes a more extensive
annual pilgrimage than this species, for it has been found in
northern Grinnell Land, at latitude 82° 44’, and it goes south
to the Straits of Magellan, not far from Cape Horn. It
migrates principally along the Atlantic coast, both spring and
fall, but in the spring, numbers of the species arrive in Texas,
Louisiana and other southern States, going north through the
Mississippi valley region, and they are found in migration on
the Pacific coast. August is the principal month of autumnal
migration along the Atlantic coast. The adult birds appear
first, in July, and the young follow. This is the general rule
with shore birds. In migration this species formerly reached
the shores of New England in immense numbers.

The following abridged extracts indicate its decrease:
They seem like a diminutive army marshalled in rank and
spreading their animated lines (Nuttall, Massachusetts, 1834).
Seen in large flocks (Peabody, Massachusetts, 1839). Com-
mon spring and autumn (Turnbull, eastern Pennsylvania and
New Jersey, 1869). Seen on shore in flocks of eight or ten
(Samuels, New England, 1870). Common spring and autumn
(J. A. Allen, 1879). A common bird on New England shores
spring and autumn (Chamberlain, 1891). An uncommon
migrant along coast (Howe and Allen, Massachusetts, 1901).
Now annually seen in fewer numbers (Knight, Maine, 1908).

The Knot had decreased considerably near Boston before
the middle of the last century. Mackay states that before
1850 they were more numerous at Chatham, Nauset, Well-
fleet and Billingsgate on Cape Cod, and on the flats around
Tuckernuck and Muskeget islands, than in all the rest of New
England combined. Their numbers were so large on Cape
Cod that estimates were useless. There was then no railroad
to the Cape. The birds were slaughtered in great numbers.
at night by “fire-lighting.” Thoreau refers to this in his:
Cape Cod. One man, carrying a lantern prepared for the
264 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

purpose, directed its light on the flocks as they rested on the
flats, while the other, keeping him company, seized the birds
one at a time, killed them by biting their necks, and placed
them in the bag. Mackay was credibly informed that six
barrels of these birds thus taken were seen at one time on the
deck of the Cape Cod packet bound for Boston, and that in
hot weather barrels of spoiled birds were sometimes thrown
overboard when the vessel reached Boston. The birds brought
but ten cents per dozen in the market. Turnstones and Black-
bellied Plover, which keep company with the Knots, were
often taken and mixed with them. Beside the Red-breasts
destroyed by fire-lighting on Cape Cod, great numbers were
shot later, when the railroad opened up the region to sports-
men, and this was true all along the Atlantic coast. Every-
body shot the Knot, both fall and spring, for it was in demand
for the table, brought a good price in the market, decoyed
easily, and flew in such flocks that many could be killed at a
shot. Sometimes, as in the case of the Dowitchers, one or
two skilful gunners annihilated a flock.

Mackay says (1893) that they are much reduced in numbers
and are in great danger of extinction. Mr. 8. Hall Barrett
informed him that in “old times” he had seen as many as
twenty-five thousand of these birds near Billingsgate Light in
one year, and that for the five years previous to 1893 he had
seen only about one hundred birds a year there. Mr. C. L.
Leonard of Marshfield was then seeing about eleven hundred
birds during a season, and Mr. Mackay himself reports on
good authority that for twelve years the average number on
Tuckernuck had not exceeded fifty.!

In time the old birds grew more shy, and sometimes
avoided the danger spots along the coast, but the young
were easy victims. The numbers of this bird have decreased
tremendously all along the Atlantic coast within the last
seventy-five years. Up to about 1900 they were still very
plentiful in the Carolinas. Brewster has been informed that
they are seen there still in considerable numbers. Wayne
(1910) says of the Knots near Charleston, S. C., that they used to

 

1 Mackay, George H.: Observations on the Knot, Auk, 1898, pp. 28-30.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 265

 

be abundant, but that now very few are to be seen. Most of
my Massachusetts correspondents never see the bird now. It
no longer appears in the interior at any point, so far as I can
learn, and is rare or wanting on most of our coast. Three
observers record a slight increase at certain points on Cape
Cod during the past few years. One notes that they bave
increased ‘“‘very much” at Chatham, and one tells of an in-
crease on Martha’s Vineyard. Forty say they are decreasing.

The causes of decrease as given by most correspondents are
overshooting and spring shooting. One attributes a local
decrease to a “lack of feed.” Mr. William B. Long of Bos-
ton states that these birds are so tame when they arrive on
the feeding grounds that any one can kill almost a whole
flock. The following brief extracts tell the story: “Used to
be shot here; scattering; have not seen or shot one for two
years” (E. W. Eaton, Newburyport). “Decreased eighty per
cent. in twenty-eight years; we took quite a few this autumn
(1908)” (Thomas C. Wilson, Ipswich). “Rather a common
bird on Cape Cod twenty-five years ago; now comparatively
rare, though there is an occasional good flock; decreased
seventy-five per cent. in twenty-five years” (Dr. L. C. Jones,
Malden). “A very few only” (G. W. Holbrook, Wellfleet).
“Decreased seventy-five per cent. in eighteen years” (N. A.
Eldridge, Chatham). ‘Decreased ninety-five per cent. in
thirty-four years; comparatively a rare bird” (Alfred S. Swan,
North Eastham). “None here” (Willard M. Small, North
Truro). “Used to be plenty; very few now” (William H.
Allen, Dartmouth). “‘Not more than a dozen killed in last
three years” (Richard J. Sharrock, Westport). The above
are mainly experienced gunners who live near the shooting
grounds.

Some few sportsmen seem to find occasional flocks. The
following notes tell the other side of the story: Dr. Albert H.
Tuttle says he shot about thirty in one day in 1903. ‘“‘Increas-
ing twenty-five per cent.; took fourteen in one day on Martha’s
Vineyard (1908)’’ (Lewis W. Hill). “Holding its own; in
September, 1907, observed several large flocks at Chatham
and shot eighteen in six days” (C. O. Zerrahn, Milton).
266 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

“About as plentiful to-day as twenty-five years ago” (Charles
R. Lamb, Cambridge). ‘‘We get more at the Cape I think”
(Samuel E. Sparrow, East Orleans).

The species seems to be doing as well at Chatham as any-
where along our coast. The shooting records of the old
Chatham Beach Hotel will give an idea of the numbers taken
there. They are as follows: 1897, one hundred and fifty-
three; 1898, one hundred and fifty; 1899, one hundred and
sixty-one; 1900, one hundred and eighty-eight; 1901, one hun-
dred and sixty-one; 1902, one hundred and twenty-three;
1903, two hundred and sixty-seven; 1904, one hundred and
sixty-seven. The year 1903 seems to have brought an unusual
number, as fifty were killed in one day with sixteen men
shooting; another day nineteen were taken with seven men
after them. In 1900, on another record day, twenty-eight
birds were killed by three men.

All my correspondents outside of Massachusetts, from
Maine to Florida, tell a sad story of the decrease of these
birds, except Mr. Harry S. Hathaway of Providence, who
says that there are many small flocks of young birds on Block
Island in September. Even on the southwestern coast of
Florida Mr. Charles L. Dean says that they have decreased
fifty per cent. in twenty years. Dr. Leonard C. Sanford of
New Haven says that this decrease is due largely to spring
shooting on the coast of Virginia and North Carolina, and
Mr. George H. Mackay tells of heavy spring shooting in
Virginia. The decrease is probably due, however, to shoot-
ing both spring and fall all along our coasts, and possibly to
some extent in South America. Evidently we are doing more
than driving the Red-breast off our coast, and while the utter
extinction of such a cosmopolitan bird is not imminent, its
extirpation from the Atlantic coast of North America is one
of the possibilities of the near future.

This bird frequents the ocean beach, the tidal flat and more
rarely the salt marsh. On the beach it plays back and forth,
following the receding waves and retreating before their
advance. When the surf pounds upon the sandy shore it is
the Red-breast’s harvest time. Then the surge constantly
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 267

 

washes up the sand, bringing simall shell-fish to the surface
of the beach, as a placer miner washes out gold in his pan,
and the birds, nimbly following the recession of the wave,
rapidly pick up the exposed shells ere the return of the surge.
They are fond of the spawn of the horsefoot crab, which, often
in company with the Turnstone, they dig out of the sand,
sometimes fighting the former birds before they can claim
their share. With the flow of the tide, which drives them
from the flats or the tide-washed beach, the Knots seek either
the beach ridge, some shoal above high-water mark or the
salt marsh. They are prone to alight on outer half-tide
ledges, where they find small crustaceans and other forms of
marine life among the seaweed. They are so attracted to
such places and to beaches where sea-worms are plentiful
that they will return to them again and again in the face
of the gunners’ fire, and this habit accounts in part for their
diminution.

Mackay says that they eat the larve of a cutworm, which
he has found in their throats, and that their food is similar to
that of the Black-breasted Plover, with which they often asso-
ciate. Most authors, both in this country and Europe, state
that their food, both on the flats and on the beach, consists
of very small mollusks of several species. Dr. Townsend says
that small periwinkles (Littorina) and mussels (Mytilus edults)
almost always are found in their stomachs.

The Red-breasts are decoyed easily by imitating their note
or that of the Black-breasted Plover. The ease with which
they may be taken will prove their bane unless all spring
shooting can be stopped on the Atlantic coast.
268 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

PURPLE SANDPIPER (Arquatella maritima maritima).

Common or local names: Winter Snipe; Rock-snipe; Rock-bird; Rock-plover.

 

Length. — About 9 inches; bill 1.40.

Adult in Winter.— Above very dark gray or bluish ash, with purple or
violet reflections, each feather of back and wing with a lighter border;
throat and breast bluish ash; belly, under side of wing and wing bar
white; sides and upper breast streaked or spotted with dark gray; legs,
feet and base of bill orange or yellow, rest of bill blackish.

Adult in Spring. — Similar, but with a general rusty tinge above.

Young. — Similar; feathers of back light tipped; under parts mottled with
ashy and dusky.

Season. — A not uncommon winter visitant on rocky islands coastwise;
September to April. Dr. C. W. Townsend gives July 30 and May 11
as unusual dates in Essex County, Mass.

Range. — Northern parts of northern hemisphere, mainly. Breeds in high
latitudes; in North America, chiefly in northeastern parts, from Mel-
ville Island, Ellesmere Land and northern Greenland south to Melville
Peninsula, Cumberland Sound and southern Greenland; winters from
southern Greenland and New Brunswick to Long Island, N. Y.; casual
to the Great Lakes, Georgia, Florida and Bermuda, and in the eastern
hemisphere south to Great Britain and the Mediterranean.

History.

This bird is unique among the Sandpipers. It is not a
bird of the August sun and the light airs of summer. The
“‘rock-weed bird”? comes late in autumn, or when the winter
wind blows cold. It is a bird of the Arctic, and only takes
refuge in this more moderate clime when the frosts have
sealed up the waters of its northern home. It migrates regu-
larly only about as far south as Martha’s Vineyard and Long
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 269

 

Island. The following notes exhibit the former abundance of
the Purple Sandpiper and its decrease: Very abundant,
nowhere more so than in Boston harbor; sold in Boston
market in autumn and winter; some in New York market;
rarely seen farther south (Audubon, 1827). Abounds in
autumn, and is sold in the market in Boston (Peabody, 1839).
Not uncommon in spring and autumn flights (Samuels, 1870).
In Massachusetts this bird is rather uncommon, seen only in
small groups of three or four (Chamberlain, 1891). Only
four Massachusetts correspondents note an increase of this
species, and twenty-one record a decrease.

It is no longer “‘very abundant” in Boston harbor, as it
was in Audubon’s day, but small numbers still frequent the
outer ledges in winter. And it may be seen at that season
on the rocky wave-washed shores of Nahant, where its little
companies enliven the winter scene along this stern and rugged
coast.

Its form is peculiar for a Sandpiper. It is short, thick,
wide, squat and sturdy. It stands firmly on its short strong
legs and is not at all timid. Often it will allow one to approach
within a few yards. It never has needed to practice dodging
the summer gunners, for it never sees them nor they it. It is
very rarely seen on beach or marsh when with us, but fre-
quents outlying rocky islands and ledges, where the sea
washes the mantle of rockweed back and forth. It may be
found sunning itself contentedly when the thermometer
registers near the zero mark. Small flocks may be seen even
in a storm, resting at high tide, face to the wind, or chasing
one another in play. It is met with sometimes in numbers on
the rocky islands of Essex County, Mass., but is rarer farther
south. Usually most of the Purple Sandpipers have left the
New England coast for their arctic homes in March, but
some are seen in April.

This species is said to feed on mollusks, insects and seeds
gleaned largely from the salt rockweed. Dr. Townsend states
that its food consists chiefly of mollusks, especially the edible
mussel (Mytilus edults).
270 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

PECTORAL SANDPIPER (Pisobia maculata).

Common or local names: Grass-bird; Brownie; Brown-back; Marsh-plover;
Krieker; Squatter.

 

Length. — About 9 to 9.50 inches; bill about 1.10.

Adult in Fall. — Above brown in general effect, the centers of feathers
brownish black, the edges ashy, buffy, white and dark chestnut red;
top of head chestnut, streaked heavily with black; a light streak over
eye and a more or less distinct dark line through it; middle tail feathers
dark, longest, pointed, outer ones light ash with white edges; throat
white; sides of head, neck and breast dull buff, streaked with dusky;
rest of under parts white; bill yellowish at base, rest black; feet and

_ legs dull yellowish olive.

Adult in. Spring, and Young. — Similar. (The differences between spring
or summer and fall or winter plumages appear to be inconstant.)
Field Marks. — Usually found in pairs or small flocks on salt marshes or
meadows and rarely on mud flats or beaches. This and its general
brown appearance and absence of conspicuous streaks on the back, as
well as absence of a white rump, should distinguish it from other Sand-
pipers of this size. It looks as if it might be a great, overgrown Least

Sandpiper.

Notes. — A grating whistle, creak, creak; song, a hollow, resonant, musical
166-1, repeated eight times, made after filling esophagus with air until
it is puffed out to size of body (Nelson). Heard only on its northern
breeding grounds.

Season. — April and May, July to October.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds on the Arctic coast from the
Yukon mouth to northeastern Mackenzie; winters in South America
from Peru and Bolivia to northern Chile, Argentina and central Pata-
gonia; in migration very rare on Pacific coast south of British Columbia,
except in Lower California; common in fall migration on Atlantic coast
and in Mississippi valley, rare in spring; casual in northeastern Siberia,
Unalaska and Greenland; accidental in Hawaii and England.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 271

 

History.

Formerly this bird arrived on our coasts in great flocks,
and was extremely abundant in our meadows. In olden
times it was not much noticed or hunted, for there was an
abundant supply of larger and better game, but for the past
fifty years, during the growing game scarcity, most gunners
found the little Grass-bird one of the most numerous species
commonly met with in the meadows and marshes, and it was
much sought for the market. It is still one of the common
birds found in the salt marsh at times, particularly during
storms in August and September, but its numbers have de-
creased greatly, and since the decline of the Curlews, Godwits,
Willets and larger Plover this little fellow has come to be
reckoned with as one of the “big birds” which helps to make
out a bag. Now not even a “Peep” is too small to shoot.

The following abridged extracts from the writings of orni-
thologists throw light on the history of the species: In the
neighborhood of Boston more abun-
dant than elsewhere (Audubon). Have
been killed in abundance on shores of
Cohasset and other parts of Massachu-
setts Bay, and brought to markets in
Boston (Nuttall, 1834). More abun- —
dant on the shores of Massachusetts fra. 15.—Tail of Pectoral
Bay than in any other part of the — Sndpiver. -(After Cory.)
country (Peabody, 1839). Quite plentiful on Long Island
(Giraud, 1844). A few remain in spring, but the greater
number come from August to November; occasionally occurs
in great numbers:along the coast of the State; some years
very scarce (De Kay, New York, 1844). Common migrant
on marshes (Maynard, eastern Massachusetts, 1870). Com-
mon in migration (J. A. Allen, 1879). Generally not uncom-
mon, occasionally abundant (Hoffmann, New England and
New York, 1904). Transient autumn; formerly not un-
common (Brewster, Cambridge region, Mass., 1906). Rare
spring and common fall migrant (G. M. Allen, Massachu-
setts, 1909). Seven Massachusetts correspondents report an

 
272 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

increase of this species and forty-four report a decrease. Mr.
Frank A. Brown of Beverly thinks that its decrease has been
more marked than that of any other marsh bird. On the
other hand, Mr. Lewis W. Hill says that it was abundant at
Martha’s Vineyard from 1905 to 1908. Mr. Robert O. Morris
states that it formerly was seen sometimes in large flocks in
the Connecticut valley. From Nova Scotia to New Jersey all
correspondents outside of Massachusetts who mention this
species report a serious decrease in its numbers.

The Grass-bird usually comes in the night, in flocks of
twenty-five to fifty birds, and scatters in small parties in the
salt marshes, particularly those on which the grass has been
cut and where little pools of water stand. It seems to prefer
the higher portions of the salt marsh, where the “‘black grass”

grows, and it is sometimes common in the fresh-water mead-

ows near ponds in the interior. In such places it collects
worms, grubs, insects and snails, such as are commonly found
in the marsh. The grass pattern and shading of its back
furnish such complete protection from the eye of man that it
can conceal itself absolutely by merely squatting in the short
grass. Where it has not been shot at or disturbed it becomes
exceedingly tame and confiding, but old experienced birds are
wild, and fly so swiftly and erratically that some of the gunners
call them “Jack Snipe”? because of a fancied resemblance in
their flight to that of Wilson’s Snipe. Sometimes they are
found in fresh meadows near the salt marsh, and more rarely
on the ocean beach, where they follow the retreating wave
like the Sanderling or any other beach bird.

While here in autumn the Pectoral Sandpiper is an ex-
tremely fat, gluttonous bird, apparently intent only on filling
its stomach, but in early summer in its far northern breeding
grounds in Alaska or on the shores of the Arctic Sea it is quite
a-different being. During the mating season the male develops
a great pouch, formed of the skin of the throat and breast,
which he is able to inflate until it is nearly as large as the
body. He now becomes a song bird, and flutters upwards
twenty or thirty yards in the air, as if emulating the famous
Skylark, and, inflating his great pouch, glides down again to
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 273

 

the ground; or he flies slowly along close to the ground, his
head raised high and his tail hanging straight down, uttering
a succession of booming notes. As he struts about the female
his low notes swell and die away in musical cadences, which, as
Nelson describes them, form a striking part of the great bird
chorus of the northern wilds.

As this bird apparently breeds along most of the Arctic
coast from Alaska to Ungava, and as it follows the general
southeastern direction, which so many northern birds take in
the fall, it must always reach the coast of the Maritime
Provinces and New England in large numbers, unless it de-
creases largely on its breeding grounds. It is believed that
birds of this species from northern Siberia which migrate east
cross to Alaska and continue southeasterly to the Atlantic
coast, for it is found in the Aleutian Islands, but is uncommon
farther south on the Pacific coast, and is almost unknown in
California. It reappears in Lower California (Brewster), but
no one knows how it gets there. The old birds start south in
July, and by the end of August a few have reached Argentina.
The young birds begin to leave their arctic homes late in
August and early in September. Most of the birds of this
species killed in Massachusetts are taken between August and
November 1. In winter the species dwells in South America.
In Argentina and Chile it visits both mountain and plain, and
is by no means confined to the sea-coast.

Insects, shell-fish and vegetable matter have been found
in stomachs of this species. Crickets, grasshoppers, ground
larvee and earthworms are commonly taken by those which
feed inland.

 

1 Cooke, W. W.: Distribution and Migration of North American Shore Birds, Bull. No. 35, Biol.
Surv., 1910, p. 35.
274 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

WHITE-RUMPED SANDPIPER (Pisobia fuscicollis).

Common or local names: Bull-peep; Sand-bird.

 

Length. — 6.75 to 8 inches; bill about 1.

Adult in Spring. — Above black and brownish buff; the back feathers have
black centers and buff margins arranged in stripes; top of head dark-
ened with fine black streaks on buff ground, much like Pectoral Sand-
piper, but upper coverts at base of tail pure white; middle tail feathers
dark, outer ones light ashy; throat and most of under parts white;
sides of head, neck and breast buffy and streaked with lines of distinct
dusky spots.

Adult in Fall. — Above plain ashy or brownish gray, often showing patches
of the black and brown of spring plumage; a white line over eye and a
dark line through it; breast faintly and indistinctly streaked.

Young. — Similar to spring adults, but less distinctly marked; feathers of
back tipped with white and edged with reddish brown; breast grayish.

Field Marks. — The large pure white patch just above the tail, conspicuous
in flight, distinguishes this bird.

Notes. — A rather sharp piping, weet, weet (Goss); and a lisping note.

Season. — Rather uncommon spring and fall migrant coastwise; very rare
inland; May and mid July to October.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds along the Arctic coast from
northwestern Mackenzie to Cumberland Island; has occurred in sum-
mer west to Point Barrow and east to Greenland; winters from Para-
guay to southern Patagonia and the Falkland Islands; in migration
most abundant in the Mississippi valley, less so on the Atlantic coast;
casual in Bermuda, Great Britain, the West Indies and Central America.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT, 275

 

History.

The White-rumped Sandpiper was known formerly as Bona-
parte’s or Schintz’s Sandpiper.

Dr. Coues (1874) calls it a very abundant bird along the
whole Atlantic coast, from Labrador to Florida. It is not so
to-day. Warren rates it as rare in Pennsylvania. Stone (1908)
calls it apparently rather scarce on the New Jersey coast, and
Wayne (1910) rates it as a rare transient on the coast of South
Carolina, and he has seen it but once in autumn. It is signif-
icant that Dr. Coues spent considerable time in earlier days on
the coast of South Carolina as well as on other parts of the
Atlantic coast. The bird is still common in migration in fall
on parts of the Massachusetts coast, and occasionally so inland,
particularly along the Connecticut River. Eaton (1910) calls
it common on Long Island and less so in New York.

Stearns says that it is the common Sandpiper of Labrador,
where it is called the Sand-bird. As it does not now visit our
shores in large numbers, the majority probably fly by us at
sea on their way to South America. This bird seems to be
more numerous in Maine than here, but many are found here
at times about the little ponds and sloughs in our salt marshes,
where they are confounded sometimes with the Grass-birds by
the gunner. When found on the shore they are seen most
often along rocky beaches. They are quite gentle little birds
and very tame where they are undisturbed. On the beaches
they are found in company with the Semipalmated Sandpiper,
which is the common Peep of the beach. When disturbed
by the gunner they fly rapidly, circling about and turning
first the upper parts and then the under parts to view. At
such times the white under bodies flash and gleam in the sun-
light, and then the darker backs are turned, showing the white
upper tail coverts to the observer. On the mud flats they
wade often breast deep into the flowing tide, and are driven
from the flats only when the water becomes too deep for
them. At high tide they collect with other species on ledges
_ above water, on the higher parts of the beach, or on the drift
grass and seaweed in some corner of the marsh, where they
276 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

often snuggle down to rest and bask in the sunshine. While
this is largely a bird of the sea-coast with us, it is found also
not rarely in the interior.

Notwithstanding various statements regarding the breeding
grounds of these birds, I know of no definite authentic record
of eggs found except that recorded by MacFarlane near the
coast of Franklin Bay and on the barren grounds in that
region. Prof. W. W. Cooke believes that during the breed-
ing season the species is crowded into the belt of tundra
extending from near the mouth of the Mackenzie east to the
southern extremity of Baffin Land. From this region the
southeasterly summer and fall migration brings it down
through the Hudson Bay country, Ungava and Labrador
directly to the Atlantic coast of New England. In July and
August it traverses almost the entire length of the Atlantic
coast of both continents, as it has been taken at Cape Horn on
September 9, but it is sometimes taken in Massachusetts
after September 15. As this species appears to be very rare
in the Carolinas in fall, it must pass out to sea, and very likely
follows a route somewhat similar to that followed by the
Eskimo Curlew. In the spring it is a late migrant; remaining
in Brazil until May, when it is seen also in South Carolina and
Florida. Apparently the larger numbers pass north through
the Mississippi valley region and south by the Atlantic coast.
The wonderful flight of this species over almost the entire
length of the western continents has not yet been fully traced
and mapped.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 277

 

BAIRD’S SANDPIPER (Pisobia bairdt).

 

Length. — About 7.50 inches; bill .90 to 1 inch.

Adult. — Above grayish buff, varied with dusky; stripe over eye white;
middle tail feathers dusky, others gray; breast tinged with buff, streaked
with dusky; below white; bill and feet black; resembles Pectoral Sand-
piper, but smaller, and fore neck and breast less heavily streaked.

Young of the First Winter. — Closely resemble young of White-rumped Sand-
piper, but upper parts paler; back feathers conspicuously margined
with white, and rump not white.

Field Marks. — Only a little larger than Semipalmated Sandpiper or Sand-
peep, but has a darker breast.

Notes. — Peet-peet; a shrill trilling whistle, like that of Semipalmated Sand-
piper (C. W. Townsend).

Season. — Rather rare fall migrant; late July to early October.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds along Arctic coast from Point
Barrow to northern Keewatin; winters in Chile, Argentina and Pata-
gonia;’ occurs regularly in migration from Rocky Mountains to Missis-
sippi River, and in Central America and northern South America, and
irregularly in autumn on Pacific coast from Alaska to Lower California,
and on Atlantic coast from Nova Scotia to New Jersey; casual in sum-
mer in Guerrero, Mex.; accidental in England and South Africa.

History.

This bird is considered rather rare in New England but
may be more common than it is gen-
erally believed to be. On our coasts
it is mistaken often for the Pectoral
Sandpiper, which it resembles, or is
Jumped with it under the name of Zz
Grass-bird. Jillson found this species yo. 15,—cailof Baird’s Sandpiper.
very abundant in Essex County, Mass., (After Cory.)
in 1852. It is not very rare in some parts of New York.

     
278 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

LEAST SANDPIPER (Pisobia minutilla).

Common or local names: Peep; Mud-peep.

 

Length. — 5.50 to 6 inches; bill about .75.

Adult in Spring. — Feathers of upper parts black centered, edged with gray,
rusty or chestnut; sides of head, neck and breast streaked with brown;
belly white; legs and feet dusky greenish or yellowish green.

Adult in Fall. — General tone of upper parts ashy.

Young. — Upper parts much as in fall adult; breast dusky, very indistinctly
streaked with darker; rest of under parts white; legs greenish yellow.

Field Marks. — The smallest Sandpiper; like Semipalmated Sandpiper, but
feet not webbed at all and breast more streaked; legs greenish or yellowish.

Notes. — Peep-peep. A simple and trilling whistle (Townsend).

Season. — Common to abundant spring and fall migrant coastwise, less
common inland; late April to early June; early July to early October;
formerly summered on our coast.

Range. — North and South. America. Breeds from northwestern Alaska,
southern arctic islands and northern Ungava to Yakutat Bay, Alaska,
valley of Upper Yukon, northern Mackenzie, central Keewatin, southern
Ungava, Nova Scotia and Sable Island; winters from California, Texas
and North Carolina through West Indies and Central America to Brazil,
Chile and Galapagos; in migration occurs throughout United States
and west to northeastern Siberia and Commander Islands, north to
Greenland, and in Bermuda; accidental in Europe.

History.

The little Peep, the “baby” among the shore birds, is
probably the most abundant of them all throughout the land;
but in recent years its numbers have diminished sadly along
the coast of New England. Formerly it rarely was hunted
except by small boys. A gunner now and then shot into a
large flock when larger birds failed to occupy his attention;
but these ‘“‘pot shots” usually were made merely to see how
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 279

 

many he could kill, and no real sportsman ever thought of
pursuing the little birds. Now all is changed. In the present
scarcity of shore birds “Peeps”? form a principal object of
pursuit in some localities, and it is not uncommon to see three
or four summer gunners chasing about the same number of
“Peeps,” and sometimes even a single bird is the object of
_ their pursuit.

The following extracts explain themselves: The most
common and abundant species in America; when they arrive
[about Boston] in company with the Semipalmated Sandpiper
the air is sometimes clouded with their flocks (Nuttall, 1834).
Abundant in migration (Maynard, eastern Massachusetts,
1870). Abundant during migration (J. A. Allen, 1879). The
Peeps still throng our shores (Chamberlain, 1891). “Peeps”
are with us in but a small percentage of their former multi-
tudes (Sanford, Bishop and Van Dyke, 1903). Common mi-
grant on our coast (Hoffmann, 1904). Abundant transient
(C. W. Townsend, Essex County, 1905). Formerly abun-
dant, still very common (Brewster, Cambridge region, Mass.,
1906). Seven Massachusetts observers in 1908 reported that
this species had increased in their localities within their recol-
lection, and seventy-three reported a marked decrease.

Wondrous tales are told of the quantities of these birds
killed out of the great flocks in past centuries. Old gunners
tell of killing “a peck” of the poor little things with two shots,
or of taking a bushel in a few minutes. Two charges fired into
them as they passed the gunner opened two holes in the
middle of the flock. The numerous survivors soon closed
ranks and came sweeping back over their dead and wounded
comrades, when the gunner, having reloaded, tore two more
clean holes in their formation, and so the slaughter went on.
Sometimes the flocks were “raked’’ when massed together on
the ground, and thus most of the larger scores were made.
Samuels says that in old times he once brought down ninety-
seven at one discharge of a double-barreled gun. This must
have been near the middle of the nineteenth century. Bourne
states that a century ago in Maine the “Sandbirds or Peeps”
were as numerous as the Wild Pigeons. They were killed
280 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

easily, he says, not manifesting the shyness that they show
to-day. It was not uncommon for the boys of that date to
take fifty or more at a shot. John Bourne one morning filled
his bag with them, then took off his pants, tied up the legs,
filled them full and trudged home, well satisfied with his
morning’s work. Think of this, ye Peep shooters of the
twentieth century, and forsake the unmanly occupation of
chasing little Peeps on beach and marsh. Let the beautiful,
harmless birdlings enjoy their lives in peace. If the present
rate of destruction is kept up the Peeps eventually will go
the way of some of their larger relatives, despite their great
numbers and wide dispersion over the continent.

This is one of the shore birds which formerly remained all
summer on the Massachusetts coast, but there is no evidence
that it ever bred here. Maynard saw some at Ipswich on June
18, 1868. Dr. Townsend says that a few birds may be found
between early June and early July.

This species breeds across most of the upper part of the
continent and migrates southward through it. Apparently,
however, some birds from the northeastern part of their breed-
ing range cross the sea to the Antilles and South America.
Formerly when the species was very abundant along the
Atlantic coast, it was a common visitor at the Bermudas in
the fall migration. To reach Bermuda these little birds must
have flown over seven hundred miles across the sea if they
went straight east from the coast of South Carolina, but as
the flocks visited the island annually in the fall migration and
never in spring, it is reasonable to believe that they followed
the route taken by several other species, and flew directly
over the ocean from Labrador or Nova Scotia to Bermuda
and the Antilles. The fact that the advance guard arrives at
the Lesser Antilles about the middle of July lends color to
this theory, for that is only a few days or a week later than
their usual arrival in New England. The species winters in
Chile, Peru, northern South America, Central America and
Mexico, the West Indies and the more southern States. It
goes north mainly through the interior of North America, but
some migrate up the coast.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT 281

 

The Peep is naturally tame and confiding. Where it is
undisturbed, it pays little attention to man. Along the shores
and in the marshes it runs about among the larger shore birds
and Ducks, and they seem to tolerate the little ones and
seldom disturb them. This species seems to prefer the salt
marsh, the mud flat and the shallow muddy shores of ponds
and rivers to the sea beach; hence the name Mud-peep. It
is by no means confined to the mud, however, but is also not
uncommon on the sands. It is fond of poking about among
masses of eelgrass and seaweed cast upon the strand by the
waves. Here it finds sand fleas, flies and many other small
forms of life on which it feeds. It is a great insect eater, par-
ticularly in the interior, where its flocks sometimes devour
great quantities of grasshoppers and locusts.

DUNLIN (Pelidna alpina alpina).

Adult. — A little smaller than the Red-backed Sandpiper; resembling it
almost exactly in coloration but a little duller; bill shorter. For de-
scription of the Red-backed Sandpiper see next page.

Range. — Eastern hemisphere. Winters south to North Africa, India, etc.;
accidental in eastern North America, District of Columbia, Long Island,
New York, and Massachusetts.

History.

The Dunlin is an accidental wanderer here from the Old
World. Mr. Charles J. Paine, Jr., reported the capture of a
female taken at Chatham, Mass., August 11, 1900, by Mr.
J. S. Cochrane. It is now in the Brewster collection at Cam-
bridge. This is the only record for Massachusetts.! Mr.
Curtis C. Young of Brooklyn secured a specimen, September
15, 1892, at Shinnecock Bay, Long Island, N. Y. This speci-
men was identified by Mr. F. M. Chapman, of the American
Museum of Natural History.”

 

1 Howe, Reginald Heber, and Allen, Glover M.: Birds of Massachusetts, 1902, p. 41.
2 Auk, 1893, p. 78.
282 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS,

 

RED-BACKED SANDPIPER . (Pelidna alpina sakhalina).

Common or local names: American Dunlin; Brant Bird; Redback; Simpleton; Stib;
Crooked-billed Snipe; Crooked-bill; California Peep; Little Blackbreast; Lead-
back.

 

Fay. Sprina.

Length. — About 8 inches; bill 1.50 to 1.75.

Adult in Spring. — Back largely rusty or chestnut red, marked slightly with
black and whitish; head (except crown, which is rusty and black), neck,
breast and tail light gray, shading into white below and to ashy on tail;
head, neck, breast and flanks slightly spotted and streaked; wings gray
or ashy, with a white bar; upper belly black; bill long and down-curved.

Adult in Fall. — Above ashy gray or brownish gray; top of head and streak
through eye darker; a light streak over eye; below white; neck and
upper breast tinged with gray and streaked with dusky; streaks con-
tinued on flanks.

Young. — Back similar, the feathers bordered with rusty; head and neck
buffy, streaked with dusky; breast shading to buffy white streaked with
black; belly white, spotted with black.

Field Marks. — Birds showing the red back and black belly not often seen in
Massachusetts either in spring or fall. The long curved bill and the mouse-
colored back distinguish fall birds. In flight a white line shows on the wing.

Notes. — Peurr (Hoffmann). When frightened or flying, a hoarse grating
note; a contented peeping chatter (Eaton). When disturbed a sikh.

Season. — Rare spring and common autumn migrant coastwise; April to
early June, and September to November; formerly a few summered here.

Range. — North America and eastern Asia. Breeds on northern coast of
Siberia west to mouth of Yenisei, from Point Barrow to mouth of Yukon,
in Boothia and Melville peninsulas and northern Ungava; winters on
Pacific coast from Washington to southern Lower California and from
New Jersey (rarely Massachusetts) south to Louisiana and southern
Texas, and in Asia from China and Japan to Malay Archipelago; rare
in migration in interior of United States, except about southern end of
Lake Michigan.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 283

 

History.

Although this bird is found often in the interior of North
America, in New England it is confined mainly to the neighbor-
hood of the sea and largely to the salt marshes, but also fre-
quents sand bars and mud flats. It is an active little bird
usually keeping in companies, which run about nimbly and
fly very rapidly, performing varied evolutions in concert, as if
drilled to act together. In the breeding season it has a rather
musical flight song, which never is heard except in its northern
home so far as I know.

The following notes throw some light on its history:
Abundant in autumn and winter along the whole length of
coast on sandy or muddy shores from Maine to mouth of
Mississippi (Audubon, 1835). These birds, with several others,
sometimes collect in such flocks as to seem at a distance a large
cloud of thick smoke (Wilson). Collect in such flocks as to
seem at a distance like a moving cloud (Nuttall, 1834).
Quite abundant in September; fifty-two killed with two barrels
(Giraud, Long Island, 1844). Abundant in spring and autumn
migration; on June 18, 1868, saw and shot several on Ipswich
Beach (Maynard, 1870). Abundant on our shores (Samuels,
New England, 1870). Rare spring and not uncommon
autumn migrant (Hoffmann, New England and New York,
1904). Rather local in October, very rare in spring (Knight,
Maine, 1908). Only four Massachusetts correspondents note
an increase of the ,Red-backed Sandpiper and forty-nine have
observed a decrease. Mr. E. W. Eaton of Newburyport says
that he shot about one hundred out of one flock about 1893,
but in 1908 saw “‘only three or four bunches.” Reports all
along the Atlantic coast, from Nova Scotia to Virginia, corrob-
orate the above.

There seem to be two well-defined migration routes of the
Red-backed Sandpiper, one from Alaska and Siberia down the
Pacific coast of North America, and one from Hudson Bay,
Ungava and the lands to the north down the Atlantic coast.
A large part of the flight which concerns the gunners of Mas-
sachusetts comes down the west coast of Hudson Bay in the
284 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

fall and crosses from there to the Atlantic coast, where it
joins the birds from Ungava and the eastern shore of Hudson
Bay. The Atlantic birds winter mainly in the United States,
and the Pacific birds are common in winter only as far south
as southern California. The future of this species, therefore,
is in our hands. It can be protected or exterminated by the
people of the United States and Canada. In spring the migra-
tion passes more to the westward, and the species appears in
numbers on the Great Lakes, becoming rare to the northeast of
Massachusetts. It is usually common on our coast in autumn,
between September 1 and November 1, and much less com-
mon in May.

No one yet knows where the great majority of these birds
reach the Atlantic coast, but from the fact that numbers are
seen on the shores of the Great Lakes and in New York and
Pennsylvania, and from the other fact that the numbers of
the species seen on the coast of South Carolina are much
greater than those now seen on the coast of New England,
we may surmise that the great body of birds from the Hud-
son Bay region crosses the country via the Great Lakes and
reaches the coast in the south. It seems probable that the
majority of these birds which pass down the New England
coast are reared east of Hudson Bay, and that, as in the case
of the Knot, overshooting along the Atlantic coast must have
reduced greatly the birds that breed in that region.

The Red-backed Sandpiper feeds largely on worms, crus-
taceans and insects.

CURLEW SANDPIPER (Frolia ferruginea).

Length. — About 8.50 inches; bill, average, 1.50, slender, and a little curved
beyond the middle.

Adult in Summer. — Above mottled black, gray and rusty; wings and tail
ashy gray; tail coverts pale buff barred with black; below chestnut.

Adult in Winter. — Above plain grayish brown; upper tail coverts white;
below white; breast with a few indistinct streaks of gray.

Young. — Like adult in winter, but feathers above margined with buff or
whitish; rump dusky; neck streaked with brown.

Field Marks. — Resembles the Knot or Red-breast, but smaller and bill
proportionately longer and more curved.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 285

 

Range. — Chiefly eastern hemisphere; occasional in North and South
America. Breeds in Yenisei delta and on Taimyr Peninsula, Siberia;
winters in Africa, India, Malay Archipelago and Australia; in migration
occurs from Great Britain to China and the Philippines; occasional in
North America; Alaska (Point Barrow), Ontario, Nova Scotia, Maine,
Massachusetts, New York and New Jersey, and in the West Indies and
Patagonia.

History.

The Curlew Sandpiper is a straggler from the Old World.
It has been recorded six times at least in Massachusetts, as
follows: A specimen was taken in the autumn of 1865 on Cape
Ann.1’ A specimen in the collection made by Mr. Baldwin
Coolidge (now in possession of the city of Lawrence) was killed
at Nahant about 1869.2. A female in the collection of the
Peabody Academy at Salem was killed at Ipswich, October 2,
1872, by R. L. Newcomb.? Another was taken at East Boston
in May, 1876.4. Another specimen in the collection of Mr.
John Fotiler, Jr., was taken at Cape Cod about May 10, 1878.?
A male was taken at Chatham, August 26, 1889, and came
into the possession of Mr. Gordon Plummer.’ One specimen
is on record for Maine and another one at Grand Manan,
N. B.,° which has been erroneously credited to Maine. The
earlier records from New York are rather indefinite, but the
probability is that at least a dozen specimens have been taken
in that State.”

Elliot says that the Curlew Sandpiper resembles the Red-
backed Sandpiper in its. habits, and that it is an active little
bird, fond of associating with other species of waders. It
runs rapidly upon the shore, carrying the head down, and flies
rather high and fast, showing the back and breast alternately
as it wheels in its course.

Its food, he says, consists of small mollusks, crustaceans,
insects, etc., and it is said to swallow the roots of marsh
plants, to eat small ground fruits and to feed much at night.

 

1 Samuels, E. A.: Ornithology and Odlogy of New England, 1867, p. 444.

2 Deane, Ruthven: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1879, p. 124.

3 Townsend, C. W.: Memoirs of the Nuttall Orn. Club, No. 3, Birds of Essex County, 1905, p. 177.
‘ Brewster, William: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1876, pp. 51, 52.

5 Ornithologist and Odlogist, July, 1890, Vol. 15, No. 7, p. 110.

6 Knight, Ora W.: The Birds of Maine, 1908, p. 167.

7 Eaton, E. H.: Birds of New York, 1910, p. 316.
286 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

SEMIPALMATED SANDPIPER (Hreunetes pusillus).
Common or local names: Peep; Sand-peep; Black-legged Peep; Sand Oxeye.

 

Length. — 6.30 inches; bill of male, .66 to .75; female, .80 to .92. Foot with
two evident webs.

Adult in Spring. — Above variegated with black, pale bay and ashy or
white; a dark line through eye and a white line above it; below white;
breast usually rufescent and speckled with black; rest of lower parts
white; legs and feet black.

Adult in Fall. — Upper parts grayer; breast with specks faint or obsolete.

Young. — Upper parts mostly ashy gray; under parts white; a slight
dusky wash across the unspotted breast; legs and feet greenish black.

Field Marks. — Distinguished from the Least Sandpiper in autumn by its
black legs and unspotted breast.

Notes. — A quailing call, like ’to-weet, *to-weet; a shrill clattering whistle
(Nuttall).

Season. — Common migrant early May to mid June; early July to October.
Non-breeding birds occur in summer.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from Arctic coast of North
America south to Yukon mouth and to southern Ungava; winters
from Texas and South Carolina through the West Indies and Central
America to Patagonia; migrates mainly east of Rocky Mountains;
casual in British Columbia, Pribilof Islands and northeastern Siberia;
accidental in Europe.

History.

The Semipalmated Sandpiper was one of the smaller species,
the great abundance of which is described by the earlier writers
in the days when twelve score were taken “at one shoot.”
Authors give some of its history as follows: Sometimes seen
near Boston in large flocks (Nuttall, 1834). Exceedingly
abundant in winter, spring and autumn from Florida to Maine
(Audubon, 1838). Appears here in May, and many remain
with us during the whole summer and late in autumn (De Kay,
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 287

 

New York, 1844). Abundant (Maynard, eastern Massachu-
setts, 1870). Abundant in migration; few sometimes seen in
summer (J. A. Allen, 1879). Still abundant in New England,
but flocks not so numerous as formerly (Chamberlain, 1891).
Common migrant on coast (Hoffmann, 1904). Formerly
abundant (Brewster, Cambridge region, Mass., 1906). Seven
Massachusetts observers who reported in 1908 recorded an
increase in the numbers of this species, and seventy-three
noted a decrease. The species, though greatly reduced in
numbers, is still common and often locally abundant in New
York and New England.

Much that has been said of the Least Sandpiper will apply
quite as well to the Semipalmated. Its former abundance and
its present diminution parallel that of the latter. Its habits
are much the same, and usually it is confounded with the
Semipalmated Sandpiper.

This bird, however, is more of a sand bird and less of
a mud bird than its smaller companion. It often is very
tame and confiding, but sometimes is rendered shy by sad
experience. It is called easily and thus enticed to the slaughter.
Its breeding grounds lie mainly farther north than those of the
Least Sandpiper, and it migrates farther south, even to Pat-
agonia. It winters in a large part of eastern South America,
Central America, Mexico and the West Indies and on the Gulf
coast of the United States. It is noted in numbers all along
the Atlantic coast of the United States in fall, but is rather
rare there in spring. Formerly it summered in some numbers
in Massachusetts and some other northern States, and a few
have remained here in recent years, but they were non-breeding
birds.

These smaller Sandpipers are chased and taken sometimes
by Hawks, but although I have seen some long and persistent
pursuits I never saw one caught. Once as I drifted with the
wind in a canoe, watching a flock feeding on the shore of a
quiet bay, a crippled bird standing on one leg amidst its com-
panions tucked its head into the feathers of its back, as if
napping. Soon a Sharp-shinned Hawk swooped at the little
birds, but the cripple was wide awake and away in an instant,
288 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

and the Hawk quickly gave up pursuit. In Florida I have
seen the swift Pigeon Hawk chase large flocks of Sandpipers
back and forth for a long time, but they were too swift for him.
His persistent efforts stirred up about all the ““Peeps”’ over a
large expanse of flats, and as they swirled and sped away in
writhing, twisting evolutions, back and forth in panic, it was
evident that they realized the danger that they were exerting
all their powers to avoid. The apparent ease with which they
evaded their swift enemy indicates great speed and dexterity
of flight. One who has seen the Duck Hawk overtake and
strike down Ducks going at full speed cannot help admiring
the speed and skill displayed by these little birds in avoiding
the attacks of an enemy which seems to possess as much
speed and prowess, in proportion to its size, as the Duck Hawk.

The following interesting account of the notes of this bird
is taken from Dr. Townsend’s Birds of Essex County: “Their
call note is very much like that of the Least Sandpiper but is
shriller and less musical. A harsh rasping note and a peeping
note are sometimes heard. A low, rolling, gossipy note is
often emitted when they approach other birds. This latter
note often is imitated with success by gunners. In the spring,
however, the bird is delightfully musical on occasions, and
his flight song may be heard on the beach and among the
bogs of the dunes. Rising on quivering wings to about thirty
feet from the ground, the bird advances with rapid wing beats,
curving the pinions strongly downward, pouring forth a suc-
cession of musical notes, — a continuous quavering trill, —
and ending with a few very sweet notes that recall those of
the Goldfinch. He then descends to the ground where one
may be lucky enough, if near at hand, to hear a low musical
cluck from the excited bird. This is, I suppose, the full love
flight-song, and is not often heard in its entirety, but the first
quavering trill is not uncommon, a single bird, or a member of
a flock singing thus as he flies over. I have seen birds chasing
one another on the beach with raised wings, emitting a few
quavering notes, and have been reminded of a Long-billed
Marsh Wren. I have also heard them emit at this time a
sharp grasshopper-like sound.”
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 289

 

WESTERN SANDPIPER (Ereunetes maurt).

Length. — Same as that of Semipalmated Sandpiper, except bill, which is
longer, .80 to .95 in the male and 1.00 to 1.20 in the female.

Adult in Summer. — Similar to Semipalmated Sandpiper, but bill longer;
plumage richer in color and more rusty above, with stronger markings.

Adult in Winter. — Distinguished in the winter from the Semipalmated
Sandpiper only by the greater length of bill and tarsus; some specimens
may have more rusty on the upper parts.

Notes. — A soft weet-weet; song uttered on the wing on its northern breeding
grounds “a rapid, uniform series of rather musical trills’’ (Nelson).

Season. — Rare fall migrant; mid July to late September.

Range. — NorthandSouth America. Breeds along the Alaska coast; winters
from North Carolina to Florida and from southern Lower California to
Venezuela; in migration occurs mainly west of Rocky Mountains, but
also on Atlantic coast as far north as Massachusetts, and in the West
Indies.

History.

The Western Sandpiper is considered a rare bird in New
England and New York, but it has appeared abundantly on
Long Island and may be more common at times than the
records show, as in fall, when it comes here, it resembles the
Semipalmated Sandpiper so closely that it can be identified
only by measurement.

This little Sandpiper performs a remarkable feat of migra-
tion. Its breeding range appears to be a narrow strip along
the coast of Alaska, and from this region it seems to move
southeasterly across the country to the coast of the south
Atlantic States. A little of the northern edge of its migra-
tion apparently laps over into Massachusetts, and it becomes
more common from New Jersey southward, particularly on
the coast from. North Carolina to Florida. The peculiar part
of the history of its migration is that apparently it is rare in
the Mississippi valley region and in a great part of the in-
terior of the continent. Just how the main flight reaches
the southern coast is yet to be learned. Probably it reaches
Venezuela by sea from the south Atlantic coast of the United
States. The close resemblance of this bird to the Semipal-
mated Sandpiper causes it to be mistaken for that species,
and possibly that accounts for the scarcity of inland records.
290 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

SANDERLING (Calidris leucophea).

Common or local names: Beach-bird; Whitey; Beach Plover; Bull-peep.

 

Length. — 7.50 to 8 inches; bill averages about .77; no hind toe.

Adult in Spring. — Head, back, sides of neck and upper breast varied with
rufous, brown and black, the feathers largely centered with black, edged
with pale rufous and tipped or frosted with grayish white; rump dark
brown; tail grayish brown; under parts white; wings grayish, marked
with whitish, showing a band of white on secondaries when spread..

Adult in Fall. — Above pale gray, the shaft lines of each feather black; below
pure white.

Young. — Gray above, spotted with black and white; hind neck dusky
white; throat and breast washed with buff or dusky, rest of under parts
white; wings as in adult; iris hazel; bill, legs and feet always dark.

Field Marks. — In fall the general whitish appearance and the black bill.
Sand beaches. 7

Notes. — A short chit (Hoffmann). <A rasping note and a peeping note, some-
limes also a sharp grasshopper-like sound. The flight song in spring a
quavering trill.

Season. — Common spring and fall migrant coastwise, and rare winter resi-
dent; rarer in interior; most common in late May, early June, July,
August and September; non-breeding birds formerly summered here.

Range. — Northern and southern hemispheres. Breeds from Melville
Island, Ellesmere Land and northern Greenland to Point Barrow,
Alaska, northern Mackenzie, Iceland and in northern Siberia; winters
from central California, Texas, Virginia and Bermuda to Patagonia,
and casually to Massachusetts and Washington; also from the Mediter-
ranean, Burma and Japan to South Africa and various Pacific islands,
including Hawaii.

History.
It is half tide on Cape Cod. Great waves heave high their
tossing heads, which, curling, break and thunder down in
sheets of snowy foam that overwhelm the beach, charging for-

ward and upward across the sloping sands almost to the very
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 291

 

foot of the dunes. The sea bellows and roars. It pounds
the shifting sands until the very earth trembles with the
impact, and the salt spray, blown from the wave crests, drifts
in clouds across the beach. The flotsam and jetsam of the
sea are tossed and washed upon the beach amid the froth and
spume; bits of rockweed, seaweed, sponge, cork, bamboo and
driftwood, floating wreckage which was once a part of the hull
or cargo of some ship overwhelmed at sea or wrecked on the
treacherous sands, — all are cast high on the sands or washed
back by the returning wave. Many small forms of marine
life are torn from their ocean bed and thrown upon the beach.

Here the little Sanderlings are in their element. With
nimble, ready step they follow the back-wash down and re-
treat before the rush of the incoming wave. Sometimes in
their eager pursuit of some unusually tempting morsel they
run so far down the beach that they are met by the returning
surge coming too fast for their little flying feet to escape its
overwhelming rush. Then with ready wings they mount and
flutter beyond its reach. If disturbed they rise and gather
into a rather compact flock, then, wheeling out over the surf,
they fly up or down the beach, now fluttering low in a great
sea hollow, now skimming the crest of a foaming breaker, soon
to alight again on the sands.

The Sanderling is well-named “Beach-bird,”’ for in all
countries the beach is its habitat and the sea its refuge. It
seeks not only the outer shore, where the surf continually
roars, but also the strand of the quiet bay, where the swell
gently washes on sunny sands. In August, when the water
is low in the ponds and lakes of the interior, it may be found
there sometimes along the exposed bars or beaches.

Since the days when Morton shot between four and five
dozen “‘sanderlins” ‘‘at one shoot,’ near his home at Merry-
mount, the numbers of this bird have not fallen off quite so
much, perhaps, as those of most of the other shore birds. The
following abridged extracts give some idea of its decrease in
numbers: Extremely abundant on coast in autumn and spring
from Maine to Florida (Audubon, 1835). Occurs on coast in
small numbers in May, again in large flocks about middle of
292 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

August (De Kay, New York, 1844). Abundant on sea-coast
spring and autumn (Turnbull, eastern Pennsylvania and New
Jersey, 1869). Abundant in migrations (Maynard, eastern
Massachusetts, 1870). Abundant on shores in autumn (Sam-
uels, New England, 1870). Stragglers sometimes seen in
summer (J. A. Allen, Massachusetts, 1879). Common migrant
(G. M. Allen, Massachusetts, 1909). Only four of my Mas-
sachusetts correspondents had seen an increase of the species
in their localities up to the year 1908, and fifty-five report a
decrease. Mr. Alfred E. Gould says that large numbers fre-
quented Nahant many years ago, but he saw one only in 1908.
Mr. William P. Wharton reports great numbers at Plum Island
in 1901, and “not seen in abundance since;”” but he says that
large numbers were seen in Provincetown in 1908; and Mr.
Benjamin F. Curtis writes that Sanderlings were more nu-
merous that fall on Plymouth and Duxbury beaches than he
ever has seen them there in his long experience. Mr. Fred B.
Lund also states that they have been numerous at Duxbury
(1908) “‘for the past few years.””’ Mr. Lewis W. Hill states that
they are numerous at Edgartown. Outside of Massachusetts
I get no reports of their abundance along the Atlantic coast
(except one from Florida) other than in places where they are
protected from gunning, on the beaches of public parks and
private preserves.

The Sanderling breeds so far to the north that it has nothing
to fear from man in the breeding season. This is its best pro-
tection. Possibly no bird is a greater wanderer or is distributed
more widely over the surface of the globe. Its breeding grounds
surround the pole, and it is known to occur in the southern
portions of all the continents, except perhaps Australia, and
in many isolated islands in the Pacific. Many linger in the
south until late in spring. They have been taken in Chile in
May and in southern Florida on May 25, and they remain
commonly along the New England coast and on the Great
Lakes until about the first week in June. They breed in the
arctic lands in June and July. They leave their summer
homes in July and August, and travel by land and sea to their
winter quarters in South America. The Sanderling appears to
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 293

 

migrate through the interior as well as on the coast, and it
traverses almost the length of both American continents. In
the spring migration it begins to come northward in March,
and sometimes arrives in New England by the latter part of
the month, but after that its movement toward the pole is
slow and it does not reach its breeding grounds in the north
until the first week in June.

Sanderlings associate sometimes with flocks of other shore
birds, particularly the Semipalmated Sandpipers, but, ordi-
narily, they are found in small flocks, unaccompanied by any
other species. Early comers from the north in July sometimes
are ruddy on the back, throat and breast. This is the remains
of the spring plumage, which gradually disappears as winter
comes on. The young birds begin to appear during the latter
part of August; they may be distinguished from the old birds
by the black spots on the back and the strong contrast be-
tween the white line on the wing and the black primaries.
Dr. Townsend records that Mr. F. H. Allen found in a gunner’s
bag at Ipswich Beach a Sanderling with a rudimentary hind
toe. This is the only instance of this kind on record for Mas-
sachusetts, so far as I am aware. The Sanderling, like the
Plovers, ordinarily has no hind toe.

The Sanderling is naturally a very unsuspicious bird, paying
little attention to man unless it has learned to do so by painful
experience. The flocks move well together, but fly rather
steadily and usually low, directing their course along the beach.
They are not much given to those graceful uniform evolutions
which are performed by flocks of other species, during which
the upper and under parts are alternately exposed to view.
At high tide they resort to the higher parts of the beach or to
some exposed sand bar, where they rest and often sleep, with
the head thrust into the feathers of the back.

The Sanderling often feeds on beaches or flats by plunging
its bill into the sand in search of worms. At such times Audu-
bon found sea-worms, minute shell-fish and gravel in the stom-
achs of birds which he dissected; when they were seen following
the receding waves and wading in the returning waters he
found that they had eaten “‘shrimps and other crustacea.”
294 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

MARBLED GODWIT (Limosa fedoa).

Common or local names: Marlin; Brown Marlin; Red Curlew; Badger Bird.

 

Length. — 16 to 22 inches; bill 3.50 to 5.50.

Adult. — Head and neck pale buff or pale cinnamon, streaked with blackish;
prevailing color above dull reddish buff, varied with black; a broad
whitish stripe from bill over eye; a narrow dark stripe below it;
throat whitish; below pale rufous or buffy, varying in individuals;
breast, flanks, rump and tail barred with brownish black; bill pinkish,
black toward tip; legs and feet slaty.

Field Marks. — Largest shore bird except the Long-billed Curlew, which it
resembles in color. Conspicuous by its light reddish tone; bill curved
slightly upward. No white patch at base of tail.

Season. — Now a very rare migrant, formerly more common; May, mid
July and August.

Range. — North America. Breeds from valley of Saskatchewan south to
North Dakota; winters from southern Lower California, Louisiana,
Florida and Georgia to Guatemala and Belize; casual in California in
winter; in migration occurs on Pacific coast north to British Columbia,
and on Atlantic coast to Maritime Provinces (formerly) and south to
Lesser Antilles; accidental in Alaska.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 295

 

History.

This is one of the largest shore birds. Only the Long-
billed Curlew and the Oyster-catcher equal or exceed the great
Godwit in size and weight. Probably it never was very abun-
dant on the coast of New England. As it breeds in the interior
of the country (formerly as far south as Nebraska, Iowa and
Wisconsin at least, and still from northern North Dakota to
the valley of the Saskatchewan) its southeasterly fall migration
would not be likely to bring it here in large numbers; but a
good many individuals formerly migrated almost directly east,
and appeared in the Maritime Provinces and in New England,
and from there moved down the coast, increasing in number by
accessions from the interior until Florida was reached. Ap-
parently it also goes almost directly west from its breeding
grounds to the Pacific coast. This is a remarkable departure
from the usual route of the shore birds, and seems to be unique.
Probably this bird’s breeding range extends much farther
north than its principal summer home, as it has been found
both on Hudson Bay and in Alaska. While Wayne states that
this species winters as far south as Argentina, the weight of
evidence seems to show that it winters mainly farther north.
Some individuals winter, or formerly did so, in southern Cal-
ifornia, Georgia and Florida. Audubon observed it in great
flocks in Florida, but now it rarely is seen except in small
companies, or a pair or single individual here and there on the
Atlantic coast, and is rare north of Florida. Cape Cod, it is
said, was formerly a favorite stopping place, but the bird is
very rare there now.

The following notes indicate its decrease: Passes in spring
from Florida along the coast to Massachusetts, in immense
flocks (Audubon). In August they appear in large numbers,
and many are shot for table (Peabody, Massachusetts, 1839).
Around May greater part go north to breed; return in large
flocks in August; remain until November (De Kay, New York,
1844). Not uncommon spring and autumn (Turnbull, eastern
Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 1869). Flocks of from ten or a
dozen to one hundred birds in marshes of Massachusetts sea-
296 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

coast, hunted with great activity (Samuels, 1870). Very rare
migrant (Maynard, 1870). Rare in migration (J. A. Allen,
1879). A rare bird in New England (Stearns and Coues, 1883).
Hovers around the wounded, and the pursuer sometimes bags
the entire flock; the great and increasing army of sportsmen
will probably exterminate the bird before many years have
passed (Samuels, 1897). This and the Long-billed Curlew
probably show evidence of relentless persecution more than
any others of our shore birds; in places where flocks of thou-
sands were not an uncommon sight, now rare (Sanford, Bishop
and Van Dyke, 1903). Mr. Alfred E. Gould writes (1908) that
he saw great flocks of this species in the Lynn marshes more
than forty years ago, and three correspondents claim to have
killed one or two within thirty years in Massachusetts. All
but two of my Massachusetts correspondents who mention
this bird say that it has decreased in numbers in New England
and New York.

Its large size and its excellent quality for the table fully
explain its present scarcity. Also, it has a very tender feeling
for its companions, and if one be wounded its fellows hover
about it in distress, until the gun has decimated their ranks.
Ordinarily, however, it is very wary and difficult of approach.
Like most of the large shore birds it is in great danger of ex-
tinction. Elliot says that, like all the waders, they are met
with yearly on our eastern coast in diminished numbers.
While with us it is a bird of the salt marsh and the borders
of ponds.

Since the above was written reports have been received
regarding a flock of fifty or more large birds, apparently God-
wits, that was seen at Chatham, Mass., in 1910. Undoubtedly
these birds were not of this species but were Hudsonian God-
wits, as Mr. S. Prescott Fay records a flight of that species in
August and September, 1910. Reliable records were secured
of twenty-five birds shot on seventeen different dates. Single
birds were seen or taken; two were seen in one case, and in
other cases ten and thirty or thirty-five were seen. These
birds were all Hudsonian Godwits, an unusual flight.!

 

1 Fay, S. Prescott: Auk, 1911, pp. 257, 258.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 297

 

HUDSONIAN GODWIT (Limosa hemastica).

Common and local names: Goose-bird; Black-tail; Spotrump; Whiterump; Ring-
tailed Marlin.

 

Length. — 14 to 16 inches; bill 3.20, slightly up-curved.

Adult in Spring. — Blackish above, mottled with buff; head and neck
rufous, streaked with dusky; rump blackish; upper tail coverts mostly
white; tail black, white at base, tipped slightly with white; under parts
chestnut, barred with dusky and white; bill reddish or flesh color, black
toward tip; legs and feet slaty.

Adult in Winter. — Upper parts unmarked brownish gray, white spot still
conspicuous; buffy whitish or dingy white below; breast grayer.
Young. — Lower parts similar to winter adult; upper parts brownish gray.
Field Marks. — Much smaller than the Marbled Godwit. The white spot
just below the black rump and at the base of the black tail is conspicuous

in flight.

Season. — A very rare spring and irregular but less rare autumn migrant
coastwise.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from lower Anderson River
southeast to central Keewatin; winters in Argentina, Patagonia and
Falkland Islands; in migration occurs principally east of the Great
Plains, most commonly on Atlantic coast in autumn and in Mississippi
valley in spring; casual in Alaska.
298 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

This bird undoubtedly was common here formerly in mi-
gration, particularly on Cape Cod, where it once appeared in
large flocks. It seems more common in eastern than in western
North America, although it occurs in practically all of North
and South America at different seasons of the year.

The following abridged extracts will give some idea of the
history of this bird: Less abundant than Marbled Godwit,
seldom see more than half a dozen on our coast in one season;
uncommon in eastern States (Nuttall, 1834). Not common
here (Peabody, Massachusetts, 1839). Not as common as
Marbled Godwit; often found associated with it (De Kay,
New York, 1844). Rather scarce (Turnbull, eastern Penn-
sylvania and New Jersey, 1869). Very rare migrant (May-
nard, Massachusetts, 1870). Rare in migration (J. A. Allen,
Massachusetts, 1879). In some seasons fairly common in
New England (Stearns and Coues, 1883). I know of no
other part of the United States where this bird can more surely
be found during migrations than upon some portions of the
Massachusetts coast, though in no part of the country is it a
common species, so far as I can ascertain (Gurdon Trumbull,
1888). Less common every year, one time abundant (Cory,
1896). Rare spring and irregularly common autumn migrant
on coast (Howe and Allen, Massachusetts, 1901). Rare spring
and fall migrant (G. M. Allen, Massachusetts, 1909). Twenty-
five Massachusetts observers report a decrease of this species
and only one an increase. Messrs. George M. Bubier and
Lawton W. Lane report a flock of about fifty birds at Ipswich
on August 26, 1908, of which several were killed. This is the
largest flock seen there in recent years.

During my boyhood I frequently heard old gunners about
Boston tell their tales of the Goose-bird which was well and
favorably known all along our coast. But it is impossible now
to tell with certainty whether these tales referred to one or
both of the Godwits. The Hudsonian Godwit is now less rare
than the larger species, but few are seen or taken regularly
on the Massachusetts coast. It is shy, like its larger relative,
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 299

 

but a good bird caller finds no difficulty in luring it to his
decoys.

The breeding range and migration of this species are more
or less shrouded in mystery. The eggs have been found once
by MacFarlane in the Anderson River region, which proves
that the birds breed near the coast of the Arctic Sea, and that
is about all we know of its breeding range, except that it sum-
mers in Keewatin. Audubon was informed that this species
bred in the Magdalen and Prince Edward islands, and Mr.
Fletcher Osgood believes that once it bred on the Lynn Marshes
in Massachusetts, but there is no conclusive evidence that it
ever bred in New England or the Maritime Provinces. It
formerly appeared rarely on the coast of Maine and more
commonly in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New York
(Long Island). Farther south it appears always to have been
rather rare in the United States. We must assume that the
species goes to South America by sea, like the Eskimo Curlew,
and lands on Cape Cod and Long Island in numbers only
when driven there by storms. It was considered rare by
Wilson and Audubon, as it probably never was seen on the
coast of the middle and southern States in any numbers unless
driven in by a severe storm. On August 13, 1903, a large
flight occurred on the Long Island coast, and many were killed,
but little was heard of them to the southward. The only flight
of Godwits that is shown on the record of Chatham Beach
Hotel for seven years is in August, 1903. No birds were taken
on the 13th, when the great flight appeared on Long Island,
for at Chatham the weather apparently was fair, with a west
wind. One bird, perhaps a straggler from the Long Island
flight, was picked up on the 20th, after a southeast wind had
blown for two days. On the 26th a northeast wind set in, and
it blew from the east or northeast for six days. On the 29th
seven Godwits were killed. During the seven years for which
the record was kept Godwits were taken only singly or in
pairs, with the above exception, and the record shows forty-
two killed all told. Twenty-four were taken during east, north
or northeast winds; eight in northwest winds; six in southwest
winds; two in west winds, and only one ina south wind.
300 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

GREATER YELLOW-LEGS (Totanus melanoleucus).

Common or local names: Winter Yellow-leg; Winter; Cucu; Large Cucu; Big
Yellow-leg; Greater Tell-tale; Tell-tale Godwit; Tattler.

 

Length. — 12.50 to 15 inches; bill 2 to 2.20.

Adult in Spring. — Blackish and light gray above, speckled with white;
tail white, barred with blackish; basal half of the tail and upper tail
coverts mainly white; under parts white, streaked on throat and neck
with dusky, and on breast and sides spotted and barred with same; iris
brown; bill black or greenish black; legs long and slender, chrome yellow.

Adult in Winter, and Young. — Similar, but without the blackish above;
below streaked only on the neck and upper breast; legs yellow.

Field Marks. — Long, slender yellow legs; white or whitish tail and upper
tail coverts. Easily recognized by its manner of flight, alternately
scaling and flapping, curving its dark wings downward.

Notes. — A soft, flutelike whistle, wheu, wheu, wheu, wheu, wheu, wheu, wheu,
wheu (Chapman). A prolonged rolling call or a succession of quick
calls (C. W. Townsend).

Season. — Common migrant, mostly coastwise; early April to mid June
and early July to November; a few non-breeding birds occur, or
formerly occurred, in summer.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from Alaska and southern
Mackenzie to southern British Columbia, Ungava, Labrador and Anti-
costi Island; winters from southern California and Georgia, casually in
North Carolina, south to Patagonia; occurs in Bermuda in migration.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 301

 

History.

Few if any shore birds have a wider and more general dis-
tribution in America than the Winter Yellow-legs. It does not
go as far north as some species, but it ranges southward over
the greater part of both the American continents. Although
this species is hunted much, and has diminished greatly in
numbers in most parts of the Union, it is still a rather common
bird in the migrations along the coast of New York and New
England, and sometimes appears in considerable numbers,
particularly in spring. Only nine of my Massachusetts cor-
respondents saw an increase in this species up to 1908, and
ninety-one a decrease. A recent increase is recorded in por-
tions of Plymouth and Barnstable counties, where large flights
are noted from 1906 to 1908, also in some parts of Essex and
Norfolk counties; but this species, which is generally common
in the interior of the continent, seems to appear here mainly
on the coast or not far from it.

Spring protection in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and
Connecticut has shown good results. Many of the flocks keep
well off shore during the fall migration, and so escape the
gunner, except where they come ashore to feed. Thus the
diminution of this species has been lessened. The bird is sus-
picious and noisy, and often alarms other birds by its cries
and warns them of the presence of the hunter, but it is easily
deceived by a good bird caller, and sometimes can be called
back to the decoys after it has been shot at, and so it falls an
easy prey to the hidden and skilful sportsman.

The Greater Yellow-legs migrates north and south over
the greater part of the United States to the Antilles, and up
and down both coasts of South America. It winters mainly
in the southern part of South America and north to Georgia
and the Carolinas. This is one of the species that no doubt
was once common along our coast all summer, although it
probably never bred there. Non-breeding individuals still
summer in South America and along the south Atlantic coast
of the United States. Those which once summered here were
mostly destroyed long ago by the gunner. The migration of
302 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

this species along our coast presents some extreme variations
in numbers from year to year. Evidently the large migration
in fall which goes south by sea does not come on to the coast
of Massachusetts unless driven there by strong adverse winds
or storms. Great numbers of these birds are seen in flight,
miles at sea, and they have been reported as resting on the
water at times. This is one of the species that now comes to
Cape Cod in large numbers on some of the spring flights. The
inaccessibility of the breeding grounds of this bird and the
protection that it receives: on Anticosti Island have done
much to keep up the numbers of those which migrate through
New England.

The Winter Yellow-legs is a bird of the meadow, marsh and
the muddy shores of fresh-water streams and ponds. When
alighting it often raises its wings and folds them slowly, then
nods its head, teetering its whole body up and down and utter-
ing its sweet whistling cries. The flocks fly compactly, and,
like many other shore birds, they turn, and rise or fall, as if
at the word of command.

In spring at low tide this bird frequents the pools and
streams in the salt marshes of Cape Cod, where it picks up
little minnows and other aquatic forms of life. It seems to be
very fond of both land and water insects, and must do con-
siderable good as an insect eater.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 303

 

YELLOW-LEGS (Totanus flavipes).

Common or local names: Summer Yellow-leg; Summer; Little Yellow-leg;
Small Cucu.

 

Length. — 10 to 11 inches; bill 1.40.

Adult. — Closely resembles the Greater Yellow-legs, but is about one-third
smaller.

Notes. — A call like that of the Greater Yellow-legs, but usually composed
of fewer syllables, sometimes only one, often only two.

Season. — A rare spring but common fall migrant locally and irregularly
for brief periods; early May to June and early July to October.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from Kotzebue Sound, Alaska,
northern Mackenzie, central Keewatin and southern Ungava to valley
of Upper Yukon, southern Saskatchewan and northern Quebec; winters
in Argentina, Chile, Patagonia, and casually in Mexico, Florida and
Bahamas; in migration occurs mainly east of Rocky Mountains (rare
in spring on Atlantic coast) and in Pribilof Islands, Greenland and
Bermuda; accidental in Great Britain.

History.

The Lesser Yellow-legs formerly was one of the most
numerous of all the shore birds of North America, and still
holds its numbers better than many other species. Mr. Wil-
liam P. Wharton states that his uncle killed a bushel basket
full of this species one day at Ipswich more than thirty years
ago. Its decrease is exhibited in the following abridged notes:
i
304 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

A plentiful species, and great numbers are brought to market
in Boston, New York and Philadelphia, particularly in autumn
(Wilson, 1813). Florida to Maine, autumn and spring; very
abundant in the interior at other seasons (Audubon, 1835).
In certain sections may be considered the most abundant bird
of the family in North America (Nuttall, 1834). In August
and September they appear in large flocks in their southern
migration (De Kay, New York, 1844). One hundred and six
killed by one discharge of a double gun (Giraud, 1844). Abun-
dant spring and autumn and many remain during summer
(Turnbull, eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 1869).
Summer resident; common migrant; perhaps breeds; have
seen it at Ipswich all summer (Maynard, eastern Massachu-
setts, 1870). Common; rare in summer (J. A. Allen, 1879).
More abundant in west than the Greater Yellow-legs, but on
Atlantic shores seldom seen in spring and not very common in
fall (Chamberlain, 1891). Being driven from many of the old-
time resorts, and may easily become rare (Sanford, Bishop and
Van Dyke, 1903). Rather common fall migrant; very rare in
spring (Hoffmann, 1904). Formerly common in late summer
and early autumn; now rare at all seasons (Brewster, Cam-
bridge region, 1906). Rare spring and common fall migrant
(G. M. Allen, Massachusetts, 1909).

Only nine Massachusetts observers in 1908 reported an
increase in Yellow-legs and in most cases the increase was
recent and perhaps temporary. Eighty-seven have noted a
serious decrease within an average of thirty years. Mr. Gard-
iner G. Hammond saw a bunch of fifty or sixty in 1908 on
Martha’s Vineyard, and Mr. Gilbert R. Payson saw a flock
of about fifty, and they are reported as numerous in the marshes
about Newburyport, Cohasset, Duxbury and in Barnstable
County; elsewhere reports of decrease are almost unanimous.

No longer ago than 1870 the flocks were quite numerous
about some of the inland ponds and lakes in Massachusetts in
August, particularly in dry seasons, when the ponds were low.
I remember that they were always watchful, but they were
readily attracted by a whistled imitation of their call, and if
even one was shot out of the flock the others hovered about
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 305

 

until many had paid the penalty of their sympathetic concern.
Of late years at those same ponds a single bird or a pair is
seen occasionally, but the flocks are gone, perhaps never to
return. Unlike its larger relative this species is seen very
rarely within our limits in the spring. Sometimes in fall the
flight along Cape Cod is very large, but in spring most of the
birds of this species go north through the interior. The fall
flight seems to trend mainly southeastward, in the direction of
South America. Large flights pass out to sea, no doubt follow-
ing the route of the Golden Plover, some possibly going directly
from Nova Scotia to the Lesser Antilles. Others, perhaps,
pass down the coast to the southern States, and from there,
undertake a shorter flight to the southern continent. But
the numbers of those taking this route have been so decimated
that they are now comparatively few. Greater flights pass the
Bermudas, where they formerly sometimes landed if beset
by adverse winds. These flights probably do not land on our
coasts except when driven here by easterly winds. Strong
westerly or northwesterly winds sometimes seem to bring to
our shores a flight from farther west. The Summer Yellow-
legs once remained here all summer, but was not known to
breed. Its habits are similar to those of the Greater Yellow-
legs, and it feeds largely on insects, including ants.
306 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

SOLITARY SANDPIPER (Helodromas solitarius solitarius).

 

Length. — 8 to 9 inches; bill slender, nearly straight, 1.15.

Adult in Spring. — Upper parts dark, lustrous olive brown, sparsely speckled
with white; head, neck and flanks streaked or otherwise marked with
dusky and white; two central tail feathers, mainly dark; all upper tail
coverts, outer tail feathers, under wing coverts and axillars white, barred
with black or dusky; belly white; legs dark greenish.

Adult in Fall. — Similar, but upper parts dark grayish or ashy brown, less
speckled with white; head and front of neck less streaked.

Young. — Upper parts brownish gray; head more uniform grayish; every-
where speckled with buff or yellowish white; sides of head and neck
dusky; rest of under parts white; tail as in adult.

Field Marks. — Larger and darker than the Spotted Sandpiper. The strik-
ing barred black and white outer tail feathers show in flight, which is
less erratic than that of the Spotted Sandpiper; more regular wing beats
and less sailing. Frequents mainly inland lakes and woodland streams.

Notes. — Low whistling and sharp alarm notes somewhat similar to those of
the Spotted Sandpiper.

Season. — A rather common migrant inland; less common on coast; a few
formerly summered in Massachusetts; late April and May, and second
week in July to late October.

Range. — North and South America. Summers from central Keewatin,
northern Ungava and Newfoundland south to Nebraska, Illinois, Indi-
ana, Ohio and Pennsylvania; probably breeds regularly in northern part
of its range, locally and casually in southern part; winters from the
West Indies to Argentina; recorded from Greenland, Bermuda and
Great Britain.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 307

 

History.

This is the only Sandpiper in New England which appar-
ently is more common in the interior than on the coast.
Although it sometimes frequents salt marshes and the shores
of tidal streams, it is not commonly met with on the sea beach.
It is a bird of inland ponds and streams, and frequents the
shores of small wooded creeks. While it is not as solitary
during migration as its name implies, it rarely flocks, and,
usually, only a pair or a few individuals are seen in the same
neighborhood. During the breeding season this bird is met
with rarely in Massachusetts, and though it sometimes summers
as far south as Pennsylvania, very little is known of its breeding
habits. It is said that it nests on the ground, and also in the
abandoned nests of other birds in trees. Mr. Gerald H. Thayer
tells me that formerly it summered on Mount Monadnock, in
southern New Hampshire. At that season it appears, indeed,
to be most solitary, as it is rare to find more than one bird in a
locality, even in those northern States where undoubtedly it
breeds.

The decrease of this bird has not been as noticeable as that
of many other Sandpipers because of its rather solitary habits
and its preference for sylvan retreats. The shore gunner rarely
sees many, and the pot-hunter ordinarily has little chance to
get more than one bird at a shot. Nevertheless only five
Massachusetts observers report an increase of the species,
while one hundred and thirty-eight note a decrease.

When the ponds are low in August we may look for the
Solitary Sandpiper on the exposed shores and sand bars. It
goes south mainly through the interior, and although it is the
eastern form of the species, it has been taken in Mexico.
Still, it may cross the Mexican Gulf and the Caribbean Sea,
as it has been noted in Porto Rico and Vera Cruz. It prob-
ably visits a large part of northern and eastern South America;
it may even reach the Pacific coast of that continent, as it is
noted from Lower California.

This bird has a curious habit of balancing its body and
nodding its head, like the Spotted Sandpiper, but the action
308 GAME BIRDS, WILD~FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

is not so rapid and pronounced as that of the latter; it is
confined more to nodding, and there is less movement of the
hinder parts. The bird is graceful and elegant in shape, moves
lightly and flies swiftly and easily. Often, when alighting, it
holds its long wings straight up and closes them slowly, as is
shown in the cut, exhibiting the beautiful markings of the
under wing coverts and axillars. When the ponds and lakes
of the interior are low, after a long drought in August or Septem-
ber, this bird may be seen about the sand bars searching for
its favorite food. Often it wades into the water up to its
belly, but I never have seen it swim.

In the fall, on its return from the north, it has a habit of
wading into the water in stagnant ditches or ponds, where it
advances one foot at a time, and by rapidly moving the forward
foot stirs up the vegetation at the bottom ever so slightly.
This motion is so swift and delicate that the leg seems to be
merely trembling, as if the bird were chilled by contact with
the water, but it is done with intent to disturb insects among
the algze at the bottom without roiling the water, and the eager
bird, leaning forward, plunges in its bill and head, sometimes
to the eyes, and catches the alarmed water insects as they
dart away. I have watched this carefully with a glass while
lying in the grass only ten or twelve feet from the bird. It is
easy by stirring the bottom slightly with a stick to cause a
similar movement of the water insects, but I never could
agitate it so delicately as to avoid clouding the water with
sediment from the bottom.

Audubon states that he has found stomachs of this species
filled with aquatic insects, caterpillars of various kinds and
black spiders. Professor Aughey examined the stomachs of
two birds; one contained nine locusts and thirty-four other
insects, the other a grasshopper and forty-three other insects.
Dr. Warren examined eleven stomachs and found in ten of
them “‘worms,” beetles or other insects and one contained
“small shells.”
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 309

 

WILLET (Catoptrophorus semipalmatus semipalmatus).

Common or local names: Humility; Pied-wing Curlew.

 

Length. — 15 to 16 inches; bill 2 to 2.50 ; feet partly webbed.

Adult in Summer. — Above brownish gray or ashy, speckled and barred
more or less with blackish; below white, sometimes with a brownish
tinge; fore neck and upper breast streaked with dusky, flanks barred;
wing blackish below, browner above, showing, when spread, large
conspicuous white markings; basal part of the tail and its upper
coverts white, rest light ashy to whitish, sometimes barred with
blackish. |

Adult in Fall and Winter. — Above ash gray; below white; wing as in sum-
mer; axillars black at all seasons.

Young. — Brownish gray above, tinged with buff; white patch above tail,
as in adult; sides tinged with buff, finely-mottled with gray; wings as
in adult; bill, feet and eyes dark at all ages.

Field Marks. — Large size, extensive white on wing and white rump. Re-
sembles the Hudsonian Godwit in fall plumage (in which we usually see
it), but the Godwit lacks the great white wing markings of the Willet.
The Willet’s notes also are distinctive.

Notes. — Pill-will-willet, repeated, loud and clamorous; also a single note,
loud, rasping, suggestive of a giant Catbird (C. W. Townsend).

Nest. — A hollow scooped out in a tuft of grass and lined with grass.

Eggs. — Four to five, about 2.05 by 1.50, brownish or greenish olive, spotted
and blotched with dark brown or various shades of brown.
310 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Season. — Very rare transient visitor coastwise; formerly a common mi-
grant and summer resident; May, June, August and September.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from Virginia (formerly Nova
Scotia) south to Florida and Bahamas; winters from Bahamas to Brazil
and Peru; accidental in Bermuda and Europe.

History.

This large, handsome, showy bird is one of the few greater
shore birds which formerly bred all along the Atlantic coast,
from Nova Scotia and New England to the Gulf of Mexico.
Dr. Coues (1874) states that it breeds anywhere in the United
States in suitable resorts, and that he has found it wherever
he has been in this country, but this statement includes the
Western Willet, which had not been separated and described
at that time. Like all game birds which nest in the eastern
United States, the Willet has lately deserted many of its former
haunts. It has vanished as a breeding bird, not only from
Nova Scotia and New England, but also from the Atlantic
coast north of Virginia. This is one of the inevitable results
of the spring and summer shooting so long permitted in all
the Atlantic coast States, and still practiced in many of them.

Another factor in the extirpation of the Willet was the
destruction of its eggs. The eggs were large and well flavored
and were considered a great delicacy by the baymen. The
nests were robbed continually and the birds were shot during
the breeding season.

It seems probable that the eastern Willet practically has
disappeared from New England, and that most of the birds
now taken are referable to the succeeding form, the young of
which are hardly distinguishable from those of the present
species. Little is known of the breeding of the Willet here in
early times. In the last century it bred in large numbers in
Nova Scotia; also on Muskeget Island and near New Bedford,
Mass., and in Connecticut.

The following notes show its former abundance and its
recent decrease: Breeds in great numbers on shores of New
York, New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland (Wilson, 1813),
Known to breed not far from New Bedford (Audubon, 1838).
Breeds here (Linsley, Connecticut, 1843). Breeds from
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 311

 

Louisiana to Massachusetts; many remain along the shore of
this State (New York) to breed, and loiter with us until
November (De Kay, 1844). Common migrant April to
October (Turnbull, eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey,
1869). Not very abundant on shores of New England
as a summer visitor and resident; taken in considerable
numbers in autumn (Samuels, 1870). Sometimes breed
(J. A. Allen, Massachusetts, 1879). Known to nest in suitable
plains of interior and coast from Florida to Halifax, N. S.
(Brewer, 1884). One of the few species of the family which
regularly and plentifully summer in some portion of New Eng-
land (Stearns and Coues, 1888). Rare spring and autumn
migrant along the coast (Howe and Allen, Massachusetts,
1901). A few years ago bred commonly on coast of Virginia
and New Jersey (Sanford, Bishop and Van Dyke, 1903). A
mere straggler on Maine coast (Knight, 1908). Rare migrant,
mainly coastwise (G. M. Allen, New England, 1909). Flights
comparatively rare in recent years (Eaton, New York, 1910).
Only two of my Massachusetts correspondents report an in-
crease, while thirty-one note a decrease.

There is a great migration of Willets in fall from northwest
to southeast, and formerly many of these birds reached the
coast of New England. Many wintered and some still winter
in the Carolinas, Georgia and Florida. Eaton gives the Willet
as a former winter visitant in the interior of New York. It
winters, however, as far south as southern Peru at least, and
reaches the Amazon on the Atlantic coast. It follows the
interior route in spring, but the following extract from a letter
received from Hon. George Bird Grinnell suggests that some
may take an outside route: “‘We often hear of the journey
of two thousand miles which some of the shore birds make
from the coast of Labrador or Nova Scotia south to the Lesser
Antilles, or even to South America, and two years ago (1907),
while coming back from France the end of May, I saw some-
thing that had a bearing on this matter, and which greatly
interested me. We were passing the Newfoundland Banks
one fine morning, when the sea was absolutely calm. We ran
into a great body of birds scattered over the water, apparently
312 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

in flocks of from a dozen to fifty. Farther away were what
looked like great rafts of these birds, I should suppose several
thousands easily within sight. The birds appeared to be rest-
ing on the water, and acted as if they were occasionally picking
something from its surface. The ship passed near a number of
small groups, and as they rose on the wing — for they were
not very tame, and none of them were within gunshot — I
watched them with a glass, and recognized that all of them
seemed to be Willets. This confirms what, of course, has been
said many times, that these migrating shore birds, on their
long journey toward the south, often stop and rest, and, of
course, must find food on the journey.” This is not the first
record from the vicinity of Newfoundland, for Reeks records
it there, and it is said to have bred there about ponds at some
distance from the sea-shore. The Willet’s half-webbed feet
equip it for swimming well at sea.

The Willet is a shy bird, easily alarmed, and it takes wing
with loud cries at the least indication of danger; but during
the breeding season its nature undergoes a change, and in its
solicitude for its nest and young it seems to forget its own
danger. Screaming in alarm if disturbed, it circles around its
nesting place, and so exposes itself to the miserable lawbreaker,
who recks not of time or season so long as he secures a victim
for the pot. Wayne watched a nest in which the young were
hatching. The parents became much alarmed, and he saw one
of the old birds take a young-one and fly with it across three
creeks and some marsh land to an island a quarter of a mile
away; all the young were taken in the same manner to the
same place. He believes that they were held between the
thighs of the parent bird, as the Woodcock is known to carry
its young. «

The Willet eats grasses and roots when on inland lakes
and rivers, also small fish and fish fry. Along the coast it
takes many small mollusks, crabs, etc. In South Carolina it
visits the rice fields, and is said to feed on the grain.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 313

 

WESTERN WILLET (Catopirophorus semipalmatus inornatus) .

Length. — Averaging larger than the Willet; bill longer and more slender 2.25
to 2.75 inches.

Adult in Summer. — Like Willet, but markings above ‘‘fewer, fainter and
finer,” on a lighter ground; less heavily marked below.

Adult and Young in Winter. — Similar to Willet; can be distinguished only
by measurement.

Field Marks. — Sometimes much grayer than the Willet, but cannot be dis-
tinguished with certainty in the field.

Season. — Fall migrant mainly coastwise.

Range. — Western North America. Breeds from central Oregon, southern
Alberta and southern Manitoba south to northern California, central
Colorado, southern South Dakota and northern Iowa, and on coasts of
Texas and Louisiana; winters from central California, Texas, Louisiana
and Gulf coast of Florida to Mexico (Lower California, Tepic and
Guerrero); in fall migration occurs in British Columbia and on Atlantic
coast from New England south.

History.

The Western Willet, a subspecies of the Willet, comes here
occasionally, if not regularly, in the fall flight. The following
note from Mr. A. C. Bent, of Taunton, Mass., who has been
investigating the status of this species, is pertinent here.
“This bird is increasing. There was a very heavy flight this
year (1908). I believe all, or practically all, of the Willets
shot in Massachusetts during the past few years have been
Western Willets; all that I have examined are referable to
the western form. I believe that many of the western-bred
shore birds and Ducks have been forced to migrate farther
eastward, owing to the settling of the middle west and the
draining and destruction of their feeding grounds in the Mis-
sissippi valley, and that they seek the Atlantic coast by the
shortest route rather than make the long overland flight to
the Gulf of Mexico.” Mr. Bent’s belief may be warranted by
his observations, but to my mind it seems more probable that
such flights of western birds to the east always have occurred,
but have not been so much noted until the eastern birds began
to decrease. Since then the increase in the number of such
competent ornithologists as Mr. Bent has resulted in a more
accurate knowledge of these flights.
314 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

RUFF (Machetes pugnaz).

Length. — 10 to 12 inches.

Adult Male. — Face bare in front of eye, with reddish warts; colors varying
much, probably no two specimens exactly alike; a large shield-like
erectile ruff about the neck, conspicuously barred, and the colors vary
from chestnut and glossy black streaked with reddish to mottled reddish
and buff streaked with buffy white and barred with pure white; sides
of rump usually white; bill brown; legs yellow.

Adult Female. — No ruff; head fully feathered; plumage banded with
black and buff, white or reddish; the lower abdomen or ventral region
usually pure white.

Young. — Back and shoulders brownish black; feathers usually bordered
with buff; crown yellowish, streaked with black; lower parts unspotted,
white before and buff behind.

Range. — Eastern hemisphere. Breeds from Arctic coast south to Great
Britain, Holland, Russia and Siberia; winters throughout Africa, India
and Burma; strays occasionally to western hemisphere, from Ontario
and Greenland south to Indiana, North Carolina, Barbados and northern
South America.

History.

The difference in the appearance of the sexes of the Ruff
is so great that in Europe the male is known as the Ruff on
account of the ruff about his neck, while the female is named
the Reeve.

The bird is an accidental visitor to Massachusetts, perhaps
blown here on the wings of some storm or wandering from its
habitat in the Old World. The Massachusetts records follow:
Mr. Gordon Plummer of Brookline secured a fine young male
taken in Chatham, September 11, 1880, which is recorded as
the ninth specimen for North America, the third for New
England and the second for Massachusetts. The other two
New England specimens were females, one taken at Newbury-
port, Mass., in 1871,! and the other taken at Upton, Me., in
1874; both now in the Brewster collection.?. Later, another
was taken by Mr. Alfred Dabney, on Nantucket, Mass., late
in July, 1901, and is now in the collection of Hon. J. E. Thayer,
at Lancaster, Mass.®

 

1 Brewster, William: American Naturalist, May, 1872, p. 306.
2 Forest and Stream, October 7, 1880, Vol. XV, No. 10, p. 186.
3 Auk, 1906, p. 98.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 315

 

Twenty-four or more specimens of this species have been
recorded from North America; three of these are from Maine
and two from New York (Long Island). Baird’s statement
that the Ruff has been “frequently killed on Long Island”
is not substantiated by available records. Nevertheless, the
bird is likely to occur in New York or New England at any
time and should be looked for. (See Appendix B.)

UPLAND PLOVER (Bartramia longicauda).

Common or local names: Bartramian Sandpiper; Uplander; Field-plover; Grass-
plover; Pasture-plover. :

Length. — 11.50 to 12.75 inches; bill 1.15.

Adult. — Above a mixture of black, buffy brown, brownish gray and whitish,
blackish prevailing on crown and back, lighter colors on neck, sides of
head and wings; primaries blackish, outer one barred with white; outer
tail feathers barred with white, black and reddish brown; tail reaching
considerably beyond the tips of wings; neck, breast and flanks buffy,
marked with dusky streaks and arrow heads or irregular bars, the former
mainly on neck, the latter on breast and sides; throat, belly and under
tail coverts whitish; legs yellowish; bill yellowish at base and below,
dusky toward tip. (See Frontispiece).

Field Marks. — Large size, long neck and bill and general buffy brown color
and absence of marked white. Found mainly in pastures and old fields
away from water, even at the sea-shore.

Notes. — Alarm, quip-ip-ip-ip quip-ip-ip-ip (Langille). Quitty-quit-it-it
(Knight). A soft bubbling whistle; song, a prolonged, weird, mournful,
mellow whistle, chr-r-r-r-r-ee-e-e-e-e-€-00-0-0-0-0-00 (Langille). Wh-o-e-e-
et-et-e-e-¢-e-e-e-0-0-0-000 (Richard).

Nest. — Built of grasses and weeds on ground.

Eggs. — Usually four, averaging 1.75 by 1.28; pale clay color with spots of
umber, yellowish brown, reddish brown and black, most numerous and
blotchy toward the large end.

Season. —- Rare or uncommon migrant and very rare local summer resident;
formerly common; early April to September.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from northwestern Alaska,
southern Mackenzie, central Keewatin, central Wisconsin, southern
Michigan, southern Ontario and southern Maine to southern Oregon,
northern Utah, central Oklahoma, southern Missouri, southern Indiana
and northern Virginia; winters on pampas to Argentina; in migration
occurs north to Newfoundland and in Europe; accidental in Australia.
316 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

Among all the impressions of my boyhood, which will re-
main with me while life shall last and reason maintain her sway,
none is more vivid, none brings back a greater flood of recollec-
tions, than the memory of the hours of darkness spent in listen-
ing to the notes of the birds passing overhead when the warm
south winds of May brought the great tide of bird migration
which flooded the fields and woods of New England and
passed on toward the north. Chief among the notes heard on
such occasions, falling from the far spaces of the darkened
night, came the soft but penetrating flight call of the
Upland Plover. Mingling with the faint notes of Warblers,
Thrushes, Cuckoos, and Yellow-legs, it always fell clear and
distinct to the ear. There is no richer music among all the
songsters of the grove than the long, mellow, rippling whistle
of this lovely bird. In those days it nested in the fields back
of our house, within the limits of the city of Worcester, and
was well known to the farmers of Worcester and the western
counties. It was plentiful, particularly in the migrations
along our coast and in the Connecticut valley.

What a change has occurred in forty years! The fields and
hills that once knew this dove-like bird know it no more, and
its note, then commonly heard in most parts of the State, is
now rare. We listen for it in vain. The Grass-plover once
came in multitudes to the prairies of the west in spring, but
is growing rare as far west as Minnesota, South Dakota and
Texas, and is really common now-only in some of the States
west of the Mississippi valley. It never was as plentiful here
as in the prairie States, for New England was originally a
wooded country. No doubt this bird increased in numbers at
first when the woods were cut off and many of our uplands
were made over into fields, pastures and gardens, but its
decrease began when the larger game had been killed off and
the shotgun took the place of the rifle. The following notes
from authors indicate its decrease: One of the most common
birds along the sea-coast of Massachusetts; found throughout
the continent according to season; common in Worcester
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 317

 

County, Mass., in summer (Nuttall, 1834). Common on
sea-coasts but not confined to them; extends into the country
(Peabody, Massachusetts, 1839). About middle of August
very plentiful on Shinnecock Hills (Long Island) and Mon-
tauk; common in Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New
Jersey, (Giraud, 1844). Breeds from Maryland north; in
July and August appears in large flocks on its way south; much
esteemed game bird (De Kay, New York, 1844). Quite com-
mon in western part of State (Zadock Thompson, Vermont,
1853). Not uncommon summer resident; common in migra-
tion (Maynard, eastern Massachusetts, 1870). Not abundant
as summer resident, breeds sparingly in all New England
States (Samuels, 1870). Common summer resident (J. A.
Allen, Massachusetts, 1879). Moves in large flocks, and as it
breeds through the country may be met with from Canada to
the southern States; considered one of the best game birds;
eagerly sought by all lovers of the gun (Murphy, 1882). Abun-
dant spring and fall (Stearns and Coues, New England, 1888).
Still abundant in New England; some breed here (Chamber-
lain, 1891). Not as abundant in eastern Pennsylvania and
New Jersey as in Wilson’s day (Abbott, 1895). Now occurring
chiefly as uncommon migrant (Howe and Allen, Massachusetts,
1901). Was formerly abundant in New England, on Long
Island and through the country west to the Rocky Mountains
(Huntington, 1903). Within my recollection nested plenti-
fully in Worcester County, Mass., and southern Maine and
New Hampshire; few localities in New England where one
can be sure of finding the birds now (Brewster, 1906). Tran-
sient, not common; breeding very rarely; formerly common
migrant and summer resident (Stone, New Jersey, 1908).
Rare spring and uncommon fall migrant; rare local summer
resident (G. M. Allen, Massachusetts, 1909). Six of my Mas-
sachusetts correspondents report an increase of this bird in
their localities, while seventy-six report a decrease.

About 1880, when the supply of Passenger Pigeons began to
fail, and the marketmen, looking about for some other game
for the table of the epicure in spring and summer, called for
Plover, the destruction of the Upland Plover began in earnest.
318 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The price increased. In the spring migration the birds were
met by a horde of market gunners, shot, packed in barrels and
shipped to the cities. There are tales of special refrigerator
cars sent out to the prairie regions, and parties of gunners
regularly employed to follow the birds and ship Plover and
Curlews by the carload to the Chicago market. These may
not be based on facts, but we know that the birds came to
market in great quantities. In the eastern breeding grounds of
the Uplander, in New England and the middle States, gunners
pursued them in July, as soon as the young were large and well-
feathered enough to be fit for market. Less than ten years of
such market hunting sufficed to reduce the numbers of the
species tremendously, and but for the wary nature of the bird
it would have been extirpated from the east before the close of
the nineteenth century. All sorts of stratagems were resorted
to to approach it or to lure it within call of the gunner. A
horse and wagon were used commonly in the west to drive
over the fields and prairies. The birds, having become accus-
tomed to farmers driving their teams afield, were not much
alarmed at the approach of the gunners in this fashion. In the
east, where the fenced lands prohibited the use of the vehicle,
other means were resorted to. Some gunners have been very
successful in circumventing this wary bird, which holds forth
every inducement for its capture, as it is considered a delicious
morsel on the table, and brings a high price. Probably the
Uplander would have become practically extinct already had
not many western States passed laws prohibiting the spring
shooting of Plover and the export of game, while several New
England States later began protecting it by law at all times.
The position of the bird is still precarious, however, and unless
perpetual protection is given it in every State it will disappear.

In the west it has not yet become so wary as in the east,
where it tests the skill of the hunter to the utmost. In the
breeding season it loses its habitual caution and seems con-
cerned mainly for the safety of its young. It will use every
artifice known to a bird to draw the invader away from their
vicinity, and cases have been known in the west where it has
flown directly at the intruder. In the east it circles round
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 319

 

him, complaining loudly. Like many others of its tribe it
has a habit of extending its long wings high above the back
when alighting, and then folding them slowly down. This
bird, although a Sandpiper, resembles the Plovers in habits.

The southward migration of this species begins before the
middle of July and is in full swing in August. It moves south
both through the interior and along the coast, and there is
some reason to believe that individuals put out to sea from the
south Atlantic and Gulf coasts, for it is one of the species which
commonly visits Barbados, the most easterly of the Lesser
Antilles. It passes through both the Greater and Lesser
Antilles, but in the Bahamas, Porto Rico and Jamaica it is so
rare that many must reach the more easterly islands by a sea
route. Probably it also crosses the Gulf of Mexico, flying
south from Louisiana and Texas to southern Mexico, for it
is found in its fall migration in Nicaragua and Costa Rica,
and some birds which probably go by land, taking the western
route, are seen in western Mexico. It winters on the pampas
of South America.

In spring it arrives in Louisiana on the average about
March 14, before it reaches Florida or the plains of Texas.
As Professor Cooke reasons, this seems to indicate that it
makes a direct flight across the Gulf. Formerly it came in
immense flights to Louisiana and Texas, and from northern
Texas to North Dakota multitudes remained to breed. Ap-
parently there are no records of this species in spring east of
Cuba, which suggests the probability that about all the in-
dividuals come north through Central America, some going
east through Yucatan, Cuba and Florida, while the majority
cross the Gulf and go up the Mississippi valley.

This bird is a valuable ally of the farmer. It feeds on
locusts, grasshoppers, cutworms and other enemies of grass
and other crops. During the Locust invasions in Nebraska
Professor Aughey found this species among the most useful in
destroying the insects and saving the crops, for at that time it
was abundant and correspondingly useful. It came in large
flocks in spring and did great service on locust-infested farms.
320 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

BUFF-BREASTED SANDPIPER (Tryngites subruficollis).
Local name: Hill Grass-bird.

 

Length. — 7.50 to 8 inches.

Adult. — Colored similarly to the Upland Plover, but smaller, rather paler
and less marked on breast and sides; dark brown or blackish above;
feathers edged with brownish yellow, giving the bird a general tawny
appearance; primary.and secondary wing feathers dusky brown, darken-
ing toward tips and light tipped; tail shading like that of the Upland
Plover from the dark brown middle feathers to the light brownish
yellow outer ones, all with a subterminal bar of blackish and tipped
with whitish; below light buff; slightly spotted on sides of breast;
iris dark brown; Dill blackish; legs greenish or yellowish.

Field Marks. — The general tawny color of the bird and its buff under parts.
When in hand the primaries (inner webs) and the secondaries are seen
to be curiously marbled with black and white. Like the Upland Plover
it is seen usually on dry upland fields and rarely on the shore.

Season. — Rare migrant July to September.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds along Arctic coast from
northern Alaska to northern Keewatin; winters in Argentina and
Uruguay; most abundant in migration in Mississippi valley; occasional
on Atlantic coast in fall; casual on Pacific coast north to St. Michael,
Alaska, and to northeastern Siberia; straggles to Bermuda and western
Europe.

History.

The Buff-breasted Sandpiper is rather a rare bird upon the
Atlantic coast, and possibly always has been, as it breeds in
northern Alaska and its main migration route does not touch
the Atlantic coast. It seems probable that the birds of this
species which appear in Massachusetts are members of strag-
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 321

 

gling parties that follow the flight of other shore birds which
normally come down the Atlantic coast. It appears that the
regular fall migration route of the Buff-breasted Sandpiper
trends southeast from Alaska to the western shores of Hudson
Bay, and from there south through the Mississippi valley
region. It moves south rapidly, and appears in Colombia,
South America, in September. Apparently it crosses the Gulf
of Mexico from Texas, and, reaching Central America, crosses
the South American continent southeasterly to Argentina.
There are no very recent records of its occurrence on the
Atlantic coast south of Long Island, and the older records may
be open to doubt. This and the fact that a few records have
been made of the species in the Antilles give color to the belief
that the individuals of the species which reach the north
Atlantic coast put out to sea, following the fall route of some
other shore birds to South America. I know of no spring
record of this species on the Atlantic coast. It follows the
interior route northward.

The following notes seem to show that the Buff-breasted
Sandpiper was once not uncommon here: Not uncommon in
markets of Boston in August and September (Nuttall, 1834).
With us not a very common bird (Giraud, Long Island, N. Y.,
1844). Rare spring and autumn (Maynard, eastern Massa-
chusetts, 1870). Not abundant on shores of New England,
but by no means rare in August and September; seldom seen
in spring (Samuels, 1870). Rather uncommon migrant
(J. A. Allen, Massachusetts, 1879).

Formerly it was very abundant in Texas, and still is com-
mon there, but decreasing. The reports of its decrease in the
west are very impressive. Apparently it is on the way to
extinction.

It is usually a very gentle and confiding bird and pays little
attention to the hunter. It is valuable as an insect eater, par-
ticularly in the west, but in its pursuit this fact is overlooked
and its food value only is considered. Dr. Hatch found it living
upon crickets, grasshoppers, ants and their “eggs,”’ and other
insects, and on minute mollusks taken from the shores of
shallow ponds in the warmest part of the day.
1322 GAME, BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

SPOTTED SANDPIPER ‘(Actitis macularia).

Common or local names: Teeter; Teeter-peep; Tip-up; Sand-lark.

Length. — About 7.50 inches; bill .95.

Adult. — Above light brown, with a faint greenish luster, and lightly marked
with blackish; a whitish line above eye from bill to hind head; below
white, marked with rounded spots of blackish, larger in female; a row
of white spots on’ wings show in flight as a white line; outer tail feathers
barred with white; iris dark brown; bill yellowish and black; legs and
feet grayish olive. . ;

Young. — White below, unspotted; washed. on breast with:grayish.

Field Marks. — The only Sandpiper which has large and distinct spots on
the under parts. Sails about borders of streams and ponds with wing
tips bent down, wings showing a white line; almost always teeters when
alarmed. i

Notes. — A loud peet, weet, or weet, weet, beginning high and gradually
declining into a somewhat plaintive tone. —

Nest. — Of dried grasses, etc., on ground.

Eggs. — Three to five, large for the bird, about 1.30 by 1, creamy, buffy or
clay colored, pointed, blotched with blackish and neutral tints.

Season. — Common summer resident and migrant; mid April to mid Novem-
ber. :

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from tree limit in northwestern
Alaska and Newfoundland south to southern California and northern
South Carolina; winters from California and South Carolina to southern
Brazil and central Peru; straggles to Great Britain and Helgoland.

History.

This is the most common of all Sandpipers in the interior,
and the only one which still breeds commonly in Massachusetts
and the greater part of New England. It is well known every-
where and readily is distinguished from all other summer
residents by its habit of teetering, or bobbing the head and
elevating the hinder parts, often turning about to all quarters
of the compass. This habit of extravagant balancing attracted
the attention of. an Irish immigrant many years ago, who
christened it the “‘steelyard.bird” from its habit of “weighin’
th’ wurrums.”

Unlike the Solitary Sandpiper it frequents the sea-shore
quite as much as the interior, and nests along the sea beach
and on islands off shore. It sometimes makes its nest near a
 

   

 

 

ai

PLATE VIIl.— SPOTTED SANDPIPER, YOUNG.

From Bird-Lore.

 

 

 

 

 

 

PLATE IX.—SPOTTED SANDPIPER, ADULT.

From Collier's Weekly. (Photographs by Howard H. Cleaves.)
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 323

 

cornfield or a potato field. Often as a boy while hoeing in the
field I found its antics much more interesting than my work.

The Spotted Sandpiper has not diminished in numbers
so much within my experience as have those species which
frequent mainly the sea-shore. Nevertheless, there are many
places in eastern Massachusetts where it formerly was common
and where now it rarely is seen. Only fifteen of my Massa-
chusetts correspondents report an increase of this species in
the State, while fifty-nine write of a decrease.

This bird frequents the uplands away from the water more
than most of the Sandpipers, and it does not wade much when
feeding along the shore. Still, at need, it does not hesitate to
wade, swim and dive. Dr. Warren notes that a young bird
when wounded took to the water in a shallow stream, went to
the bottom like a stone, ran across on the bottom, and coming
up on the other side endeavored to conceal itself by sub-
merging its body and pushing its head among long grass grow-
ing at the water’s edge. In September, 1876, I saw a wounded
bird of this species when pursued, dive into deep water from
the shore of the Charles River and fly off under water, using
its wings somewhat as a bird would use them in the air. All its
plumage was covered with bubbles of air, which caught the
light until the bird appeared as if studded with sparkling gems
as it sped away into the depths of the dark river.

In the mating season the male struts before the female, puff-
ing out the breast as if to display his importance and beauty.

This Sandpiper shows its characteristic motions to the best
advantage when it fears that its young are in danger. It bal-
ances along the top of a wall or fence, displaying the utmost
activity and alarm, rapidly uttering its cries of peetweet, peet-
weet, and bobbing about from one side to the other. It is more
or less a land bird during the breeding season, but is fond of
the shores of lakes and the banks of streams during the migra-
tions. It flies along the rivers usually in half circuits, going
out over the water and returning to the shore with short
nervous strokes. Sailing sometimes with down-bent wing
tips, it veers from side to side, and then alighting bobs about
near the brink. Sometimes in early spring it is very quiet,
324 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

and unless alarmed exhibits few of the motions for which it is
famous.

The following, regarding its habits on the sea beach, is
taken from Dr. Townsend’s Birds of Essex County: “It is
particularly fond of nesting on islands. I used to find the eggs
at Kettle Island off Magnolia, in the late seventies, and Mr.
W. A. Jeffries notes the finding of eleven nests with eggs and
one with young at Tinker’s Island, off Marblehead, on June
8th, 1878. Four nests were in the short grass on high: land,
‘while others were all found more or less far under the rocks,
scattered over the grass or along the shore.’ Nuttall speaks
of their nesting at Egg Rock, off Nahant, ‘in the immediate
vicinity of the noisy nurseries of the quailing Terns.’ The
young birds, while still covered with the natal down, run very
fast and when hard pressed, take to the water and swim rapidly
and easily. On the beach, the Spotted Sandpiper rarely strays
beyond the dry sand, often in the beach grass, where he hunts
for insects and occasionally perches on an old root or piece of
wreck. They are particularly fond of pebbly beaches.”

There seems to be good reason to believe that it migrates
by sea as well as by land in the fall, as formerly it was common
in Bermuda at that season. In winter it ranges south to
southern Brazil, passing through Mexico and Central America
as well as the Antilles. In spring it arrives usually in northern
Florida earlier than it appears in southern Louisiana. This
seems to indicate that the species comes north by way of the
Antilles and Florida, but as it is taken in Mexico and Lower
California in migration, it may reach Louisiana from the west-
ward, or cross the Gulf of Mexico from Yucatan or Central
America. Eaton states the belief that this species comes to
central and western New York by the Mississippi route, as it
arrives there seven to ten days earlier than on the coast.

The food of the Tip-up consists largely of insects and earth-
worms. The bird apparently is harmless and very beneficial,
and, except along the sea-shore, where it is shot with other
Sandpipers for the table, it is killed mainly for sport.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 325

 

LONG-BILLED CURLEW (Numenius americanus).

Common or local names: Sicklebill Curlew; Sicklebill; Old-hen Curlew; Hen Curlew.

t-)
KS
KE

oe

   

Length. — 20 to 25 inches; bill from 3 (in some young birds) to 8, but com-
monly 5 to 6; toes webbed at base.

Adult. — Plumage similar to that of Marbled Godwit; generally reddish in
tone, varying in intensity in individuals; top of head dark, and variegated
with blackish, whitish and reddish, with no distinct central light line, as in
the Hudsonian or Jack Curlew; upper parts a mixture of brownish
black, tawny or buffy and cinnamon brown; lower parts reddish, cin-
namon or buffy, varying in intensity, usually deepening under wings;
fore neck and breast with dusky streaks which tend to arrowheads on
the sides, iris brown; bill black turning to fleshy brown toward base;
legs and feet grayish blue.

Young. — Similar to adult, but bill shorter.

Field Marks. — The great size and the extremely long curved bill serve to
identify the adults. The young, which have shorter bills, can be dis-
tinguished with certainty from the Jack Curlew when in the hand by
the smaller size of the latter, its striped head and the comparatively
rufous and unmarked wing linings and axillars of the Sicklebill. (See
Fig. 17.)

Note. — A ‘‘loud scream” (Maynard).

Season. — Now a very rare or accidental migrant, formerly more common;
usually August and September.
326 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Range. — North America. Breeds from central British Columbia, southern
Saskatchewan and Manitoba to northeastern California, northern New
Mexico and northwestern Texas; winters from central California and
southern Arizona south to Guatemala, and on Atlantic coast from South
Carolina to Florida, Louisiana and Texas; formerly migrated north to
Massachusetts and rarely to Newfoundland; now a straggler east of the
Mississippi, north of Florida; casual in West Indies.

History.

Probably the Long-billed Curlew was common in migration,
irregularly if not annually, on the coast of New England as
late as the earlier part of the last century. Old gunners who
have now “passed over the divide” have told. me that the
bird was plentiful in the days of their youth, and a few are
still living who say that they have seen it common here. Mr.
John R. Floyd of Rowley assures me that the bird was common
in 1840 on Plum Island River in Essex County, and Mr. Charles
L. Perkins of Newburyport says it was common there in his

 

Fic. 17.— First primary and axillars of Long-billed Curlew (after Cory).

youth. Mr. Thomas C. Wilson of Ipswich has not seen one
in his thirty years’ experience, but the older gunners there
tell him that it frequently was seen at times during the 60’s
and early 70’s. Old gunners say that it was common on the
marshes of South Sandwich about 1850. Mr. James P. Hatch
of Springfield says that about forty years ago (1868) it was
common on the plains from Eastham to South Wellfleet,
Cape Cod, but he has seen none for thirty-five years. There
is always much liability to error in these statements, as some
adult specimens of the Hudsonian Curlew have a longer bill
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 327

 

than the young of the Sicklebill, but some of the older gunners,
who had handled, watched and shot both species, were quick
to learn the difference in their notes, flight and markings, and
are not likely to have been often mistaken. Mr. Lewis Stone
of Ipswich told me (1908) that he killed many Sicklebills
“about forty years ago;” when he first went gunning he
killed them often. Mr. John M. Winslow of Nantucket never
has seen the species very numerous there; he states that years
ago he saw about one hundred in a flock, but usually saw only
a few at a time. Linsley (1843) found it at Stratford, Conn.,
and Colonel Pike told Mr. Dutcher that “sixty years ago”
(perhaps about 1840) it was plentiful on Long Island, N. Y.
The only record that I have from the interior of the State is
that of one seen by Prof. F. E. L. Beal of the Biological Survey,
in Leominster in 1898. I have received many reports of birds
seen or killed on the coast of Massachusetts within the past
forty years, but as no specimen was preserved in any case,
and as the Hudsonian Curlew often is mistaken for the Sickle-
bill, I hesitate to record any of them.

The following notes abridged from standard authors show
the former abundance of this bird and its decrease, on the
Atlantic coast: One or two pairs remain in salt marshes
of Cape May all summer (Wilson, 1813). Dr. Brewer tells
me that he has seen large flocks at Nahant, and that they are
offered for sale in the markets of Boston at close of summer
(Peabody, 1839). Regular visitor at Egg Harbor and Long
Island in spring and summer; in latter place seen as late as
middle of November (Giraud, 1844). Not uncommon during
migrations but very shy (Maynard, eastern Massachusetts,
1870). Not very abundant on coast in spring and fall on
northern side of Cape Cod; most abundant in autumnal
flight, when it appears in flocks of fifteen or twenty; much
sought after for markets (Samuels, 1870). In New England
appears to be rather uncommon (Coues, 1874). Not very
common (J. A. Allen, Massachusetts, 1879). Not now a com-
mon species in New England or north of New Jersey, and
noticeably less common in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland
and Virginia than in former years (Gurdon Trumbull, 1888).
328 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

At one time very abundant on Atlantic coast during migra-
tions; becoming less common every year (Cory, 1896). Be-
coming more scarce every year, and ornithologists believe its
extinction is only a question of time (Samuels, Massachusetts,
1897). Now a very rare or even accidental migrant (Howe and
Allen, Massachusetts, 1901). A bird of the past, threatened
with extinction; flocks along the Atlantic coast utterly de-
stroyed; twenty years ago abundant in late fall on coast of
Virginia and North Carolina, now practically unknown; in
Florida, where great numbers wintered, now rare (Sanford,
Bishop and Van Dyke, 1903). Very rare, accidental transient
visitor (C. W. Townsend, Essex County, Massachusetts, 1905).
A casual visitor (Knight, Maine, 1908). Now an accidental
migrant (G. M. Allen, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode
Island and Connecticut, 1909). A rare or accidental visitor
(Eaton, eastern New York, 1910).

Not one of my Massachusetts correspondents reports an
increase of this species, while thirty-eight report a decrease.
Within my own recollection, less than forty years ago, the
Long-billed Curlew was abundant in the Carolinas and Florida
where now it has almost disappeared, and I see no reason to
doubt that a somewhat similar condition once existed on our
own shores. Massachusetts was a little out of the line of its
great migration from its breeding grounds in the northwest
to the Atlantic coast, and while probably it was never so
plentiful here as in the south, its decrease there merely followed
and paralleled its disappearance here.

This Curlew is the largest of all our shore birds, and had
the quality of its flesh been equal to its size it would have been
extinct ere now. On the western plains, where it feeds largely
on insects and berries, its flesh is quite palatable. When it
reaches the Atlantic coast, and begins to feed on marine food,
it soon becomes fishy and more or less unpalatable. Therefore
it was not sought by epicures, and did not bring so high a
price pound for pound as did the Eskimo Curlew. Neverthe-
less, its great size rendered it a good target. It readily was
attracted by decoys. It sailed steadily in toward them, pre-
senting an imposing mark, easy to hit, and it was so solicitous
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 329

 

of the safety of its companions that when one or two were shot
down, the rest, though greatly alarmed, returned and flapped
about above their stricken comrades, diving toward them and
urging them to flight, until so decimated by the gunner that
only a remnant of the flock remained alive. This explains the
destruction of this bird, along the Atlantic coast. There are
very few gunners who, in the excitement of a scene like this,
would fail to shoot so long as a bird remained within range, and
it is to this lack of self-restraint on the part of the gunner,
and to the settlement of its prairie breeding grounds, that we
owe the destruction and approaching extinction of this great
and curiously formed wader. It is decreasing fast in the in-
terior, where it breeds, and on the Gulf coast of Texas, where
it still winters. As it is not known to visit South America,
the American people alone are to blame for its destruction.
Its future is in our hands. Soon it will disappear from the
Atlantic seaboard.

Unless we take immediate action to save this Curlew, it will
be unknown to our children’s children. It will be shameful if
this generation permits the extermination of this great, unique,
harmless and useful bird! It should be protected throughout
the United States and Canada. Nothing less than this will
restore it to the shores of the Atlantic, or prevent its rapidly
approaching extinction. Nothing more than this can be done
by legal enactment; and it is probable that this never will be
done unless the protection of all migratory birds is put in the
hands of the federal government, where it should have been
placed long ago. Anything that can be done with voice and
pen to bring about that consummation will tend to secure
sufficient protection for this and many other waders which are
doomed to extinction under the haphazard methods of legis-
lation and law enforcement which now prevail in many States.

Wilson says that the long bill of this bird is used in probing
into the holes of the small crabs, on which it feeds, and that it
takes worms and sea snails, such as are found in marshes;
also berries and insects, and that it is very fond of bramble-
berries, for which it searches the fields and uplands.
330 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

HUDSONIAN CURLEW (Numenius hudsonicus).

Common or local names: Jack Curlew; Jack.

 

Length. — About 17 inches, variable; bill about 4, twice length of head.

Adult. — Top of head blackish, with'a sharply defined central whitish stripe;
line over eye whitish; line through eye blackish brown; rest of upper
parts and tail brown, varied with blackish and grayish white; inner
webs of flight feathers or primaries barred with buffy; throat and belly
white; neck and breast thickly streaked with dusky; iris dark brown;
bill flesh colored toward base and black toward tip; legs grayish blue.

Field Marks. — General tone of plumage more grayish and less reddish than
that of the Sicklebilled Curlew; long curved bill sometimes longer than
that of the young Sicklebill; a light central crown stripe, bordered by
blackish stripes, distinguishes it from the other American species, but
this can be seen only at close range.

Notes. — Call note pip-pip-pip-pip; in spring a sweet Kur-lew (Hoffmann).

Season. — Usually a rare migrant, but irregularly and locally common
coastwise; early July to late September.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds on coast of Alaska from
mouth of Yukon to Kotzebue Sound, and on coast of northern Macken-
zie; winters from Lower California to southern Honduras, from Ecuador
to southern Chile, and from British Guiana to mouth of Amazon; migrates
mainly along Pacific and Atlantic coasts; rare in the interior; casual on
Pribilof Islands and in Greenland and Bermuda; accidental in Spain.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 331

 

History.

In this species, which is practically the only Curlew now
left to us, we have a peculiar instance of the survival of the
fittest. While probably decreasing in numbers, apparently it is
holding its own in many localities, and even increasing in
recent years. This increase may be more apparent than real,
for as time goes on, and birds become fewer, our standards
change, and the Hud-
sonian Curlew, which
once was regarded as
uncommon for a Cur-
lew when compared at
that time with the
abundance of the other a
large chore binds, is ™6 fa Mor aiene i erties of Subic ton
considered now as
common locally, when contrasted with the present scarcity
of the other species. It is probable that the extinction of the
Eskimo Curlew has provided more nesting places and more
food for the Hudsonian Curlew and that recently it has begun
to increase locally, and is now occupying some of the northern
breeding and feeding grounds formerly in possession of the
smaller species.

The following quotations, abridged from standard authors,
seem more or less contradictory, and show that there is some
question regarding the status of the species: Arrives in large
flocks on the coast of New Jersey early in May; few seen in
June; some in July (Wilson, 1813). On island in Piscataqua,
near Plymouth, N. H., dense flock, covering several acres
(Nuttall, 1834). Plentiful spring and autumn (Turnbull,
eastern Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 1869). Rare in New
England (Samuels, 1870). Rare in the migrations (Maynard,
eastern Massachusetts, 1870). Appears much less abundant
in United States than either of the others; according to all
observers, rare in New England (Coues, 1874). Rare migrant
spring and fall (J. A. Allen, Massachusetts, 1879). Abundant
every year in Massachusetts in fall; barren birds found on

 
332 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Atlantic coast from May to August (Brewer, 1884). While on
my way through these marshes (between Cobbs Island and
the mainland in the spring of 1885), frightening into the air
clouds of these big birds, more in a minute than I had seen
before in my whole life, it impressed me oddly to hear my
boatman complaining over yearly decrease (Trumbull, 1888).
Cannot be considered a common bird; more frequent than
the Long-bill (Stearns, New England, 1887). Becoming fewer
in number every year (Samuels, 1897). Uncommon migrant
on coast (Hoffmann, New York and New England, 1904).
Rare spring and uncommon fall migrant (G. M. Allen, Massa-
chusetts, 1909).

Mackay (1892), who has published the best account ever
written of the habits of this species, states in The Auk that
reliable accounts show that in the summer of 1833 some fifteen
hundred of these birds passed the season on the islands of
Nantucket and Tuckernuck, while for the seventeen years
previous to 1892 he never saw more than one hundred on
the average annually, and in the later years even this number
had decreased.

Twenty-two of my correspondents in Massachusetts have
seen a decrease of this species within their experience, and
seven find it increasing in their localities. Its increase
seems to be greatest on Cape Cod. The main reason for its
preservation is plain. Though formerly a tame and unsus-
picious bird, it has developed a remarkable faculty of taking
care of itself, and there is no shore bird to-day more difficult
to take and of which fewer are killed according to its numbers.
Young birds of the first year sometimes may be approached
readily, but the adult birds are so shy that few gunners find
that it pays to hunt them. They are indifferent food at best,
and for this reason there is little market demand.

This species migrates the entire length of both continents,
from the Arctic Ocean to the Straits of Magellan; it is com-
mon in Patagonia. It frequents mainly the wilder places,
little inhabited by man, breeds in the far north and so per-
petuates its race.

This species breeds, as did the Eskimo Curlew, on the
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 333

 

Barren Grounds and the treeless lands about the Arctic Sea.
In migration the birds often fly in flock formations, similar
to those of Geese and Ducks. Apparently they cross the
country west of Hudson Bay, flying from the shores of the
Arctic Sea direct to New England. Some are said to pass
through southern Labrador, but they are almost unknown on
the barren east coast. Probably the birds from the most
easterly breeding grounds are those which reach New England
and from here pass on down the Atlantic coast, where they
join and follow the main flight, which does not come here
but reaches the coast farther south. The adult birds come
to Massachusetts from the north in July and the young first
appear toward the last of August. There is a large migration
south through the Mississippi valley region and another on
the Pacific coast. The “Jack” is seen now on the coast in in-
creasing numbers in spring. The cessation of spring shooting
in many States and provinces probably accounts in a measure
for this.

In Massachusetts, according to Mackay, these birds feed
largely on fiddler crabs, grasshoppers, large gray sand spiders
(Lycosa), June beetles (Lachnosterna), other beetles (Scara-
beide) and huckleberries, which they pick from the bushes.
When flying to or from their feeding grounds they usually pass
about thirty yards high, except on windy days, when they fly
close to the ground or water. They feed mainly either in the
fields or pastures, where they find insects and berries, or among
the beach grass, where they find the fiddler crabs and spiders.
They also frequent marshes and mud flats and feed to some
extent on worms.! When feeding they usually scatter about
over the ground, moving slowly and sedately, except when in
pursuit of some particularly lively prey. Berries they pick
from the bushes with their bills, and presumably they probe
the holes or hiding places of the fiddlers with their long man-

dibles.

1 Mackay, George H.: Auk, 1892, pp. 347, 348.
334 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

PLOVERS.

The Plovers, family Charadriide, form a large family of
shore birds, many of the members of which, however, are not
by any means confined to the shore. The bill usually is short,
never longer than the head, and resembles that of a Pigeon.
The body is plump and well rounded, neither depressed as in
the Phalaropes nor compressed as in the Rails. The legs are
medium in length and the feet partially webbed. The hind
toe is wanting usually, but not always. Some species are
crested but those of North America are not. The members of
this family run and fly very rapidly, and the voice is usually a
mellow whistle. The sexes generally are similar in form and
color, but there are great changes with age and season in many
species. Often the young are so dissimilar in color to the adult
birds that they commonly are regarded as different species.

Five species of plover once were abundant here, —two
breeding commonly, one on the coast and the other mainly in the
interior. It is a sad commentary on the destructive tendencies
of the American people that only two are common here now,
and those only in migration, and that already we have come
very near exterminating the breeding species, which, however,
are now protected by law at all times in Massachusetts. These
beautiful dove-like birds are so attractive and interesting that
they should be protected throughout the summer months and
allowed to roam unmolested on beach, marsh, meadow and
upland. Such protection would save those which normally
breed here and would give the people a chance to become
acquainted with the migrating species which would swarm here
in the summer months if the State could be made a safe place
for them to rest in. Birds like the Plovers, which commonly
lay no more than four eggs in a season and rear but one brood,
cannot stand excessive shooting during a long open season.
They have had practically no protection until recent years.
If the Plover season were reduced to one month (September)
all over the United States, these birds might have some chance
to recover their former numbers. If they could be protected
and increased they would be valuable to agriculture.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 335

 

BLACK-BELLIED PLOVER (Squatarola squatarola).

Common or local names: Blackbreasted Plover; Blackbreast; Beetle-head; Bull-head
Chuckle-head; Bottle-head; Gump.

 

ADULT (SPRING). Youna (FALL.)

Length. — About 11 inches; bill 1.10; usually has a small hind toe.

Adult in Spring. — Above varied with blackish and ashy white; hind head
and back black, spotted and marked with white; tail white, barred with
brownish black; wings showing a band of white in flight; sides of head,
fore neck, throat, breast and upper belly black, bordered broadly by
white on each side, from forehead to lower breast; axillary feathers
(showing under the raised wings) black; legs and feet dusky lead color;
adult spring female smaller, duller and with less pure black.

Adult in Late Summer and Fall.— Upper parts dark brown, profusely
speckled with white; under parts white, with an occasional black feather;
tail and wings as in spring; black breast sometimes retained until fall.

Young. — Upper parts lighter and with a golden shade on each feather;
under parts whitish; breast streaked with gray.

Field Marks. — Whitish tail and upper tail coverts, and white band in the wing
plainly seen when bird is in flight; black avillaries seen on sides of body
under raised wing, which is white beneath, in strong contrast to axillaries.

Distinguishing Marks. — When in hand the small hind toe (other Plovers
have none) and basal web between outer and middle toes.

Notes. — Not unlike the toor-a-wee of the Bluebird, but lower in pitch, more
prolonged and mournful (Hoffmann).

Range. — Nearly cosmopolitan. Breeds on Arctic coast of North America,
from Point Barrow to Boothia and Melville peninsulas, and also on
Arctic coast of Russia and Siberia; winters from the Mediterranean to
South Africa, in India and Australia, and from California, Louisiana and
North Carolina to Brazil and Peru; in migration occurs throughout the
United States, in Greenland and Bermuda; accidental in Hawaii.
336 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

This cosmopolitan species is a large bird, of fine, imposing
and almost distinguished appearance in its black and white
nuptial dress. The shape of its head and beak seems to indi-
cate force of character, and its large, dark, beautiful eyes are
full of intelligence. Its wild, plaintive call is one of the sweetest
notes heard on our storm-beaten coast.

The plumage of the adult is so different from that of the
young that it is not to be wondered at that gunners often
regard the Beetle-head as another species than the Black-
breast; but the former is the young of the latter.

Nelson (1877) believed that the birds which remained
in Illinois during the summer bred there! but of this there
is no direct evidence. This is one of the species which,
according to Audubon, once passed the summer here, and
bred in New England and as far south as Pennsylvania,
but it is believed that he was mistaken in this, as the eggs
he describes resemble those of the Upland Plover. Nuttall
(1834) says that the Black-breast rears but one brood in
Massachusetts, where it rarely breeds; but the bird does
not breed here now, and probably never did, although
formerly it was seen here all summer, and a few have been
reported within recent years. Howe and Allen give dates of
June 18 and July 8. Dr. C. W. Townsend found a pair on
Ipswich Beach on June 25, 1903. This bird still possibly sum-
mers as far south as Florida, where Scott and Worthington
reported it on June 14, July 4 and July 26, and it summers
in South Carolina, where it is a permanent resident.? A few
remain there all summer, but do not breed (Wayne). The
June birds seen there are in winter or intmature plumage.

The American breeding grounds of this species are little
known, but it is believed to breed mainly on the coast and
islands of the Arctic Ocean, from Hudson Bay to Alaska and on
the Barren Grounds. It migrates apparently over practically
the same route in both spring and fall, and is found in migration

 

+ Nelson, E. W.: Bull. Essex Inst., 1876, Vol. 8, p. 122.
2 Wayne, Arthur T.: Birds of South Carolina, 1910, p. 58.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 337

 

not only on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, but in the interior
from Ohio at least to the Dakotas and Texas. The southward
movement begins early in July. Dr. Townsend records an
arrival in Essex County, Mass., on July 15. The adult birds
come first and sometimes reach Massachusetts the latter half
of the month; but their greatest wave of migration reaches
here and passes Cape Cod in August. The young begin to
arrive about September 1, accompanied by some adults. Sep-
tember is the month of greatest plenty, and the birds often con-
tinue to come in numbers well into October. The records
of the Chatham Beach Hotel show this plainly. Three were
killed on Monomoy in December, 1872, supposedly wintering.
The latest migration dates recorded are Essex County, Novem-
ber 10; Cape Cod, November 14.

This Plover was once very abundant here in migration.
Nuttall (1834) says that flocks of more than one thousand
gathered by the middle of September on the Chelsea (now
Revere) marshes, near Boston. The following condensed notes
record their decrease: Appears the last of September; collects
in great flocks (Peabody, 1839). Early in autumn very abun-
dant at Montauk (Giraud, Long Island, N. Y., 1844). Gener-
ally abundant during migrations; sometimes not even common
(Maynard, eastern Massachusetts, 1870). More or less com-
mon in spring and fall (J. A. Allen, 1879). The constant
gunning of the past few years has decreased their numbers in
this location (Monomoy) and on Long Island (Sanford, Bishop
and Van Dyke, 1903). Still common, but few remain in com-
parison with the hosts of former days (C. W. Townsend, Essex
County, Mass., 1905). Sixty-eight of my Massachusetts cor-
respondents find this bird decreasing; twelve find it increasing.

As the birds of this species which go down the Atlantic
coast in the fall apparently retrace the same route in the
spring, the abolition of spring shooting in a few of the Atlantic
coast States has stayed the depletion of their numbers some-
what, and they have held their own in Massachusetts better
than has the Golden Plover, which on its return north through
the Mississippi valley region in spring has been subject to tre-
mendous slaughter. If spring shooting were prohibited in all
338 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

the Atlantic States the species undoubtedly would increase.
Indeed, it is believed that even now the birds are coming to
parts of Cape Cod in the spring in much larger numbers than
before the spring shooting of shore birds was prohibited.

In May, 1909, I learned from Mr. J. A. Farley that a great
flight of Blackbreasts was passing Sandy Neck, Barnstable, and
through the kindness of Mr. Vaughan D. Bacon I am able to
present some notes on this flight: ““May 14, lots of Plover,
even way up incranberry bogs. May 20, M. G. reported three
thousand Yellow-legs and Plover. May 22, marshes full of
birds. May 23, northeast storm; plenty of birds. May 24,
M. H. reported flats covered with Plover and Yellow-legs at
low tide. May 27, harbor and marshes full of birds; saw
three thousand Blackbreasts rise in one flock from Phyllis
Island. May 29, at Sandy Neck, bunches of Plover flying all
day; fifteen to twenty in a bunch. May 30, Plover still flying
in bunches, like Coot. May 31, plenty Blackbreasts all along
shore; flats covered at low tide. June 1, Blackbreasts fewer
but still plenty. June 2, wind southwest; only a few Black-
breasts. June 3, Blackbreasts fewer. Last birds seen on the
8th.”

Such flights as these seem like the days of old, and go to
prove that more and more birds are finding refuge in Mas-
sachusetts in spring. I am told that this Plover comes to
Connecticut in larger numbers and stays longer since spring
shooting has been prohibited.

The experienced adult birds are very wary, and where
they are not molested in spring they are likely to return year
after year. During the fall these old and ‘‘educated” birds
will not stop often or stay long where they are much hunted.
The fall flights seen here consist very largely of the young or
immature birds, called Beetle-heads, Chuckle-heads, etc., by
gunners.

In New England this bird is found mainly along the coast,
and is seen usually in greatest numbers on Cape Cod, where it
feeds along beaches, sand bars, salt marshes and flats left bare
by the tide. It often seeks its food in the foam. Sometimes
it goes to the uplands, particularly when the tide is in, feeding
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 339

 

on berries and grasshoppers, like the Golden Plover. Formerly
it fed more on the hill pastures along these shores and the
islands near them, but continual shooting in spring and fall
drove it from some of these feeding grounds, to which it never
has returned.

Favorite resorts of these birds on Cape Cod during the days
of their greatest plenty were the flats and marshes of the harbor
of Barnstable, along Sandy Neck, the Dennis marshes, the
flats near Chatham, and marshes near Hyannis and Well-
fleet. Nantucket, Tuckernuck and Martha’s Vineyard also
were favorite feeding grounds. The earliest date I find given
for this Plover in spring in Massachusetts is April 18 (Mackay),
but they do not usually come in numbers much before the
15th of May. Their numbers commonly decrease about
June 1, and by June 5 to June 8 they practically have dis-
appeared, as few ever remain for the summer.

A careful review of all the available records of the flight
of this species in the different States of the Union leads to the
following conclusions: (1) The records show conclusively that
the species has decreased very much over the continent during
the last seventy-five years, except, perhaps, on the Pacific
coast, where there are few early records. (2) It never collected
in such large flights as did the Golden Plover. (3) It now
appears to be more numerous on the Atlantic coast, particularly
on Cape Cod, than in the interior.

In the west the Blackbreast is partial to ploughed fields,
where it feeds on earthworms, grubs, cutworms and beetles.
Prof. Samuel Aughey had two of these birds sent him from
Sarpy County, Neb., and found their stomachs crammed with
the destructive Rocky mountain locust and very few other
insects. Mackay in his excellent paper on this bird says that
in the Massachusetts marshes it feeds on the larve of a cutworm,
and that it eats the large, whitish, maritime grasshopper
(dipoda maritima), also marine insects and very small shell-
fish, which constitute a very large part of their food during
their flight along the coast of Massachusetts.!

 

1 Mackay, George H.: Auk, 1892, p. 146.
340 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

GOLDEN PLOVER (Charadrius dominicus dominicus).

Common or local names: Green Plover; Green-head; Green-back; Toad-head; Field
Bird; Pasture Bird; Brass-back; Pale-breast; Pale-belly; Muddy-breast; Frost
Bird; Three Toes.

 

ADULT (SPRING), Youne (Faz).

Length. — About 10.50 inches.

Adult in Breeding Plumage. — (Almost never seen in Massachusetts.) Gen-
erally black above, spangled with bright yellow and white; tail dark
grayish brown, barred with white, tinged with yellow; linings of wings
ashy; a wide white stripe from forehead passes over eyes down side of
head and neck, broadening on the side of breast; black below from chin
to tail.

Adult in Late Summer and Fall. — As seen here, upper parts as in spring, but
duller, little white, and the yellow is golden or greenish; below white,
mottled with grayish brown; linings of the wings grayish ash, as in spring.

Young. — Dusky above, mottled with dull whitish spots, becoming yellow
on the rump; below ashy, especially on lower neck and breast; generally
greener in tone than the adult.

Field Marks. — Young birds may be distinguished from the young of the
Black-bellied Plover (Beetle-head) by the absence of the whitish tail,
rump or upper tail coverts and the absence of the white in the outspread
wings. This species bobs its head frequently, the Black-bellied Plover
rarely.

Notes. — A plaintive too-lee-e; song, a marvellously harmonious succession
of notes (heard only on their breeding grounds) (Nelson). A bright
whistle, queep-quee-lee-leep; a note like the syllable queedle; a chuckle
(Townsend). A coodle (Mackay).
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 341

 

Season. — A rather rare or local fall migrant coastwise, formerly abundant;
August to mid October.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from Kotzebue Sound along
Arctic coast to mouth of the Mackenzie, and from Melville Island,
Wellington Channel and Melville Peninsula south to northwestern Hud-
son Bay; winters on pampas of Brazil and Argentina; migrates south
across Atlantic from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick; a few pass south
through Mississippi valley, and all migrate north by this route; in mi-
gration to California, Greenland and Bermuda.

History.

Of all the species of wading birds which formerly, in migra-
tion, swept in flocks from the arctic seas down the two Ameri-
can continents, the Golden Plover seems to have been the
most numerous. The Eskimo Curlew made a great show in
Labrador, where a large part of its numbers concentrated
in August, but the fall flight of the Golden Plover swept
over a great part of the continent as well. From their breeding
grounds on the arctic coasts and islands, extending from
Bering Sea to Hudson Bay and far toward the pole, they
moved southeasterly, probably crossing the continent diag-
onally, and reached the Atlantic not only in Labrador but at
many points. Thence by sea or along shore they followed
down the coasts of North and South America to the plains of
Argentina. Some also went down the Mississippi valley to
the Gulf.

Professor Cooke says that they are apparently unrecorded
at all seasons from Ecuador, Colombia, Panama, Nicaragua
and Honduras, although a few have been noted in Costa Rica,
Guatemala and eastern Mexico. He advances what is prob-
ably a true explanation of this line of flight. Birds follow the
shortest route that furnishes an abundant food supply. The
Plover, a bird of treeless regions, summers on the northern tun-
dras and winters on the pampas. It cannot return in spring
by the sea route as the food supply in Labrador is not ready;
therefore it goes north through the interior, migrating through
the treeless regions of the Mississippi valley and the Sas-
katchewan, where insects and seeds are plentiful. It might be
added that as the Atlantic seaboard was mainly forested
342 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

before its settlement, it possibly did not originally furnish
sufficient food in the fall migration for the great body of the
Plover, and so, therefore, many of them took the shortest
route to South America, which was by sea.

In the spring they probably leave the pampas, and passing
in one flight over the forested regions of interior South America,
cross the Gulf of Mexico and land on the plains of Louisiana
and Texas. When they land they are no longer fat. They
then move slowly northward over the prairies of the Missis-
sippi valley region. Very few stragglers are recorded authen-
tically at that season anywhere on the Atlantic coast. Before
the settlement of the west the Plover practically were un-
molested there by man, and they landed in such enormous
flocks on the prairies of Louisiana and Texas in the spring
that in those days of muzzle-loading guns the gunners killed
great numbers. Audubon states that on the 16th of March,
1821, he was invited by some French gunners to accom-
pany them to the neighborhood of Lake St. John, near
New Orleans, to observe the flight of thousands of these
birds. These gunners, who were familiar with the route that
the Plover would take, gathered in parties of from twenty to
fifty, and, sitting on the ground equi-distant from each other,
imitated the whistle of the birds so accurately that the Plover
came within a few yards, and were slaughtered unmercifully.
Several times he saw a flock of a hundred or more reduced to
a few individuals. This was continued all day, and at night
the gunners were as intent to kill as in the morning, when
they arrived. Dogs were used to bring the birds to their
masters after a considerable number had been killed. One
man killed sixty-three dozen, and Audubon having reckoned
the number of gunners in the field at two hundred, estimating
each to have shot twenty dozen birds, concluded that forty-
eight thousand Golden Plover fell there that day.!

Somewhat similar scenes were enacted in the fall on the
prairies of Illinois, when apparently the birds were moving
southeasterly toward the coast. The following notes exhibit
a part of this bird’s history: Green Plover are here very com-

 

1 Audubon J. J.: Ornithological Biography, Vol. III, p. 624.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 343

 

mon (Lawson, Carolina, 1709). Caught in great numbers in
nets at daybreak (Nuttall, Massachusetts, 1834). Quite
abundant (Giraud, 1844). Appears in large flocks on the open
plains of Long Island in fall, searching for grasshoppers and
other insect food (De Kay, New York, 1844). Common on
our coast both spring and autumn; great numbers taken in
nets (Peabody, Massachusetts, 1839). Pass throughout New
England; in 1865 immense flocks seen a few miles at sea fly-
ing south in fall; few alighted ashore (Samuels, 1870). Com-
mon spring and autumn migrant (J. A. Allen, 1879). Shot
numbers of these birds in marshes of Back Bay, Boston, where
the Public Library now stands (Samuels, 1897). Not unusual
in northern Illinois in 1890 for one gun to kill from one hundred
to one hundred and fifty Golden Plover a day by walking up
to birds; decoy often two or three times to the decoys and
whistle, until sometimes the greater part lie dead upon the
grass; wing-tipped birds are tied out among the flock by
market hunters; dead birds also put out on sticks; in northern
Illinois two hundred a day, one thousand a week, may be
killed over decoys; Isaac McLellan, veteran sportsman, says
that in years past they were found in countless numbers over
the grassy slopes of Montauk Point (Long Island, N. Y.), and
the hillsides of Gardiner’s Island, but in later years, for some
unknown cause, they have forsaken their old haunts, and
flown to fresh fields and pastures new (Leffingwell, 1890).
Excellent sport with these birds when Snipe shooting on west-
ern prairies in spring; once so abundant as to seem to need
no legislation; seen no more in some places where very abun-
dant a few years ago; in Illinois and Indiana their number
was remarkable (Huntington, 1903). In late September,
young used to frequent Back Bay marshes, Boston, which I
considered splendid Plover ground; now a thing of the past
(Herbert K. Job, 1905). In 1886 could go within eight miles
of Chicago (April) and see thousands; now seen chiefly in
small flocks (Parker, 1890). At one time abundant in New
England in early fall; decreased greatly in past few years
(Cory, 1896). Becoming steadily rarer (Hoffmann, 1904).
Before the settlement of the west, and up to and beyond
344 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

the middle of the nineteenth century, great flights of Golden
Plover sometimes passed over New England in the fall migra-
tion. Severe easterly storms checked their flights or drove
them inland from the sea, and they occasionally settled and
fed in our fields. They were exceedingly abundant at times
along the Connecticut River valley and on the hills of Worces-
ter County, Mass.

Such flights as these may have come direct from the north-
west, but the greatest flights which landed here were those of
the main body of birds which came down the coast from the
arctic regions, or crossed Labrador and took flight thence, by
the sea route direct for South America. A great part of the
species came down the Atlantic from Labrador, Newfoundland
or Nova Scotia, and sometimes, leaving the land in fair weather,
they met a circular cyclonic storm at sea coming up the coast,
and were buffeted, driven back and carried over toward the
coast by that westerly motion of its border known as a north-
easter or a southeaster, according to its direction, which,
blowing with irresistible force, landed them on the shores of
New England. A tempest with thunder, lightning and a
heavy downpour of rain often had the same effect. Under
such conditions they were driven to our coasts in immense
numbers, and tales are told still, among the natives of Cape
Cod, of the enormous flights of Plover which their fathers and
grandfathers saw. Some of these flocks are remembered still
by living witnesses. Mr. John M. Winslow of Nantucket tells
me that Mr. Peter Folger, one of his former shooting com-
panions, awaking one morning in the 40’s found a great storm
raging, and it seemed to him as he looked out from his window
that it was “raining Plover.” He and Deacon David N.
Edwards loaded up with ammunition, dividing a bag of shot
between them. Three times during that forenoon they were
obliged to go down to the pond and wash out their guns. They
shot until 3 p.m., and killed Plover enough to fill a tip cart
two-thirds full. The captain of a cod-fishing vessel then in
the harbor, bound for New York, agreed to take the birds to
New York for them, and to give them half of what he received.
He returned them twenty-five dollars. Mr. Edwards said
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 345

 

that he never knew before that the people of New York would
eat Plover. Mr. M. M. Boutwell records a great flight of the
Golden Plover which came to Clark’s Hill, Lunenburg, Mass.,
near Fitchburg, in 1851. This is a large, high hill, and the
birds came there in the fall after a hard easterly storm. They
stayed about the hill feeding for a few days, and Mr. Boutwell
and a hunting companion, George Smith, shot many of them
at two different trips. Firing into the flocks did not seem to
disturb them much, for they would simply rise in the air,
make a wide circle and alight again only a few rods from their
starting place. Mr. Boutwell says that there were so many
that he could not even attempt to estimate their numbers.
Mr. Lewis Stone of Ipswich says that about the last of August
1852, a tremendous flight of Golden Plover landed on the coast.
They came over the hills in such numbers and so fast and
low that any one who went there seemed in danger of being
struck by birds in full flight. A three days’ rainstorm was
blowing. On the first day the wind was northeast, the second
day east and the third day southeast. The next day was
Sunday, and on Monday the Boston market was so over-
stocked with birds that the marketmen would give only five
cents apiece for them, and a Mr. Newell of Ipswich, a market
hunter, gave up gunning for a time, because there was no sale
for birds. Mr. Henry Shaw tells me that “‘soon after 1860,”
a great flight of these birds swarmed over the fields and hills
south of Worcester. On the first day he and one other hunter
alone found them, but on the second day nearly every man
and boy who heard of it and could secure a gun was out shoot-
ing. This probably was a part of the great flight of 1863.
Mr. Winslow of Nantucket well remembers this flight (August
29, 1863), when Golden Plover and Eskimo Curlews landed on
the island in such numbers as to “almost darken the sun.” Be-
tween seven and eight thousand of these birds were killed on
the island and on Tuckernuck. All the powder and shot on
Nantucket were expended, and the gunners had to send to
the mainland for more. After that the wind changed to the
southwest, and there was good shooting for two weeks. Sep-
tember 5, 1863, an immense flight landed on Cape Cod and
346 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

along the shores of Massachusetts. No such great flight has
occurred on that coast since that time. Considerable flights
have landed, notably in 1867, 1870, 1873, 1881, 1882, 1883 and
1886, but their numbers diminished until by 1904 they had
almost disappeared. A potent reason for this condition, as
given by Mackay, was the continual persecution the poor birds
suffered whenever and wherever they landed on our coasts.
Having undergone such experience they afterwards passed over
or by, keeping out to sea, landing only when absolutely forced
to do so, and leaving again the moment clearing weather ap-
peared. The persecution which they suffered at all times all
along the Atlantic coast, from Labrador to the Carolinas, must
have had some effect by this time in reducing their numbers,
but the most destructive force was spring shooting in the
Mississippi valley region, which developed and increased
with the settlement of the country. As the west became
settled and the railroads made the great markets accessible,
they were flooded during the spring, from New Orleans to
Chicago and St. Louis, with thousands of Golden Plover.
From 1860 to 1880 the species gradually diminished all over
the United States. The decrease of the Passenger Pigeon
in the markets about 1880 caused an excessive demand in
spring for game to take its place, and as the demand was par-
tially met with the Eskimo Curlew, so it was also in part met
by the Golden Plover, which continued to decrease through-
out its range. It was marketed in large numbers in the east
whenever the western market was glutted, until about 1890 or
1891. In 1890 alone two Boston firms received from Nebraska,
Missouri and Texas forty barrels closely packed with Eskimo
Curlew, Golden Plover and Upland Plover (see page 427).

The Golden Plover almost disappeared from New England,
falling off about ninety per cent. in fifteen years. It also grew
rapidly less in the west, but was saved from the fate of the
Eskimo Curlew by the passage of laws in many western States
prohibiting spring Plover shooting, and forbidding the sale
of game or its shipment out of the State.

Since these laws have gone into effect we have seen a slight
increase in the numbers of this bird on the Atlantic coast, and
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 347

 

for at least four years, greater numbers have been seen or
killed than for some previous years. Nevertheless, the Golden
Plover is still in danger of extinction. Only four of my Mas-
sachusetts correspondents (1908) report an increase of this
species in the State, while fifty-four report a marked decrease.

The food of the Golden Plover consists largely of insects,
Orthoptera being well represented. They are fond of grass-
hoppers and locusts, but Mackay says that on Nantucket he
has never seen them eat any, and that the stomachs that he
has examined have been filled with crickets, (which seem their
principal food), grass seeds, and a little vegetable matter like
seaweed. In Labrador they feed on the crowberry (Empetrum
nigrum). Formerly their vast flocks, visiting the ploughed
lands of Ontario in the fall, gleaned great numbers of insects
from the fields. All over their migration range in the west
they did great service in ridding the fields and prairies of wire-
worms, cutworms and other destructive insects exposed by
the plough. On the prairies of Manitoba they followed the
prairie fires, picking up the half-burned insects and those that
had escaped the flames among the grass roots.!. This being
the character of their food, they are found principally where
it is plentiful, on ploughed lands, marshes, old fields, prairies
and pastures, particularly where the grass is short, as they
seem rather to dislike tall grass. The marshes and the com-
mon pasture about Newburyport, the hill pastures and shores
of Ipswich, the sandy hills and fields of Cape Cod, and the
pastures of Tuckernuck, Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard
were favorite feeding grounds of this bird.

Every farmer knows, or should know, that the grasshoppers,
locusts, crickets, white grubs, cutworms and wire worms which
the Plover eat are reckoned among the most destructive of all
pests in the hayfield, grain field or garden, and it must be evi-
dent to all thoughtful people that the immense flocks of Golden
Plover which formerly swept north and south over the fertile
plains of this country would have done great service to agri-
culture had they been protected during their flights up and
down the continent.

 

1 Nash, Charles W.: Birds of Ontario, 1909, p. 24 (Bull. 173, Ontario Dept. of Agr.).
348 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

KILLDEER (Ozyechus vociferus).

Common or local names: Killdeer Plover; Killdee.

      
 

   
 

hn
h

woe eon
1

Vlas

st

y epil

4
i

    

Length. — 9 to 10.50 inches; bill .80.

Adult. — Top of head and entire back brown; chin, throat and ring entirely
around neck white; forehead and sides of head black and white before
eye, passing to brown and buffy behind it; lower parts white; a black
collar, widening in front, and a narrow black band across breast a little
below it; wings show contrast of dark and white when spread; rump
and base of tail vary from orange brown to light chestnut or cinnamon;
tail variegated with cinnamon or chestnut brown, black and white and
their gradations; bill, iris, legs and feet blackish.

Young. — Similar, but the black bands replaced by gray; feathers of upper
parts marked with rusty brown.

Field Marks. — One of the larger Plovers, with a white ring on neck and
two black bands on breast. When facing the observer it shows four
black bands, two on head and two on breast. Wings long and narrow;
cinnamon rump and white of wings show plainly in flight.

Notes. — A high-pitched, noisy kildee, kildee, kildee and similar notes, in
a complaining tone.

Nest. — In grass or among pebbles, usually near water, sometimes in fields.

Eggs. — Usually four, about 1.50 by 1.10, varying from drab to cream, and
marked with blackish or dark brown in endless variations.

Season. — A rare migrant and very rare local summer resident; formerly
more common; about March 1 to mid November.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from central British Columbia,
southern Mackenzie, central Keewatin and central Quebec south to
Gulf coast and central Mexico; winters from California, Arizona,
Texas, Indiana, New Jersey and Bermuda south to Venezuela and
Peru: casual in Newfoundland, Paraguay and Chile; accidental in
Great Britain.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 349

 

History.

Undoubtedly the Killdeer once bred commonly in suitable
localities throughout southern New England. Old people in
Berkshire, Hampden, Worcester, Middlesex and Barnstable
counties spoke of this bird years ago as nesting commonly
there in their youth, and it has bred not uncommonly in
Barnstable, Hampden and Dukes counties within the memory
of men now living. Dr. Townsend says that undoubtedly it
once bred in Essex County, and Brewster speaks of a nest
found long ago in what is now Back Bay Fens in Boston.

The following abridged notes, showing the former abun-
dance and later decrease of this bird, are interesting: Known
to almost every resident of the United States, being a common
and pretty constant resident (Wilson, 1813). Breeds in middle
and western States and farther north (Audubon, 1835). A
common bird; there’ is hardly any time when it is worth the
trouble of shooting (Peabody, Massachusetts, 1839). To
most persons residing in the country this species of Plover is
familiarly known as the Killdeer (Giraud, Long Island, N. Y.,
1844). A rare summer resident; said to have been locally
common (Maynard, eastern Massachusetts, 1870). Pretty
generally distributed through New England as a summer resi-
dent (Samuels, 1870). A not common summer resident (J. A.
Allen, 1879). Throughout New England general distribution,
nowhere common (Brewer, 1884). At one time not uncommon
in New England, but of late years quite rare (Chamberlain,
1891). A rare summer resident in southeastern Massachusetts
(Hoffmann, 1904). I have received no report of any increase
in this species in Massachusetts, while fifty-one of my Mas-
sachusetts correspondents report a decrease.

In November, 1888, after a southern hurricane, great
numbers of these birds appeared on the New England coast.
Probably they were carried to sea on the edge of the cyclone,
and brought ashore here by an easterly wind, having been
swept around the circumference of the storm. They were
seen in numbers all over Nantucket, as well as on the main-
land near the coast. Many of them remained until they were
350 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

shot by gunners, and the next season the species was as rare
as before.

Notwithstanding the facts that the flesh of the Killdeer is
of little value as food, and that it is one of the most useful
insectivorous birds of the garden and field, it has been almost
exterminated in Massachusetts by shooting in spring, while
it was preparing to nest, and in summer before the young
were able to fly. Quite a colony of Killdeers was in existence
near Springfield until after the beginning of this century; but
it was exterminated by shooting in July and August. Mas-
sachusetts has presented to the world the singular spectacle
of legalizing the extermination of a beautiful and useful species
of practically no food value. It was lawful to shoot this bird.
in spring until recent years and in summer until 1909, when it
had become nearly extinct in the State. Then the passage of a
law protecting it at all times was secured. This, together with
a statute for the protection of wild-fowl in spring, which was
passed the same year, may save the bird from extirpation in the
Commonwealth. Within the past two years a few instances of
its breeding in Hampden, Middlesex and Bristol counties have
been reported. This year (1910) a pair of Killdeers built a
nest almost under the walls of a gunning stand and reared
a brood unmolested. ‘This species still breeds in some num-
bers in New York and New Jersey, and even in Connecticut
and Rhode Island, where it has been better protected by
the farmers than in Massachusetts. This Commonwealth is
well within its range, for it breeds north to Quebec, and there
is hope that if it is protected at all times by law in Massa-
chusetts for a long term of years it may become common
again on our farms and gardens.

The Killdeer is one of the most beautiful and attractive of
the Plovers, and, contrary to the general rule among shore
birds, it is more numerous in the interior than along shore.
As soon as the ice breaks up in the rivers and lakes the Kill-
deer’s cry is heard — the harbinger of spring. It makes its
home on low-lying farms. Jt frequents meadows and cul-
tivated lands, where it feeds on destructive insects and worms.
In some localities it is recognized among the farmers, as one of
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 351

 

their best and most constant friends in garden and field, and
if fully protected and left unmolested in its occupancy of the
fields it becomes as common a feature of the country home
as is the Lapwing in England. So far as its food habits are
now known it seems to be utterly harmless and very bene-
ficial — a beautiful and desirable bird to protect and cultivate.

In the middle States and in the south it often builds its
nest in tilled fields, and follows the instruments of cultivation,
gleaning worms and insects from the furrow, like the Robin or
the Blackbird. When disturbed or alarmed its wild cry, kzlldee
dee dee deer, rings on the air as it flies rapidly away or circles
about, exhibiting in turn the bright contrasting markings of its
breast and the lovely and striking hues of its back, wings and tail.
Its large, intelligent, carmine eyes seem to fit it for nocturnal
activity. In the fields of the south I frequently have started
it from its feeding grounds at night, and listened to its weird
and plaintive cry as it swept and circled about in the moon-
light. Like other species of Plover it often stands quite still
in the field, with head drawn in, uttering a plaintive cry when
approached. The hunter is not fond of it, for its cries alarm
other game.

Prof. Samuel Aughey examined the stomach contents of
nine of these birds taken from May to September in Nebraska,
and found 258 locusts and 190 other insects. Only one had
taken grain, and of that only a few waste kernels. Nash states
that its food consists of earthworms and insects, of which
small beetles form the greater part, and that a brood of these
birds and their parents will relieve a farm of an enormous
number of insects daily. He has known stomachs of this
species to be completely filled with weevils taken from or-
chards.!_ Eaton found it feeding on grasshoppers, beetles,
caterpillars and a few water insects. Throughout the country,
wherever the Killdeer is found, it is very destructive to weevils,
some species of which cost the farmers of the United States
millions of dollars annually. The Killdeer takes weevils from
ploughed fields as well as from orchards, and it is one of the
enemies of the Mexican cotton boll weevil.

 

1 Nash, C. W.: The Birds of Ontario, 1909 p. 25 (Bull. 173, Ontario Dept. of Agr.).
352 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

SEMIPALMATED PLOVER (Agialitis semipalmata).

Common or local names: Ring-neck; Little Ring-neck.

 

Length. — 6.76 inches; bill .50; feet partly webbed.

Adult. — Forehead white, bordered all around by a black band that also
surrounds the eye and extends below and behind it; spot behind eye,
chin, throat and ring around neck white; a black collar around base of
neck; rest of upper parts grayish brown; under parts white; legs and
feet pale flesh color; base of bill orange or yellow, tip black.

Young. — No black markings; white of forehead reaches bill and eyes, and
is prolonged over latter, neck ring and stripe behind eye gray; upper
parts with slight whitish or rusty edgings of the feathers; bill mostly
black.

Field Marks. — One black ring around neck. This bird is the color of wet
sand, while the Piping Plover, which is about the same size, is the color
of dry sand.

Notes. — A simple, sweet, plaintive call. Chee-wee (Hoffmann).

Season. — Common spring and autumn migrant coastwise, rare inland; late
April to mid October. ;

Range. — North and South America. Breeds from Melville Island, Welling-
ton Channel and Cumberland Sound to valley of Upper Yukon, southern
Mackenzie, southern Keewatin and Gulf of St. Lawrence; winters from
southern Lower California, Louisiana and South Carolina to Patagonia,
Chile and the Galapagos; casual in Siberia, Greenland and Bermuda.

History.

This common and handsome little Plover is known almost
universally as the Ring-neck. It is one of the small birds
which rarely was shot by the earlier settlers or by sportsmen
up to the latter half of the nineteenth century; but since the
great depletion of the larger shore birds this little one has
become a common target. It is regarded now as legitimate
game, and its numbers have decreased rapidly of late. Only six
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 353

 

of my Massachusetts correspondents report an increase of this
species in their localities, while seventy-one report a decrease.

It formerly was very abundant and familiar all along the
coast of New England. Usually a pair or a few pairs are now
seen together or associated with the smaller Sandpipers.
Sometimes as many as forty or fifty are seen in a flock, flying
in loose order, though occasionally they move more com-
pactly. At such times the fortunate gunner makes a “killing.”
When they alight they usually scatter and run about with
their heads up, occasionally bobbing their heads or snatching
up some food. Sometimes at high tide they may be found
huddled together above high-water mark fast asleep, with
heads drawn in, although some are usually on the watch.
They frequent sandy or pebbly shores, bared by the flowing
tide, and may be seen singly, in pairs or in small flocks on salt
marshes and mud flats.

Ordinarily this Plover is a rather silent bird, unless alarmed,
and stands quietly when approached, but runs so swiftly
when apprehensive of danger that it seems almost to glide
over the ground. It is quite an adept at concealment, and
when hidden behind a few stalks of grass it is almost invisible.
When standing or squatting on the wet sand or among wet
rocks its color so perfectly matches its surroundings that the
eye hardly can find it.

Dr. Brewer says that a few Semipalmated Plovers have
been known to summer and probably to breed on Grand
Manan; but I know of no recent instance of the summering of
this species in New England.

Its food on the coast consists largely of small crustacea,
mollusks, eggs of marine animals, and insects, which it some-
times gleans from ploughed fields. In the interior it feeds on
locusts, other Orthoptera and many other terrestrial insects.
Professor Aughey examined the stomach contents of eleven
Ring-necks taken in four counties of Nebraska between April,
1865, and July, 1875, and found all of them filled with insects.
Eight stomachs contained from forty to sixty Rocky Moun-
tain locusts each, and in all but one of the eleven there were
other insects.
354 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

PIPING PLOVER (igialitis meloda).

Common or local names: Clam-bird; Mourning-bird; Beach-plover; Ring-neck.

 

Length. — 6.50 to 7 inches; bill .45 to .48.

Adult Male. — Forehead, chin, throat and ring around neck white; band
across forward part of crown, between eyes, black; a partial black
collar on lower neck, almost always broken both front and back, in
rare cases complete; upper parts mainly pale ash; tip of tail black;
below white; base of bill orange, tip black; legs and feet orange yellow.

Adult Female. — Similar, but the black tending to brownish, and less distinct.

Young. — Resembles female, but no trace of dark color on head and little,
if any, on sides of neck; feathers of upper parts with pale or rusty
edgings; bill mainly black.

Field Marks. — This is the only pale Ring-neck on the beach. In flight
the wings show much marked dark brown and white.

Notes. — A plaintive piping whistle, repeated. Queep, queep, queep-o
(Langille).

Nest. — A hollow in the sand or shingle of the beach.

Eggs. — 1.20 to 1.30 by .95 to 1, clay color or creamy white, sparsely marked
with chocolate specks.

Season. — Uncommon migrant; uncommon and very local summer resident
along coast; formerly common. Early April to mid September.

Range. — Eastern North America. Breeds locally from southern Saskatch-
ewan, southern Ontario, Magdalen Islands and Nova Scotia south to
central Nebraska, northwestern Indiana, Lake Erie, New Jersey (for-
merly) and Virginia; winters on coast of United States from Texas
to Georgia, and in northern Mexico; casual in migration to Newfound-
land, Bahamas, Greater Antilles and Bermuda.

History.
This lovely little bird is a resident of the sandy shores of
the sea. It formerly was abundant, and bred in colonies on
all the sandy outer beaches from Nova Scotia to Virginia.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 355

 

Now it almost has disappeared as a breeder from great stretches
of sea-coast, from Maine to New Jersey at least, although still
seen locally, but rarely in numbers exceeding two or three
pairs. In the migrations, however, it is more or less common
locally. The following notes give convincing evidence of its
former abundance and recent decrease: Very abundant on
the low sandy shores of our whole sea-coast during the sum-
mer (Wilson, 1813). Common inhabitant of our sea-coast
from New Jersey to Nova Scotia (Nuttall, 1834). Breeds
on all the eastern coast of the United States that is adapted to
its habits (Audubon, 1835). Found along our whole coast in
summer (Peabody, 1839). Common summer resident; breeds
abundantly on sandy shores (Maynard, eastern Massachusetts,
1870). Pretty abundantly distributed along coast of New
England as summer resident (Samuels, 1870). Common
summer bird of New England coast (Coues, 1874). Common
summer resident along coast (J. A. Allen, Massachusetts,
1879). From many of our beaches in New England and New
Jersey this Plover has been driven (Brewer, 1884). Formerly
common in August and September (Brewster, Cambridge
region, 1906). Formerly breeding on west coast of Maine,
now rare migrant (Knight, 1908). Uncommon migrant and
summer resident coastwise (G. M. Allen, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island and Connecticut, 1909). Common on Long
Island in Giraud’s time; now limited as a breeder to a few
localities (Eaton, New York, 1910).

Only four of my correspondents find the species increasing
anywhere, and the increase given is slight, except by one man
in Barnstable County, who finds an increase of fifty per cent.
since the law was passed in Massachusetts protecting this
bird at all times. Forty find it decreasing. Most of the
others never have seen it. Legalized shooting of shore birds
after July 15 in several of the Atlantic coast States is respon-
sible largely for the great diminution and the threatened
extinction of this species on this coast. In August I have seen
the downy young, only a few days from the egg, running
along the beach, while men and boys who ought to have
“known better” were engaged in the pleasant (and then
356 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

lawful) recreation of shooting the solicitous parents, whose
anxiety for the little ones brought them within gunshot. Even
the half grown young were legitimate targets (and still are
in some States). They are the game of boys and some foreign
gunners.

This bird is said to raise two broods in a season, but I
never have seen any evidence of this except July and August
broods, which may have been the result of an attempt to raise
young after the first brood had been destroyed. The eggs are
laid in a mere hollow in the sand or pebbles of the lonely barren
beach, or among the scattering beach grass near the foot of
some sand dune. Sometimes they are washed away by an
unusually high tide and sea. The young are able to run about
as soon as they are hatched. Like their parents they match
the color of dry sand. On the approach of danger they squat,
close the eyes and remain motionless. I once saw one hide
in this way, and, keeping my eye upon it, walked to it and
took it in hand. I then let it go, thinking to see if it could
conceal itself effectually on the open beach. It ran a few steps,
then disappeared behind a little rise, and although I followed
it immediately I never saw it again. The parents, ordinarily
rather suspicious and shy, become emboldened by their solici-
tude for their young, and with cries of alarm follow the intruder
on their breeding grounds. The call of this Plover is wild and
pensive, but melodious withal. Dr. Townsend names it
“the call of a dying race.” When alarmed on its breeding
grounds at night-fall, it follows the disturber of its peace until
daylight has faded, and, pillowed on the sand, I have been
lulled to sleep by its wild and mournful cries as they mingled
with the ceaseless roar of the pounding surf.

This species feeds, according to Dr. Warren, on insects,
crustacea, mollusks and the eggs of marine animals. Professor
Aughey found the stomachs of four birds from Nebraska
filled with insects, and two of them had eaten locusts.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 357

 

WILSON’S PLOVER (Ochthodromus wilsonius).

Length. —'7 to 8 inches; bill long and large for a Plover, .80 to .90; outer
toes half webbed.

Adult Male. — Above ashy gray or brownish gray; forehead white, white
extending over eye; top and sides of head, and nape brownish gray,
blackening at upper edge of forehead; a blackish stripe from bill to
below eye, not meeting its fellow above base of bill, as white of forehead
comes down to bill; below white, with a broad black half collar on fore
neck and upper breast, not extending’ to back of neck; but white of
neck so extends; wing quills dark; white wing bar; tail darkening in the
middle toward tip, but end and edges whitish; iris dark brown; bill
black; legs flesh colored.

Adult Female. — Like male, but the black marks replaced by dark or brownish
gray, often tinged with reddish; the breast band tinged with buff.
Young. — Similar to adult female, but without black marks on head; a

broad band of the color of back across front of neck.

Field Marks. — The large, long, thick bill and the larger size of the head
distinguish it from the smaller Ring-necks.

Season. — Accidental summer visitor.

Range. — Southern North America. Breeds from Texas eastward along
Gulf coast, and from southeastern Virginia (formerly New Jersey)
south to northern Bahamas; winters from southern Lower California,
Texas and Florida south to southern Guatemala and probably to West
Indies; casual in Nova Scotia and New England, and at San Diego, Cal.

History.

This bird is an accidental visitor from the south. There
are two tenable Massachusetts records, namely, a specimen
taken at the Gurnet, Plymouth, August
22, 1877, by Arthur S. Fiske, and one
taken from a gunner’s bag at Ipswich
by Dr. C. W. Townsend, May 8, 1904.?
Linsley records it at Stratford, Conn.,
and Eaton gives eight records for New
York. Peabody states in his report on
the Birds of Massachusetts (1839) that
the species was abundant at Nahant in 1838. “This record,”
says Dr. C. W. Townsend, “was believed to be on the authority
of Dr. Brewer, who later refuted the statement.”

 

Fie. 19.—Wilson’s Plover.

 

1 Coues, Elliott: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1882, p. 59. .
2 Townsend, C. W.: Memoirs, Nuttall Orn. Club, No. III., The Birds of Essex County, Mass.,

1905, p. 199.
358 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Dr. Brewer himself says, in reviewing Dr. J. A. Allen’s
list of Massachusetts birds, that in his opinion this species
is not to be anticipated in Massachusetts. Nevertheless, as
two records have been made since his opinion was promul-
gated, the Wilson’s Plover may be confidently looked for as a
straggler at least in Massachusetts. It formerly bred north
to New Jersey and probably visited New England during the
late summer, as at that time birds are given to wandering,
and some species from the southern States occasionally reach
New England. Like all the shore birds which formerly bred
along the Atlantic coast, it has been reduced much in numbers
and extirpated from the more northern part of its breeding
ground, where spring and summer gunners are numerous, and,
like the other species, it will disappear from the Atlantic
coast unless such gunning is prohibited on all coasts within
its breeding range. This bird may be distinguished at once
from the Ring-neck by its larger size, its large head and its
large black bill. It feeds on insects, crustaceans, etc.

TURNSTONES.

The Turnstones (Subfamily Arenariine) somewhat resem-
ble the Plovers, but they have four toes, and the bill, which is
shorter than the head and quite straight, is very hard, and
tapers from about the middle to a sharp point. The legs are
rather short and stout, and the toes are not webbed but
narrowly margined. Turnstones are distributed generally over
the globe. The few species are known everywhere by their
peculiar habits. Only one inhabits the eastern coast of North
America. This species, so long sought by gunners and sports-
men, has been saved from extinction because it breeds in the far
north, on the coasts and islands of the Arctic Ocean, where it is
comparatively safe from mankind during the breeding season;
but it will continue to decrease in numbers unless better pro-
tected. The very least.that should be done for its conser-
vation is to prohibit spring shooting all along the Atlantic
coast of the United States.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 359

 

RUDDY TURNSTONE (Arenaria interpres morinella).

Common or local names: Turnstone; Chicken-plover; Chicken-bird; Chicken; Brant-
bird; Redlegs; Sparked-back; Streaked-back; Creddock; Sea-quail.

 

Length. — 8 to 9.50 inches; bill .80 to .90.

Adult. — Pied above with black, white, brown and chestnut red or rufous;
the white top of head streaked with black; upper breast, fore neck and
region about eye black; white showing on back and wings in flight;
below mainly white, except breast; legs and feet orange red or coral
red; bill blackish.

Young. — Upper parts brown, streaked with gray or mottled with black
and paler brown; in flight, lower back, wings and tail appear similar
to those of adult; sides of throat and breast dark brown, mottled; rest
of under parts white.

Field Marks. — In flight three longitudinal stripes of white show on back,
the middle one interrupted by a patch of black at base of tail. In adult
plumage the black upper breast, reddish-brown back and red feet may
be distinguished by the use of a glass.

Notes. — When flying, a loud twittering note (Nuttall). Call note a chuck-
ling whistle (Hoffmann). A clear whistle of two or three notes, deep,
melodious.

Range. — North and South America. Breeds on Arctic shores from Mac-
kenzie River east, probably to Melville Peninsula, and north to Melville
Island; winters from central California, Texas, Louisiana and South
Carolina to southern Brazil and central Chile.

History.

This bird, which is known quite generally among the older
shore gunners of Massachusetts as the Chicken-plover or
chicken, is known on Nantucket as the Creddock. It formerly
was very abundant, and was one of the first shore birds named
in the game laws of Massachusetts, when, in 1835, a law was
360 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

passed to protect the Plover, Curlew, Dough-bird and Chicken-
bird at night.

It was considered of much economic importance then
because of its numbers and food value. Although its flocks
were never very large, they were numerous all along the coast,
and it was found on the shores of inland rivers in the fall
migration, though never very common away from the salt
water, except, perhaps, on the large lakes of the interior.
Notwithstanding its numbers on our coasts have decreased
greatly, it is still rather common, except in certain localities,
where it seems to have become rare. This probably was one
of the shore birds which formerly remained here through the
summer, for Mr. N. B. Moore found several non-breeding
birds in Florida throughout the months of June and July, and
according to Wayne it still summers on the coast of South
Carolina, but does not breed.t. Emmons (Massachusetts,
1833) regards it as breeding “in this climate,” but while a few
may have summered here at that time there is no specific
evidence that it ever bred here.

The Turnstone received its name from its habit of turning
over pebbles, oyster shells and other objects that it found on the
beach. I often have observed it at work on the pebbly beach
of Buzzards Bay and on the shores of Cape Cod. It loves the
foot of a rocky cliff or a beach with great stones partly sub-
merged by the tide, but is common also on sandy beaches near
the pounding surf, and on bars bared by the tide. Sometimes
it is seen in marshes or along the banks of tidal creeks. It
prods the sand with its beak, follows the retreating wave,
raises pebbles from their beds, oftentimes squatting, heaving
and working hard to dislodge them. Sometimes it pushes
with its breast against a stone or shell in the effort to overturn
it, or even digs beneath to undermine it when it is too firmly
imbedded to be moved otherwise. It turns over bundles of
seaweed, and “roots”’ out weeds and sea mosses, as Dr. Town-
send says “like a little pig.” These labors are undertaken in
the hope of finding something eatable beneath such objects,
and the little laborer often is rewarded. Dawson states that

 

1 Wayne, A. T.: Birds of South Carolina, 1910, pp. 61, 62.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 361

 

near the shores of Lake Erie he has seen it on the ploughed
lands turning over clods bigger than itself with such force as
to roll them a foot or more. This habit of turning objects is
not constant, however, with this bird, and is sometimes the
exception, as I have watched it when it seemed to be occupied
entirely in probing the sand, or searching for food, like a sand-
piper, along the strand.

The bright variegated plumage of the Turnstone, with its
strong contrasts of black, white and chestnut, places it among
the most attractive birds of the sea-shore. The flight is rather
low and swift at times and then the white of the plumage is
very striking. In flight it often alternates scaling and flapping,
and sometimes gives a curious chattering or rattling note
as it passes. I have heard, too, the rapidly repeated kuk, kuk,
kuk, which a pair uttered as they flew by overhead, but as a
rule I have found them rather silent, and never have heard the
variety of calls which they undoubtedly give.

The Turnstone can swim well at need, and like some other
species loves to bathe in the wash of the waves that roll up
on the sands, where it shakes off the water like a little dog.
It feeds on the spawn of the great crab, known locally as the
horsefoot or horseshoe; also on insects, worms and small crusta-
ceans. Audubon noticed that in northern Florida the Turnstone
fed on the oyster beds at low tide, picking at oysters that had
been killed by the heat of the sun; also breaking the shells of
small, thin-shelled bivalves.

OYSTER-CATCHERS.

The Oyster-catchers (family Hamatopodide) may be known
at once by their large size, striking appearance and the pe-
culiarly shaped bill, which is about twice as long as the head,
much compressed or flattened on the sides, cut off at the end
like the blade of a screwdriver, sharp edged and contracted at
the nostrils. It is a very efficient weapon for opening the shells
of bivalve mollusks or prying barnacles off the rocks. Each
toe has a narrow membrane on each side, and the middle and
outer ones are connected by a web toward the base.
362 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

OYSTER-CATCHER (Hematopus palliatus).

 

Length. — 17 to 21 inches; bill 3 to 4; no hind toe, outer and middle toes
slightly webbed.

Adult. — Head and neck black; back, wings and end of tail dark brown;
rump, broad wing bands, base of tail and under parts white; bill ver-
milion, long, stout, compressed toward tip; feet, legs and eyelids pale red.

Young. — Head and neck more brown than black; feathers of upper parts
more or less edged with buff, bill dull rather than bright.

Notes. — A loud shrill whistling, wheep — wheep — wheo (Wilson).

Nest. — A mere depression in marsh or beach.

Eggs. — Two or three, about 2.20 by 1.55, bluish white or buff, marked with
blackish and various shades of brown and neutral tints.

Season. — Formerly summer resident; late April to August.

Range. — Sea-coasts of temperate and tropical America from Virginia, Texas,
Louisiana, south on both coasts of Mexico and South America to south-
ern Brazil and central Chile; formerly to Labrador; breeds probably
throughout its range; its place is taken from Lower California to Alaska
by the Black Oyster-catcher.

History.

The American Oyster-catcher is a candidate for the list of
extirpated species as it no longer breeds in the northeast, and
there are only two records of its capture or occurrence in Mas-
sachusetts since Audubon’s time; but it may yet occur here
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 363

 

as a straggler from the south. This bird was known early in
our history, but was confounded with the Old World species
until it was separated and described by Temminck. Oyster-
opener would have been a better name for it, for as Dr. Coues
remarks, “Oysters do not run fast.’”’ No doubt the Oyster-
catcher once inhabited the entire eastern coast-line from the
Gulf of Mexico to Labrador, and bred upon the coast of
Massachusetts, as a large part of this coast is eminently suited
to its habits, and provides quantities of its chosen food (sea-
worms, mollusks, crustaceans, etc.) Nevertheless, there is no
definite record to substantiate this statement. The Oyster-
catcher was one of those beach-loving species that practically
was extirpated as a breeding bird along the Massachusetts
coast before ornithological records were made in America.
The colonists, and later the market hunters and eggers of
our coast, probably destroyed or drove off this bird, as they
did the Cormorants, Eider Ducks and other Ducks, the Wil-
lets and other large shore birds and the larger Gulls, which
once spent the summer in numbers along our coasts and un-
doubtedly bred here. Champlain found the Black Skimmer in
flocks “like the pigeons” about Nauset harbor on Cape Cod
between July 19 and 25, 1605.1 As this was in the breeding
season, the Skimmer may have bred there; but, like the
Oyster-catcher, it has been long regarded as a mere straggler
in Massachusetts.

This bird and the Oyster-catcher probably were extirpated
from the shores of New England by the same causes that since
then have driven both from Long Island and the middle
States. Audubon establishes the fact that the Oyster-catcher
once bred on the Bay of Fundy and as far north as Labrador;
but since his definite statement has been questioned by Dr.
Brewer,? who seems to think that he must have been misled
in some way, I quote Audubon’s exact words: “Our Oyster-
catcher has a very extensive range. It spends the winter

 

1 Champlain, Samuel de: Pub. Prince Soc., 1878, Vol. 2, p. 87.

2 Since Dr. Brewer wrote, Audubon’s Journals have been published, and in his Labrador Journal,
under date of July 6, 1833, when he was in the vicinity of Cape Whittle, he says, ‘‘ Coolidge and party
shot two Oyster-catchers; these are becoming plentiful.” Probably had Dr. Brewer read this def-
inite statement he would not have doubted that Audubon found Oyster-catchers in Labrador.
364 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS. 4

 

along the coast from Maryland to the Gulf of Mexico, and
being then abundant on the shores of the Floridas, may be
considered a constant resident in the United States. At the
approach of spring, it removes toward the middle States,
where, as well as in North Carolina, it breeds. It seems scarcer
between Long Island and Portland, Maine, where you again
see it, and whence it occurs all the way to Labrador, in which
country I found that several were breeding in the month of
July. . . . In Labrador, I met with it farther from the open
sea than in any other part, yet always near salt-water. .. .
On the coast of Labrador, and in the Bay of Fundy, it lays its
eggs on the bare rock. When the eggs are on sand, it seldom
sits on them during the heat of the sun; but in Labrador, it
was found sitting as closely as any other bird. Here, then, is
another instance of the extraordinary difference of habit in
the same bird under different circumstances. It struck me so
much that had I not procured a specimen in Labrador, and
ancther in our Middle Districts, during the breeding season,
and found them on the closest examination to be the same,
I should perhaps have thought the birds different. Every-
where, however, I observed that this bird is fond of places
covered with broken shells and drifted sea-weeds or grasses,
as a place of security for its eggs, and where, in fact, it is no
very easy matter to discover them.”

This is not hearsay evidence. Audubon saw these things
with his own eyes, for he says again: “I have seen it probe
the sand to the full Jength of its bill, knock off limpets from
the rocks on the coast of Labrador, using its weapon sideways
and insinuating it between the rock and the shell like a chisel.”
The mere fact that the Oyster-catcher has disappeared since
then from Labrador, Nova Scotia and all New England should
not in any way discredit Audubon’s statement. We do not
allow its disappearance from Long Island and the middle
States to discredit the evidence that it once was found there.
Even without Audubon’s testimony there is presumptive
evidence that the bird once bred here. Wilson asserts that
“though nowhere numerous, it inhabits every sea-shore.”
Giraud (1844) says that on Long Island it is rather scarce,
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 365

 

although “‘during summer a few are found on almost every
beach along the whole extent of the sea-coast.” De Kay
(1844) says (probably following Audubon) that it breeds from
Texas to Labrador. The Oyster-catcher breeds throughout
its range in temperate America. Durnford found it breeding
at Tombo Point, Patagonia, and its Pacific prototype, the Black
Oyster-catcher, still ranges up the coast from Lower California
to Alaska, and breeds there. In Puget Sound I have seen its
eggs laid on the rocks, and the bird sitting upon them, as
Audubon saw our Oyster-catcher incubating her eggs in Lab-
rador. Oyster-catchers are not confined normally to warm
climates. Wilson tells of a specimen that was sent him
prior to 1813, killed from a flock near Boston harbor. Linsley
(1843) says “the Oyster-catcher is now rare here [Stratford,
Conn.], but fifteen years ago they were not very uncommon
in autumn.” Dr. Brewer himself says that a pair of these
birds was procured by Daniel Webster at Marshfield in the
summer of 1837 and presented to the Boston Society of Natural
History, that it was not uncommon to see specimens in the
Boston market, and that Boardman informed him that the
Oyster-catcher was seen occasionally at Calais, Me. Probably
it was common in early times about the sandy beaches and
rocky headlands guarding Boston harbor.!

The Oyster-catcher, being a shy bird except when it has
young, was probably killed off in the breeding season in the
country within reach of summer gunners near Boston before
it was extirpated from the rest of the northeast coast and that
of the middle States, and for that reason it was rare here in
Audubon’s time. It has disappeared now from Labrador, the
Maritime Provinces, New England and the middle States,
and in the United States it is found only as a straggler, except
on the southern Atlantic and Gulf coasts. It is growing rare
even on some of the shores of Florida and Texas, where once
it was numerous. It is destined to extermination wherever the
coast is settled, for it lays its eggs on the bare sand or rocks
or among beach grass, where they are exposed to the eggers,

 

1 Prof. W. W. Cooke states that Mr. W. H. Osgood saw a flock of about twenty July 20, 1897, at
Digby, N..S., but these must have beea wanderers from the South. (See Bull, No, 35, Biol. Surv.,
p. 99.)
366 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

who consider them a great delicacy and its large size and con-
spicuous plumage assure its destruction by gunners who shoot
in summer when the young are unable to fly.

The Oyster-catcher is a bird of lonely open beaches and
rocky shores by the sea. It may be found about inlets and
lagoons in the south, but never far from the salt water. Its
large size, striking plumage and loud cries make it a very
conspicuous bird, and it is easily alarmed and difficult to
approach, except in the breeding season, when its solicitude
for its eggs or young lead it to discard its customary caution.
It formerly wintered from Maryland to the Gulf, and was
seen at that season in flocks. The flocks moved in lines,
wheeling and turning with the precision of trained soldiers
on parade. At such times they presented a striking picture,
their black and white plumage flashing in the sun.

There has been some discussion as to whether this bird
really eats oysters. Wilson and some other ornithologists
doubt that it ever eats them; Audubon avers that it eats
the small “racoon” oysters that grow on bars in shallow
water in the south, where the ebb tide uncovers them. Oysters
in such situations cannot exist long in the north, because the
frost kills them at low tide in winter. Therefore in the north
our bird was never seen to eat oysters, although it may have
taken a few occasionally in shallow water. I frequently have
seen the Oyster-catcher acting the part assigned him. Once
near Mosquito Inlet on the Halifax River on the Florida coast
one of my companions shot one of these birds which, when
held up by the legs, emitted from its mouth quite a quantity
of “coon oysters.” Maynard records a similar occurrence.
The bright peculiar beak is shaped somewhat like an oyster
knife, and the bird plunges this sharp weapon into an incautious
and partly opened bivalve, and, swiftly cutting the closing
muscle, opens the oyster like a professional oyster-opener.
Wayne says “‘I have seen these birds open raccoon oysters by
inserting the bill into the gaping shell, like a wedge, when the
shell at once opens.” These little oysters, however, are of no
commercial value, and the bird was never known to trouble
oysters which are grown for commercial purposes on beds in
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 367

 

deeper water. The Oyster-catcher does not dive except when
hard pressed, but gets its food on or near the surface, although
it can dive and swim well at need. The bill often is much
worn by hard usage and sometimes bent to one side. The
bird is not by any means confined to an oyster diet, and in-
habits coasts where oysters are never found. Its knife-shaped
beak is used in opening mussels, in knocking or chiselling
limpets off the rocks, in opening sea urchins and even in catch-
ing a few small fish. Audubon says that it eats crabs, sea-
worms, shrimps and “razor-handles”’ or solens. He watched
it with an excellent telescope and saw it pat the sand with its
feet to “force out insects.”

The Oyster-catcher gets its food from the ocean and its
shores, and harms no man. It is a handsome creature, whose
alert presence and harmonious cries once lent to our beaches
a charm now gone forever. Its extirpation in New England
has served no good purpose, but merely adds another item
to the accounting that shall put “our race and time to shame
in the age to come.”

BOB-WHITES.

The American Partridges (family Odontophoride) are small
in size, with the head usually well feathered and sometimes
crested. They are distinguished from the Grouse by the small
size, lack of feathers on the tarsi or toes, and by the naked
scale which covers the nostrils. There is much variation in
plumage among the different species, which are well represented
in the southwestern United States and in subtropical America.
The Bob-whites occupy the temperate and tropical regions
of America and are not found elsewhere. There is but one
species in eastern North America, with a subspecies in Florida
which is much smaller than the northern bird and somewhat
darker. The species ranges over the greater part of the
eastern United States, mainly in open country, and is one of the
most prized of all American game birds. The elegant, plumed
and crested Quails or Partridges belong mainly to the mountain
regions of the west and the Pacific slope. Some species have
been introduced in the east but have not become acclimated.
368 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

BOB-WHITE (Colinus virginianus virginianus).

Common or local name: Quail.

 

Length. — About 10 inches.

Adult Male. — Upper parts mainly reddish brown, with dark streaks and
light edgings; forehead and broad line over eye white, bordered with
black; throat patch white, bordered with black; tail short, gray; crown,
upper breast and neck all round brownish red; breast and belly whitish,
narrowly barred and marked with crescent-shaped, irregular black
marks; flanks reddish brown.

Adult Female. — Similar, but duller, with very little black on head, and the
white mainly replaced by buff.

Young. — Resemble female.

Notes. — A ringing, whistled Bob-white or buck-wheat-ripe; a conversational
quit-quit and a whistled call and reply, repeatedly uttered when the
individuals of a flock are separated; also many low conversational
clucks and twitterings.

Nest. — On ground, among bushes, grass or grain.

Eggs. — Eight to eighteen or more, averaging 1.20 by .95, white, often
stained with brown.

Season. — Resident throughout the year, but now rare in the northern part
of Massachusetts and in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont, where
it is found only in the lower latitudes and altitudes.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 369

 

Range. — Upper Sonoran and southern half of Transition zones of eastern
North America from South Dakota, southern Minnesota, southern
Ontario and southwestern Maine south to eastern and northern Texas,
Gulf coast and northern Florida, west to eastern Colorado; introduced
in central Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Idaho, California, Oregon and
Washington.

‘History.

The cheery, interrogative call of Bob-white was one of the
first distinctive sounds of the open field that, as a child, I
knew and loved among the hills of New England. It was as
well known among the country folk as the morning carol of
the Robin in the orchard, the drumming of the Ruffed Grouse
in the woods or the reiterated plaint of the Whip-poor-will on
the moonlit doorstone. Bob-white was ever an optimist, for
even if, as the farmers stoutly niaintained, his call sometimes
presaged a storm, the prophecy ‘‘more wet” was delivered
with such vim, in such a cheerful frame of mind, and in such a
joyous, happy tone as to make rain seem the most desirable
thing in life. It appears that this cheerful, brisk and busy
little fellow is fain to express in the brief ringing notes bob,
white, or bob, bob, white, his love, his longings, his impetuous
desires, his joy in life, his appreciation of the warm sunshine
and the fragrant sensuous breeze, his abundant content with
his lot and his defiance to all his rivals. What other sound in
nature is so heartening? And now, as ever, in the grassy
fields of New England, in the wide rolling lands of the west, or
under a burning southern sky, wherever that call is heard it
gladdens the hearts of men. Psychologists may tell us that
the bird is merely wound up like a clock and set to run for a
certain time, or until the sexual impulse runs down, but there
is in his call the gladness of spring days, a quality unmistakable
and unquenchable, and “all the world” loves it.

Perhaps there is no bird to which the American people are
more deeply indebted for both esthetic and material benefits.
He is the most democratic and ubiquitous of all our game
birds. He is not a bird of desert, wilderness or mountain
peak, which one must go far to find. He seeks the home,
farm, garden and field; he is the friend and companion of
mankind; a much needed helper on the farm; a destroyer of
370 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

insect pests and weeds; a swift flying game bird, lying well to
a dog; and, last as well as least, good food, a savory morsel,
nutritious and digestible.

There can be no doubt that Bob-white has decreased in
numbers in New England since the days when Morton wrote
that he saw “sixty Quails” in one tree; but doubtless the
species increased much in this region during the time of settle-
ment. It could not have been so numerous in the primeval
forests that covered most of New England as it became later,
when much of the forest had been cleared away. When
civilization and settlement extended, and grain raising became
almost universal among the farmers, the Bob-white must
have multiplied throughout southern New England. The
cultivation of the soil increased the size and productiveness of
many weeds, the seeds of which form a large part of the food
of this bird; the grain scattered among the stubble provided
a new and abundant food supply, and the area over which
this supply extended constantly increased as the forests were
cleared away and farming began. There was no lack of excel-
lent cover among the rank growths that sprang from a virgin
soil, and the smaller game birds were little hunted by the
settlers so long as deer, turkeys, pigeons, wild-fowl and grouse
were plentiful.

Under these favorable conditions the Bob-white became
common, if not abundant, over most of Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, Connecticut, much of New York, southern New
Hampshire, Vermont and southwestern Maine. It was most
plentiful along the coast and up the river valleys, and rare or
absent on the higher elevations. In New Hampshire, Vermont
and Maine it is now (1911) practically gone, except where it
has been imported. In New York it is now a rare bird, except
on Long Island, in the lower Hudson valley and in the Delaware
valley. In Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut it
is found now only in the most favorable localities, or where it
has been introduced from other States. It was never common
in Berkshire County, Mass., except locally, and is now nearly

 

1 Part of this history of the Bob-white was written originally for a leaflet published in Bird-Lore
by the National Association of Audubon societies.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 371

 

extinct there as well as in northern Worcester County. Mr.
Clinton G. Gilmore says that Mr. William C. Whitney stocked
his preserve on October Mountain, but the Bob-whites all
left it for the valley, and later disappeared. In Nantucket the
native Bob-white is extinct, but there are a few introduced
birds left. Bob-whites were very plentiful during the latter
part of the eighteenth century and the early part of the nine-
teenth. Mr. George Linder of Boston says that he once knew
of the killing of ninety-six by two men in two days. Some
large bags have been made within fifty years; but the species
always had its “ups and downs,” owing largely to occasional
severe winters. I have no record, however, of the fluctuations
in numbers in early times, and all the available information
to be had on that subject has been gathered within the past
century.

Mr. Henry H. Fay writes me that there was a very severe
snowstorm on Cape Cod sometime in the 50’s, possibly in
1857. The snow was heavy and damp, and falling on the
“‘evergreens”’ bent their branches to the ground. The Quail
sought the cover of the down-bent branches as a refuge from
the storm. The snow covered them, and then the weather
turned cold, freezing the snow hard and imprisoning the birds
beneath it, where they all starved. Their remains were found
in numbers under the trees the succeeding spring, and the
species appeared to be absolutely extinct on the Cape. Mr.
Fay states that his father, who had been in business in the
south, imported a number of birds from some southern State
and turned them out. A resident, who watched the result,
said that the reproduction of the Bob-white in that district
was due to that importation, and that the introduced Quail
were smaller than the native birds. Mr. Lyman Pearson writes
from Newbury that there were no Quail left there in 1865,
but that they increased up to the 70’s, when a severe winter
killed them off again. Since then several such storms have
occurred, wiping out most of the individuals of the species
in New England. Many instances have been reported to me
where, locally, after such a season, gunners with bird dogs
have exterminated every bird.
372 GAME BIRDS, WILD=FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Until recent years we have filled the places of the birds thus
extirpated by introducing others from the south. People who
have watched the result say that these southern birds cannot
survive severe northern winters, but that if they are intro-
duced in spring and breed successfully, their young are more
hardy than the parents, and do well if the succeeding winter
is not too severe. It is believed that the many southern birds
introduced have so interbred with the few native birds left
as to produce a smaller and less hardy race than the northern
Bob-white, — one which cannot withstand so well a severe
winter. Most of them die during a hard winter when the snow
is deep, even if they are not frozen under.

In 1898 the destruction of most of the Quail from New
Hampshire to Cape Cod was reported. Afterward they in-
creased somewhat, but the very severe winter of 1904-05
destroyed fully ninety per cent. of the birds throughout the
State; two hard winters followed, and the gunning which
was allowed in those years exterminated the birds in many
localities. Many sportsmen stopped shooting them during
the succeeding years; but others continued to kill every bird
that could be found. This and the impossibility of pro-
curing birds from other States, which has put an end to the
practice of restocking with southern birds, accounts for the
extermination of the species in large areas where it was once
common. There must have been a section on Cape Cod where
the winter of 1904-05 was not so destructive as elsewhere, for
Mr. George H. Tripp writes that about West Harwich the
season of 1906 was the best that he ever saw for Quail, and
several correspondents from the lower end of the Cape note a
large increase. Mr. Fred F. Dill of North Eastham attributes
this to mild winters and the fact that the foxes were killed off.
Two hundred and thirty-two of my correspondents reported
in 1908 that the Bob-white had decreased in numbers in the
years of their experience, but twenty-six, mainly from south-
eastern Massachusetts, recorded an increase.

Snow and cold are important factors in the destruction of
the Bob-white in the north. Given mild winters, a very short
open season and the prohibition of sale and shipment, with
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 373

 

strict enforcement of the law, and this bird holds its own fairly
well. The past three winters have not been severe, and now
(1911) the Quail is increasing locally in southeastern Mas-
sachusetts, and parts of Rhode Island and Connecticut in
territory where very few birds have been available for re-
stocking. A few have been turned out here and there, which
no doubt have swelled the total somewhat.

Much may be done to preserve the Bob-whites during
winter by feeding (see page 581), but if they are at large dur-
ing a heavy storm, when the snow above them freezes hard
in the night, nothing can save them, as they will starve and
freeze in a few days, or, if they break out before death en-
sues, they are so weak that they cannot escape cats, dogs and
hawks.

The belief is held quite generally in southeastern Mas-
sachusetts that this bird rears two broods. Mr. E. J. Boyle
of Boston says that he has shot the old birds in October and
afterward found their young so small that they could be
caught under a hat. Many witnesses tell similar tales. Such
stories are the best possible argument for a later open season.

Bob-white comes in close contact with the crops on the
farm year after year, yet seldom appreciably injures grain or
fruit. Through the investigations of the Bureau of Biological
Survey of the United States Department of Agriculture, it is
now well known that Bob-white ranks very high as a destroyer
of many of the most destructive insect pests. Large numbers
of these pests are eaten. I have devoted several pages in
Useful Birds and their Protection to the food and habits of
Bob-white, but some recent experiments with captive birds
by Dr. C. F. Hodge and Mrs. Margaret Morse Nice have given
us further interesting facts. Mrs. Nice gives the following as
eaten by captive birds. Each number of insects given rep-
resents the largest number eaten during a single meal by one
bird. Chinch bugs, one hundred; squash bugs, twelve; plant
lice, two thousand three hundred and twenty-six; grass-
hoppers, thirty-nine; cutworms, twelve; army worms, twelve;
mosquitoes, five hundred and sixty-eight; potato beetles,
one hundred and one; white grubs, eight. The following
374 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

records are taken from a list which she gives to show the
number of insects eaten by Bob-white in a day, each number
given representing the insects eaten by one individual in a
day: Chrysanthemum black flies, five thousand; flies, one
thousand three hundred and fifty; rose slugs, one thousand
two hundred and eighty-six; miscellaneous insects, seven
hundred (of which three hundred were grasshoppers); and
insects, one thousand, five hundred and thirty-two (of which
one thousand were grasshoppers). Mrs. Nice gives a list of
one hundred and forty-one species of insects eaten by the
Quail, nearly all of which are injurious, and Dr. C. F. Hodge
remarks that a bird which eats so many injurious insects is
welcome to the beneficial ones as well. We cannot assume that
birds at liberty, having their choice of food, would accept the
same diet offered these birds in captivity; but the above
experiments may indicate their taste in the matter.

As a destroyer of weeds Bob-white shines pre-eminent.
Mrs. Nice gives a list of one hundred and twenty-nine weeds
the seeds of which are eaten by this little gleaner. These
seeds are digested, and the germs thus destroyed. The num-
ber of seeds taken by one bird at a single meal varies from
one hundred and five of stinkweed or four hundred of pigweed
to five thousand of pigeon grass or ten thousand of lamb’s-
quarters, while the number taken by one bird in a day varies
from six hundred of burdock to thirty thousand of rabbit-
foot clover. By a careful computation Dr. Sylvester Judd of
the Biological Survey reached the conclusion that the Bob-
whites of Virginia consume annually, from September 1 to
April 30, five hundred and seventy-three tons of weed seeds.

If we take as our measure the quantity of weed seeds and
insects eaten by captive Quail, as given by Mrs. Nice, we find
that a family consisting of two adult birds and ten young
would consume seven hundred and eighty thousand nine
hundred and fifteen insects and fifty-nine million seven
hundred and seven thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight
weed seeds in a year, in addition to their other food. The
annual loss due to insects in the United States is believed to
reach nearly one billion dollars, and the annual injury to farm
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 375

 

crops by weeds in this country is estimated at many millions.
How much of this loss might be saved by the conservation
of Bob-white!

GROUSE.

The Grouse (family Tetraonide) is a large and interesting
one. The true Grouse are confined to the northern hemisphere,
and the family reaches its highest development in North
America, which is particularly well supplied with species.
Grouse are chiefly birds of northern or temperate regions. The
various species have become so well adapted to varying con-
ditions that treeless arctic wastes, barren mountains, deep
forests, brushy plains, prairies, fertile cultivated lands and
sandy deserts all have their Grouse. They are found in most
of North America, except in the more southern parts and in
regions where they have been extirpated by man.

Birds of this family have the head feathered, excepting
usually a bare patch, strip or “comb,” over the eye, and often
crested; the legs, and often the feet, more or less feathered;
the sides of the neck often with modified, ruffed or crestlike
feathers, or bare spaces of skin, or both. The plumage is
commonly subdued in tint, for the most part, and the sexes
are usually, but not always, similar in color. All things con-
sidered, Grouse are the choicest of our game birds, and they
now furnish the greater part of our upland shooting. The
two species which are native to the Atlantic seaboard are
regarded as the most valuable of the family in America.

CANADA SPRUCE PARTRIDGE (Canachites canadensis canace).

. Common or local names: Spruce Partridge; Swamp Partridge; Black Grouse.

Length. — 15 to 17 inches.

Adult Male. — Barred with black and gray above in transverse wavy cres-
cents; throat and breast black; rest of under parts black; many of
the feathers bordered or tipped with much white; tail black, tipped
with reddish brown or deep orange yellow; a line of bare skin above the
eye, bright red.

Adult Female. — Smaller; barred with black, gray and pale rusty above;
general tone rufous brown; whitish below, barred with black.
376 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Field Marks. — Very dark, smaller than the Ruffed Grouse; tail shorter,
much rounded. No other Grouse has the large, conspicuous white spots
on breast, flank and lower tail coverts.

Nest. — On ground.

Eggs. — Six to sixteen, 1.71 by 1.22, buffy or pale brownish, more or less
speckled or spotted with deep brown (Ridgway). Col. John E. Thayer,
who has taken the nest of this bird in Maine, found but six eggs, and
says that the guides tell him that they rarely see more than six or seven
young in a brood. :

Range. — Manitoba, southern Ontario and New Brunswick south to north-
erm parts of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, New York and New

England.

History.

The Canada Spruce Partridge is a small wood Grouse of
the northern evergreen forests. In early days it may have
been not uncommon among the spruce and hemlock forests
and in the tamarack swamps, which were then found in the
Berkshire Hills and in northern Worcester County, Massa-
chusetts. I cannot find any definite reference to it, however,
in the chronicles of the early Massachusetts writers. There
are but two records of its occurrence in the State, one at
Roxbury, in the 60’s,! and another recorded by Prof. F. W.
Putnam, who states that it was found in the hemlock woods of
Gloucester September, 1851.2. It was once common, however,
in the spruce and tamarack woods of northern New England
and New York, from most of which it has disappeared, and
it is now found in large numbers only in the fastnesses of the
coniferous forests of Canada. I can remember when it was
common in some of the Maine woods, and when it was seen
not uncommonly in Massachusetts markets. Knight (1908)
states that it still occurs as a rare resident in the more wooded
and less inhabited parts of Maine. Eaton (1910) says that
it was formerly common in the Adirondack woods, but is now
threatened with extermination in New York. Much more
evidence of its destruction and decrease might be given. In
destroying this bird we have not even the excuse that it is a
table delicacy, for its flesh is strongly impregnated with the
taste of spruce buds; nor the other stock excuse that it was

 

1 Allen, J. A.: Amer. Nat., February, 1870, Vol. III., No. 12, p. 636.
2 Putnam, F. W.: Proc. Essex. Inst., 1856, Vol. I, p. 224.
‘aBPOH "4 °D “Jog Aq api] wor YydesBoyoyg

t

“ONINWNYG ‘3SNOYD G3as4sNY—'K JLlWd

 
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 377

 

injuring our crops, for it never touched them. It was extir-
pated because it was tame and confiding and an “easy- mark,”
giving the gunner or the backwoods loafer a chance to unload
his gun and kill something. Formerly this bird sometimes
assembled in great flocks. Mr. Manly Hardy of Brewer, Me.,
1s quoted by Dr. Bendire as saying that a pack of many thou-
sands was utilized by a tribe of Indians in Nova Scotia to “feed
the whole village.”

The male has a curious habit of “drumming” in flight or
while climbing the leaning trunk of a tree. The female sits
so closely on her eggs that she will almost allow herself to be
taken from the nest by hand. Mr. Watson L. Bishop of Kent-
ville, N. S., has succeeded in domesticating this bird.

In summer the Spruce Partridge feeds much on the foliage
of spruce and fir, and on berries and insects; the winter food
consists largely of the buds of the evergreen trees among which
it lives. This Grouse, therefore, is much more palatable in
summer and early fall than in winter, which may account in
part for its decrease.

RUFFED GROUSE (Bonasa umbellus umbellus).
CANADA RUFFED GROUSE (Bonasa umbellus togata).

Common or local names: Partridge; ‘.Patridge;”’ Birch Partridge.

Length. — 16 to 18 inches.

Adult. — Above variegated reddish brown, yellowish brown or grayish
brown; large ruffs of glossy black or brown feathers on sides of neck;
tail long and broad, brown, reddish brown or gray, lightly barred and
mottled with lighter and darker shades; a broad dark band near tip;
throat buffy; rest of lower parts white, tinged with buffy, barred and
otherwise marked with darker shades.

Young. — Similar to adult. (The Canada Ruffed Grouse is grayer than the
Ruffed Grouse, has a grayer tail and is more distinctly marked below).

Field Marks. — A broad black band near tip of long tail. Large size and
crested head. are

Notes. — Besides the drumming of the male, which is not vocal, he has a
series of vocal clucks and calls. The female when. disturbed with her
young often squeals much like a rabbit.

Nest. — Of leaves, etc., on ground.

Eggs. — Eight to fourteen, rarely more, creamy buff to creamy white,
sometimes dotted or speckled with minute brown spots.
378 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Season. — Resident entire year.

Range.— The Ruffed Grouse occupies the eastern United States from
Minnesota, Michigan, southern New York and southern Vermont
south to eastern Kansas, Virginia and the mountain ranges of northern
Georgia. The Canada Ruffed Grouse occupies the spruce region from
central Keewatin, southern Ungava and Nova Scotia, south to Mani-
toba, New Brunswick, Maine and northern New Hampshire, Vermont
and New York, running into western Massachusetts and northern Con-
necticut on the mountain ranges, and west to and into the mountains
of Oregon, Washington, British Columbia and Idaho; but not to the
Pacific coast, where its place is taken by the Oregon Ruffed Grouse
(B. u. Sabint).

History.

How well the memory retains the first impressions of child-
hood when later and more important happenings have faded
and grown dim. I can still recall, as if it had chanced but
yesterday, my affright and sudden alarm when, as a boy of
eight, I stood for the first time in the woods of West Roxbury,
with my eye on the spot where my first Ruffed Grouse had
just vanished. A hair-raising roar of wings, a whirl of dead
leaves, a plunge through foliage and branches, and the bird
was gone! There were deep woods then where houses stand
to-day. Then the Grouse drummed, the Cottontail fled
away from my approach, and the Wild Pigeon called where
the House Sparrow chatters now.

New England is the home of the Ruffed Grouse, and here
it is known everywhere by the name of Partridge or “Pat-
ridge.” In the middle and southern States it is called the
Pheasant, but it does not even belong to the same genus as
either species of which it is the namesake. It is a true Grouse
and is regarded by American sportsmen as the king of game
birds. It is introduced in this volume under two subspecific
names, because the two varieties both occupy New England,
and individuals more or less intermediate between the two
are found in Massachusetts; but the Ruffed Grouse (B. uw.
umbellus) is the bird usually taken in southern New England.
We may judge how numerous it was in Massachusetts in the
days of old when Morton says that he saw forty in one tree.
Nuttall (1834) believed that it was more plentiful in Mas-
sachusetts and New England during the early part of the
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 379

 

nineteenth century than in any other section of the United
States, and that it was then greatly thinned in the most
populous parts of the Union. Maynard says that it was so
numerous here formerly, and was so injurious to orchards,
that the town authorities in some towns paid a bounty on its
head. He states (1870) that it is still common in the wilder
sections of eastern Massachusetts, but that in localities where
it was abundant ten or fifteen years ago there is not one to-
day. I can remember when a market hunter going out from
the city of Worcester by train each day, walking to the covers
and returning at night, killed from ten to fifteen birds daily.
Dr. F. H. Saunders of Westfield tells me that years ago, when
snaring was allowed, he is informed that two men in that
vicinity took one hundred and twenty of these birds from
snares in one day; but he does not know whether they were
all caught in twenty-four hours. Mr. Edward F. Staples of
Taunton states (1908) that he has hunted for forty-seven
years, and that the last “‘real good”’ year was about twenty-
five years ago. In the old days, he says, about a thousand
birds were killed in a season on about twenty thousand acres
over which he ranged. Mr. William H. Leonard of East Fox-
borough states that five men in Foxborough snared Grouse
prior to 1888, and Mr. Eugene E. Morse says that these men
averaged about one hundred birds a week, and that the game
dealers, George Austin & Sons, did not at that time care for
birds which had been shot. Others bought shot birds. Mr.
George Hawes, who shot for market about that time, marketed
three hundred and ninety-eight birds in one shooting season.
Mr. C. Harry Morse of Belmont tells of an old-time hunter
friend who killed from three hundred to four hundred and
twenty Grouse in a season. These instances may serve to give
some idea of the former abundance of this species in Mas-
sachusetts.

Practically all the older hunters and sportsmen among my
correspondents admit that, while no bird has any better pro-
tection than this Grouse, it has decreased greatly in numbers
since the years of their early experience, and that the decrease
has been progressive for many years, although the numbers
380 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

fluctuate much from year to year. Mr. James P. Hatch of
Springfield says that there is an unusual scarcity of the birds
about once in eight years, and that this has occurred three
times in his experience of thirty years. Mr. George H. Haines
of Sandwich says that for about twenty-five years the decrease
has fluctuated, but that it has been most marked in the past
ten years. Mr. William P. Wharton, who interviewed gunners
of long experience in Groton, found that their estimates of the
decrease of this bird varied from eighty per cent. in fifty years
and seventy per cent. in fifteen years to fifty per cent. or
sixty per cent. within six or seven years. Dr. Hugh Cabot of
Boston states that most of the country that he once shot over
contains no birds now. Mr. Henry W. Harwood of Barre
asserts that up to 1880 the decrease was not very marked each
year; but that since then it has been greater year by year.
He has hunted and been much in the woods since 1857. Mr.
William N. Prentiss of Milford says that the decrease has been
greatest in the past ten years. Twenty years ago he could
find fifty where now he sees five; but he finds the decrease less
where gunners are fewer. The above notes were received at
the close of the year 1908. Two hundred and thirty-five
observers reported that the Ruffed Grouse had decreased in
numbers within their experience, and nineteen reported a re-
cent increase. The diminution of this noble game bird is well
known and generally attested. It practically has disappeared
from several States and from large regions in others, but it is
more or less common still in New England in most of the
region where formerly it was abundant. According to Eaton,
it probably is now extirpated from Richmond, New York and
Kings counties, N. Y. There is not one left on Nantucket,
Mass., and several other neighboring islands, and it has dis-
appeared from some of the territory near the end of Cape Cod
and from a few towns and cities near Boston; elsewhere in
Massachusetts it still exists, although in reduced numbers.
The most marked decrease of this bird in recent years was
in 1907. A sudden drop in numbers occurred then over nearly
all its range, from Ontario to Pennsylvania and from Maine
to Michigan. It was all the more marked coming, as it did,
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 381

 

after a year of plenty. Grouse were reported as more abundant
than usual at the close of the shooting season of 1906 through-
out most of their range in the east. Soon after the shooting
season of 1907 opened, complaints of a scarcity of birds began
to come in and soon it became evident that some unusual
calamity had overtaken them. I had been much in the field
during the spring and summer of 1907, and had noted that
very few young birds were reared in the region with which I
was familiar. An investigation showed that a similar con-
dition was widespread. Sportsmen’s journals began to pub-
lish communications showing that few Grouse were reared in
New England, New York, Long Island, New Jersey and Penn-
sylvania, in New Brunswick and other provinces, and as far
west even as Minnesota.

While investigating the cause of this dearth of Grouse I
went to Albany, where I met Mr. E. Seymour Woodruff of the
Forest, Fish and Game Commission of New York, and found
that he was engaged in a similar investigation. He kindly gave
me a copy of his conclusions, which he since has published.
In brief, his conclusions, supplemented by my own, are as
follows: During the winter of 1906-07 a great flight of Gos-
hawks appeared in the northern and eastern States. They
usually winter farther north, and may have been driven south
by an unusual scarcity of hares or Ptarmigan, on which they
feed in the fur countries. Finding Grouse plentiful here, they
lived largely upon them. Twenty-eight out of forty-eight of
these Hawks, dissected by Angell & Cash, the Providence, R.I.,
taxidermists, were found to have the flesh of Ruffed Grouse
in their stomachs. Mr. C. A. Clark of Lynn, Mass., states
that he saw a pair of Goshawks near his place one of which
had a Grouse in its claws, and from the feathers and signs on
the snow he read the story of the destruction of thirteen Grouse
by Goshawks in his neighborhood. Many observers in other
States saw these Hawks and found them killing Grouse during
that season, from late October to March. These Hawks must
have destroyed a very large number of Grouse, all of which
were full-grown birds, most of which probably would have
bred the succeeding spring had they lived and found mates.
382 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Such a flight of Goshawks is very unusual in this region;
and, so far as I can learn, this is the greatest flight of these
birds on record.

Following this disaster to the Grouse, came a very cold,
backward spring, with cold rains and late frosts. The weather
conditions in New England in April were more like those that
usually prevail in March. May was very cold and backward,
with snow in the country about Boston on the 11th. New
York had the coldest April since the climatological service was
established; in New England and in Pennsylvania the average
April temperature was the lowest for eighteen years; in New
Jersey it was the lowest for thirty-one years, and in Michigan
it was the lowest since 1874. Exceptionally cool weather in
May was followed by unseasonable weather during the first
half of June, with killing frosts in many localities.

All poultrymen know that a hard winter with much snow,
so that fowls cannot get the usual amount of exercise, followed
by a cold backward spring, with its lack of insect life and green
food, will render the stock less vigorous. There will be fewer
fertile eggs and more weak chickens than after a mild winter;
and many chickens will be too weak to withstand such ad-
verse conditions.

In the spring of 1907 Grouse were in a similar condition.
Exhausted by the hard winter, they found the season late and
cold, and much of their usual insect and vegetable food want-
ing. If the females left their nests long enough to get a liberal
supply of food the eggs probably were chilled. If they remained
constantly on the nests they died from exhaustion, starvation
and cold or disease, as sitting hens often do. Very many
deserted nests were found with the eggs unhatched, — some
addled, others frozen, — and some female birds were found
dead on their nests. In many cases some of the eggs hatched;
but the young disappeared later.1 Probably many of these
birds were weak when hatched, and like feeble chickens they
soon succumbed to wet, cold, disease or the attacks of insects.
Wood ticks were noted as prevalent in many localities. These

 

1 In Rhode Island many broods were late in hatching, and the young had fine weather during
the latter part of June; but most of them never reached maturity.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 383

 

ticks bury themselves in the heads of the young birds and
weaken or kill them. Foxes were reported as unusually
numerous, and many hunters believed that they caught the
young birds; a few claim to have seen the fox in the act.

When the shooting season opened, it was discovered that
nearly all the birds killed by hunters were adults, and that
most of them were males. This was the case throughout most
of the region affected. Dr. F. H. Saunders of Westfield writes
me that in 1906, when the birds were plentiful, ninety per cent.
of those killed in his region were old cocks, and that in 1907
about seventy-five per cent. were cocks, but that in 1908 the
sexes were about equal.

I have not heard of such a disparity of the sexes elsewhere
in 1906, but it was commonly noted in 1907. This may be
accounted for by the fact that in this species the male does not
assist the female in nest building, incubation or the care of the
young, hence he is care-free and can take food at any time,
seek shelter during storms and keep in better condition than
the female, who is exposed to storms and is deprived of suf-
ficient food. If, by reason of unseasonable weather, she was
obliged to stay constantly on the nest until weakened by
starvation and exposure, she fell an easy prey to disease or to
her enemies. We know that the female of this species is very
devoted to her eggs and young, and is loath to leave them un-
til fairly forced to do so. It is said to be a fact well known to
all gamekeepers, that an excess of male gallinaceous birds pre-
vents successful breeding, as the unmated cocks constantly
persecute the sitting hens, and prevent them from nesting
and rearing young.

We have no means of knowing what part disease played
in the destruction of the females and young; but judging from
their weakened condition and from the number of apparently
diseased birds, both old and young, reported as found dead in
the woods, it seems probable that disease was responsible to
some extent for the decrease, at least locally. Many young
birds died when two-thirds grown, and many that were found
dead seemed to have died from an enteric disease similar to
the “blackhead” of Turkeys (see page 540). In one place one
384 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

old bird and thirteen young were found. In another, seven
young birds were found.

In the early part of the last century the Grouse of England
and Scotland were swept away by an attack of the “grouse
disease.”” The Bob-whites on a large preserve in North Carolina
were nearly exterminated in 1907 by a disease that was in-
troduced among them by the importation of Bob-whites from
Alabama. If some such disease appeared among our Grouse
in 1907 it probably was a secondary and more or less local
cause of their destruction, the prime cause being the unfavor-
able breeding season following a hard winter. This unfavorable
season and the flight of Goshawks are the only adverse con-
ditions known to have been prevalent over most of the great
area in which the destruction of the birds was apparent.

Grouse did not breed well in many localities in 1908, and
although they have increased quite generally in number since
then, they are uncommon or rare still in many localities.
Such a combination of adverse conditions as obtained in
1906-07 probably happens rarely, but it is likely to occur
again at any time.

We must seek some other cause for the general and con-
tinued diminution of the species during the past thirty years.
One hundred and six of my correspondents attribute it largely
to the increase of gunners, and since most of them are gunners
themselves, and know whereof they speak, we must concede
that they are right, but many of them believe that illegal
hunting and snaring are responsible for the decrease.

T have written much on the habits of this Grouse in Useful
Birds and their Protection; its conservation is considered in
Part III of this volume.

Nore. — The Willow Ptarmigan or Willow Grouse, a bird of the arctic
and subarctic wilderness, is accidental in New England and New York. One
was taken in Manchester, Essex County, Mass., May 10, 1859;! another
was collected in Watson, Lewis County, N. Y., on May 22, 1876, by Romeyn
B. Hough;* and still another at Kenduskeag, Penobscot County, Me.,
April 23, 1892.8

 

1 Coues, Elliott: Proc, Ess2x Inst., 1868, Vol. V, p. 289.
2 Coues, Elliott: Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, 1878, p. 41.
3 Merrill, Harry: Auk, 1892, p. 300.
 
     
    
   

   

   

a CERE, ai Nae
in PELE (atin 0
fis ails ae

wes

ie

   

a oate ws ian,

 

creat CP Hap se oe
ie wii we Pena ae tye, ath 4 Hi! le yn f V!
1

  

vw ’ |
Se OP pe 7 “ Va oH Wty
“a 4 "a lta,
4 wale Yl ae ,
— hg ls FE ea ge ie oy. wd

 
 
  
  
 

bday ae nai Ae a BN

Soret . AS
jun wu, NY

Piety n ae a agit

cae M fl wi ey 4 ie 4
int Me al, WAP

a, ‘“ i wile ane

' My TAY
or 14 hy fi ye

 
   
  

   

         
  

   
  
   
 
  

   
 
  

 

aH

sey Woe

ae uel Hie
ti

A Weg

    
 
  
  
 
 

   

a
24M fee. nt, =

hy i Hi An atest
Me ae i lo

{ es if =
IK Vig he VA gy \
gah i Ze

   

 
 

PLATE Xl.—THE HEATH HEN.

Once abundant in southern New England, New York and the Middle States ;
now extinct, except on the island of Martha’s Vineyard, Mass. Upper
figure, female. Middle figure, male, tooting. Lower figure, male,
strutting.

(Drawn by W. |. Beecroft. From photographs of the living birds taken by
Dr. George W. Field.)
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 385

 

HEATH HEN (Tympanuchus cupido).

Length. — About 18 inches; legs feathered to toes.

Adult Male. — Above light reddish brown, barred with black and buff;
under parts rusty white, barred with brown; chin, throat, cheeks and
line over eye buffy; sides of neck with tufts of less than ten stiff, rather
long black feathers, obtusely pointed; tail grayish brown, without
bars, except a whitish tip; large orange air sacs on each side of neck
and a small orange comb over each eye.

Adult Female. — Similar, neck tufts shorter; tail barred with buff or light
brown.

Field Marks. — Size of Ruffed Grouse, with shorter tail, and plumage gen-
erally barred.

Notes. — Male, a peculiar toot, repeated, resembling the whistle of a distant
tugboat in a fog; a laughing cackle given in the mating season; a peculiar
short crow and a startled clucking when alarmed (Field). Female, a
hen-like cluck and a low call, resembling that of a hen calling her young.

Nest. — On ground.

Eggs. — Drab, unmarked, about 1.65 by 1.35.

Season. — Resident the entire year.

Range. — Island of Martha’s Vineyard, Mass.; formerly, suitable portions
of southern New England, New York and the middle States.

History.

The eastern Pinnated Grouse or Heath Hen formerly was
distributed along the Atlantic seaboard from Cape Ann, Mass.,
to Virginia, and especially was abundant in suitable regions
in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Long Island, New York and
New Jersey. Belknap (1792) said that it was rare in New
Hampshire, and Audubon (1835) asserted that it was met with
in his day on Mt. Desert Island and near Mar’s Hill in Maine,
where it was confused with the Willow Grouse. I find no
other references to the species northward or eastward of Mas-
sachusetts. Many early American writers speak of this bird,
and it is designated by some of them as the “grous,” “phei-
sant,” “Heathcocke”’ or ‘‘ Heath Hen.”” Thomas Morton in his
New English Canaan (1632) says of the “pheisants”’ that they
are formed like the Pheasant Hen of England, and that they
are delicate meat, ‘yet we seldome bestowe a shoote at them.”
Wood in his New Englands Prospect (1629-34) says, ‘‘Heath-
cockes and Partridges bee common; hee that is a husband,
386 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

and will be stirring betime, may kill halfe a dozen in a morn-
ing.” Nuttall (1834) states that according to Governor Win-
throp this Grouse formerly was so abundant on the bushy
plains in the neighborhood of Boston that laborers and servants
stipulated in agreements with their masters that they should
not have it “brought to table oftener than a few times in the
week.”

As the Heath Hen is not primarily a forest bird, the settle-
ment of the land and the clearing away of the forests favored
its increase, and had it been properly protected it might have
been plentiful now in southern New England; but this was
not to be. In early times.it probably was confined mainly to
the more open lands along the coast and to the river valleys;
but the settlers cleared land and sowed grain and grass, thereby
adding largely to its feeding grounds and increasing the supply
of seeds and insects. This naturally would have increased
the numbers of the species; but it was pursued, trapped and
shot at all seasons; the young were destroyed by dogs and
cats, and thus the Heath Hens soon were reduced in numbers
and driven to dense thickets which hunters and dogs found it
difficult to penetrate. In such regions this Grouse persisted in
considerable numbers until the nineteenth century. It never
has been adequately protected by law until recent years, for,
although some States passed laws for its protection,. such
laws rarely were enforced. Nuttall (1834) asserts that it is
still met with in New Jersey, Long Island, Martha’s Vineyard
and at Westford, Conn. Peabody (1839) states that it is
found in Massachusetts only on Martha’s Vineyard and one
small island near it, and the same year Lewis rated it as “very
rare and almost extinct in the northern and middle states;
but within a few years quite abundant in portions of Long
Island. . . .A few,” he says, “‘are still found on the Jersey
Plains,’’ and ‘‘every year we hear of the extermination of a
small pack.” Giraud states (1844) that on Long Island it is
very nearly if not quite extinct, and that occasionally it is
seen near Schooly’s Mountains, New Jersey, and in Pennsy]l-
vania and Kentucky. According to William Dutcher the last
specimen recorded from New York was killed in the Comac
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 387

 

Hills in 1836. Turnbull (1869) says, “It is now very rare; a
few are still met with in Munroe and Northampton Counties,
Pa.; within the last year or two it has been found on the
Jersey plains.”

The Heath Hen seems to have been exterminated earlier in
the neighborhood of Boston than elsewhere; but Brewster quot-
ing notes of a conversation with Mrs. Eliza Cabot, states that
the assertion is made that Mrs. Cabot saw a “prairie grouse”
in Newton in her youth (probably about the beginning of the
nineteenth century), and another (on Cape Cod), after her
marriage (probably about 1812). Judd, in his history of Hadley,
quotes the statement of Levi Moody of Granby to the effect
that the Heath Hen had not been seen on the plains of Spring-
field for about fifty years. This would fix the date of its dis-
appearance from that part of the Connecticut valley at about
1812 or 1813. Dr. Timothy Dwight published the statement in
1821 that, the Grouse was no longer common in New England.
Between that date and 1840 it disappeared from the mainland
of Massachusetts. Audubon (1835) quotes Mr. David Eckley,
who says that “‘fifteen or twenty years ago” it was common
to see as many Heath Hens in a day on Martha’s Vineyard
“as we now see in a week.” The Heath Hen was introduced
by the Forbes family on the island of Naushon, where it was
not native, and it soon disappeared. About 1888 Mr. E. H.
Thompson told me that he had seen the species in his early
days at Falmouth, on the mainland, and that his father killed
two, which were preserved and presented to Col. E. B. Stod-
dard of Worcester, Mass. Mr. William Brewster, however, be-
lieves that these birds were introduced Prairie Chickens. In
1876 Minot asserted that the Heath Hen was found no more
on Naushon and probably was extinct on Martha’s Vineyard.
Subsequent inquiry proved that it was still extant. In 1877
foxes and raccoons were introduced on the island and prob-
ably helped to reduce the numbers of the Heath Hen. Brewster
estimated in 1890 that there were from one hundred and
twenty to two hundred birds on Martha’s Vineyard left over
from the previous winter. Mr. C. E. Hoyle asserts that in
1892-93 men who had watched the birds closely stated that
388 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

they had decreased seventy-five per cent. during the previous
few years. Since then the species narrowly has escaped ex-
tinction. In 1894 a fire swept over practically all the breeding
grounds, and Mr. Hoyle states that in the fall of that year he
spent two weeks going over the ground, and found the skele-
tons of many birds destroyed in the fire; that where he had
started a hundred birds the previous fall, he failed to start
five. He says that in 1897 he again went over the ground with
a good bird dog and did not start a bird. Since then the foxes
and raccoons are believed to have been exterminated. In
1902 three specimens of the Prairie Chicken (Tympanuchus
americanus americanus) were liberated on Martha’s Vineyard,
but whether or not they survived is not known. A fire swept
over the breeding grounds in 1906 and very few birds were
reared that year; but, under protection, the birds have in-
creased slowly. On May 2, 1907, the Commissioners on Fish-
eries and Game could find only twenty-one birds on the island.
On January 11, 1908, the number was between forty-five and
sixty.

The exceptional conditions on the island, which have been
partly responsible for the preservation of the Heath Hen, are:
(1) its isolation, the island having no railroads and no trolley
line into the interior; (2) the ground inhabited mainly by the
Heath Hen is very sparsely settled; (3) wolves, foxes, raccoons,
lynxes and other natural enemies, except cats, are extirpated
or rare on the island, and a bounty is paid on bird Hawks
by the county commissioners; (4) the soil, vegetation and
cover are exactly suited to the bird; (5) the snowfall on the
island is light; (6) there is some local pride in preserving the
Heath Hen. It would thrive wherever such conditions existed
if it were undisturbed by poachers, but unfortunately as it
grew rarer its skins and eggs were sought by museums and
collectors, and this furnished an added incentive to the hunters,
a few of whom I am assured still shoot the birds wherever
they can find them regardless of law or any other consideration.

The history of legislation to protect the Heath Hen is
interesting. I have found no record of any laws or regulations
regarding it in any town or city, or in the Commonwealth
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 389

 

generally, until 1831, when it had become very rare if not
extinct on the mainland. Then the Legislature passed a special
act to protect it during the breeding season only, from March 1
to September 1, with a penalty of only two dollars. Under this
act the Heath Hen had been nearly, or quite, exterminated
from the mainland, when in 1837 a close season of four years
was declared, with a penalty of two dollars and a forfeit of the
same sum to the landowner. This close season was extended
five years more in 1841, but these acts permitted any town
to suspend the law within its own limits by vote of any regularly
called town meeting. Some towns took advantage of this,
thus nullifying the law in the only towns where the birds still
existed. On May 6, 1842, for example, the Tisbury town
meeting voted to allow the townspeople (hunting without
dogs) to take, kill or sell Grouse or Heath Hens from December
1 to December 10. In 1844 the close season was extended for
five years more; but the birds evidently had decreased in their
last stronghold on Martha’s Vineyard, for on April 1, 1850,
the town of Tisbury voted to suspend the law so as to allow
hunting only on the “12th and 13th of November next.” In
1855 all protection was removed, but for five years the Heath
Hen existed without it. In 1860 it was protected again by law
at all times; but in 1870 the period of protection was limited to
five years. Thus, under periodical juggling of the statutes,
the species managed to exist, protected most of the time until
the year 1907, when Mr. John E. Howland of Vineyard Haven,
finding it in imminent danger of extinction, agitated the ques-
tion of establishing a Heath Hen reservation. Owing to the
cordial and energetic co-operation of Dr. George W. Field,
chairman of the Massachusetts Commission on Fisheries and
Game, a protector was located in the breeding grounds of the
birds. Dr. Field secured contributions from public-spirited
citizens for the purchase of land for a reservation. The towns
of Tisbury and West Tisbury contributed to the good work
and the sum of $2,420 was collected. A bill was introduced
into the Legislature by Representative Mayhew of Martha’s
Vineyard, placing under the control of the Commissioners on
Fisheries and Game such lands as might be leased, given or
390 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

otherwise acquired for the purpose, and authorizing the com-
missioners to take not more than one thousand acres in the
name of the Commonwealth. The bill was advocated by the
Audubon Societies and sportsmen’s organizations, and was
passed with an appropriation of two thousand dollars for
carrying out its provisions. The commissioners soon secured
sixteen hundred acres, by donation and purchase, which has
now (1911) been increased to over two thousand. Fire stops
were made, the birds were guarded carefully and fed, and by
the year 1909 they had increased in number to about two
hundred. They then began to wander over the island, en-
croaching on the farms of the different towns, and from that
time to the present their numbers have not increased much.
This check to their increase, I believe, is in part owing to a
large number of Marsh Hawks, which apparently were feeding
on the young in 1909; in part to poaching by law-breaking
gunners, and in part to both wild and domesticated house
cats, which are known to be very destructive to the young
Heath Hens.

The history of the Heath Hen in Massachusetts shows
clearly the ineffectiveness of partial and belated legislation,
and the effectiveness of the reservation plan, backed by law
enforcement, to save a species in imminent danger of extinc-
tion. If we expect to preserve the Heath Hen and increase its
numbers, however, we must do very much more than we have
yet done to that end. More wardens or gamekeepers must
be employed; other State reservations must be secured, and
the birds introduced and protected upon them until it becomes
possible to exchange birds between different localities and
thus add new vigor to the breeding stock. All the money
expended by the State authorities in rearing Pheasants and
other foreign game birds might far better have been used in
re-establishing this hardy native game bird in its original
haunts from Cape Cod to the Connecticut valley.

The Heath Hen belongs to this country. It has been fitted
by the natural selection of centuries to maintain itself abun-
dantly in southern New England. It is superior in every way
to any foreign game bird that we are likely to introduce.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 391

 

As the forests are cut off and the land thus unfitted for the
Ruffed Grouse it becomes better fitted for the Heath Hen.
Why have we so long neglected the opportunity to propagate
and multiply this indigenous species? The survival of the
Heath Hen upon the island of Martha’s Vineyard, after it
has been extirpated elsewhere, leaves its fate in the hands of
the people of Massachusetts. Let us hope that they will accept
this trust and spare no pains to preserve this noble game bird
and restore it to its former range.

This eastern Grouse was not distinguished from the western
Pinnated Grouse or Prairie Chicken until 1885, when Brewster
described and named the eastern form from specimens taken
on Martha’s Vineyard. Some authors appear to regard the
Heath Hen as a woodland bird, but I have found it pre-
eminently a bird of almost treeless or bushy plains, although
it is seen occasionally in the woods. The experience of most
observers agree with my own. To-day on Martha’s Vineyard
it is mainly an inhabitant of open lands and shrubby growths.
It is not partial to heavy timber or pine coverts, such as the
Ruffed Grouse prefers, but frequents dry, sandy or gravelly
lands, covered by low-growing vegetation. It sometimes goes
to the more sheltered portions of the oak groves during late
autumn and in winter, after heavy snowfalls, for the sake of
the acorns that it finds there. The region which it now mainly
inhabits on Martha’s Vineyard (some forty square miles) has
been stripped of most of its timber by fire and the axe. This
_ tract is more or less surrounded by, and occasionally inter-
spersed with, farms or cleared lands. The soil is chiefly sandy
and dry, and generally rather level, with some low rolling hills
and low ridges. Oaks of several species, bayberry, dwarf
sumac and other shrubby vegetation (all more or less dwarfed)
are characteristic of its chosen haunts; and small pitch pines are
scattered over the plains. The Heath Hen formerly inhabited
somewhat similar “‘barrens’’ on Long Island and in New Jer-
sey. It also frequents grass fields and open cultivated lands.
It is an adept at concealment in such situations, and in case
of danger the members of a flock will squat so closely, with
heads and necks drawn in or stretched along the ground, that
392 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

it is almost impossible to distinguish them. In fall and winter
they gather into bands containing twenty-five or more birds.
In the fall of 1910 I saw a flock of more than fifty individuals.
When flushed they do not rise high, but often fly half a mile or
more, sometimes wheeling and quartering, until they have
chosen a place to alight. In flight the wings are beaten rapidly
and then set while the bird sails. This alternate fluttering
and sailing is continued somewhat after the fashion of the
flight of a Meadowlark. I am told by natives of the island
that individuals or flocks fly several miles, at times going from
one township to another, and that in winter they sometimes
alight and plume themselves on the roofs of isolated farm-
houses, as the Prairie Chicken was wont to do of old. In
early spring the males indulge in their peculiar antics. At
daybreak many males meet at certain places that they seem
to choose for their dancing grounds, where they run, jump
and flop about, cackle, blow and toot until the sun gets high,
when they fly. away. Sometimes two males engaged in this
performance run toward each other, dancing and blowing as
they go, but on approaching quite close they squat, and remain
motionless from two to five minutes. Sometimes they fight
a little, but usually expend most of their energy in puffing and
blowing, or “‘tooting.”” The sound produced is described by
Dr. Field as like that made by the distant whistles of tugboats
in a fog, but all on the same pitch. Each call extends over a
period of two seconds. The bird first runs forward about
three feet, with short, mincing steps, and then sounds its call.
It raises its tail erect, spreads it, lowers its wings a trifle, leans -
forward, erects the peculiar pinnates or ‘‘neck wings” above
its head in the form of a V, and inflates the peculiar orange-
colored air sacs on the neck to the size of a small orange (as
shown in the plate facing page 385). The tooting seems to be
produced by the inflation of the air sacs, after which the air
is expelled suddenly. Audubon, however, believed that the
sound was made by expelling the air, and he found that the
bird was unable to toot after these sacs had been punctured
by a pin. Another call, according to Dr. Field, resembles a
single syllable of the hoot of a Barred Owl.
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 393

 

The Hens build their nests on the plain among the scrub
oaks. The young leave the nest soon after they are hatched
and the mother broods them beneath her wings wherever
night overtakes them. During the heat of the day in warm
weather these birds appear to delight in “dusting’’ in the
sandy roads, in ploughed land or wherever they find dry earth.
All gallinaceous birds have this habit, but the Heath Hen
seems to be particularly addicted to it as a means of ridding
itself of vermin. So far as is known, however, the dust bath
seems to be the only bath that it takes, for it avoids water and
does not appear to drink or bathe in the brooks. Apparently
it gets water only from rain or dewdrops which it drinks from
the vegetation.

The food of the Heath Hen in summer consists largely of
insects, such as grasshoppers, crickets and beetles, also spiders
and worms; the leaves of low-growing plants, such as sorrel
and clover, and berries,, including wild strawberries, blue-
berries and the partridge berry, of which it is very fond;
cranberries and their leaves, and the leaves of various other
plants; the seeds of weeds, grasses and other low-growing
plants, and acorns. In winter and early spring, acorns, buds,
green leaves, bayberries and sumac berries form a part of the
food. During severe winter weather it eats even the buds of
cone-bearing trees. Occasionally it does some injury to crops
of peas, and it sometimes attacks corn in the shock, and also
newly sown grain, but it is useful as an insect destroyer, seek-
ing freshly ploughed lands at morning and evening for the in-
sects and worms to be found there.

PIGEONS AND DOVES.

The Pigeons and Doves (family Columbide) are represented
now in New England by but one species, and this, the Mourn-
ing Dove, is placed by Sharpe and other British authorities
in a separate family (Peristertide), which includes the Ground
Doves and their allies. The general characteristics of the
Doves and Pigeons are. well known, as exemplified in the
domesticated birds. The differences in plumage between our
394 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

only remaining wild species and the Passenger Pigeon (now
probably extinct), will be seen by comparing their descriptions,
and the figures on Plate XIX, facing page 460.

MOURNING DOVE (Zenaidura macroura carolinensis).

Common or local names: Turtle Dove; Wild Dove; ‘Wild Pigeon.”

Length. — 11 to nearly 13 inches.

Adult Male.— Above mainly light grayish brown, shaded with olive and
turning to bluish on wings and tail, which show blue when spread;
forehead, sides of head and neck pale pinkish brown; sides of neck also
iridescent with reddish, golden and greenish reflections; hind head and
neck bluish; a black spot below ear and a few black spots on shoulder
and wing; tail, particularly middle feathers, elongated and rather
pointed, all except middle tail feathers bluish with a black subterminal
bar and a white tip; chin pale yellowish or whitish; breast pale reddish
brown, sometimes purplish, lightening to yellowish or whitish on belly
and under tail coverts; legs and feet coral red seamed with white.

Adult Female. — Similar, but smaller, duller and tail shorter.

Young. — Similar to female, but tail shorter; feathers light-edged.

Field Marks. — Much smaller than the Passenger Pigeon, but generally
mistaken for it; may be distinguished by the lighter and more brownish
tone of its plumage. The Passenger Pigeon is darker and more blue,
and the male has a redder breast; the black spot on the side of neck is
distinctive of the Mourning Dove and lacking in the Passenger Pigeon.
The Mourning Dove makes a whistling noise as it rises, which the
Pigeon never made.

Nest. — A frail platform of twigs or straws, usually at a moderate height,
in a tree, rarely on rocks, stumps or the ground.

Eggs. — Two, rarely three or four, white, usually about 1.08 by .80.

Season. — March to December; may winter sometimes in New York.

Range. — North America. Breeds chiefly in Sonoran and Lower Transition
zones from British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and
southern Nova Scotia south throughout the United States and Mexico,
and locally in Lower California and Guatemala; winters from southern
Oregon, southern Colorado, the Ohio valley and North Carolina to
Panama; casual in winter in middle States.

History.

The familiar pensive moan of the Mourning Dove has in
it a quality of sadness that is almost “akin to pain,” and yet
it is a soothing and attractive call, for it is the love note of
the male cooing to his mate. Happily it may be heard still in
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT. 395

 

the groves of New England, where the voice of the Passenger
Pigeon has so long been silent.

There is some evidence in old chronicles that the “Turtle
Dove” was once abundant in New England, but it is so fre-
quently confused with the Passenger Pigeon that nothing of
any value can be deduced from these old accounts. Even to-
day the same confusion regarding the two species exists in the
minds of the people, and the Mourning Dove is now known as
the “Wild Pigeon” in sections of southern New England.
Within my recollection this Dove has decreased in numbers in
many parts of Massachusetts. Fifty-nine of my correspond-
ents reported in 1908 that it had been decreasing for years,
but since the law protecting it at all times was passed in 1908,
it evidently has increased in a portion of the Connecticut valley
and on some parts of Cape Cod. Thirty-three observers noted
such an increase.

The Mourning Dove is somewhat widely, though rather
locally, distributed through southern New England and New
York, but is rare or wanting at elevations above one thousand
feet, and in the northern portions of the region. It is a social
species, assembling sometimes in large flocks, but I have
never seen more than twelve together in Massachusetts,
although others have been more fortunate. The Dove is quite
prolific though ordinarily it lays but two eggs in a set. It has
two or more broods, and eggs may be found in the nest from
May to September. The nest is so frail and so carelessly built
that it seems as though the slightest blow would scatter it. The
twittering or whistling sound that this bird makes as it rises
from the ground appears to come from the wings; but once I
distinctly heard a Dove make this sound while sitting on a
branch with its wings motionless.

The Mourning Dove is fond of small grains, particularly of
buckwheat. It sometimes does some injury to newly sown
grain fields, but is very destructive to weed seeds. Eaton says
that he took several thousand seeds of foxtail or pigeon grass
from the crop of a Dove which he shot from a flock of thirty
which were flying from an oat field. He computes that the
members of this flock had just picked up about two quarts of
396 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

weed seeds from that field of oats, or elsewhere, for their after-
noon meal. It is evident that Doves feeding on the newly
sown fields may do more good by destroying weed seed than
harm by eating grain. Prof. F. E. L. Beal of the Biological
Survey reports that nine thousand two hundred seeds of
common weeds were found in the stomach and crop of a Mourn-
ing Dove; he found seven thousand five hundred seeds of the
yellow wood sorrel (Oxalis strictor) in another stomach and six
thousand four hundred seeds of barn grass in another. The
examination of the contents of two hundred and thirty-seven
stomachs showed over ninety-nine per cent. of vegetable food.
Small grains were found in one hundred and fifty of the stom-
achs, and constituted thirty-two per cent. of the food con-
tents; but three-fourths of this was waste grain picked up
from the ground after harvest, or from the roads or stock-
yards. The principal and almost constant diet is weed seed,
which constitutes sixty-four per cent. of the annual food
supply. These seeds vary in size from the largest to the most
minute; some are so small as to seem beneath the notice of so
large a bird as the Dove. This useful bird should be protected
at all times in New England.

Note. — A specimen of the little Ground Dove (Columbigallina passerina
terrestris) was taken by Dr. George Bird Grinnell in October, 1862, near
New York City, and was identified by J. W. Audubon. Dr. Grinnell states
that he saw another in New York possibly twelve years later.1 So far as I
am aware this southern species has never been noted in New England.

 

1 Eaton, E. H.: Birds of New York, Memoir 12, New York State Museum, 1910, pp. 389, 390.
 

 

PART II.

A HISTORY OF THE GAME BIRDS AND OTHER
BIRDS HUNTED FOR FOOD OR SPORT,
WHICH HAVE BEEN DRIVEN OUT OF
MASSACHUSETTS AND ADJACENT
STATES, OR EXTERMINATED,

SINCE THE SETTLEMENT
OF THE COUNTRY.

 
 

PLATE XIl.—GREAT AUK,

Once probably an abundant summer resident on the New England coast;

now extinct.
PART II.

SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED.

Those species of Massachusetts birds which formerly were
important as a source of food supply, and which have become
extinct since the settlement of the State, or which have been
extirpated within its borders since the Pilgrim fathers landed
at Plymouth, are of primary importance in a work of this
kind, because the history of their extirpation will throw light
on the dangers that menace all birds which are killed for food
or sport.

Naturalists regard a species as extinct only when it has dis-
appeared from the earth; but a bird may be extirpated or
rooted out from one State or country, while it still exists in
others. The history of the extinct species is here given first,
and that of the extirpated species follow.

EXTINCT SPECIES.
THE GREAT AUK (Plautus impennis).

Common or local names: Penguin, Wobble or Garefowl.

Length. — About 30 inches; wing, 6; tail, 3.

Adult. — Blackish above; large white patch before the eye; white wing-bar
along the tips of secondaries; sides of throat and neck dark brown;
rest of under parts white.

Eggs. — Laid on ground or rock. Pyriform-ovate; pale olive or buff,
marked with brown or black, in patterns like those of the Razor-billed
Auk; measuring about 3 by 5. :

Season. — Formerly in Massachusetts waters throughout the year.

Range. — In Europe, from the British Isles north to Iceland; in America,
from the southern part of the east coast of Greenland to northern
Florida.

History.
Very little is known about the migrations of this bird in
America. I have seen no record of the occurrence of the
species at sea beyond soundings; but if it passed in migration
400 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

from Greenland to Iceland, or from Greenland to the North
American continent, it must have crossed the open sea. It
may seem improbable that a flightless bird could swim in one
season from Labrador to Florida and back; but fish make
similar migrations, and the Auk was a faster swimmer than
the fish on which it fed. When we read that a boat propelled
by six oars was unable to overtake an Auk, and that the bird
finally escaped its would-be captors, the performance of this
long migration appears not improbable. It seems possible
also that the species may have had one or more breeding
places in Massachusetts. Birds bred here would not have
had to journey more than twelve hundred miles to reach north-
ern Florida.

The Great Auk was not a bird of the arctic regions.
There is no record of its occurrence within the arctic circle.
It is believed to have lived in Greenland at a time when the
climate there was much milder than it is to-day, but not
within the last three hundred years. It inhabited the tem-
perate zone. It probably never bred in any numbers on the
mainland of Europe. Being flightless, it was obliged to seek
outlying reef-environed islands, where it would not often be
endangered by man or predatory animals. It may have lived
in prehistoric times off the coast of Denmark, as its bones
have been found in Danish as well as in Scotch shell-mounds,
and one instance of the supposed occurrence of the living bird
in Denmark has been recorded.!

It is believed to have occurred in considerable numbers
about seaward portions of the British Isles, also; but it was
extirpated from Great Britain and the continent so long ago
that few records of its presence remain. Within a century
it frequented St. Kilda, possibly Shetland, Faroe, the three
Garefowl rocks off the southern coast of Iceland, and a few
other isolated isles. It suffered continual persecution on its
nesting grounds. The last specimen recorded at St. Kilda was
killed in 1821; and the last at Eldey, off Iceland, in 1844.
This may have been the last living Great Auk.

The history of the bird along the Atlantic coast of the

 

1 Grieve, Symington} The Great Auk or Garefowl, London, 1885, p. 27.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 401

 

North American continent, so far as its relations to civilized
man were concerned, began in 1497 or 1498, when the adven-
turous French fishermen commenced fishing on the banks of
Newfoundland. Until that time the Auks, breeding as they
were on outlying reef-guarded islands, were comparatively
safe from man’s interference, for the Indians found a plentiful
supply of other birds along the coast, and did not often dare
the dangers of these remote and rocky islands in their frail
canoes; but the hardy fishermen, coming in from the sea,
immediately sought the bird islands for a supply of fresh eggs
and meat. At that time these birds were so plentiful that it
was unnecessary to provision the vessels, for the fleet could
secure all the fresh meat and eggs wanted, without visibly
affecting the supply.

The first available record of a breeding place of the
Great Auk in America is that given by Jacques Cartier (first
voyage to Newfoundland, 1534). He writes: ‘“‘ Upon the 21
of May the winde being in the West, we hoised saile and
sailed toward North and by East from the cape of Buona
Vista until we came to the Island of Birds, which was
environed about with a banke of ice, but broken and crackt:
notwithstanding the sayd banke, our two boats went thither
to take in some birds, whereof there is such plenty, that
unlesse a man did see them, he would thinke it an incredible
thing: for albeit the Island (which containeth about a league
in circuit) be so full of them, that they seeme to have been
brought thither, and sowed for the nonce, yet are there an
hundred folde as many hovering about it as within; some of
the which are as big as jayes, blacke and white, with beaks
like unto crowes: they lie alwayes upon the sea; they cannot
flie very high, because their wings are so little, and no bigger
than halfe ones hand, yet they do flie as swiftly as any birds
of the aire levell to the water; they are also exceeding fat;
we named them Aponath. In lesse than halfe an houre we
filled two boats full of them, as if they had bene with stones:
so that besides them which we did eat fresh, every ship did
powder and salt five or sixe barrels full of them.”! This evi-

 

1 Burrage, Henry S., ed.: Early English and French Voyages, Am. Hist. Asso., 1906, p. 5.
402 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

dently refers to the Great Auk, although there are some
discrepancies in the account, which may have been due in
part to lapse of memory and in part to the translator; a later
passage evidently refers to Murres, Razor-billed Auks and
Gannets. Funk Island, apparently the location referred to,
was probably the principal breeding place of the Great Auk
in America, situated some thirty miles off the northeast coast
of Newfoundland. Cartier also gives evidence of having met
with the Great Auk in large numbers, at the Bird Rocks in
the Gulf of St. Lawrence on May 25, 1534;1 but there seems
to be no other record of the occurrence of this bird at those
islands. In 1535 he again called at Funk Island. In his
account he gives its latitude and longitude, and says: ‘‘ This
Island is so full of birds, that all might easily have bene
fraighted with them, and yet for the great number that there
is, it would not seeme that any were taken away. We, to
victuall ourselves, filled two boats of them.” ?

In 1536 Capt. Robert Hore records another ‘“ Penguin
Island” to the southward of Newfoundland. From the course
steered from Cape Breton, the island must have been Penguin
Island, off Cape La Hume.

Evidently the bird became known very early among the
fishermen and fowlers as the Penguin (French Pingouin). Pro-
fessor Newton says that he considers it probable that this
name might have been derived from Pinwing, a name until
recent years used in Newfoundland, and denoting a pinioned
or flightless bird. The name “ Penguin” appears to have been
applied originally to the Great Auk, and later to the group
of birds in the southern hemisphere now known as Penguins.
There are several islands known as Penguin islands near
Newfoundland, one in particular off Cape Freels, on the
eastern coast.*

Anthonie Parkhurst, writing in 1578, speaks of ‘‘ one island

 

1 Burrage, Henry S., ed.: Early English and French Voyages, Am. Hist. Asso., 1906, p. 13.

2 Ibid., p. 38.

3 Ibid., p. 107.

4In Hakluyt’s Voyages, third volume, there is a statement made by Sir George Peckham, in
his account of Sir Humphrey Gilbert’s voyage to Newfoundland, which gives credit to Madock
ap Owen Gwyneth for the discovery, and naming of ‘' Pengwin Island ”’ in ‘‘ the yeere of our Lord
God 1170.” If this is founded on fact, the Welshman long antedated Columbus, and the name
Penguin may be of Welsh origin.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 403

 

named Penguin where wee may drive them [Great Auks] on a
planke into our ship as many as shall lade her.”’!

Capt. Edward Haies, in his narrative of the “‘ Voyage of Sir
Humphrey Gilbert,”’ in 1583, states that the French fishermen
about Newfoundland carried little provisions, but depended
on the flesh of the “Penguin,” which they salted.”

In 1593 Richard Fisher speaks of ‘‘ Pengwyns”’ seen at Cape
Breton during the “ Voyage of the ship called Marigold.” ?

In Archer’s account of Gosnold’s voyage to Cape Cod, in
the spring and summer of 1602, “‘ Penguins” are mentioned
as among the birds seen and taken. Penguins were seen south
of Cape Cod on the shoals between Monomoy and Nantucket.

Champlain, in 1604, found another island well stocked
with Great Auks, situated near the shore of the southwest end
of the peninsula of Nova Scotia, which seems to have been
overlooked by the historians of this bird. This was in May,
and possibly the birds may have bred there. These are evi-
dently the Tusket or Tousquet Islands, off Pubnico Head, .
ten or twelve miles from where the wharves of Yarmouth are
now situated, and nearly in the latitude of Portland, Me.
This leads us to the statement of John Josselyn, who was
located at Black Point (Scarborough, near Portland, Me.).
He mentions the occurrence of the Great Auk, or ‘‘ Wobble,”
as he calls it, in the spring. His New England’s Rarities Dis-
covered was published in 1672.

During all this time the slaughter of the Auks went on at
all the islands frequented by them. At first they were killed
by the fishermen, — mainly for their flesh. Later, this great
and apparently inexhaustible source of food supply was used
as a bait to lure colonists to Newfoundland; and for years
the islands were visited by settlers, and the birds killed and
salted for winter use. It was in 1622 that Sir Richard Whit-
bourne published his oft-quoted dictum regarding the bird, —
that “‘God made the innocency of so poor a creature to
become an admirable instrument for the sustenation of man.”

 

1 Hakluyt’s Voyages, 1600, Vol. ITI, p. 133.

2 Ibid., pp. 143-161.

8 Ibid., pp. 191, 193.

4 Champlain, Samuel de: Voyages, Pub. Prince Soc., 1878, p. 13.
404 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Undoubtedly during this period the Great Auk was plenti-
ful about Newfoundland and off the shores of New England.
Professor Lucas, who reported at some length the history of this
bird, and procured quantities of its remains in 1887, says that
millions must have died on Funk Island.!| When they were
plentiful there, some of these millions must have passed along
our coast.

Steenstrup believes that this Auk probably occurred at
Cape Cod.?

It is perhaps a little more than seventy miles from Port-
land, where Josselyn probably saw the Great Auk, to Ipswich
Bay; and there Prof. F. W. Putnam states that great numbers
of the bones of the Great Auk have been found in the shell-
heaps of Ipswich and Plum Island, Mass. They were found
also at Marblehead.’

Miss Hardy points out that these shell-heaps were made
by the aborigines in spring and summer.‘

Josselyn speaks of the ‘‘Wobble” among the birds of New
England as an ill-shaped fowl, having no feathers in its
pinions, and unable to fly. He says that in spring they are
very fat or oily, and tells of his experience in roasting them
at that time. Audubon states that an old gunner residing at
Chelsea Beach (Revere) told him that he well remembered
the time when the Penguins were plentiful about Nahant and
some islands in the bay. This must have been some time after
1750.

J. Freeman, in a topographical description of the town of
Truro on Cape Cod (1794), gives the ‘ Penguin” as one of
the sea-fowl that were then ‘“‘plenty on the shores and in the
bay.’>

Grieve marks Cape Cod on his map as one of its breeding
places.

In a rather careful search through Massachusetts historical
papers, I have found thus far but one other reference which
points toward the breeding of this bird in Massachusetts in

 

1 Lucas, F. A.; Report National Museum, Washington, 1888, pp. 493-529.
2 Videnskabelige Middelelser, 1855, Nos. 3-7, p. 96.

3 Putnam, F. W.: Amer. Nat., 1869, Vol. III, p. 540.

4 Hardy, Fanny P.: Auk, 1888, pp. 380-384.

5 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. III, 1st ser., p. 199.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 405

 

the early days, and that seems to have been overlooked
by ornithologists. Davis (1815) says in his History of Ware-
ham, Mass.: ‘“‘Hog Island, so termed, and which is very
small, is appendant to this town. It may, perhaps be perti-
nent here to notice, that in early colonial annals, there appears
to have been several little islands in Manomet Bay, on the
Sandwich side, some of them, marsh islands, probably, within
its necks, thus denominated; Panoket (little land) Chup-
pateest, (coney island or neck) Squannequeest and Mashne;
while Unset and Quanset were little bays or coves on the
Wareham side. . . . It is but a mile across, from a part of the
Wareham shore, to Manomet River, on the back shore of Sand-
wich. That rivulet was visited by Gov. Bradford as early as
1622, to procure corn, and was the Pimesepoese of the natives.
This compound phrase signifies ‘provision rivulet.” What a
remarkable coincidence between the aboriginal name and the
colonial voyage! We do not assume this explanation without
substantial and tenable grounds. The first part of the phrase,
pime, is, in its uses, ‘food’, ‘provision;’ the latter, ‘little
river.’. . . The shores of this secluded and pleasant little bay,
indented by many necks and inlets, and embosoming islands,
must have been the chosen haunt of aquatic birds. The waders
yet seek it, tracing up its marshy creeks. On the Sandwich
side was Penguin River, where that singular bird resorted, in
the breeding season, in great numbers. The manner in which
the natives took them was, to erect stakes, or a weir, across an
inlet, drive them into it, and when the tide receded, strike
them down with clubs. This bird, it is well known, dives at
a flash: hence its significant name, Wuttoowaganash, ‘ears’,
that is, they ‘hear quick.’ The English settlers, it seems,
without knowing the meaning of this name, have used and
transmitted the plural termination only, Wagans, which has
no meaning, but a plural merely. We shall seek this bird now,
at this spot, in vain; but it appears and is taken, now and
then, in the salt ponds, near Ellis’ tavern, Plymouth. The
name given this bird, with trifling addition, is a watch word,
or an alarm; as much as to say, hark! listen!’’!

 

1 Davis, S.: History of Wareham, 1815, Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. IV., 2d ser., pp. 289-292.
406 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The method used here by the Indians to capture the Auks
seems to favor the hypothesis that the birds thus taken were
not breeders; otherwise, the Indians would have been able
to kill them with less trouble on their breeding grounds, unless,
indeed, the birds had Jearned by experience to nest close to
the water, so that they could reach it quickly at the least
alarm. It is possible that the weirs were built for fishing and
used incidentally to catch the Auks.

In the summer of 1868 Prof. Louis Agassiz, Prof. Jeffries
Wyman and Colonel Theodore Lyman examined the shell-
heaps in East Wareham, on the shore of which are the bays
referred to by Davis, and they found there the bones of the
Great Auk.!

Thus we have the best of evidence that the Great Auk was
found in summer at the head of Buzzards Bay, at the junction
of the Cape Cod peninsula with the mainland.

As some readers of this volume may not know the origin
of the shell-mounds along our coast, it may be well to explain
that they were made by the aborigines, some of whom camped,
during the warmer months of the year, at suitable places for
taking clams, oysters and other shell-fish, and thus in time
formed these mounds, which consisted mainly of the shells
of shell-fish, with bones and other remains of the native feasts,
mixed with ashes and charcoal from the fires, and various in-
destructible parts of utensils, etc., which had been thrown
broken upon the heap. The finding of the bones of the Great
Auk in these shell-heaps indicates that the birds were taken
during the warmer months, which constitute their breeding
season. The Auk evidently lived at sea or in the water most
of the time, except during the nesting time, and, no doubt,
slept on the waves. A bird which could dive at the flash of
a gun and escape the charge ought to find little difficulty in
avoiding the spears or arrows of an Indian hunter, but the
question as to how the Indians were able to take them has been
answered already.

Manomet Bay is at the head of Buzzards Bay, and its
western portion is now known as Onset Bay. Manomet

 

1 Wyman, Jeffries: Report Peabody Mus. Arch. and Eth., 1869, p. 17.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 407

 

River is now named Monument River, near which the former
home of Grover Cleveland is situated. There is no doubt
that the bird referred to by Davis as the Penguin was the
Great Auk. It was remarkably quick of hearing, and was
readily frightened by the least sound. Buzzards Bay and
its tributaries were once famous spawning grounds for many
species of fish, and the Auks on their northward migration,
entering Buzzards Bay and following the shore to the north-
east, would have found themselves embayed there, and
might have bred on an island at the mouth of Manomet Bay.
There is a regular spring migration of Loons, Geese and other
water-fowl here, which come up the bay and across the pen-
insula of Cape Cod at this point. Loons and Mergansers
formerly bred here. If the Great Auk bred here, the whites
must have extirpated it, even if the Indians, when furnished
with guns, did not. It is possible that the Auks which fre-
quented this bay in summer might have been infertile birds
which summered south of their usual breeding place.

In August, 1910, in company with Mr. C. Allan Lyford, I
explored the region at the head of Buzzards Bay in a search for
remains of the Auk. By elimination we concluded that
Penguin River must have been what is now known as Back
River. Back River lies south of the Buzzards Bay station,
in what is now known as the town of Bourne, and the railroad
to Woods Hole crosses it. There are shoals here where the
waters are very low at low tide, and where the Indians might
have trapped the birds in a weir. On the bank of an inlet
of what is now known as the Mill Pond, which connects with
this river, there is a small shell-mound. Excavations here
show no signs of bones. We learned from old residents that
formerly there were other mounds about the bay, but one of
them apparently has been buried under a railroad embank-
ment, and others probably have been covered by the filling in
which has been done along the shores where cottages of sum-
mer residents now stand. If the Auk bred in this locality,
it must have nested on Mashne Island, which on the north
side has several acres of low, flat land. There seems to be no
other island fitted for its breeding place.
408 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Catesby (1754) gives the “Penguin” among the Euro-
pean water-fowl which he had observed to be “also inhabit-
ants of America, wintering in Carolina, though most of them
return north to breed.”

The finding of two of the left humeri of the Great Auk in
a shell-mound near Ormond, Fla., one by Prof. W.S. Blatch-
ley and the other by Prof. C. H. Hitchcock, in 1902, indicates
that the bird went much farther south than has been generally
believed.t' As this shell-mound was on the bank of the Hali-
fax River, and several miles from the inlet, the Auks may
have entered this shallow inlet for the fish which were once
plentiful there.

Miss Hardy says that ‘it will yet be conclusively proved
that the Great Auk was a resident the year round on the
coasts of New England;”’ and Mr. Hay regards it as probable
that we shall yet learn that it was a permanent resident along
our coast considerably farther south than Cape Cod; but it
will be difficult now to secure such absolute proof. The only
possibility lies in unearthing some long-forgotten record from
the mass of historical papers now extant.

The above citations cover practically all the available evi-
dence of the breeding of the Great Auk on the coast of the
United States; and there seems to be no conclusive evidence
of a breeding place except at Funk Island, where many skele-
tons and portions of egg shells have been found. It seems
improbable, however, that the myriads of these birds that
have been seen on so many islands and in so many waters in
America could all have bred on this one small island, and we
may yet find proof that they bred on several others.

All through the latter part of the seventeenth century the
banks fishermen salted down Auks by the ton. Later, the
merchants at Bonavista sold them to the poor by the hun-
dredweight, instead of pork.?

The taking of the birds and their eggs for food was fol-
lowed by a demand for their feathers, and this is what finally
led to their extermination. Probably the bird was nearing

 

1 Hay, O. P.: Auk, 1902, pp. 255-258.
2 Toeque, Philip: Newfoundland as it Was and Is, 1877, p. 486.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 409

 

extinction in North America during the latter part of the
eighteenth century, for Cartwright (July 5, 1785) says that
several crews of men lived all summer on: Funk Island, for
the sole purpose of killing the birds for their feathers. He
says that the destruction was incredible; and that, unless the
practice could be stopped, the whole breed would be dimin-
ished to almost nothing, as Funk Island was then “the only
island they had left to breed upon.”

When Prof. F. A. Lucas, to whom we owe much of our
knowledge of Plautus impennis, visited this island in 1887,
there were still standing the remains of several buildings or
camps, and the stone enclosures or ‘‘ pounds” into which the
birds had been driven for slaughter, and killed with clubs.
Thus at their last place of refuge uncounted millions of these
birds went to their death. They were thrown into kettles
of hot water to scald them sufficiently to start the feathers
easily, and the fat bodies of those that had been plucked were
added as fuel to the fires.

Tocque, in Newfoundland as it Was and Is, says that the
Great Auk was very plentiful “about seventy years ago.”
As his book was published in 1877 the Auk must have been
abundant in the earlier years of the nineteenth century.

Mr. George A. Boardman questioned a Methodist mis-
sionary, who was stationed on the coast of Newfoundland not
far from Funk Island from 1818 until 1823, who said that he
saw the Penguins during his whole stay on the island.!

When Audubon visited Labrador, in 1832, he was told by
many persons that fishermen still called at an island off the
Newfoundland coast, and took great numbers of the young of
these birds for bait. It is probable that even then the birds
were nearly extinct; but Audubon states that a brother of his
engraver, Mr. Henry Havell caught one with a hook off New-
foundland.’

Dr. J. A. Allen (1876) quotes Mr. Michael Carroll of
Bonavista, Newfoundland, who in early life was often a visitor

 

1 Brewer, Thos. M. (Baird, Brewer and Ridgway): The Water Birds of North America, Vol. II,
p. 471, Mem. Mus. Comp. Zoél., Vol. XIII.
2 Audubon, J. J.: Ornithological Biography, 1838, Vol. IV, Pp. 316.
Al0 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

to Funk Island and a witness of the destruction of the Great
Auks there. Mr. Carroll stated that the birds were very
numerous on Funk Island and were hunted for their feathers
about forty-five to fifty years before 1876, but that soon after
that time they were wholly exterminated. This would place
the extermination of the birds there in the decade between
1830 and 1840.1

Singular as it may seem, the destruction of these birds went
on so much faster in America than in Europe that the species
probably was extirpated first on this side of the Atlantic.

Mr. Ruthven Deane published in the American Naturalist
(Vol. VI, 1872, p. 368) the statement that a specimen of the
Great Auk was found in the vicinity of St. Augustine, Labra-
dor, in November, 1870; but Dr. Coues, in his Key to North
American Birds, says that there appears to be some question
respecting the character, date and disposition of this alleged
individual; and it seems very improbable that the species
lived down to 1870.

To-day there are about eighty mounted specimens of the
bird, and about seventy eggs, in the museums of the world.?
Little is known about the habits of the Great Auk. Toward
the last it was difficult to shoot, as it had learned to dive at
the flash of a gun. It seems to have been easily frightened
by noise, but not so much by what it saw; for Grieve tells us
that in 1812, near Orkney, one was enticed to a boat by hold-
ing out fish, and was killed with an oar. The Auk swam with
head lifted, but neck drawn in, ready to dive instantly at the
first alarm. Its notes were gurgles and harsh croaks. On its
island home it stood or rather sat erect, as its legs were far
back. It laid but one egg. It never defended its egg, but
bit fiercely when caught.

Its food is believed to have been mainly fish; but Fabri-
cius found, in the stomach of a young bird, rose root (Sedum
rhodoriola) and other littoral vegetation, but no fish. Rose
root grows in the crevices of sea cliffs. Grieve, however,
doubts whether the bird taken by Fabricius was of this species.

 

1 Allen, J. A.: Amer. Nat., 1876, Vol. X, p. 48.
2 Grieve, Symington: The Great Auk, supplementary note, 1897, p. 26.
 

PLATE XIIl.—LABRADOR DUCK.

a migrant on the New England coa

st; now extinct.

Once
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED All

 

LABRADOR DUCK (Camptorhynchus labradorius).
Common or local names: Pied Duck; Sand Shoal Duck; Skunk Duck.

Length. — 18 to nearly 20 inches.

Adult Male. — Head, neck, breast, scapulars and wings, except primaries,
white; long scapulars pearl gray; tertials black-edged; other parts of
body, stripe over crown, ring around neck, and primaries, black; bill
mainly black, with orange at base and along edges; iris reddish brown;
feet and legs grayish blue.

Adult Female. — Lower plumage ash gray, brown-spotted; upper parts
bluish gray; several secondaries and sides of forehead white.

Young Male. — Similar to female, but chin and throat and sometimes breast
white.

Season. — Formerly late fall, winter and early spring.

Range. — The Labrador Duck is believed to have been an inhabitant of
the Labrador coast. I have seen no records of its occurrence in the
Hudson Bay country or within the Arctic Circle; but according to
Audubon it migrated southward in winter to Chesapeake Bay.

History.

The Labrador Duck has a brief history, for very little is
known about it. It was first described by Gmelin (Syst.
Nat., 1788, Vol. I, Part 2, p. 537.)

It is supposed to have bred only along the Labrador coast,
and, although the evidence of its breeding there seems to
have been gathered mainly from settlers and Indians, some
color is given to their statements by the fact that it has not
been reported in summer from any other part of North
America. Nevertheless, there are no definite records.

John W. Audubon was shown deserted nests at Blanc
Sablon, Labrador, that were said to be those of this species,
but he saw no birds.!

Professor Newton asserts that this bird, like the Eider
Duck, bred on rocky islets, and that it was commonly found
in summer about the mouth of the St. Lawrence and the
coast of Labrador until about 1842; but he does not state
where he obtained this information.’

Major King writes: ‘The Pied Duck or Labrador Duck

 

1 Audubon, J. J.: The Birds of America, 1843, Vol. VI, p. 329.
2 Newton, Alfred: Dictionary of Birds, 1893-96, p. 221.
Al2 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

is common in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and breeds on its
northern shore, a short distance inland.” He says that the
bird derives its name from its Magpie-like plumage; that its
flesh is dry and fishy, and that as an addition to the bag it is
not worth shooting. All these statements would apply to the
Labrador Duck.t | As King had spent three years shooting
and fishing about the Gulf of St. Lawrence and in Canada
previous to 1866, when his book was published, and as he
evidently was familiar with the water-fowl, his statement
perhaps is entitled to as much credence as was that of the set-
tlers who showed Audubon the supposed nests of this Duck.

Dr. Coues, in his notes on the Ornithology of Labrador,
made in 1860, says: ““I was informed that, though it was
rarely seen in summer, it is not an uncommon bird in Labra-
dor during the fall.”? This is the only intimation that I have
been able to find that this bird ever bred to the northward
of Labrador; but it is too indefinite to have much weight.

Audubon regarded the Labrador Duck as a very hardy
species, for it remained off the coasts of Maine and Massa-
chusetts during the winter and was unknown south of Chesa-
peake Bay. It must have migrated in some numbers to the
coast of Long Island and New York as late as the first half
of the nineteenth century, for DeKay (1844) says that it was
well known to the gunners on that coast, but that on the
coast of New Jersey it was “not very abundant.”? But
Giraud, writing about the same time of Long Island, says:
‘With us it is rather rare.” 4

Probably the Labrador Duck in its migrations was once
common along the New England coast. Morton, writing of
the birds noted by him in New England between 1622 and
1630, speaks of “pide Ducks, gray Ducks and black Ducks in
greate abundance.” * It seems probable that some of the
‘pide Ducks” were of this species, for this is the one Duck
that best merits the name of pied Duck, because of its being

 

1 King, W. Ross: The Sportsman and Naturalist in Canada, 1866, p. 235.

2 Coues, Elliott: Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1861, p. 239. :

3 DeKay, James E.: Nat. Hist. of New York, Part I, Zodlogy, Ornithology, 1844, p. 326.
4 Giraud, J. P., Jr.: Birds of Long Island, 1844, p. 327.

5 Morton, Thomas: New English Canaan, Pub. Prince Soc., 1883, p. 190.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 413

 

marked ‘‘like a Magpie,” and it was so named by the earlier
writers and ornithologists. Morton lived at Merrymount,
now Wollaston, in Quincy, Mass., and shot wild-fowl about
Boston Bay. He probably found this bird common there in
his time, for, although considered a “sea-fowl,”’ it entered the
bays and tidal rivers along the coast. Audubon never saw
the bird alive. The specimens from which his drawings of
the species were made were shot by Daniel Webster at
Martha’s Vineyard, Mass., and are now in the collection of
the National Museum at Washington, D. C.

Freeman (1807) includes the Shoal Duck as one of the
species found on Martha’s Vineyard.!

Dr. D. G. Elliot says that between 1860 and 1870 he saw
a considerable number of these birds, mostly females and
young males, in the New York markets, and that a full-
plumaged male was then exceedingly rare; but no one then
imagined that the species was approaching extinction.”

Maynard (1870) records the Labrador Duck as rare during
the winter on the Massachusetts coast.’

The extermination of this bird never has been satisfac-
torily accounted for; but Newton considered that the whole-
sale destruction of eggs and nesting birds on the Labrador
coast, as witnessed by Audubon, could have had no other
effect.*

If this bird’s breeding range was limited to the southern
and eastern coast of that peninsula, and if it bred, as is
stated by Newton, only on the small, rocky islands off the
coast, or, as King says, on the mainland near it, the whole-
sale slaughter that went on for many years by eggers, feather
hunters and Eskimos may have been a chief factor in its
extinction. Audubon’s story of the Labrador eggers, as pub-
lished in his Ornithological Biography, graphically exhibits
a terrible destruction among the sea birds of the Labrador
coast; but long before his time a forgotten yet still greater
slaughter of wild-fowl occurred on those coasts to supply the

 

1 Freeman, J.: A Description of Dukes County, Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. IIT, 2d ser., p. 54.
2 Elliot, D. G.: Wild Fowl of North America, 1898, pp. 172, 173.

3 Maynard, C. J.: Birds of Eastern Massachusetts, Appendix to Naturalists’ Guide, 1870, p. 148.
4 Newton, Alfred: Dictionary of Birds, 1893-96, p. 222.
414 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

demand for feathers and eider-down for beds. Amos Otis,
in his Notes of Barnstable (Mass.) Families, says that Josiah
and Edward Child in early life went on “feather voyages.”
This must have been about 1750 to 1760, when vessels were
fitted out for the coast of Labrador for the express purpose
of collecting feathers and eider-down. Otis states a well-
known fact that at a certain season of the year (presumably
July or August) some species of wild-fowl shed a part of their
wing feathers and can fly little if at all. He asserts that
thousands of these birds congregated on barren islands on the
Labrador coast; the crews of vessels surrounded them, drove
them together and killed them with short clubs, or with
brooms made of stiff branches. ‘“‘ Millions of wild-fowl,”’ he
says, were thus destroyed, and a few years later their haunts
were so broken up by this wholesale slaughter and their
numbers were diminished so much that feather voyages became
unprofitable and were given up.t Feather hunting in the
breeding season is doubly destructive, because the helpless
young are hunted down as well as the old birds. The killing
of birds for their eggs, flesh and feathers has been continued
by fishermen and the natives of the Labrador coast ever since.

It seems probable that the only Ducks breeding in large
numbers on islands along the Labrador coast were Eiders,
Labrador Ducks and possibly Scoters. The Labrador Duck
is believed to have been a maritime species, and its breeding
range appears to have been as restricted as that of the Great
Auk. If the Labrador Ducks were unable to fly in July they
probably were reduced greatly in numbers by the feather
hunters long before their existence was known to naturalists.
A somewhat similar case is that of the Great Cormorant
(Phalacrocorax perspicillatus), which became extinct in the
North Pacific somewhere about 1850, and which was formerly
abundant about Bering Island. It is said to have been
killed for food. Dr. C. W. Townsend informs us that the fisher-
men and Eskimos still wantonly destroy the nesting birds
on the Labrador coast in spring and summer; and the
same wholesale killing which has so reduced many other

 

1 Otis, Amos: Genealogical Notes of Barnstable County, 1885, Vol. I, p. 187.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. Al5

 

breeding species in that region, may have hastened the
extinction of the Labrador Duck.

When the Magdalen Islands were discovered, great herds
of walrus resorted there; but to-day the fact that the walrus
was once numerous in the Gulf of St. Lawrence is almost
forgotten. We do not know the cause of the extermination
of the species there, but practically, it is certain that it was
extirpated by man. The fact that the Labrador Duck was
well known to gunners, and was found in some numbers
in the markets, indicates that many were once shot along our
coasts. Col. Nicolas Pike relates that in November, 1844,
while paddling in his sneak boat covered with salt hay at the
south end of Plum Island, Ipswich Bay, he saw three of
these birds, two males and a female, feeding on a shoal spot
near a sand spit. He shot them all.!| This indicates that the
birds were taken easily by an expert gunner.

Dr. Elliot says that no satisfactory explanation of the
extinction of the Labrador Duck can be given, and yet he
says, on the same page: ‘‘ While we marvel at the disappear-
ance of this bird from our fauna, similar or equally forcible
methods are at work, which in the process of time, and short
time too, will cause many another species of our water fowl
to vanish from our lakes and rivers, and along the coasts of
our continent. Robbing the nests for all manner of purposes,
from that of making the eggs an article of commerce to pos-
ing as specimens in cabinets, slaying the ducklings before
they are able to fly, and have no means of escape from the
butchers, together with the never-ceasing slaughter from the
moment the young are able to take wing and start on their
migration, at all times, in all seasons and in every place, until
the few remaining have returned to their summer home, all
combined, are yearly reducing their ranks with a fearful
rapidity, and speedily hastening the time when, so far as our
water fowl are concerned, the places that now know them,
and echo with their pleasant voices, shall know them no more
forever.”’?

 

1 Dutcher, William: Auk, 1891, p. 206.
2 Elliot, Daniel Giraud: The Wild Fowl of North America, 1898, p. 174.
Al6 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

This extract seems to indicate that Dr. Elliot looks upon
it as probable that man had much to do with the extinction
of this species. Positive proof of this, however, always will be
wanting, for the early history of the bird is unknown; but it
seems very probable that the extinction of the species was
due to the advent of the white man in North America.

The last Labrador Duck of which we have record died by
the hand of man near Long Island, New York, in 1875; and,
according to Dutcher’s excellent summary, there are but
forty-two preserved specimens recorded as still existing in
the museums and collections of the world.!

Very little is known about the habits of this bird. Giraud
says that it feeds on shell-fish, and Audubon says that a bird-
stuffer at Camden had many fine specimens which he said
were taken by baiting hooks with the common mussel. The
name Sand Shoal Duck indicates that the bird was partial to
such shoals, and was found feeding in the shallow water near
them.

ESKIMO CURLEW (Numenius borealis).

Common name: Doe-bird; Dough-bird.

Length. — 12 to 14.50 inches; bill, about 2.10.

Adult. — General ground color, warm buff; upper parts streaked and mot-
tled with very dark brown or dusky, so much so that the back often
appears blackish; head and neck streaked, rather than mottled. The
effect of the distribution of the markings gives the sides of the head
and neck, and particularly the under parts, a much lighter appearance
than the back; the top of the head, however, is darker, and there is
a rather light line over the eye; no whitish stripe in center of crown.
Primaries or flight feathers plain, not spotted or barred; tail barred
with dusky brownish black; bill black; base of lower mandible pale
or yellowish; legs grayish blue.

Notes. -— A soft, melodious whistle, bee, bee; a squeak like that of Wilson’s
Tern, but finer (Mackay); and a low, conversational chatter (Coues).

Season. — August to November.

Range. — Eastern North America and South America, breeding on the
Barren Grounds of northwestern Canada; wintering in Argentina and
Patagonia.

 

1 Dutcher, William: Auk, 1894, p. 176.
"JOUNXE aq 0} Panaljaq MoU ‘ UOT! JeBusssed OY} JO esoY} pa|quiasal soo} s}! Jey} 1SkO9,pUe|BUY MAN OY} LO yUepUNge os Ayauuo4

*“MITEND = OWINSA—'AIX 3LV1d

 
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. Al7

 

History.

The Eskimo Curlew is placed in the list of extinct species
to call attention to the fact that this bird, the flocks of which
resembled in appearance and numbers the multitudes of the
Passenger Pigeon, is now practically extinct. As in the case
of the Passenger Pigeon, it is not improbable that a few more
small flocks or single specimens may yet be seen or taken;
but it is too late to save the species. Its doom is sealed.

Most of the so-called “Dough-birds”’ taken in recent
years have proved to be Hudsonian Curlews, which have a
light stripe along the top of the crown. The Eskimo Curlew
may be distinguished at once by its unstriped dark crown, its
small size, unbarred primaries, and small, slender bill.

The history of this bird, so far
as it is known to us, began in the
eighteenth century. It was de-
scribed by Forster in 1772 (Philos.
Trans. Royal Soc., London, 1772,
Vol. LXII, pp. 411, 431); but sixty-
three years earlier Lawson (1709)
mentions three “ sorts” of Curlews
that were found in “vast numbers” in Carolina, of which
this, possibly, was one; and Hearne (1795) spoke of two
species that were abundant about Hudson Bay (1769-72), the
smaller of which undoubtedly was this bird, although, follow-
ing Pennant, he gives the name “ Eskimaux Curlew” to the
larger.

The Eskimo Curlew was unknown to Wilson. The bird
which he described as the “‘ Esquimaux Curlew” was the Hud-
sonian. The Eskimo Curlew was found breeding by Richard-
son at Point Lake in 1822,! and it bred abundantly in the
Barren Grounds. Its breeding range extended from Alaska to
Labrador. In the fall migration its swarming myriads massed
in Labrador, from there crossed the Gulf of St. Lawrence,
landed at Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, and then put
out to sea, heading for South America. If southerly storms

 

 

Fic, 20.— Axillars and first primary of
Eskimo Curlew (after Cory).

 

1 Fauna Boreali-Americana, 1831, Vol. II, p. 378.
Al8 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

occurred during their migrations, great numbers landed on
the Bermuda Islands. Easterly storms brought similar flights
to the coast of New England, and less frequently, perhaps, to
the shores of the middle and southern States, where, ornithol-
ogists believe, they were rarely if ever as abundant as in
Massachusetts.

We know nothing definite of their migrations in the early
days of the colony, but since the beginning of the nineteenth
century comparatively few have been seen on our shores
in fair weather. Whether they kept at sea, resting on the
ocean when weary, or continued their flight until they reached
that great mass of floating weed called the Sargasso Sea,
where seafaring birds find food, we can only conjecture; but
in some way they reached the West Indies and later South
America, where they spread over the continent, sweeping on
even to Patagonia, thus coursing nearly the length of two
continents. Returning in spring, they were seen rarely if
ever on the Atlantic or its coasts; but they reappeared in
Texas and other gulf coast States in March and April, and
swarmed over the prairies and through the Mississippi valley
region, reaching the fur countries by the interior route.
They were accompanied in their migrations by the Golden
Plover. The name ‘“ Dough-bird” applied to this Curlew is
an old one, antedating American ornithologists, and was used
to denote an extremely fat and delicious fowl. It was given
occasionally to species of similar habits, as the Godwits; but
the Eskimo Curlew is the true Dough-bird of New England.

Cape Cod and Nantucket often were overrun by Dough-
birds, and they landed in enormous numbers all along the
Massachusetts coast. The shores and islands of Boston har-
bor were favorite resorts. During the first years of the nine-
teenth century Noddle Island (now East Boston) was owned
by Mr. H. H. Williams, who often invited his friends there to
shoot; and Mr. William H. Sumner (1858) says that he has
seen “that kind of Plover called Dough-birds,” from their
superlative fatness, alight upon the island “fifty years ago”
in a northeast storm, in such large flocks and so weary that
it was “‘as difficult for them to fly as it is for seals to run.”
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. Al9

 

Mr. Williams told him, he asserts, that when the birds
arrived in this condition they were chased by men and boys,
who knocked them down with clubs as they attempted to
rise. If the August storm passed, and these birds did not
land on the island, very few would be seen in the markets
that year... Mr. Sumner says that these birds were so fat
that if shot when flying they burst open when they struck
the ground. It is well known that this was their condition
when they left Labrador.

We have some records of the immense flights of these
birds that appeared periodically on our coasts during the
early days of the last century, but we can only surmise what .
was their abundance when the country was first settled. The
flights may have decreased in Massachusetts even before the
settlement of the west, and the beginning of the destructive
spring shooting there.

Audubon says that on July 29, 1833, while he was near
the harbor of Bras d’Or, Labrador, these Curlews came from
the north in such dense flocks as to remind him of the Pas-
senger Pigeon. Mr. E. W. Tucker (1838) writes that Curlews
in vast flocks were exceedingly abundant on the Labrador
coast.2. Dr. A. S. Packard was there in 1860, and notes a
flock which was perhaps a mile long and nearly as broad. He
describes the sum total of their distant notes as resembling
the wind whistling through the rigging of a ship. At times
it sounded like the jingling of many sleigh bells.

The Dough-birds continued so plentiful until long after
the middle of the nineteenth century that the fishermen of
Labrador and Newfoundland made a practice of salting them
down in barrels. A Newfoundland correspondent, quoted by
Hapgood in Forest and Stream, says that they reached that
island in millions that darkened the sky. “Millions” of
these birds and Golden Plover arrived in the Magdalen
Islands in August and September. There they went to the
high beach to roost in such masses that on a dark night a
man armed with a lantern to dazzle their eyes and a stick to

 

1 Sumner, Wm. H.: History of East Boston, 1858, p. 53.
2 Tucker, E. W.: Five Months in Labrador and Newfoundland in 1838, 1839, p. 110.
420 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

strike them down could kill enormous numbers.' It is a well-
known fact that thousands of shore birds were killed on Cape
Cod by similar methods in early days.

Mr. W. J. Carrol quotes Mr. C. P. Berteau, who says that
he does not remember getting less than thirty or forty brace
of these birds in a two hours’ shoot when he was in Labrador;
and that the Hudson Bay Company’s store at Cartwright
sometimes had as many as two thousand birds, as a result of
a day’s shooting by twenty-five or thirty men.’

Up to the middle of the nineteenth century, and even
later, great flights of Eskimo Curlews continued to come to
Massachusetts. Old gunners say (1908) that, “sixty or
seventy years ago,” so many Dough-birds and Golden Plover
alighted on Nantucket that the inhabitants used all the shot
on the island, and had to stop shooting until more could be
obtained from the mainland.

The greatest flight within the memory of men now living
occurred on Nantucket, August 29, 1863, but it was composed
of much greater numbers of Golden Plover than of Curlews.

Hapgood describes a flight that occurred a few days later,
September 3, 1863, on Cape Cod, when a party of several
gunners killed two hundred and eighty-one Eskimo Curlews
and Golden Plover in a little over one day.’

Mr. Elbridge Gerry tells me that “about 1872”? Dough-
birds came in a great flight to Cape Cod and Nantucket.
They “ were everywhere,” and were killed in such numbers on
the Cape that the boys offered them for sale at six cents each.
Two market hunters killed three hundred dollars’ worth at
that time.

Mr. John M. Winslow of Nantucket states that in 1882 he
and Peter Folger of that town killed eighty-seven Dough-
birds there one morning, and there were probably five hun-
dred birds in the pasture where these were killed. Mr. Lewis
W. Hill writes that his grandfather, Mr. W. W. Webb, killed
about seventy at Cape Pogue, Martha’s Vineyard, about the
same time.

 

1 Hapgood, Warren: Forest and Stream Series, No. 1, Shore Birds, 1885, p. 17.
2 Carrol, W. J.: Forest and Stream, Vol. 74, March 5, 1910, p. 372.
3 Hapgood, Warren: Forest and Stream Series, No. 1, Shore Birds, 1885, pp. 22, 23.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 421

 

The Rev. Herbert K. Job records a flight of Eskimo Cur-
lews and Golden Plover on Cape Cod, August 30, 1883, and
remarks (1905) that such a flight ‘‘ may never be seen again.”’!
His words were prophetic. That was the last great flight that
landed on the Cape.

A “cloud” of them was seen on the Magdalen Islands in
1890.2. This was perhaps the last large flock of the Eskimo
Curlew that has been recorded in the east, although the fish-
ermen of Labrador reported smaller flights for a few years
longer.

The decrease of the Dough-birds in Massachusetts during
the last century may be explained in part by the continual
persecution that they suffered here. The arrival of these
birds was the signal for every gunner and market hunter on
the coast to get to work. The birds were rarely given any
rest. Nearly all that remained on our shores were shot, and
only those that kept moving had any chance for their lives.
As a consequence of this continual persecution, the birds
probably learned to avoid the New England coast; and most
of those that were driven to land by storms left the moment
the weather was favorable for a continuance of their flight.
Often they came in at night and went in the morning.

Peabody (1839) regarded the bird as “ sufficiently common
in Massachusetts,” and says that it is “valued as game;”
and Giraud (1844) says that it is seen every season in New
York, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. The
great flights about Boston disappeared early in the nineteenth
century. Sumner writes (1858): ‘‘ None are now to be seen
where once they were so abundant, and even the market
offers but few at fifty cents apiece.” Turnbull (1869) gives it
as a rather rare transient (eastern Pennsylvania and New
Jersey). C.J. Maynard (1870) says that it is not uncommon
in Massachusetts. during migration. E. A. Samuels (1870)
states that it visits New England, but only in small numbers.
Dr. Elliott Coues (1874) states that it migrates through the
Missouri region in immense numbers in May; and that in

 

1 Job, Herbert K.: Wild Wings, 1905, pp. 207, 208.
2 Sanford, L. C., Bishop, L. B., and Van Dyke, T.S.: The Water-fowl Family, 1903, pp. 445,

446.
422 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Labrador it is seen in flocks of from three birds to three
thousand.

Dr. J. A. Allen (1879) considers it a common migrant
in Massachusetts. Gurdon Trumbull (1888) says that this
species appears on the more eastern uplands of Cape Cod
in August or September, “and if severe storms prevail, it
arrives in very large numbers.”” This should have been writ-
ten in the past tense.

At first sight it may seem difficult to reconcile all these
statements with that of Sumner, made in 1858; but his asser-
tion referred mainly to Boston harbor, with the conditions of
which he was familiar, and Curlews were still fairly common
on less frequented parts of the coast long after the great
flocks had disappeared from the neighborhood of Boston. In
1888, however, Stearns and Coues considered it “singular”
that this species was not common in New England.

A dimimution of the species was noticed next in the west.
The birds no longer came in their usual numbers. A warn-
ing note was sounded by Charles B. Cory (1896), who said:
“It is becoming less common every year.” This diminution
had been gradual and progressive for years, but attracted
little attention until it became rapid and marked. Mr. J.D.
Mitchell, who is familiar with southern Texas, writes: ‘‘ They
used to visit the prairies in immense flocks, but it has been
many years since I have seen a flock.’ Pressed for details,
he writes that his earliest recollections of these birds date
back to 1856. From that time to 1875 they came every
spring in immense flocks on the prairies; after that they dis-
appeared. In 1886 he saw several small flocks in Calhoun
County, and in 1905 he saw three birds feeding with four
Black-breasted Plover in Victoria County. These are his last
records. Mr. A. S. Eldredge says that this Curlew came
through the region about Lampasas, Tex., in 1890, in flocks
of fifteen or twenty. In 1902 he killed one bird, — the only
one that he saw. Prof. Geo. H. Beyer writes that the Eskimo
Curlew disappeared very gradually in Louisiana. The last
records he has for the species are March 17 and March 23,
1889. Prof. W. W. Cooke knows of no record of the species
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 423

 

in Oklahoma since the spring of 1884. Prof. Thomas J. Head-
lee sends me a copy of a letter from Mr. Richard H. Sullivan,
president of the Kansas Audubon Society, who has gathered
information from well-known and trustworthy informants,
who report as follows: Mr. James Howard of Wichita says
that the last time that these Curlews were killed there in any
numbers was in the springs of 1878 and 1879. A good many
were taken in 1878, but they were much reduced in 1879. They
decreased rapidly afterward, and were not seen in numbers in
the markets after 1878. Mr. Fred G. Smyth of Wichita says
that the Curlews disappeared rather rapidly, and that the last
bird was shot in the spring of 1902; this is corroborated by his
brother, Charles H. Smyth. Mr. Charles Payne, a naturalist,
says that there were still a few Eskimo Curlews in the markets
of Kansas in the early 90’s. All these gentlemen believe that
there are living Curlews still in western Kansas and Oklahoma,
but as no one has been able to secure a specimen of the Eskimo
Curlew for the museums, it is probable that the birds now seen
are Hudsonian Curlews. Prof. Myron H. Swenk states that
during the 60’s and 70’s this bird passed through Nebraska in
spring in immense flocks, and was known commonly as the
Prairie Pigeon, because of the resemblance of its flocks to
those of the Passenger Pigeon. This name also was applied to
the Golden Plover (see page 340). They were the victims of
tremendous slaughter. In eastern Nebraska they began
diminishing rapidly in the early 80’s, or even earlier, and
disappeared during that decade. There is not a specimen
recorded there for the past fifteen years. There are occasional
reports of the birds from western Nebraska, but no specimens
are forthcoming to substantiate them. The indications are
that its decrease was gradual. Mr. Charles E. Holmes of
Providence, R. I., found the bird common locally in the hills of
central Nebraska, about forty miles south of Ainsworth, in
1889. It was noticeable that if one was wounded and cried
out, others came from all directions, until thirty or forty were
fluttering over their wounded companion. They were then
decreasing and many were killed by cowboys. In 1892 he
saw about six in the Bad Lands of South Dakota, and in 1893
424 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

he saw two there, — the last that he ever saw, although he
resided in South Dakota until! recently. The reports of all my
correspondents in Kansas indicate that the bird has been rare
there for about thirty years, and has disappeared. In Missouri,
where the Curlew formerly flew in countless thousands, we
find it rated in 1907 as a rare transient. A flock of one hundred
was reported in 1894; a flock of ten, in 1902; and none after-
wards.t. Mr. Otto Widmann writes me that it was irregularly
common in the markets of St. Louis during the last two dec-
ades of the century. In Iowa the species disappeared grad-
ually, but rather suddenly at the last. The last record that
I have is that of a specimen taken at Burlington, April 5, 1893,
by Paul Bartsch. Cory (1902) says, in his Birds of Illinois
and Wisconsin, that the Eskimo Curlew may still occur during
the migrations, but is becoming very rare and apparently is
disappearing fast; also that it formerly was abundant, and as
late as 1895 was not uncommon in some localities. Dr. Walter
B. Barrows writes that there is no Michigan specimen extant
so far as he knows, and that the latest authentic record of the
taking of a specimen was at St. Clair flats in the spring of
1883. Prof. Lynds Jones says that the latest record of the
capture of the Eskimo Curlew in Ohio is September, 1878.
Prof. H. L. Ward says that this Curlew appears to have been
rare in Wisconsin for at Jeast half of a century, and that he has
no recent record. Not one of my correspondents from Alberta,
Manitoba or western Canada ever has seen the bird alive,
as their experience in the country does not date back much
over ten years. All believe that it has disappeared. Mr. H.
P. Attwater saw flocks of small Curlews, which he believes
were of this species, near San Antonio, Tex., as late as the
year 1900. All these reports taken together seem to indicate
a gradual decrease of the species in the west, accelerated at the
last.

The fishermen of Labrador noted the change about 1886
or 1887. There the decrease was more rapid. Dr. Henry B.
Bigelow, who visited Labrador in 1900, was satisfied that the
bird was nearing extinction. He saw only five birds while

 

1 Widmann, Otto: A Preliminary Catalogue of the Birds of Missouri, 1907, p. 75.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 425

 

in Labrador during the month of September. He was told
by the settlers that the Curlews appeared in numbers until
about 1892, after which no large flocks were seen. Townsend
and Allen (1906) quote Captain Parsons to the effect that the
birds were abundant in Labrador until thirty years ago (1876).
He often shot a hundred before breakfast and the fishermen
killed them by thousands. There was, he said, a great and
sudden falling off in numbers about 1886. Mr. William Pye
at Cape Charles, Labrador, told a similar story, but placed
the sudden decrease at about 1891. Dr. W. T. Grenfell says
that they became scarce in Labrador in the 80’s, and that in
1892 he saw only two flocks of any size. In 1906 he heard
of a few dozens being killed, but did not see one.!

At last ornithologists awoke to the fact that one of the
most useful, valuable and highly esteemed game birds of
America was disappearing. For the last five years all my
correspondents who mention this species have reported it
as either extinct or nearly so. Preble says (1908): ‘‘ It has
become practically exterminated, although formerly enor-
mously abundant and fairly common up to 1890.” ?

Stone (1908) says: ‘‘ Now apparently almost extinct.” *

Mr. Harry Piers, curator of the Provincial Museum of
Halifax, Nova Scotia, writes me that during a period of close
observation of birds from 1888 to the present time he has
made but one record, a specimen in the Halifax market,
September 11, 1897, which apparently has been lost. He
has been unable to secure a specimen for the Provincial
Museum.

Ornithologists have found the bird rare or wanting every-
where in North America since 1900.

The diminution of this species on the Massachusetts coast
during the latter part of the nineteenth century may be seen
by the records furnished by Mr. George H. Mackay. These
refer in part to Cape Cod and in part to Nantucket, includ-
ing, in some years, the birds taken or seen on Martha’s Vine-

 

+ Townsend, C. W., and Allen, G. M.: Birds of Labrador, Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., Vol.
XXXIII, 1906-07, pp. 356, 357.

2 Preble, E. A.: North American Fauna, No. 27, Biol. Surv., U. 8. Dept. Agr., 1908, p. 332.

8 Stone, Witmer: Birds of New Jersey, An. Rept., N. J. State Mus., 1908, p. 142.
426 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

yard and Tuckernuck Islands. These notes, condensed from
various numbers of the Auk, follow: —

1858 to 1861.—Some birds each| 1883. — A large flight, August 26.
year. 1884. — A few landed.

1862. — No birds. 1885. — Eight shot on Nantucket.

1863. — An immense flight. 1886. — A few landed.

1864. — No birds. 1887. — A few shot on Nantucket.

1865. — No birds. 1888. — A number landed; one shot.

1866. — A few; no flight. 1889. — A number landed September

1867. — No flight. 11, a few shot later.

1868. — A few; no flight. 1890. — Fifteen birds reported.

1869. — A few; no flight. 1891. — Small flocks seen on Nan-

1870. — A few scattering birds. tucket and Tuckernuck.

1871. — No birds. 1892. — Ten birds killed on Nan-

1872. — Two flights; fifty birds seen tucket and Tuckernuck,
in one flock on Nantucket. eight in Prince Edward

1873. — Some birds. Island.

1874. — No birds. 1893. — One shot on Nantucket.

1875. — No birds on Nantucket, a| 1894. — No birds. One in Boston
few on Cape Cod. market.

1876. — Some birds. 1895. — No birds.

1877. — A flight; 300 birds seen. 1896. — None in markets, and none

1878. — Over 100 birds seen. on Massachusetts coast.

1879. — No birds. 1897. — None killed; eight seen on

1880. — A few shot on Nantucket. Nantucket.

1881. — Some landed; fifty seen. 1898. — Two seen.

1882. — About twenty-five birds.

 

There has been much speculation regarding the cause of
its disappearance, and all sorts of reasons except the real one
are advanced by gunners. The usual explanations, that the
birds had “changed their line of flight,’ or that they ‘do
not come any more,” for various trivial local reasons, have
been put forward.

Dr. C. W. Townsend writes: “‘ About fifteen years ago the
Curlews in Labrador rapidly diminished in numbers, and now
[1906] a dozen or two or none at all are seen in a season.
The fishermen there thought that the shooters were not to
blame for this, but that the birds had been poisoned by the
farmers in the west, because they ‘ troubled their cornfields.’ ”’
This tale, no doubt, arose because of the fact that the western
farmers, years ago, poisoned blackbirds in their cornfields by
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 427

 

wholesale; but when were the Curlews ever known to eat
corn? Poisoned corn probably would not affect them.

There is no need to look for a probable cause for the
extermination of the Eskimo Curlew, — the cause is painfully
apparent. The bird was a great favorite with epicures; it
was exterminated by the market demand.

Trumbull (1888) says that as a table dainty he considers
it superior to all other birds, and that the gunners got from
seventy-five cents to a dollar apiece for them.! The price
had doubled within thirty years.

The extermination of this bird was foreshadowed by Mr.
George H. Mackay (Auk, 1897, p. 214), when, for some years,
it had been coming into the eastern markets by the ton in
barrels from the Mississippi valley in spring. Mr. Mackay
tersely asked, ‘“‘ Are we not approaching the beginning of the
end?” In 1891 he wrote that spring shipments of Golden
Plover, Eskimo Curlews and Upland Plover to Boston markets
began ‘‘ about four years ago”’ (1887), and had increased to
date. Two firms received at one shipment eight barrels of
Curlews and twelve barrels of Curlews and Golden Plover,
with twenty-five dozen Curlews and sixty dozen Plover to the
barrel. With such shipments going out of the west to many
firms in the great markets, the remark made by Mr. Mackay,
that, “‘ while we may not be able now to answer the question
are they fewer than formerly, we shall be ably fitted to do so
in afew years” (Auk, 1891, p. 24), was prophetic. The end is
here. The destruction of this bird was mainly due to unre-
stricted shooting, market hunting and shipment, particularly
during the spring migration in the United States. When the
Passenger Pigeon began to decrease rapidly in numbers, about
1880, the marketmen looked about for something to take its
place in the market in spring. They found a new supply in the
great quantities of Plover and Curlews in the Mississippi
valley at that season. Less than thirty years of this wholesale
slaughter in the west practically exterminated the Curlews.
They were shot largely for western markets at first; they
began to come into the eastern markets in numbers about

 

1 Trumbull, Gurdon: Names and Portraits of Birds, 1888, p. 203.
428 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

1886. According to Dr. C. W. Townsend they decreased
rapidly in Labrador from about 1886 to 1892. By 1894 they
were practically gone, although straggling parties were seen
for ten years afterward. The Golden Plover lasted longer,
and has been saved for the time being by the passage and
enforcement of better laws; but its turn will come, unless
conditions are improved.

There was, of course, some shooting of these birds in South
America; but the South Americans had not the population or
the market demand that we have here. The opening of the
great west to settlement, and the unrestricted slaughter that
followed, which destroyed first the bison and other large ani-
mals, then the Wild Turkey and the smaller game birds,
exterminated the Curlew as it did the Passenger Pigeon and
the Carolina Paroquet. The Curlew was one of the first to
go, because it was easy to kill and brought a high price, and
because it had practically no protection. The season was
open while the bird was here, and closed when it was out of
the country.

Prof. W. W. Cooke brings forward as a “‘simple explana-
tion” of the probable cause of the extinction of the Eskimo
Curlew the fact that its former winter home in Argentina and
its spring feeding grounds in Nebraska and South Dakota
have been settled and cultivated; but he does not explain why
this has not exterminated the Golden Plover, which had to
meet the same conditions in the same regions. The mere
settlement and cultivation of the feeding grounds would not
have exterminated the birds. It provided more food for them,
as both species were fond of insects and earthworms, which
are increased by cultivation, and both are known to have
gleaned worms and insects on ploughed land and cultivated
fields. Settlement and cultivation then would have tended to
increase their numbers, as it provided them with a greater food
supply. We must assume that Professor Cooke means to
assign the destruction of the species to the shooting, market
hunting and other adverse influences that always follow settle-
ment. Thousands of people can testify that these were the
destructive causes in the western States.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 429

 

It has been suggested that possibly toward the last some
great storm at sea may have hastened the end. No storm
ever blew that was far-reaching, severe or continuous enough
to have threatened the extinction of these birds when they
were numerous, and bred from Hudson Bay to Alaska, when
their flights passed down the Atlantic coast in August and
September, with stragglers continuing until after the middle
of November. Their numbers were too great, and they were
extended over too large a part of the earth’s surface, to be
swept out of existence at one fell stroke. There is no evi-
dence that this species ever was overwhelmed by any storm.
It seems to have been well fitted to cope with the elements at
sea. The species that are most exposed to storms on the
ocean are the two Phalaropes, which migrate almost entirely
at sea. By breeding mainly in high latitudes and keeping
mostly off shore in their migrations they have escaped the
gunner, and have held their own better than other birds of
this order. If storms at sea exterminated the Curlews, why
have they not destroyed the Phalaropes, which are far more
exposed to them, and the Golden Plover, which travelled
with the Curlews? There could have been no possibility of
the destruction of the Dough-bird by a storm until it was
reduced to a remnant of its former numbers, and driven by
inhospitable man to seek a refuge at sea. But if such a
catastrophe had happened, it would have made no difference
in the end. The bird was doomed. It was merely another
victim to man’s rapacity and greed, as all large shore birds
eventually must be, unless protected by law and public sen-
timent from their otherwise inevitable fate.

In addition to the notes given by Mr. Mackay, there are
a few more eastern records made within the last twenty
years: —

1890. — A flock of about twenty, at Eagle Hill, Ipswich, autumn; nearly
all killed by T. C. Wilson (C. W. Townsend, Birds of Essex County).

1890. — One shot by Alfred Swan at North Eastham, September 28; speci-
men preserved. Species seen or taken in New York State every year
from 1885 to 1891 except 1888 (E. H. Eaton, Birds of New York).

1893. —— One seen at. Ipswich by Walter Faxon (C. W. Townsend, Birds
of Essex County).
430 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

1895. — Two killed by William H. Spaulding at Chatham (N. A. Eldredge).

1896 (about). — Last record for New York State (E. H. Eaton, Birds of
New York).

1897. — August, one shot and eaten, Chatham Beach (Herbert K. Job).

1898. — Last seen at Dennis, Mass. (William N. Stone).

1899. — Three killed at Chatham Beach, Mass. (Chatham Beach Hotel
Shooting Record).

1899. — One female killed at Chatham, Mass., September 5 (in J. E.
Thayer collection).

1900. — One killed at Eastham (Rev. E. E. Phillips).

1900.— One killed at Chatham Beach, September 13 (Chatham Beach
Hotel Shooting Record).

1900. — One killed on an island in the Gulf of St. Lawrence (Dr. L. C.
Sanford).

1901. — Last one killed on Prince Edward Island (E. T. Carbonnell).

1901. — One shot at Ipswich (C. W. Townsend, Birds of Essex County).

1901. — One female shot by Louis A. Shaw, Pine Point, Me., September 23
(in J. E. Thayer collection).

1902. — Two obtained by Dr. L. C. Jones of Malden in Boston market in
October. One killed in Massachusetts; the other came in with some
western birds (in J. E. Thayer collection).

1902. — Dr. Jonathan Dwight, Jr., has the head of a specimen from Sable
Island believed to have been taken in 1902 (J. H. Fleming).

1906.— Male taken, Magdalen Islands (Stanley Cobb), September 6;
specimen preserved. (See also Auk, 1906, p. 459.)

1908. — Two said to have been killed by A. B. Thomas at Newburyport.
One of these now in J. E. Thayer collection (Auk, 1909, p. 77).

1909.— One taken at Hog Island, Hancock County, Me., September 2
(O. W. Knight). (Auk, 1910, p. 79.) Now in collection of the
University of Maine.

1909. — Another at Hog Island, September 14, by Ira M. Stanley
(Curator, C. S. Winch). Specimen preserved. (See Appendix A.)

As this goes to press, Dr. Wilfred T. Grenfell writes that
the species has not been noted in Labrador for three or four
years.

The habits of the Eskimo Curlews were much like those
of the Golden Plover. They frequented the same localities,
often fed on the same food, and whenever large numbers of
the Curlews were seen in migration, flocks of Golden Plover
usually followed them. The Curlews were very strong and high
flyers, and it has been estimated that they ordinarily flew at
the rate of one hundred miles an hour, and at nearly twice
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 431

 

that speed with a high wind. These estimates were possibly
excessive. Nevertheless, this bird’s power of flight was so
great that it would not take long, under favorable conditions,
for it to cross the vast expanse of ocean lying between Labra-
dor and the lesser Antilles, which. it visited in its southern
flight. This Curlew was able to rest on the sea, like the Golden
Plover or the Willet,! and it may have done so, as all shore birds
canswim. If it could travel with a fair wind even one hundred
miles an hour, it could go from Labrador to the lesser Antilles
or about two thousand miles, in twenty hours. It is improb-
able that it could make so quick a passage; but it seems
possible that it often arrived at the Antilles without landing
on the way.

Apparently a large part of the individuals of this species
concentrated in Labrador in August, although many went
south through the Mississippi valley region. Some of those
that bred in Alaska must have made a journey of more than
two thousand miles to reach the Labrador coast. As it is
about seven thousand miles from the shores of the Arctic
Ocean, where they bred, to Patagonia, where some of them
spent the winter, their wonderful annual flight over land
and sea must have covered at least fourteen thousand miles,
and if some individuals bred in Alaska they may have trav-
elled over sixteen thousand miles.

About the last week in August or sometimes a little earlier
the migration from Labrador began. As they rarely alighted
on the Massachusetts coast in great numbers except when
blown off their course by a storm, and as they were then
tired, wet and storm-beaten, they readily were approached
by the gunner. When driven to take wing by the death-
dealing charge, they started off swiftly; but, being of an
affectionate disposition, they often returned to their strug-
gling, wounded companions, and hovered solicitously over them
until another storm of shot again tore through their thinned
and broken ranks. They were decoyed easily by the gunner,
who could give a close imitation of their call. They were
much too innocent and confiding for their own good. As

 

1 Mackay, George H.: Auk, 1896, p. 90.
432 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

one old Prince Edward Island gunner remarked, ‘‘ They
would not go out of a field until they were all killed.” He
might have added, — and not even then, unless carried out.
In later years, on the Massachusetts coast, this species was
not always so tame; but most of those which remained for
any time upon these shores were gathered in by the gun-
ner sooner or later. In flight the smaller flocks sometimes
assumed a V-shaped formation, but the great flocks were
_ simply masses or extended lines. These flocks often per-
formed beautiful evolutions, swinging about as if at command,
sometimes in ‘‘ open order,” again compactly massed. They
always appeared to follow some temporary leader; and Nel-
son says that the small flocks frequently were led by a single
Hudsonian Curlew, as small shore birds sometimes are pre-
ceded by one of a larger species, the little fellows seemingly
depending on its superior sagacity and watchfulness to keep
them from danger. When driven in by a storm, the Eskimo
Curlews usually alighted facing the wind on the sheltered side
of a grassy hill or in the open field, sometimes on the beach
or in the marsh; but they were attracted particularly by hill
pastures near the coast.

In Massachusetts their food consisted very largely of
terrestrial insects, béetles, grasshoppers, crickets and ants;
also earthworms. They were among the most useful of birds
in their migrations in the west, as they were very destructive
to the young of the Rocky Mountain locust, formerly the
scourge of the plains. Dr. Coues says that while feeding the
great flocks kept up a conversational chattering, like a flock
of Blackbirds. In Prince Edward Island they have been seen
following the furrow and searching for worms, as they did in
the west.!

In Labrador they gathered to feed on the wild berries,
chief of which was the Empetrum nigrum, called curlewberry
or “ gallowberry ” by the natives, but generally known as the
crowberry. There they also fed on snails; and Mr. Berteau
states that they ate “sea lice and infusoria found on sandy
beaches.”

 

1 Mackay, George H.: Auk, 1896, p. 182.
 

 

 

 

PLATE XV.—THE LAST PASSENGER PIGEON.

A female in the Cincinnati Zoological Garden which died September |,
1914, being then about twenty-nine years old. The long, elegant
tail feathers have been broken off in the cage. (From a photo-
graph made and copyrighted by Enno Meyer, Cincinnati, O.,
1911.) The immense hosts of the Passenger Pigeon, formerly
one of the greatest zodlogical wonders of the world, are now
extinct.

 
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 433

 

PASSENGER PIGEON (Ectopistes migratorius).

Common name: Wild Pigeon.

Length. — 15.50 to 16 inches.

Male. — Eye orange, bare space surrounding it purplish flesh color; head,
upper part of neck and chin bright slate blue; throat, breast and sides
reddish and hazel; part of neck and its sides resplendent changeable
gold and green metallic lusters; upper parts mainly dull blue; lower
parts reddish or chestnut fading toward tail; back and parts of wings
tinged with olive; shoulders and upper wings black-spotted; long wing
feathers and long middle tail feathers blackish; outer tail feathers white
or bluish, their inner webs black and chestnut near the base.

Female. — Much duller above and bluish or gray beneath.

Young. — Duller still, the feathers of upper parts with whitish edgings
and the wing feathers with rufous edgings.

Nest. — A frail platform of twigs in a tree.

Eggs. — One, rarely two, about 1.50 by 1.12; pure white.

Notes. — Coo-coo-coo-coo, much shorter than that of the domestic pigeon;
and kee-kee-kee-kee, the first loudest, the others diminishing (Audu-
bon). See also Craig, Auk, 1911, pp. 408-427,

Season. — In Massachusetts, formerly March to December.

Range. — North America, from the high plains of the Rocky Mountain
region to the Atlantic, ranging from the fur countries to the Gulf States;
one specimen recorded from Cuba. Casual in Mexico and Nevada.

History.

More interest is evinced in the history of the Passenger
Pigeon and its fate than in that of any other North American
bird. Its story reads like a romance. Once the most abun-
dant species, in its flights and on its nesting grounds, ever
known in any country, ranging over the greater part of the
continent of North America in innumerable hordes, the race
seems to have disappeared within the past thirty years, leav-
ing no trace. Men now living can remember its appearance
in countless multitudes in the western States, but the fact
that similar immense armies once ranged over the Atlantic
seaboard is almost forgotten. Nevertheless, this was a most
important part of its range, and its vast legions roamed over
the country from the Carolinas to the Maritime Provinces of
Canada, and even to the Barren Grounds and Hudson Bay.

The Passenger Pigeon was described by Linné in the latter
434 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

part of the eighteenth century (Syst. Nat., 1766, ed. 12, Vol. I,
p. 285); but it was well known in America many years before.
In July, 1605, on the coast of Maine, in latitude 43° 25’,
Champlain saw on some islands an “infinite number of
pigeons,” of which he took a great quantity.!

Many early historians, who write of the birds of the
Atlantic coast region, mention the Pigeons. The Jesuit
Fathers, in their first narratives of Acadia (1610-13), state
that the birds were fully as abundant as the fish, and that in
their seasons the Pigeons overloaded the trees.”

Passing now from Nova Scotia to Florida, we find that
Stork (1766) asserts that they were in such plenty there for
three months of the year that an account of them would seem
incredible.®

John Lawson (1709), in his History of Carolina, speaks of
prodigious flocks of Pigeons in 1701-02, which broke down trees
in the woods where they roosted, and cleared away all the
food in the country before them, scarcely leaving one acorn
on the ground.‘

The early settlers in Virginia found the Pigeons in winter
“beyond number or imagination.”

Strachey (1612) says: ‘‘A kind of wood-pidgeon we see in
winter time, and of them such nombers, as I should drawe
(from our homelings here, such who have seene, peradventure
scarse one more than in the markett) the creditt of my rela-
tion concerning all the other in question yf I should expresse
what extended flocks, and how manie thousands in one flock, I
have seene in one daie . . . but there be manie hundred wit-
nesses.”” 5

Hamor (1615) says: “My selfe haue seene three or foure
houres together flockes in the aire, so thicke that euen they
haue shaddowed the skie from vs.” ®

Professor Kalm found the Pigeons in numbers “beyond

 

1 Champlain, Samuel de: Pub. Prince Soc., 1878, Vol. IT, pp. 68, 69.

2 Thwaites, R. G., and others: Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents, 1896, Vol. I, p. 253,

3 Stork, William: An Account of East Florida, 1766, p. 51.

4 Lawson, John: History of Carolina, 1860, pp. 232, 233.

5 Strachey, William: The Historie of Travaile into Virginia Brittannia, printed for the Hakluyt
Soc., 1849, p. 126.

6 Hamor, Raphe: A True Discourse of the Present Estate of Virginia, 1615, p. 21.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 435

 

conception”’ in the middle States and in Canada.' He states,
in his monograph of the Passenger Pigeon, that there are certain
years “‘when they come to Pennsylvania and the southern
English provinces in such indescribable multitudes as to appal
the people.”’? The year 1740 was one of the years when they
came to Pennsylvania and New Jersey in incredible multitudes.
He also states that Dr. Golden told him that he had twice
seen similar great flights between New York and Albany.

G. H. Hollister, in the History of Connecticut (1855), says
that pigeons were innumerable in spring and autumn and were
startled from the thickets in summer.®

Massachusetts authors make brief but numerous references
to the species.

Wood (1629-34) records the migration through eastern
Massachusetts in the following words: ‘‘These Birds come
into the Countrey, to goe to the North parts in the beginning
of our Spring, at which time (if I may be counted worthy, to
be beleeved in a thing that is not so strange as true) I have
seene them fly as if the Ayerie regiment had beene Pigeons;
seeing neyther beginning nor ending, length, or breadth of
these Millions of Millions. The shouting of people, the rat-
ling of Gunnes, and pelting of small shotte could not drive
them out of their course, but so they continued for foure or
five houres together: yet it must not be concluded, that it is
thus often; for it is but at the beginning of the Spring, and at
Michaelmas, when they returne backe to the Southward; yet
are there some all the yeare long, which are easily attayned
by such as looke after them. Many of them build amongst
the Pine-trees, thirty miles to the North-east of our planta-
tions; joyning nest to nest, and tree to tree by their nests, so
that the Sunne never sees the ground in that place, from
whence the Indians fetch whole loades of them.” 4 This nest-
ing must have been somewhere near the coast of Essex, or, as

 

1 Kalm, Peter: Travels into North America, 1770 (first English ed.), Vol. II, pp. 82, 311.

2 Kalm, Peter: A Description of the Wild Pigeons which visit the Southern English Colonies in
North America during Certain Years in Incredible Multitudes, translated by 8. M. Gronberger from
Kongl. Vetenskaps-Akademiens Handlingar for ar 1759, Vol. XX, Stockholm, 1759; now published
in the Auk, 1911, pp. 53-66.

3 Hollister, G. H.: History of Connecticut, 1855, Vol. I, pp. 33, 34.

4 Wood, William: New England’s Prospect, Pub. Prince Soc., 1865, pp. 31, 32.
436 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Dr. Townsend puts it in his Birds of Essex County, in the
Essex woods.

The following is an extract from a letter written by
Governor Dudley to the Countess of Lincoln, March 12, 1630:
“Upon the eighth of March from after it was fair daylight, un-
til about eight of the clock in the forenoon, there flew over all
the towns in our plantations, so many flocks of doves, each
flock containing many thousands and some so many that they
obscured the light, that it passeth credit, if but the truth
should be written.”

Higginson, writing of Salem about this date, apparently
makes the same statement in nearly the same words. In
Charles Brooks’s History of Medford, Mass. (p. 37), we find
the following occurrence recorded on March 8, 1631: ‘‘ Flocks
of wild pigeons this day, so thick they obscure the light.”
Apparently these were the first large flights of pigeons of
which we have definite record in New England.

The Plymouth colony was threatened with famine in
1643, when great flocks of Pigeons swept down upon the
ripened corn and beat down and ate “‘a very great quantity
of all sorts of English grain.”” But Winthrop says that in
1648 they came again after the harvest was gathered, and
proved a great blessing, “it being incredible what multitudes
of them were killed daily.”’?

Roger Williams (1643) says that the Pigeons bred abun-
dantly in Rhode Island in the ‘Pigeon Countrie.” Josselyn
(1672), who had a general acquaintance with the New Eng-
land colonies, and who lived in Massachusetts and Maine for
some years, states that of Pigeons there were “millions of
millions; I have seen,” he asserts, ‘‘a flight of Pidgeons in
the spring, and at Michaelmas when they return back to the
Southward for four or five miles, that to my thinking had neither
beginning nor ending, length nor breadth, and so thick that
I could see no Sun.?. . . But of late they are much dimin-
ished, the English taking them with Nets.”

The latter statement shows that the extirpation of these

 

1 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. VIII, 1st ser., p. 45.

2 Winthrop, John: The History of New England from 1630 to 1649. James Savage, editor, 1825-
26, Vol. II, pp. 94, 331, 332.

3 Josselyn, John: Two Voyages to New England, 1865, p. 79.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 437

 

birds began in New England within fifty years after the first
settlement at Plymouth. It went on for more than two hun-
dred years. Nevertheless, they were still quite numerous
about the beginning of the nineteenth century.

Lewis and Newhall, writing of those early days in the
History of Lynn (1866, p. 45), state that a single family “has
been known to have killed one hundred dozens of these birds
with poles and other weapons.”

Belknap (1792), in his History of New Hampshire, says
they ‘“‘come in the spring, from the southward, in large flocks,
and breed in our woods, during the summer months.” Richard
Hazzen, who surveyed the Province line in 1741, remarks:
“*For three miles together, the pigeons nests were so thick,
that five hundred might have been told on the beech trees at
one time; and could they have been counted on the hemlocks,
as well, I doubt not but five thousand, at one turn round.’
This was on the western side of the Connecticut River and
eastward of the Deerfield River [and probably extended into
Massachusetts]. Since the clearing of the woods the num-
ber of pigeons is diminished.” !

One of the earliest settlers at Clarendon, Vt., stated that
immense numbers of Pigeons nested there. The trees were
loaded with nests, and the noise made by the birds at night
was so troublesome that the traveller could get no sleep.
Settlers often cut down trees, and gathered a horse-load of
squabs in a few minutes.’

In the History of Wells and Kennebunk, Me., it is stated
that from the first settlement to 1820 Pigeons in innumerable
numbers haunted the woods near the sea. In their season
they furnished food for many families.*

Isaac Weld, Jr. (1799), relates that a resident of Niagara,
while sailing from that town to Toronto (forty miles), saw a
great flight of Pigeons coming from the north which continued
throughout the voyage, and the birds were still coming from
the north in large bodies after he reached Toronto.!

 

1 Belknap, Jeremy: History of New Hampshire, 1792, Vol. III, pp. 171, 172.

2 Williams, Samuel: The Natural and Civil History of Vermont, 1809, Vol. I, p. 137.

3 Bourne, Edward E.: History of Wells and Kennebunk, 1875, pp. 563, 564.

4 Weld, Isaac, Jr.: Travels through the States of North America, etc., during the years 1795, 1796,
1797, London, 1800, Vol. II, p. 43.
438 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The Baron de Lahontan, in a letter dated May 28, 1687,
from Boucherville, describing a flight of these birds in the
vicinity of Lake Champlain, says: “‘One would have thought,
that all the Turtle-Doves on Earth had chose to pass thro’
this place. For the eighteen or twenty days that we stayed
there, I firmly believe that a thousand Men might have fed
upon ’em heartily, without putting themselves to any trouble.
. . . The trees were covered with that sort of fowl more than
with leaves.” }

These great flights of Pigeons in migration extended over
vast tracts of country, and usually passed in their greatest
numbers for about three days. This is the testimony of
observers in many parts of the land. Afterward, flocks often
came along for a week or two longer. Even as late as the
decade succeeding 1860 such flights continued, and were still
observed throughout the eastern States and Canada, except
perhaps along the Atlantic coast.

W. Ross King (1866) speaks of a flight at Fort Mississi-
saugua, Canada, which filled the air and obscured the sun for
fourteen hours. He believes that the flight must have
averaged three hundred miles in length by a mile wide. An
immense flight continued for several days thereafter.?

Wild Pigeons are not mentioned in Hampshire County,
Mass., records until after 1700, but undoubtedly they were
there when settlement began. They had a breeding place
near the line between Hampshire County and Vermont, and
their nests on the beech and hemlock trees extended for miles.
They were noted in Hampshire County before 1740, and many
were shot. Levi Moody is given by Judd as authority for the
statement that they were caught in such numbers in Granby
that not all could be sold or eaten, and after the feathers
had been plucked from them, many were fed to the hogs.
Pigeon feathers were much used for beds. In August, 1736,
Pigeons were sold in the Boston market at twopence per
dozen, and many could not be sold at that price. In
Northampton, from 1725 to 1785, when they could be sold,

 

1 Lahontan, Baron de: Some New Voyages to North America, 1703, Vol. I, pp. 61, 62.
2 King, W. Ross: The Sportsman and Naturalist in Canada, 1866, p. 121.
 

oof

:

+S >, ms)
I

   

ive)
 : fi

Ps AD ae

PLATE XVI.—PIGEON NET.

Taken from an old etching. (Reproduced from The Passenger
Pigeon, by W. B. Mershon.)
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 439

 

they brought usually from threepence to sixpence per dozen.
In 1790 they brought ninepence per dozen, and a few years
after 1800, one shilling, sixpence. After 1850 they were sold
at from seventy-five cents to a dollar and a half a dozen.

In the History of the Sesqui-centennial Celebration of the
Town of Hadley, Mass., it is stated that before 1719 Wild
Pigeons in their migrations roosted in countless numbers in
the oak and chestnut groves on the plains.

Thompson states that when the country was new there
were many of their breeding places in Vermont; also, that
they were much less abundant (1842) than formerly; “but,”
he says, “‘ they now, in some years, appear in large numbers.’’?

Great nestings became few and far between in the east, as
the Pigeons decreased; but there were many small breeding
places regularly occupied during the first half of the nine-
teenth century, and scattered pairs bred commonly. Mr.
Clayton E. Stone sends an account of the nesting site of a
flock of Passenger Pigeons, furnished by his father, Mr. Still-
man Stone, who was well acquainted with the birds. It was
situated on the side of Mt. Sterling, in the towns of Stowe
and Hyde Park (formerly Sterling), in the northern part of
Vermont. Mr. Stone was acquainted with it from 1848 to
about 1853. It occupied a tract of twenty acres or more of
old-growth maple and yellow birch. There were often as
many as twenty-five nests in a tree, and sometimes more.
The usual number of eggs in one nest was one or two, usually
one. Most of the time during the nesting season large flocks
of these birds could be seen coming and going in all directions
to and from the nests. The people from this and neighboring
towns went to the place with their teams to take up the
squabs that had fallen to the ground; they took them away by
eartloads. The squabs were distributed free, to be used as
food by all their friends and neighbors..

In 1848 Mr. Stone and Madison Newcomb sprung a net
over forty-four dozen, or five hundred and twenty-eight birds,
at one cast, and they thought that only about one bird in four

 

1 Judd, Sylvester: History of Hadley, 1905, pp. 351, 352.
2 Thompson, Zadock: History of Vermont, 1842, p. 100.
440 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

of the flock was taken. Many escaped while they were tak-
ing out the forty-four dozen. Pigeons were abundant in that
locality until the fall of 1865, when a man could shoot in half
a day all that he could use. Mr. Stone says that hawks
ravaged the birds continually. He left Vermont in 1866, and
does not know how long afterward the Pigeons continued
plentiful. At that time there were still many Pigeons in
Massachusetts. There were bough houses and roosts erected
for shooting Pigeons, ‘‘ Pigeon beds,”’ nets and stool Pigeons
in almost every town. Old men remember this even now.
Thoreau speaks of the arrangements for Pigeon shooting in
Concord in the 50’s.

Mr. Warren H. Manning writes me of a method of taking
Pigeons which I have not seen described. He sends a sketch of
a Pigeon basket (see Fig. 21)
which was used by Lucinda
Manning and her sisters at the
Manning Manse in Billerica,
Mass. This basket was used
as a receptacle for the Pigeons
after they had been taken.
Mr. Manning states that these
sisters had a Pigeon “‘bower”’
and snares in the valley in
sight of the house, in the edge
of what was then pine woods.
“The snaring of Pigeons,”
he says, ““must have represented quite an income to these
sisters and their family before them.” The old house was
used as a tavern for more than one hundred years, and the
tavern book, kept there from 1753 to 1796, is now in exist-
ence. Frequent references to the sale of Pigeons are made
therein.

There are not many exact records of the flights of Pigeons
in Massachusetts during the early part of the nineteenth cen-
tury. They were of such regular occurrence that no one
thought of recording them.. Dr. Samuel Cabot told Mr.
Brewster that from 1832 to 1836, while he was in college at

 

 

 

 

 

Fie. 21.— Pigeon basket.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 44|

 

Cambridge, Pigeons visited the town regularly, both in spring
and autumn, sometimes in immense numbers.!

Mr. Clayton E. Stone writes that Mr. M. M. Boutwell,
brother of the late Governor, George S. Boutwell, knew of a
nesting place of the Passenger Pigeon in the northern part of
Lunenburg, Mass., from his earliest recollection until 1851 or
1852. He states that an old gunner, Samuel Johnson, used to
visit this place every year to get squabs. It was situated in
the northern part of the town, on a tract of land which up to
1840 or 1845 was almost an unbroken forest for miles. It is
said to have comprised something like five acres. Mr. Bout-
well says that anywhere in any fall, until the year 1860, a
man could get in an hour all the Pigeons he could use.

Mr. James W. Moore of Agawam, Mass., states that after
1850 great flocks of Pigeons still visited that region; and that
as a boy he was sent to drive them from the rye, when it had
been sown but not harrowed in. ‘‘ We boys,” he says, ‘‘ had
Pigeon beds, and caught them in nets.”

About this time indications of the disappearance of the
Pigeons in the east began to attract some notice. They
became rare in Newfoundland in the 60’s, though formerly
abundant there. They grew fewer in Ontario at that time;
but, according to Fleming, some of the old roosts there were
occupied until 1870.

Mr. C. 8S. Brimley states that they were seen in some
numbers near Raleigh, N. C., up to about 1850. For thirty
years he has not seen one, which would fix the date of their
disappearance there about 1880. Mr. Witmer Stone believes
that they became rare in New Jersey about that time.

During the ensuing decade they became very rare in
Massachusetts; but Mr. August B. Ross states that the
Pigeons were ‘‘quite plenty” in rye fields on the plains at
Montague, Mass., about 1879; and Mr. Robert O. Morris
says that a small flock was seen in Longmeadow in the spring
of 1880; but there is no authentic record of a Pigeon seen or
taken in that vicinity since 1884. This seems to mark approxi-

 

1 Brewster, William: Memoirs, Nuttall Orn. Club, No. IV, Birds of the Cambridge Region of
Massachusetts, 1906, p. 176,
442 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

mately the time that the bird disappeared from the Connecti-
cut valley.

Brewster records a flock of about fifty Pigeons on Septem-
ber 2, 1868, in Cambridge; and he states that a heavy flight
passed through eastern Massachusetts between September 2
and September 10, 1871, and that he was assured that thou-
sands were killed, and that the netters in Concord and Read-
ing used their nets as of old.!

My first experience with the Pigeons was in 1872. Many
flocks went through Worcester County during the fall of that
year, and I saw small flocks passing rapidly over the northern
end of Lake Quinsigamond. Friends saw them in Spencer,
Mass., and in other towns near Worcester. At that time the
Pigeons were still breeding in Pembroke, N. H., about five
miles south of Concord, where I passed the summer.

In 1872 a flock came into a cherry tree at Lanesville, Mass.,
under the shade of which Gen. Benjamin F. Butler stood
delivering an address to a gathering of some two thousand
people. Birds alighted “‘ on every part of the tree.” ?

I have found no records of any considerable flights of Pas-
senger Pigeons in Massachusetts since 1876. Hundreds of
thousands of Pigeons then appeared in the Connecticut
valley.’

Maynard (1870) considered the Pigeon as a common bird
in localities, but growing less so every year.

In 1870 Samuels stated that the Passenger Pigeon had
become “ of late years rather scarce in New England.” >

In 1876 Minot wrote that in many places the Pigeons were
then comparatively rare. He stated also that in a low pine
wood within the present limits of Boston, flocks of several
hundred have roosted every year.°®

During the decade from 1880 to 1890 the Pigeon seems to
have disappeared from Massachusetts. A good many birds

 

1 Brewster, William: Birds of the Cambridge Region, 1906, p. 177.

2 Leonard, H. C.: Pigeon Cove, Mass., 1873, p. 165.

3 Morris, Robert O.: Birds of Springfield and Vicinity, 1901, p. 17.

4 Maynard, C. J.: List of the Birds of Massachusetts, Naturalist’s Guide, 1870, Part 2, p. 137.

5 Samuels, Edward A.: Birds of New England, 1870, p. 374.

8 Minot, Henry D.: The Land Birds and Game Birds of New England, 2d ed., ed. by William
Brewster, 1895, p. 396.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 443

 

were seen and shot as late as the year 1878; after that they
were scarce. The bird was seen by Mr. C. E. Ingalls at Win-
chendon, Mass., in 1889; and several were reported by Mr.
Ralph Holman at Worcester in August, September and
October. He also reports one killed by a Mr. Newton, jani-
tor of the Worcester high school, on September 23, 1889.
The last published authentic record of a Passenger Pigeon
taken in Massachusetts is given by Howe and Allen as 1889;
but Mr. Neil Casey of Melrose has an adult female bird
mounted, which he shot there on April 12, 1894; and he says
that two days later a friend saw another, apparently its mate,
in the same woods.?

Many observers report that they have seen the Passenger
Pigeon in Massachusetts since that time, but no later authentic
record of a specimen actually taken here is available. My
correspondence with many hundreds of people throughout the
State has resulted in no evidence of the occurrence of the
species here, that would be accepted by ornithologists, since
the beginning of the present century.

Unfortunately, there is no detailed published account of
the migrations or the nesting of the Passenger Pigeon in Mas-
sachusetts or New England in the times when they were
numerous; and to get any adequate idea of their numbers,
their habits and the causes of their disappearance, we must
turn to the writings of Wilson, Audubon and others, who
observed the bird in the south and west.

Kalm (1759) says that on the 11th, 12th, 15th, 16th, 17th,
18th and 22d of March, 1740, such a multitude of these birds
came to Pennsylvania that a flock alighting to roost in the
woods filled both great and little trees for seven miles, and
hardly a twig or branch could be seen which they did not
cover. On the larger limbs they piled up in heaps. Limbs
the size of a man’s thigh were broken off by their weight, and
the less firmly rooted trees broke down completely under their

 

1 See also Thayer, H. J.: Forest and Stream, Vol. XXXIII, Oct. 31, 1889, p. 288.

2 According to Perkins and Howe a few were to be seen near Essex Junction, Vt., and about Fort
Ethan Allen each season up to the date of their publication (1901),and Dr. Perkins wrote me in
1910 that he believed that there were a few still about Stratton Mountain in that State where for-
merly they nested in great numbers, but no one has been able to obtain a specimen. See Perkins,
Geo. H., and Howe, C. D.: A Preliminary List of the Birds found in Vermont, 1901, p. 17.
444 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

load.!. This reads like the tale of a romancer; but similar
occurrences all over the land are recorded by many credible
witnesses.

Alexander Wilson, the father of American ornithology, tells
of a breeding place of the Wild Pigeons in Shelbyville, Ky.
(probably about 1806), which was several miles in breadth,
and was said to be more than forty miles in extent. More
than one hundred nests were found on a tree. The ground
was strewn with broken limbs of trees; also eggs and dead
squabs which had been precipitated from above, on which
herds of hogs were fattening. He speaks of a flight of these
birds from another nesting place some sixty miles away from
the first, toward Green River, where they were said to be
equally numerous. They were travelling with great steadi-
ness and rapidity, at a height beyond gunshot, several strata
deep, very close together, and “from right to left as far as
the eye could reach, the breadth of this vast procession
extended; seeming everywhere equally crowded.”’ From half-
past 1 to 4 o’clock in the afternoon, while he was travelling to
Frankfort, the same living torrent rolled overhead, seemingly
as extensive as ever. He estimated the flock that passed him
to be two hundred and forty miles long and a mile wide, —
probably much wider, — and to contain two billion, two hun-
dred and thirty million, two hundred and seventy-two thou-
sand pigeons. On the supposition that each bird consumed
only half a pint of nuts and acorns daily, he reckoned that this
column of birds would eat seventeen million, four hundred and
twenty-four thousand bushels each day.

Audubon states that in the autumn of 1813 he left his
house at Henderson, on the banks of the Ohio, a few miles
from Hardensburgh, to go to Louisville, Ky. He saw that
day what he thought to be the largest flight of Wild Pigeons
he had ever seen. The air was literally filled with them; and
“the light of noonday was obscured as by an eclipse.”
Before sunset he reached Louisville, fifty-five miles from
Hardensburgh, and during all that time Pigeons were passing
in undiminished numbers. This continued for three days in

 

+ Auk, 1911, pp. 56, 57.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 445

 

succession. The people were all armed, and the banks of the
river were crowded with men and boys, incessantly shooting
at the Pigeons, which flew lower as they passed the river.
For a week or more the people fed on no other flesh than
Pigeons. The atmosphere during that time was strongly
impregnated with the odor of the birds. Audubon estimated
the number of Pigeons passing overhead (in a flock one mile
wide) for three hours, travelling at the rate of a mile a minute,
allowing two Pigeons to the square yard, as one billion, one
hundred and fifteen million, one hundred and thirty-six thou-
sand. He estimated, also, that a flock of this size would re-
quire eight million, seven hundred and twelve thousand bushels
of food a day, and this was only a small part of the three
days’ flight.

Great flights of Pigeons ranged from the Alleghenies to
the Mississippi and from Hudson Bay to the Gulf of Mexico,
until after the middle of the nineteenth century. Even two
decades later, enormous numbers of Pigeons nested in several
States.

Their winter roosting places almost defy description.
Audubon rode through one on the banks of the Green River
in Kentucky for more than forty miles, crossing it in different
directions, and found its average width to be rather more than
three miles. He observed that the ejecta covered the whole
extent of the roosting place, like snow; that many trees two
feet in diameter were broken off not far from the ground, and
that the branches of many of the largest and tallest had given
way.!

The birds came in soon after sundown with a noise that
sounded “like a gale passing through the rigging of a close-
reefed vessel,” causing a great current of air as they passed;
and here and there, as the flocks alighted, the limbs gave way
with a crash, destroying hundreds of the birds beneath. It
was a scene of uproar and confusion. No one dared venture

 

+ Audubon’s statement that trees were broken off by the birds has been questioned, but it is
corroborated by others. James Mease (1807) quotes a Rev. Mr. Hall who saw a hickory tree more
than a foot in diameter bent over by the birds until its top touched the ground and its roots were
started, and he states that brittle trees often were broken off by them. (Mease, James: A Geological
Account of the United States, 1807, pp. 348, 349. Kalm and Lawson also observed this long
before the time of Audubon.)
446 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

into the woods during the night, because of the falling
branches.

The nesting places sometimes were equal in size to the
roosting places, for the Pigeons congregated in enormous num-
bers, to breed in the northern and eastern States. When food
was plentiful in the forests, the birds concentrated in large
numbers; when it was not, they scattered in smaller groups.
Mr. Henry T. Phillips, a game dealer of Detroit, who bought
and sold Pigeons for many years, states that one season in
Wisconsin he saw a nesting place that extended through the
woods for a hundred miles.!

The last great nesting place of which we have adequate
records was in Michigan, in 1878. Prof. H. B. Roney states,
in the American Field (Vol. 10, 1879, pp. 345-347), that the
nesting near Petoskey, that year, covered something like one
hundred thousand acres, and included not less than one hun-
dred and fifty thousand acres within its limits. It was esti-
mated to be about forty miles in length and from three to ten
miles in width. It is difficult to approximate the number of
millions of Pigeons that occupied that great nesting place.

Audubon, who described the dreadful havoc made among
these birds on their roosting grounds by man, says that people
unacquainted with them might naturally conclude that such
destruction would soon put an end to the species; but he
had satisfied himself, by long observation, that nothing but
the gradual diminution of the forests could accomplish the
decrease of the birds, for he believed that they not infre-
quently quadrupled their numbers during the year, and always
doubled them. The enormous multitudes of the Pigeons made
such an impression upon the mind that the extinction of the
species at that time, and for many years afterwards, seemed
an absolute impossibility. Nevertheless, it has occurred.

How can this apparent impossibility be explained? It
cannot be accounted for by the destructiveness of their
natural enemies, for during the years when the Pigeons were
the most abundant their natural enemies were most numerous.
The extinction of the Pigeons has been coincident with the

 

1 Mershon, W. B,: The Passenger Pigeon, 1907, p. 107.
‘SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 447

 

disappearance of bears, panthers, wolves, lynxes and some of
the larger birds of prey from a large portion of their range.

The aborigines never could have reduced appreciably the
numbers of the species. Wherever the great roosts were estab-
lished, Indians always gathered in large numbers. This,
according to their traditions, had been the custom among
them from time immemorial. They always had slaughtered
these birds, young and old, in great quantities; but there was
no market among the Indians, and the only way in which
they could preserve the meat for future use was by drying or
smoking the breasts. They cured large numbers in this way.
Also, they were accustomed to kill great quantities of the
squabs in order to try out the fat, which was used as butter is
used by the whites. Lawson writes (1709): “You may find
several Indian towns of not above seventeen houses that have
more than one hundred gallons of pigeon’s oil or fat.” }

But it was not until a market demand for the birds was
created by the whites that the Indians ever seriously affected
the increase of the Pigeons. Kalm states, in his monograph
of the Pigeon, that the Indians of Canada would not molest
the Pigeons in their breeding places until the young were able
to fly. They did everything in their power to prevent the
whites from disturbing them, even using threats, where plead-
ing did not avail.

When the white man appeared on this continent, condi-
tions rapidly changed. Practically all the early settlers were
accustomed to the use of firearms; and wherever Pigeons
appeared in great numbers, the inhabitants armed themselves
with guns, clubs, stones, poles and whatever could be used to
destroy the birds. The most destructive implement was the
net, to which the birds were attracted by bait, and under
which vast numbers of them were trapped. Gunners baited
the birds with grain. Dozens of birds sometimes were killed
thus at a single shot. In one case seventy-one birds were
killed ‘by two shots.? A single shot from the old flint-lock
single-barreled gun, fired into a tree, sometimes would procure

 

1 Lawson, John: History of Carolina, 1860, p. 78.
2 Leffingwell, W. B.: Shooting on Upland, Marsh and Stream, 1890, p. 228.
448 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

a backload of Pigeons. The Jesuit Relations of 1662-64 tell
of aman who killed one hundred and thirty-two birds at a
shot.1. Kalm states that frequently as many as one hundred
and thirty were killed at one shot. Shooting in the large
roosts was very destructive. Osborn records a kill of one
hundred and forty-four birds with two barrels. An engine of
destruction often used in early times was an immense swivel
gun, loaded with “ handfuls of bird shot.” Such guns were
taken to the roosts and fired into the thickest masses of
Pigeons, killing at one discharge ‘enough to feed a whole
settlement.”

As cities were established in the east, the Indians, now
armed with guns and finding a market for their birds, became
doubly destructive; but as the white man moved toward the
west he destroyed the Indian as well as the game, until few
Indians were left in most of the country occupied by the
Pigeons.

The Pigeons were reduced greatly in numbers on the whole
Atlantic seaboard during the first two centuries after the
settlement of the country, but in the west their numbers
remained apparently the same until the nineteenth century.
There was no appreciable decrease there during the first half
of that century; but during the latter half, railroads were
pushed across the plains to the Pacific, settlers increased
rapidly to the Mississippi and beyond, and the diminution of
the Pigeons in the west began. Already it had become notice-
able in western Pennsylvania, western New York, along the
Appalachian Mountain chain and in Ohio. This was due in
part to the destruction of the forests, particularly the beech
woods, which once covered vast tracts, and which furnished
the birds with a chief supply of food. Later, the primeval
pine and hemlock forests of the northern States largely were
cut away. This deprived the birds of another source of
food, — the seed of these trees. The destruction of the forests,
however, was not complete; for, although great tracts of land
were cleared, there remained and still remain vast regions
more or less covered by coppice growth sufficient to furnish

 

1 Thwaites, R. G., and others: Jesuit Relations and Allied Documents, 1896, Vol. 48, p. 177.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 449

 

great armies of Pigeons with food, and the cultivation of the
land and the raising of grain provided new sources of food
supply. Therefore, while the reduction of the forest area in
the east was a large factor in the diminution of the Pigeons,
we cannot attribute their extermination to the destruction of
the forest. Forest fires undoubtedly had something to do
with reducing the numbers of these birds, for many were
destroyed by these fires, and in some cases large areas of forest
were ruined absolutely by fire, thus for many years depriving
the birds of a portion of their food supply. Nevertheless, the
fires were local and restricted, and had comparatively little
effect on the vast numbers of the species.

The main factors in the extermination of the Pigeons are
set forth in a work entitled The Passenger Pigeon, by W. B.
Mershon (1907), which will well repay perusal, and in which
a compilation is made of many of the original accounts of the
destruction of the Pigeon during the nineteenth century.
From this volume many of the following facts are taken.

In early days the Allegheny Mountains and the vast region
lying between them and the Mississippi River were covered
largely by unbroken forest, as was also much of the country
from the Maritime Provinces of Canada to Lake Winnipeg.
The only inhabitants were scattered bands of Indians. The
Pigeons found a food supply through all this vast region, and
also nesting places which were comparatively unmolested by
man; but as settlement advanced, as railroads were built,
spanning the continent, as telegraph lines followed them, as
markets developed for the birds, an army of people, hunters,
settlers, netters and Indians found in the Pigeons a con-
siderable part of their means of subsistence, and the birds
were constantly pursued, wherever they appeared, at all
seasons of the year. They wandered through this vast region,
resorting to well-known roosting places and nesting places,
containing from a million or two of birds to a billion or more;
and there were many smaller colonies. Wherever they
appeared, they were attacked immediately by practically all
the people in that region. At night their roosts were visited
by men who brought pots of burning sulphur, to suffocate the
450 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

birds and bring them to the ground. An assortment of
weapons was brought into service. When the birds nested in
the primeval birch woods of the north, the people set fire to
the loose hanging. bark, which flamed up like a great torch,
until: the whole tree was ablaze, scorching the young birds,
‘and causing them to leap from their nests to the. ground in
their dying agonies.

At the great nesting places. both Indians and white men
felled the trees in such a way that the larger trees, in falling,
broke down the smaller ones and threw the helpless squabs to
‘the ground. The squabs were gathered, their heads pulled
off, their bodies thrown into sacks, and large droves of hogs
were turned in, to fatten on those which could not be used.

Sometimes, when the Pigeons flew low, they easily were
knocked down with poles and oars swung in the direction of
their flight or across it, and in early days thousands were killed
with poles at the roosts. Pike, on a trip from Leech River to
St. Louis, on April 28, 1806, stopped at a Pigeon roost, and in
about fifteen minutes his men knocked on the head and brought
aboard two hundred and ninety-eight Pigeons.!

As soon as it was learned in a town that the Pigeons were
roosting or nesting in the neighborhood, great nets were set in
the fields, baited with grain or something attractive to the
birds. Decoy birds were used, and enormous numbers of
Pigeons were taken by springing the nets over them; while
practically every able-bodied citizen, men, women, children
and servants, turned out to “lend a hand” either in killing
the Pigeons or in hauling away the loads of dead birds.

Wherever the Pigeons nested near the settlements, they
were pursued throughout the summer by hunters and boys.
Kalm, in his account of the species (1759), states that several
extremely aged men told him that during their childhood there
were many more Pigeons in New Sweden during summer than
there were when he was there. He believed that the Pigeons
had been “either killed off or scared away.”” In either case
their decrease was evident at that early date.

 

1 Pike, Zebulon Montgomery: The Expeditions of, during the years 1805-07, by Elliott Coues, 1895,
Vol. I, p. 212.
 

PLATE XVII.—YOUNG PASSENGER PIGEON.

Photograph by Prof. C. O. Whitman. This illustration was first
published in W. B. Mershon’s work, The Passenger Pigeon.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 451

 

The net, though used by fowlers almost everywhere in the
east, from the earliest settlement of the country, was not a
great factor in the extermination of the Pigeons in the Mis-
sissippi valley States until the latter half of the nineteenth
century. With the extension of railroads and telegraph lines
through the States, the occupation of the netter became more
stable than before, for he could follow the birds wherever they
went. The number of men who made netting an occupation
after the year 1860 is variously estimated at from four hun-
dred to one thousand. Whenever a flight of Pigeons left one
nesting place and made toward another, the netters learned
their whereabouts by telegraph, packed up their belongings
and moved to the new location, sometimes following the birds
a thousand miles at one move. Some of them not only made
a living, but earned a competency, by netting Pigeons during
part of the year and shooting wild-fowl and game birds during
the remainder of the season. In addition to these there were
the local netters, who plied the trade only when the Pigeons
came their way.

From the time of Audubon and Wilson, even before the
railroads had penetrated to the west, there was an enormous
destruction of Pigeons for the markets. Wagonloads were
sent to market, where the birds were sold at from twelve cents
to fifty cents per dozen, according to the exigencies of supply
and demand. Audubon tells of seeing schooners loaded in bulk
with Pigeons in 1805 that were killed up the Hudson River
and taken to the New York market. He says that from ten
to thirty dozen were caught at one sweep of the net. In the
early days the farmers destroyed large quantities of Pigeons
for salting, and people were employed about the roosts pluck-
ing the birds for their feathers (which were used for beds),
and salting down the heaps of bodies which were piled on the
ground. Birds and beasts of prey got their share. Audubon
in describing a great roost In Kentucky, says that the birds
took flight before sunrise, after which foxes, lynxes, cougars,
bears, opossums and polecats were seen sneaking off, and the
howlings of wolves were heard; while Eagles, Hawks and Vul-
tures came in numbers to feast on the dead or disabled
452 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Pigeons which had been slaughtered during the night. He
states that in March, 1830, the Pigeons were so abundant in
New York City that piles of them could be seen on every
hand.

Great nesting places of Pigeons occasionally were estab-
lished in the eastern States after the middle of the nineteenth
century, when vast numbers were killed for market. In 1848
eighty tons of these birds were shipped from Cattaraugus
County, New York.

Mr. E. H. Eaton, in his Birds of New York (Vol. I, p. 382),
says that the last great nesting in New York was in Allegany
County, in 1868, extending about fourteen miles, and crossing
the Pennsylvania line. He states also that there was an
immense roost in Steuben County in 1875.

Possibly the last great slaughter of Pigeons in New York,
of which we have record, was some time in the 70’s. A flock
had nested in Missouri in April, where most of the squabs
were killed by the pigeoners. This flock then went to Michi-
gan, where they were followed by the same pigeoners, who
again destroyed the squabs. The Pigeons then flew to New
York State, and nested near the upper Beaverkill in the Cats-
kills, in the lower part of Ulster County. It is said that tons
of the birds were sent to the New York market from this
nesting place, and that not less than fifteen tons of ice were
used in packing the squabs.?

The wholesale slaughter in the west continued to increase
until 1878. There were very large nestings in Michigan in
1868, 1870, 1872, 1874, 1876 and 1878. In 1876 there were at
least three of these great breeding places in the State, one
each in Newaygo, Oceana and Grand Traverse counties.2-_ The
great killing of 1878 in Michigan is said to have yielded no
less than three hundred tons of birds to the market. Various
figures are given regarding the number of birds killed in a few
weeks at this great nesting place near Petoskey, Mich. Pro-
fessor Roney estimates that a billion birds were destroyed
there. This is evidently a very excessive approximation.

 

1 Van Cleef, J. 8.: Forest and Stream, 1899, Vol. 52, p. 385.
2 Mershon, W. B.: The Passenger Pigeon, 1907, p. 77.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 453

 

Mr. E. T. Martin, one of the netters, gives what he calls the
“ official figures” of the number marketed as one million, one
hundred and seven thousand, eight hundred and sixty-six.
His “figures” are largely estimates, but he states that one
and a half millions would cover all the birds killed at the
Petoskey nesting that year. This is apparently a very low
estimate. Mr. W. B. Mershon shows that some of Mr.
Martin’s figures are very far below the actual shipments.

Professor Roney watched one netter at the Petoskey nest-
ing place, who killed eighty-two dozen Pigeons in one day;
and who stated that he had killed as many as eighty-seven
dozen, or ten hundred and forty-four birds, in a day. The
law regarding shooting and netting the birds at their nesting
places was ignored. Professor Roney states that the sheriff
drove out four hundred Indians from the Petoskey nesting in
one day, and turned back five hundred incoming Indians the
next; and that people estimated that there were from two
thousand to twenty-five hundred people at this nesting place,
engaged in the business of trapping, killing and shipping
Pigeons. Mr. H. T. Phillips, a grocer and provision dealer at
Cheboygan, Mich., says that from 1864 until “the Pigeons
left the country”? he handled live Pigeons in numbers up to
one hundred and seventy-five thousand a year. He asserts
that in 1874 there was a nesting at Shelby, Mich., from which
one hundred barrels of birds were shipped daily for thirty
days. At forty dozen birds to the barrel, this would total
one million, four hundred and forty thousand birds.

During the 70’s most of the Pigeons concentrated in the
west. They often passed the winter in Texas, Arkansas,
Missouri, the Indian Territory and contiguous regions, and
the summer in Michigan and adjacent States and in the
Canadian northwest. At this time some very large nets were
used, grain beds were made, and the birds were allowed to
come and feed there until from two hundred to two hundred
and fifty dozen were taken sometimes at one haul. Mr.
Mershon gives many records of large catches, and the largest
number caught at one spring of the net (thirty-five hundred
birds) is attributed to E. Osborn; but Mr. Osborn himself
454 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

says that it was two hundred and fifty dozen, or three thou-
sand birds. It was made by fastening three large nets
together, and springing all of them at once; sometimes one
hundred dozen were taken in a single net. Mr. Osborn states
that his firm alone shipped in 1861, from a roost in the
Hocking Hills, Ohio, two hundred and twenty-five barrels of
birds. Sullivan Cook asserts, in Forest and Stream (March 14,
1903), that in 1869 for about forty days there were shipped
from Hartford, Mich., and vicinity, three carloads a day, each
car containing one hundred and fifty barrels, with thirty-five
dozen in a barrel, making the daily shipment twenty-four
thousand, seven hundred and fifty dozen. Evidently there is
a typographical error here, as it would require fifty-five dozen
in a barrel to make the daily shipment twenty-four thousand,
seven hundred and fifty dozen, or eleven million, eight hundred
and eighty thousand birds for the season. Thirty-five dozen
domestic Pigeons would fill an ordinary sugar barrel; and
possibly it required fifty-five dozen Passenger Pigeons to fill a
sugar barrel, as they were not as large as the domestic
Pigeons. Mr. Cook’s figures seem to be based on fifty-five
dozen to a barrel. In three years’ time, he says (which may
mean three years later), there were shipped nine hundred and
ninety thousand dozen. In the two succeeding years it is
estimated that one-third more than this number, or fifteen
million; eight hundred and forty thousand birds, were shipped
from Shelby, Mich. These estimates were made by men who
killed and marketed the Pigeons. The figures may be exces-
sive, but, if reduced one-half, they still would be enormous.
It is claimed by Mr. C. H. Engle, a resident of Petoskey,
Mich., that ‘‘two years later” there were shipped from that
point five carloads a day for thirty days, with an average of
eight thousand, two hundred and fifty dozen to the carload, or
fourteen million, eight hundred and fifty thousand birds. Mr.
§.S. Stevens told Mr. William Brewster that at least five hun-
dred men were netting Pigeons at Petoskey in 1881, and
thought they might have taken twenty thousand birds each, or
ten million Pigeons. Still, people read of the “ mysterious”
disappearance of the Passenger Pigeon, wonder what caused
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 455

 

it, and say that it never has been satisfactorily explained.
The New York market alone would take one hundred barrels
a day for weeks, without a break in price. Chicago, St.
Louis, Boston and all the great and little cities of the north
and east joined in the demand. Need we wonder why the
Pigeons have vanished?

Most of the above calculations are founded on statements
derived from Mr. Mershon’s work. A little volume entitled
Etna and Kirkersville, by Gen. Morris Schaff, gives some of
the history of the destruction of the Pigeons in Ohio; and
there are many short articles on this subject in the sports-
man’s papers, particularly in Forest and Stream and the
American Field. The birds that survived the slaughter at
Petoskey in 1878 finally left the nesting place in large bodies
and disappeared to the north, and from that time onward the
diminution of the Pigeons was continuous. Some of the net-
ters asserted that this great flight was swallowed up in Lake
Michigan, and that the Pigeons then became practically
extinct. This statement had no foundation in fact, as will
presently appear. It is probable that when they left Petoskey
in 1878 they retired into inaccessible regions of Canada,
beyond reach of the rail and telegraph, to breed again. In
April, 1880, they again passed through Michigan. Prof.
Walter B. Barrows quotes John Sims, county game warden,
to the effect that on that date “millions” of Pigeons. passed
over Iosco, going westward, but were never seen there after-
ward.

It has been stated that the Wild Pigeon “‘ went off like
dynamite.” Even the naturalists failed. to secure sufficient
specimens and notes, as no one had an idea that extinction
was imminent. Practically the same thing has been said
about the extermination of the Labrador Duck, the Great
Auk and the Eskimo Curlew, which, if not extinct, is now
apparently on the verge of extinction.

People never realize the danger of extirpating a species
until it is too late; but the apparent sudden diminution and
extermination of the Passenger Pigeon was, like that of the
other species, more seeming than real. Prof. Walter B. Bar-
456 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

rows of the Michigan Agricultural College, who has collected
many data regarding this bird, says that it was abundant in
Michigan until 1880, fairly common from 1880 to 1890, but
steadily decreasing in numbers, and was by no means rare in
1891, 1892 and 1893. Then it rapidly became scarce, and
disappeared. There were many smaller nestings for years
after the Petoskey nesting of 1878, but the records are
meager, for apparently no naturalist visited them. The
Petoskey nesting of 1878 was unusually large for that time,
for the reason that the birds at three large breeding places in
other States or regions were driven out by persecution, and
joined the Petoskey group. After this the birds exhibited a
tendency to scatter to regions where they were least molested.
There seem to have been two great nestings in Michigan in
1881. Brewster quotes Mr. 8. S. Stevens of Cadillac, Mich.,
as saying that the last nesting of any importance in Michigan
was in 1881, a few miles west of Grand Traverse. It was
perhaps eight miles long. Pigeons were common in Iowa in
1884 (Anderson: Birds. of Iowa). Mr. A. S. Eldredge writes
that he saw a flight of Pigeons near Lampasas, Tex., in the
winter of 1882-83, that was three and one-half hours in pass-
ing; and that he saw a roost among the post oaks where
every tree was loaded with the birds.

Our Canadian records of the species at this time are
meager. Mr. Ernest Thompson Seton says that it bred in
Manitoba in considerable numbers as late as 1887; but he
also says (Auk, 1908, p. 452) that the last year in which the
Pigeons came to Manitoba “in force”? was in 1878; next
year they were comparatively scarce, and each year since
they have become more so. In 1881 McCoun saw large
flocks there, and shot large numbers for food; and the eggs of
this species were taken by Miles Spence at James Bay as late
as 1888. The species was recorded in Montreal and other
localities in east Canada in 1883, 1885, 1886, 1888 and 1891.!

In 1882 Widmann saw several large flocks, February 5 and
6, going northward at St. Louis. (Birds of Missouri, p. 84.)

Up to 1886 live Pigeons came into the Chicago market in

 

1 McCoun, John: Catalogue of Canadian Birds, 1900, Part 1, pp. 215, 216.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 457

 

large numbers, and were shipped all over the country for
Pigeon “shoots.’’ In 1881 twenty thousand live Passenger
Pigeons were killed at one trap-shooting tournament on
Coney Island, held under the auspices of the New York
Association for the Protection of Fish and Game. Many of
these birds were too young or too exhausted to fly. Thus,
sportsmen who could not participate in the slaughter of the
birds on their nesting grounds had them brought alive to the
doors of their club houses, and unwittingly shared in extermi-
nating the species. Mr. Ben O. Bush of Kalamazoo, Mich.,
states that the last Pigeons which he saw used for this purpose
were obtained by John Watson of Chicago. They came from
the Indian Territory in 1886; but this did not end the traffic.
It seems probable that a good many birds still gathered in
inaccessible regions of that territory during the winter.

In the spring of 1888, Messrs. William Brewster and
Jonathan Dwight, Jr., visited Michigan in search of the
Passenger Pigeon, and found that large flocks had passed
through Cadillac late in April, and that similar flocks had
been observed in nearly all the southern counties. This flight
was so large that some of the netters expressed the belief that
the Pigeons were as numerous as ever; and Brewster himself
expressed the opinion that the extermination of the species
was not then imminent, and that it might be saved, but con-
sidered it unlikely that effectual laws could be passed before
its extinction. The birds moved somewhere to the north to
breed, and were not seen nesting in any numbers in Michigan.
One of the netters brought intelligence of a flock at least
“eight acres” in extent, and many other smaller flocks were
reported. Many birds were found scattered about in the
woods, but no large nesting place was seen anywhere. After
that date comparatively few birds are recorded at any one
locality.

Many birds were sent to the eastern markets from the
southwest during the decade from 1878 to 1888, and even
later. Prof. George H. Beyer writes me that he saw several
large flocks of Passenger Pigeons at Rayne Station, La., in
1888, from which he killed three birds.
458 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Mr. H. T. Phillips of Detroit states that he used to see
and kill Pigeons every spring, “up to ten years ago,” from the
middle of March to the middle of April, on the Mississippi
bayous. ‘This must have been in the latter years of the nine-
teenth century, at the time when the Pigeons were on the
verge of extinction.

A flock was seen in J]linois in 1895, from which two speci-
mens were taken. At that time the netting of the birds. had
been practically given up, and most of the dealers had seen no
Pigeons for two seasons. It finally ceased, on account of the
virtual extinction of the birds. How many barrels of Pigeons
were shipped to the markets during these final years? At
least one shipment of several barrels was condemned in New
York City as late as November, 1892 (J. H. Fleming: Ottawa
Naturalist, 1907, Vol. XX, p. 236), and several hundred dozens
came into the Boston market in December, 1892, and in
January, 1893. I saw some Pigeons in barrels there in 1892
or 1893, which probably were some of the lot recorded by
Brewster and noted by Fleming, who records the New York
shipment. All of these were from the Indian Territory.

Messrs. W. W. Judy & Co., marketmen of St. Louis, wrote
Mr. Ruthven Deane, in 1895, that the last Pigeons which
they received came from Siloam Springs, Ark., in 1893; they
had lost all track of the Pigeons since that time, and their
netters were lying idle.

The above paragraph epitomizes the history of Pigeon
destruction. Judy & Co. were perhaps the largest dealers in
Pigeons in the United States. The story of where their net-
ters worked after 1878, how many birds they took and what
markets they supplied, would explain only too well the so-
called “‘mystery”’ of the disappearance of the Passenger
Pigeon. It is evident from the foregoing that, although the
business of Pigeon netting was reduced much after 1878,
there were still some who followed it for at least fifteen years
thereafter. They pursued the birds as long as they could
find a flock so large that they could make a “killing.”

I have tried to get some information regarding the netting
of Pigeons by Judy & Co. Mr. Otto Widmann of St. Louis,
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 459

 

who kindly undertook to learn what he could about the
Pigeon shipments, sends an interesting letter, from which the
following extracts are taken: “In reply to your letter of
September 9, I am sorry I could not get what you wanted.
The firm was W. W. Judy & Co. Judy died twenty-five years
ago, and the firm was dissolved. One of the partners, Mr.
Farrell, died eight years afterwards, and there is at present
only one of the partners living, Mr. Dave Unger. The only
information that could be gotten from him was the interesting
statement that the Wild Pigeons have flown to Australia.
While trying to get the desired information, a game dealer,
F. H. Miller, stated that eight years ago [1902] he received
twelve dozen Wild Pigeons from Rogers, Ark., for which he
paid two and one-half dollars a dozen, and sold all to an
eastern firm for five dollars a dozen. His last Wild Pigeon, a
single individual, among some Ducks, was received four years *
ago [1906], from Black River, Mo. As he is an old game
dealer, who has handled many Pigeons, there is no doubt
about the species; but exact dates were not - obtainable.”
This closes the history of the Passenger Pigeon in our markets.
For the rest we must look to the millions of shotguns in the
United States, the natural enemies of the Pigeons, and the
accidents of migration. For every Pigeon that was shot and
recorded during the last part of the nineteenth century,
probably a hundred (perhaps a thousand) were shot and
eaten. Who was there to record them? Ornithologists may
be rather numerous in some of our cities, but they are very
rare in our western forests. We read in the press that only
a few years ago the mountaineers of the south killed hundreds
of Pigeons, and made potpies of them. This may or may
not be true; but for all practical purposes the close of the
nineteenth century saw the end of the Passenger Pigeon. We
are now (1911) trying to save it. Rewards aggregating thou-
sands of dollars are offered for the undisturbed nest and eggs;
but without result. They come twenty years too late.

A campaign of publicity has been conducted for two years,
under the energetic management of Prof. C. F. Hodge of
Clark University at Worcester, Mass.; the large rewards
460: GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

offered have been published widely in the press of the United
States and. Canada, and a great public interest in the search
has-been aroused. Passenger Pigeons have been reported in
numbers from many parts of North America, but investiga-
tion of these communications. has not resulted in producing
so much as a feather of the bird. This merely shows the unre-
liability of such statements, and how easily people may be
mistaken. There are three reports in 1911 that seem prom-
ising. In each case a single bird was seen and watched for
some time at very close range; but all assertions regarding
large flocks at this late date probably are based on observations
of Mourning Doves or Band-tailed Pigeons. The last Pas-
senger Pigeon known to exist was the lone captive whose
likeness faces page 433. This bird died September 1, 1914.

A large correspondence and a careful search through some
of the literature of the latter part of the century leads to the
belief that the Pigeons were common and in some cases abun-
dant in portions of the west from 1880 to 1890, though
gradually decreasing. After 1893 the reports became more
vague and less trustworthy, except in a few cases. Small
flocks were seen and specimens taken in the last decade of the
nineteenth century in Canada, and in Wisconsin, Nebraska,
Illinois, Indiana and other western States, and even in some
of the eastern States. Chief Pokagon reported a nesting of
Pigeons near the headwaters of the Au Sable River in Michigan
in 1896. In 1898 a flock of about two hundred birds was said
to have been seen in Michigan; one was taken; and in 1900
about fifty birds were reported.

While the big nestings of 1878 and 1881 in Michigan were
the last immense breeding places of Passenger Pigeons on
record, the species did not become extinct in a day or a year;
they were not wiped from the face of the earth by any great
catastrophe; they gradually became fewer and fewer for
twenty to twenty-five years after the date set by the pigeoners
as that of the last great migration.

Such records as I find of the last specimens actually taken
(not merely seen) in the States to which they refer indicate
how the species finally dropped out of sight: —
 

PLATE XVIII.

Upper figure, egg of Passenger Pigeon. Lower figure, eggs of
Mourning Dove, commonly mistaken for those of Passenger Pigeon.
(Photograph by Prof. C. F. Hodge.)

 

 

 

 

PLATE XIX.—PASSENGER PIGEON AND BIRDS COMMONLY
MISTAKEN FOR IT.

Mounted specimen of Band-tailed Pigeon, left; Passenger Pigeon, center ;
and Mourning Dove, right. (Photograph by Prof. C. F. Hodge.)

 
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 461

 

1882-83. — Texas, a flight seen in winter of 1882-83 near Lampasas that
was three and one-half hours in passing. Many killed. No recent

_ record (A. S. Eldredge.)

1885. — New Hampshire, Concord (G. M. Allen, Birds of New Hampshire).

1885. — South Carolina, immature female, November 21 (Arthur T. Wayne,
Auk, 1906, p. 61).

1886. — Rhode Island, specimen taken by Walter A. Angell in 1886 or 1887.
T. M. Flanagan took about a dozen at Warwick in 1885 or 1886 (John
H. Flanagan).

1889. — District of Columbia, October 19 (W. W. Cooke, Proc., Biological
Society of Washington, 1908, p. 116); specimens not taken.

1889. — Connecticut, Portland, young male, October 1 (John H. Sage);
specimen preserved.

1889. — Province of Quebec, Tadousac, specimen taken July 20, 1889; now in
collection of Dr. Jonathan Dwight, Jr., New York (J. H. Fleming, Ottawa
Naturalist, Vol. XXII, 1907, p. 236).

1893. — Indiana, pair and nest taken by C. B. Brown of Chicago in spring
of 1893 at English Lake; nest and eggs preserved in his collection
(Ruthven Deane, Auk, 1895, p. 299).

1893. — Arkansas, Siloam Springs, last shipment live Pigeons to W. W.
Judy & Co., St. Louis (Ruthven Deane, Auk, 1895, p. 298).

1894. — North Carolina, Buncombe County, female taken by J. S. Cairns,
October 20 (C. S. Brimley.)

1894. — Massachusetts, an adult female killed by Neil Casey at Melrose,
April 12, 1894; specimen preserved and mounted; now first recorded.

1895. — Louisiana, Mandeville, near New Orleans, January 26, 1895, two
taken out of a flock of five by Dr. J. H. Lamb; one an immature male
(Prof. Geo. E. Beyer).

1895. — Illinois, Lake Forest, August 7, young female in collection of John
F. Ferry (Ruthven Deane, Auk, 1896, p. 81).

1895. — Nebraska, Sarpy County, one killed out of fifteen or twenty, No-
vember 9, by Hon. Edgar Howard of Papillon, five miles southeast of
that place (Lawrence Bruner, Nebraska Birds, p. 84).

1895. — Pennsylvania, Canadensis, Munroe County, specimen shot, Octo-
ber 23, by Mr. Geo. Stewart of Philadelphia, and now in his possession
(Witmer Stone).

1896. — New Jersey, Englewood, June 23, immature female taken by
C. Irving Wood and mounted by J. Ullrich (F. M. Chapman, Auk,
1896, p. 341). ’

1896. — Wisconsin, Delavan Lake, N. Hollister killed an immature male
September 8, 1896 (Auk, 1896, p. 341); last Wisconsin record backed
by a specimen.

1896. — Missouri, Attic, pair killed from flock of fifty by Chas. H. Holden,
Jr., December 17; in collection of Ruthven Deane (Auk, 1897. p. 317).
462 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

1897. — Iowa, Lee County, September 7, William G. Praeger shot a lone
immature male (R. M. Anderson, Birds of Iowa, 1907, p. 239).

1898. — Manitoba, Winnipeg, adult male taken; specimen mounted by Geo.
E. Atkinson, Lake Winnepegosis, April 14 (J. H. Fleming, Auk, 1903,
p. 66). Probably not the same reported by Mr. Ernest Thompson
Seton as taken by J. G. Rosser at Winnepegosis September 13. Dates
differ. (Auk, 1908, p. 452.)

1898. — Michigan, Chestnut Ridge, Wayne County, immature bird, mounted
by C. Campion, Detroit, September 14 (J. H. Fleming, Auk, 1903, p.
66).

1898. — Kentucky, Owensboro, immature male, now in the Smithsonian
Institution, July 27 (J. H. Fleming, Auk, 1908, p. 237).

1900. — Ohio, Sargents, March 24 (Dawson and Jones, Birds of Ohio, Vol.
II., p. 427); specimen shot by a boy and mounted by a Mrs. Barnes.

1900. — Wisconsin, Babcock, September, specimen not preserved, killed by
Neal Brown while hunting with Emerson Hough (W. B. Mershon,
The Passenger Pigeon, p. 154). The accuracy of this record has been
questioned.

1902. — Arkansas, F. H. Miller, of St. Louis received twelve dozen from
Rogers, Ark. (Otto Widmann).

1904. — Maine, one killed at Bar Harbor, mounted by J. Bert Baxter of
Bangor (Harry Merrill). Recorded by Glover M. Allen in his List of
the Aves, 1909, Fauna of N. E., II., Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist.

1906. — Missouri, Black River, F. H. Miller of St. Louis received one bird
at his market in St. Louis, shipped from Black River. (It will be noted
that the last previous record for Missouri was in 1896.)

1907. — Province of Quebec, one bird taken by Mr. Pacificque Couture of
St. Vincent, P. Q., September 23, 1907. The bird was mounted by Mr.
A. Learo, taxidermist of Montreal, and identified by him. (I have
been unable to find Mr. Couture and get further particulars, as he is
no longer at St. Vincent. This record may not be authentic.)

The records from 1898 to 1907 appear to be authentic, but
in the few cases where the specimens were preserved I have
been unable to locate them. We have no record since 1898
that can be substantiated by a specimen preserved in any
museum.

It is only just to state that: many Passenger Pigeons
probably were seen at later dates than some of those given.
Where flocks or single birds were watched by competent
observers for hours through a glass, as they were in more than
one instance, there can be no question of their identity; but
the taking of the specimen is the only tangible proof that
satisfies the ornithologist in such a case as this, and for that
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 463

 

reason the above records are confined mainly to those cases
where at least one bird was taken. I cannot leave this sub-
ject without referring to various canards, some of which have
been taken seriously by too many intelligent people.

Efforts have been made to account for the supposed sudden
disappearance of the Pigeons by tales of cyclonic sea disturb-
ances or lake storms, which are supposed to have drowned
practically all of them. Undoubtedly thousands of Pigeons
were destroyed occasionally, during their flights, in storms or
fogs at sea or on the Great Lakes. There are many rather
unsatisfactory and hazy reports of such occurrences. The
earliest of these is recorded by Kalm, who says, in his account
of the Passenger Pigeon, referred to on page 435, that in
March, 1740, about a week after the disappearance of a great
multitude of Pigeons in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, a sea
captain named Amies, who arrived at Philadelphia, stated
that he had seen the sea covered with dead Pigeons, in some
cases for three French miles. Other ship captains, arriving
later, corroborated this tale. It was said that from that date
no such great multitudes of Pigeons were seen in Pennsylvania.
Kalm published this in 1759, but after that date the Pigeons
again came to Pennsylvania in great numbers; which shows
that the drowning of this multitude had no permanent effect
on the numbers of the birds. This story in some form has
cropped up at intervals ever since.

Giraud, in his Birds of Long Island (1844), states that he
has “heard” of great numbers of Pigeons floating on the water
which were seen by shipmasters. The old legend regarding
the dead Pigeons drifting ashore near Cape Ann, from which
occurrence Pigeon Cove is supposed to have received its name,
is possibly authentic; for the birds probably crossed Ipswich
Bay in their flight to the coast of Maine, and may have been
overtaken by a fog, become confused and fallen into the water,
or they may have been blown to sea and drowned. Neverthe-
less, this catastrophe did not wipe out the entire species, for it
had too wide a range. Schoolcraft (1821), while walking along
some parts of the shore of Lake Michigan, saw a great num-
ber of the skeletons and half-consumed bodies of Pigeons,
464 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

which he says are overtaken often by tempests in crossing the
lake, and ‘‘ drowned in entire flocks.” Vast numbers of Eagles
and Buzzards were seen feeding upon them.?

Brewster was informed by Mr. 8. 8. Stevens of Cadillac,
Mich., that on one occasion an immense flock of Pigeons
became bewildered in a fog while crossing Crooked Lake, and,
descending, struck the water and perished by thousands.
This might easily happen to young birds. They might
become bewildered in a fog on a large body of water, and fly
about until, weary and exhausted, they fell into the water;
but Mr. Stevens says that the old, experienced birds rose
above the fog, and not one was drowned.

Mr. E. Osborn states that he has seen “big bodies of
Pigeons” which were drowned off Sleeping Bear Point while
trying to cross Lake Michigan.

Capt. Alexander McDougall of Duluth writes, February 8,
1905, that, while he was captain of the steamer “Japan” on
Lake Superior, in 1872, the exhausted Pigeons in foggy weather
and at night used to alight on his boat in great numbers. He
remembers having caught several by hand.

Mr. Ben O. Bush states that at the last Petoskey nesting,
in 1881, when the nests were built and the eggs were laid, a
big wind storm with sleet came up just at dusk; the birds left,
and he believes that they were swallowed up by a fog and
storm on Lake Michigan. At any rate, they did not return.
He says that he has “heard tell of the beach being strewn for
miles with dead Pigeons.” He supposes that the storm wiped
them out, and that the netters afterwards cleaned up what
were left.

Mr. C. H. Ames of Boston advances the theory that the
Pigeons went south, and were overwhelmed by a storm on the
Gulf of Mexico; and states that years ago he read an account,
either in or quoted from a New Orleans newspaper, giving
the story of several ship captains and sailors who had sailed
over “leagues of water covered with dead Pigeons.”

The following story was very likely derived from the same
source. Mr. G. C. Tremaine Ward says (1901) that Mr. S. D.

 

1 Schoolcraft, Henry R. L.: Narrative Journal of Travels from Detroit Northwest, 1821, p. 381.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 465

 

Woodruff of St. Catherines, Ont., Can., asserts that several
shipmasters say that immense numbers of Wild Pigeons
perished in the Gulf of Mexico, ‘‘ being exhausted by contrary
winds and dense fogs.”” This gentleman also avers that Mr.
Woodruff states that several shipmasters saw myriads of
Pigeons alight on their vessels, and had to cast them off into
the sea. (Auk, 1901, p. 192,—no names or dates given.)
This is too indefinite to be of any value as evidence. Also,
there is no authentic record that the Passenger Pigeon ever
crossed the Gulf of Mexico. This species did not go so far
south, and, although there is a single record of its occurrence
in Cuba, it has not been seen in great numbers near the Gulf
coast for forty years. The Pigeons which once commonly
crossed these waters from Florida to Cuba in large numbers,
‘belonged to another species, the White-crowned Pigeon
(Columba leucocephala). Such tales about the drowning of
birds in the Gulf of Mexico may have referred to some of the
Plovers, or ‘“ Prairie Pigeons,” as they were called in the west,
which crossed the gulf annually in large numbers.

The Passenger Pigeon was not exterminated, or nearly
exterminated, by drowning, soon after the nesting at Petoskey
in 1881; for, as hereinbefore stated, there was an immense
flight in Texas the ensuing winter, a large flight crossed Michi-
gan to the north in 1888, and they were seen and taken in
numbers in many places in the United States and Canada for
years subsequent to the date of the Petoskey nesting of 1881.
The statement recently published in a magazine article, that
the Pigeons have gone to South America, is absolutely without
any foundation in fact. This bird is unknown on the South
American continent. The statement that they have gone to
Australia is hardly worth refuting.

The stories of the wholesale destruction of the Pigeons by
snowstorms in the north possibly have some foundation.
Northward migrations of Pigeons often occurred very early in
the year, and the first nesting of a season was sometimes com-
pleted while snow still remained. On March 25, 1830, a flight
of Pigeons was overtaken by a high wind and snowstorm near
Albany, N. Y. Twenty-eight inches of snow fell, and the
466 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

birds were overwhelmed, and taken “in great abundance” by
the people.?

Some of the Pigeons may have been driven by persecution
to the far north to breed, in the latter part of the nineteenth
century, and they may have been destroyed by unseasonable
storms, for many species are subject to periodical reduction by
the elements; but the whole history of the last thirty years of
the existence of the Passenger Pigeon goes to prove that the
birds were so persistently molested that they finally lost their
coherence, were scattered far and wide, and became extinct
mainly through constant persecution by man. While they
existed in large colonies, the orphaned young were taken care
of by their neighbors. Mr. E. T. Martin, in a pamphlet
entitled Among the Pigeons, which was published in full in the
American Field, January 25, 1879, states that one of his men
shot six female Pigeons that came to feed a single squab in
one nest. (Comment on this shooting is unnecessary.) This
communal habit of feeding preserved the species so long as the
birds nested in large colonies; but when they became scattered
the orphaned young starved when their parents were killed.

The Passenger Pigeon was not a suspicious bird, as birds
go; it was easily taken. It reproduced slowly, laid but few
eggs, and when its innumerable multitudes were reduced and
its flocks were dispersed, the end came rapidly.

It often is asked how it was possible for man to kill them
all. It was not possible, nor was it requisite that he should do
so, in order to exterminate them. All that was required to
bring about this result was to destroy a large part of the
young birds hatched each year. Nature cut off the rest. She
always eliminates a large share of the young of all creatures.
The greater part of the Pigeons taken in summer and fall were
young birds. The squabs were sought because they brought a
high price in the market. The flock mentioned by Mr. Van
Cleef (see page 452), which nested in Missouri, Michigan and
New York the same year, was followed by the pigeoners, who
destroyed about all the squabs at each nesting. The young
when out of the nest were less experienced than the adults,

 

1 Munsell, Joel: Annals of Albany, 1858, Vol. IX, p. 206.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 467

 

and therefore more easily taken. Sometimes the Pigeons were
so harassed that all their nestings were broken up, and few
young were raised that season; thus the natural increase was
practically cut off, and constant diminution was assured. Ex-
termination must have resulted under such conditions, even if
no man ever killed an adult Passenger Pigeon. The Pigeons
were not immortal. Even if undisturbed by man, they “ gave
up the ghost”’ in'a few years; but they were not undisturbed.
No adequate attempt to protect them was made until they
practically had disappeared. Whenever a law looking toward
the conservation of these birds was proposed in any State,
its opponents argued before the legislative committees that
the Pigeons “needed no protection;”’ that their numbers
were so vast, and that they ranged over such a great extent of
country, that they were amply able to take care of them-
selves. This argument defeated all measures that might have
given adequate protection to this species, as it has since
defeated proposed laws for the conservation of wild-fowl and
other migratory birds. That is why extinction finally came
quickly. We did our best to exterminate both old and young,
and we succeeded. The explanation is so simple that all talk
of “mystery” seems sadly out of place here. (Since the above
history was written, Mr. Albert Hazen Wright has published
a compilation of Passenger Pigeon notes from early writers,
many of which are not included here.')

Ornithologists believe that the migrations of this Pigeon
were made mainly in pursuit of food, and with little reference
to the seasons of the year. Undoubtedly, however, the ten-
dency was to migrate north in the spring and south in the fall,
like other birds of passage.

Some of the pigeoners say that the Pigeons nested in the
southern States in winter; but of this there is no authentic
record.

Lawson (1709), in his History of Carolina, says that the
Pigeons came in great numbers in the winter: and he was told
by the Indians that they nested in the Allegheny Mountains.”

 

1 Auk, 1910, pp. 428-443; 1911, pp. 346-366, 427-449,
2 Lawson, John: History of Carolina, 1860, p. 231.
468 © GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

They nested as far south at least as Pennsylvania, Tennessee
and Kentucky, but usually most of them bred in the north.

The accounts of the early settlers in Massachusetts show
that there was a northward migration of Pigeons through New
England in March, and they sometimes lingered about Hudson
Bay until December, feeding on the berries of the juniper.
The roosts of the Pigeons were so extensive and the birds fre-
quenting them were so numerous that it was necessary for
them to fly long distances daily in order to secure food enough
for their wants. In migration their flight was very high and
swift. Audubon estimates that they flew a mile a minute,
and others have asserted that they sometimes travelled one
hundred miles an hour. This was probably an exaggeration.

I remember standing, as a boy, on the shore of an arm of
Lake Quinsigamond, when a small flock of Pigeons, crossing
the water, made directly for me. I never had killed a Pigeon,
and intended to secure a specimen; but the flock, in its arrow-
like flight, descending directly toward me, passed over my
head with inconceivable velocity, and reached the woods
behind me before the gun could be brought to bear.

In searching for food in a country where it was plentiful,
the birds flew low, and, upon reaching ‘good feeding ground,
swung in large circles while examining the place. Some flocks
were composed of young birds, others were mostly males, and
still others almost entirely females.

Their roosting places were preferably in large and heavy
timber, sometimes in swamps. In most of the larger roosts,
the trees, undergrowth and all vegetation on the ground were
soon killed by a heavy deposit of guano. About sunset the
Pigeons in all the country for many miles around began to
move toward the roost, and soon after sundown they com-
menced to arrive in immense numbers, some from a distance
of one hundred miles or more. Birds poured in from all
directions until after midnight, and left the roost again at
sunrise.

Audubon says that a messenger whom he sent out from a
Pigeon roost reported to him that the guproar of the birds
arriving could be heard three miles away. A most remarkable
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 469

 

attribute of the Pigeon was its disregard of the presence of
human beings in its roosting and nesting places. Any one
who entered quietly one of these spots when the birds were
there would be surrounded by the unsuspicious creatures in a
few minutes. The nests formerly were placed in trees of great
height, in some locality near water, where food was plentiful;
but after the primeval forests were cut off, the Pigeons nested
sometimes in low trees. This contributed to their doom.
The best description of the nesting of these birds that I have
seen is given by Chief Pokagon, in the Chautauquan (Novem-

ber, 1895, Vol. XXII, No. 20). He was a full-blooded Indian,
and the last Pottawottomi chief of the Pokagon band. His
account as quoted by Mr. Mershon, follows: —

It was proverbial with our fathers that if the Great Spirit in His wis-
dom could have created a more elegant bird in plumage, form, and move-
ment, He never did. When a young man I have stood for hours admiring
the movements of these birds. I have seen them fly in unbroken lines from
the horizon, one line succeeding another from morning until night, moving
their unbroken columns like an army of trained soldiers pushing to the
front, while detached bodies of these birds appeared in different parts of
the heavens, pressing forward in haste like raw recruits preparing for battle:
At other times I have seen them move in one unbroken column for hours
across the sky, like some great river, ever varying in hue; and as the mighty
stream, sweeping on at sixty miles an hour, reached some deep valley, it
would pour its living mass headlong down hundreds of feet, sounding as
though a whirlwind was abroad in the land. I have stood by the grandest
waterfall of America and regarded the descending torrents in wonder and
astonishment, yet never have my astonishment, wonder and admiration
been so stirred as when I have witnessed these birds drop from their course
like meteors from heaven.

. About the middle of May, 1850, while in the fur trade, I was camp-
ing on the head waters of the Manistee River in Michigan. One morning
on leaving my wigwam I was startled by hearing a gurgling, rumbling sound,
as though an army of horses laden with sleigh bells was advancing through
the deep forests toward me. As I listened more intently, I concluded that
instead of the tramping of horses it was distant thunder; and yet the morning
was clear, calm and beautiful. Nearer and nearer came the strange com-
mingling sounds of sleigh bells, mixed with the rumbling of an approach-
ing storm. While I gazed in wonder and astonishment, I beheld moving
toward me in an unbroken front millions of pigeons, the first I had seen
that season. They passed like a cloud through the branches of the high
trees, through the underbrush and over the ground, apparently overturning
470 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

every leaf. Statue-like I stood, half-concealed by cedar boughs. They
fluttered all about me, lighting on my head and shoulders; gently I caught
two in my hands and carefully concealed them under my blanket.

I now began to realize they were mating, preparatory to nesting. It
was an event which I had long hoped to witness; so I sat down and carefully
watched their movements, amid the greatest tumult. I tried to understand
their strange language, and why they all chatted in concert.. In the course
of the day the great on-moving mass passed by me, but the trees were still
filled with them sitting in pairs in convenient crotches of the limbs, now
and then gently fluttering their half-spread wings and uttering to their
mates those strange, bell-like wooing notes which I had mistaken for the
ringing of bells in the distance.

On the third day after, this chattering ceased and all were busy carry-
ing sticks with which they were building nests in the same crotches of the
limbs they had occupied in pairs the day before. On the morning of the
fourth day their nests were finished and eggs laid. The hen birds occupied
the nests in the morning, while the male birds went out into the surround-
ing country to feed, returning about 10 o’clock, taking the nests, while the
hens went out to feed, returning about 3 o’clock. Again changing nests,
the male birds went out the second time to feed, returning at sundown.
The same routine was pursued each day until the young ones were hatched
and nearly half grown, at which time all the parent birds left the brooding
grounds about daylight. On the morning of the eleventh day, after the
eggs were laid, I found the nesting grounds strewn with egg shells, convinc-
ing me that the young were hatched. In thirteen days more the parent
birds left their young to shift for themselves, flying to the east about sixty
miles, when they again nested. The female lays but one egg during the
same nesting.

Both sexes secrete in their crops milk or curd with which they feed
their young, until they are nearly ready to fly, when they stuff them with
mast and such other raw material as they themselves eat, until their crops
exceed their bodies in size, giving to them an appearance of two birds with
one head. Within two days after the stuffing they become a mass of fat —
“a squab.” At this period the parent bird drives them from the nests to
take care of themselves, while they fly off within a day or two, sometimes
hundreds of miles, and again nest.

It has been well established that these birds look after and take care of
all orphan squabs whose parents have been killed or are missing. These
birds are long-lived, having been known to live twenty-five years caged.
When food is abundant they nest each month in the year.

It seems improbable, however, that they bred in winter.
The nesting usually occupied four to five weeks. The female,
when sitting, never left the nest until the flight of males
returned, when she slipped away, just as her mate reached the
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 471

 

nest. Thus the eggs were kept covered all the time. The
adult birds never ate the nuts and acorns in the immediate
vicinity of the nesting place, but went to a distance for their
food, and left the mast in the neighborhood for the young to
feed on when they came out of the nest. It is said that for
miles around there were no caterpillars or inchworms in the
oak woods for. several years after a nesting, as the adults
secured practically all of them for the young, thereby pro-
tecting the forests against their insect enemies. When the
young were first pushed out of the nest by the parents, they
went to the ground and fed mainly in the lower parts of the
woods until they became expert in flying. They passed over
the ground, the lower ranks continually flying over those in
front, scratching out all the edible material, those flying over-
head striking off the nuts as they flew by. The young birds
were able to reproduce their kind in about six months.

Chief Pokagon asserts that while the old birds were feed-
ing they always had guards on duty, to give an alarm in case
of danger. The watch bird as it took flight beat its wings
together in quick succession, with a sound like the roll of a
snare drum. Quick as thought each bird repeated the alarm
with a thundering sound, as the flock struggled to rise, leading
a novice to imagine that a cyclone was coming.

In feeding, the birds were very voracious. They scratched
among the leaves and unearthed every nut or acorn, some-
times almost choking in their efforts to swallow an unusually
large specimen. During the breeding season they were fond of
salty mud and water, and the pigeoners, learning of this, were
accustomed to attract the birds to their death by salting down
““mud beds,”’ to which the poor Pigeons flocked in multitudes,
and over which, when they were assembled, the pigeoners
threw their nets.

The food of the Pigeons consisted mainly of vegetable
matter, except for the grasshoppers, caterpillars and other
insects, worms, snails, etc., which they ate, and which they fed
to their young. Acorns, beech nuts and chestnuts, with pine and
hemlock seeds, were among their principal staples of supply.
They also fed on the seeds of the elm, maple and other forest
472 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

trees. Buckwheat, hempseed, Indian corn and other grains,
cherries, mulberries, hollyberries, hackberries, wild straw-
berries, raspberries and huckleberries, and tender shoots of
vegetation, all attracted them. They sometimes went to the
Barren Grounds in the far north in vast numbers, to feed on
blueberries. They often descended upon the fall-sown wheat
and rye fields in such numbers that the farmers had to watch
their fields, or lose their crops. Oats and peas were favorite
foods. No doubt they also fed largely on the seeds of weeds,
as the Mourning Doves, Bob-whites and many other terres-
trial feeders do; but I find no record of this. They were fond
of currants, cranberries, and poke berries, and no doubt of
many other kinds of berries, and rose hips. We know little of
their food habits, for no scientific investigation of their food
ever was made.

EXTIRPATED SPECIES.
TRUMPETER SWAN (Olor buccinator).

Average Length. — About 63 inches.

Adult. — Bill longer than head; feathers of forehead ending in semi-ellip-
tical outline; nostrils in basal half of bill; extent of wings about 8 feet,
rarely near 10; plumage white, occasionally a rusty wash on head; iris
brown; bill, lores and feet black.

Immature in Winter. — Gray; rusty on head and neck; bill dusky, or black
varied with purplish and flesh color; legs and feet yellowish brown;
claws blackish; webs blackish brown.

Nest. — OF grass, leaves, down and feathers, on dry ground.

Eggs. — Five to seven, 4 to 4.50 by 2.50 to 3; chalky white, granulated.

Notes. — A resonant trumpeting.

Season. — Formerly spring and fall.

Range. — Formerly the North American continent, rare in Alaska, breed-
ing from the northern United States to near the Arctic Ocean, and from
the Rocky Mountains to Hudson Bay, and wintering mainly in the
southern States and south to lower California. Now found only in the
interior; still breeds in interior British Provinces.

History.

This splendid bird, the largest of North American wild-
fowl, is believed to have visited Massachusetts and other sea-
board States in some numbers during their early history.
Some of the settlers wrote of Swans that were met with on the
‘yourxe Apeau pue pajediyxa mou |‘ purjsug MeN Ysnosyy poyeisiw Apawso4

"NVMS YALAdWNYL— "XX JALWId

 

 

 
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 473

 

Atlantic seaboard, but few of them distinguished between the
species.

Lawson (1709) writing of the natural history of Carolina,
states that there were “‘ two sorts” of Swans. One they called
“‘trompeters, because of a sort of trompeting noise they
make.”” These were the larger, and came in great flocks in
the winter, keeping mostly in the fresh rivers. The others
they called ‘“‘hoopers”? (in remembrance of the English
Whooping Swan), and these were smaller and kept more in
salt water.!

Turnbull (1869) includes the Trumpeter among the birds
of east Pennsylvania and New Jersey, ‘“‘on the authority of
reliable sportsmen who have shot it on Chesapeake and Dela-
ware Bays.” Thus it seems that the Trumpeter, now con-
sidered a bird of the interior, was taken on the Atlantic coast
as late as the latter half of the last century.

In the Representation of the New Netherland (1650), a
paper signed by twelve prominent citizens, the statement is
made that the Swans of the country are “full as large”
as those of the Netherlands, and they are named among
the abundant birds of this region near the mouth of the
Hudson.’

In the seventeenth century great flocks of Swans frequented
the Atlantic seaboard from New England as far south as
Georgia, some of which were undoubtedly of this species,
The Trumpeter is noted by Dr. C. Hart Merriam as probably
formerly occurring in the vicinity of East Windsor Hill, Conn.,
where an old hunter, who knew the bird well, reported that he
had seen a flock once, and had heard their notes on another
occasion. Belknap (1792) records it as a migrant in New
Hampshire. He says “it is certain that our swan is heard to
make a sound resembling that of a trumpet.”? ‘One of
them,” he asserts, ‘‘ has been known to weigh 36 lb. and to be
six feet in length from bill to the feet when stretched.”’ Here
the size alone would seem to identify the bird.4

 

1 Lawson, John: History of Carolina, 1860, p. 240. ,

2 Narratives of New Netherland, edited by J. Franklin Jameson, 1909, p. 297.
3 Belknap, Jeremy: History of New Hampshire, 1792, Vol. III, p. 167.

4 Ibid., p. 166.
474 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Undoubtedly the Trumpeter passed in migration from
Long Island Sound and the mouth of the Hudson into Canada
and the Hudson Bay country, where it bred, going through
some of the New England States on the way north or on its
southward migration. So late as the sixth decade of the nine-
teenth century it was still to be met with in Ontario, Can.,
where, so Fleming states, Professor Hincks described a sup-
posed new species of Swan in 1864, which proved to be the
young of the Trumpeter, and between 1863 and 1866 he was
able to get six local birds to examine.!

Morton (1632) stated that there was “‘greate store”’ of
Swans at their seasons in the Merrimac River and in other
parts of the country. Some of the Swans mentioned as fre-
quenting the fresh-water ponds and rivers probably were of
this species, and several small bodies of water in Massachu-
setts have derived their names from the Swan. A place called
“Swan Holt” by the first settlers of Carver, Mass., probably
denotes the visits of this species. Here, before the ice was
broken up in the ponds, the Swan, “the earliest: harbinger of
spring,” found an open place among the osier holts.2 The
Trumpeter was noted because of its early appearance in
spring. It often appeared in March, before ponds were open.

In the History of Harvard, Mass., it is stated that the
Swan occasionally was seen in colonial times, and gave name
to the long swamp where Still River has its source.2

The Trumpeter Swan long ago disappeared from the New
England seaboard, except as a mere straggler; so long ago that
there is but one specimen extant from New England, and only
one definite record or date of the capture of a specimen here.
Since the first edition of this book was written Mr..C. Wm.
Beebe has recorded a Trumpeter from Lewiston, Me., captured
alive on November 25, 1901.4. The bird formerly was com-
mon from New York west to the Pacific coast States. It
bred in Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Montana and Idaho, and
the northwest provinces, and probably in Minnesota, Iowa and
farther east before the time of ornithological records. De Kay

 

1 Fleming, James H.: Auk, 1906, p. 446.

2 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. IV, 2d ser., p. 274.

3 Nourse, Henry S.: The History of Harvard, Mass., from 1732 to 1893, ed. of 1894, p. 73.
4 Coale, Henry K.: Auk, 1915, p. 87.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 475

 

writes that hunters informed him that Swans remained all
through the year in the remoter portions of New York State.
If this were true they probably were Trumpeters, as the
Whistling Swan summered in the far north. David Pieter-
zoon De Vries, the Patroon, settled on Staten Island. In April,
1639, he went in his sloop to Fort Orange (now Albany), where
he arrived April 30, and left on his return May 14. In his
account of the trip he states that there were great numbers of
Turkeys and water-fowl, such as Swans, Geese, Teal, etc., all
along the river.t. If Swans were seen in numbers upon the
river in May, they must have been either non-breeding birds
or breeding in that region. All accounts agree that Swans
came very early in spring, that the Whistling Swan moved
north as fast as the ice broke up, and that only the Trumpeter
Swan ever remained to breed in that latitude.

The Trumpeter has succumbed to incessant persecution in
all parts of its range, and its total extinction is now only a
matter of years. Persecution drove it from the northern
parts of its winter range to the shores of the Gulf of Mexico;
from all the southern portion of its breeding range toward the
shores of the Arctic Ocean; and from the Atlantic and Pacific
slopes toward the interior. Now it almost has disappeared
from the Gulf States. Mr. A.S. Eldredge, who has a ranch at
Lampasas, Tex., writes that eighteen years ago there were
seventy-five to one hundred Swans there. Not one has been
seen for three years.”

A Swan seen at any time of the year in most parts of the
United States is the signal for every man with a gun to pursue
it. The breeding Swans of the United States have been extir-
pated, and the bird is hunted, even in its farthest northern
haunts, by the natives, who capture it in summer, when it has
molted its primaries and is unable to fly. The Swan lives to

 

1 Munsell, Joel: Annals of Albany, 1858, Vol. IX, p. 126.

2 The Trumpeter is disappearing or has disappeared from the Pacific slope as well as from the
Atlantic. It wasonce the prevailing Swan in California and was plentiful in Oregon and Washington.
Suckley in 1853-54 saw immense flocks on the Columbia River (Pac. R.R. Surv., Vol. XII, Part 2,
“~p. 249). Newberry also saw them there (Ibid., Vol. VI, Part 4, p. 100). Murphy (1882) states that they
were so common on the Columbia that he doubts if one would bring more than fifty or seventy-five
cents (Murphy, John Mortimer: American Game Bird Shooting, 1882, p. 231). It is now stated that
there is no well-authenticated instance of the recent occurrence of a Trumpeter in the State of Wash-
ington (Dawson and Bowles: Birds of Washington, 1909, p. 841).
476 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

a great age. The older birds are about as tough and unfit for
food as an old horse. Only the younger are savory, and the
gunners might well have spared the adult birds, but it was
“sport” to kill them and fashion called for swan’s-down.
The large size of this bird and its conspicuousness have served,
as in the case of the Whooping Crane, to make it a shining
mark, and the trumpetings that were once heard over the
breadth of a great continent, as the long converging lines
drove on from zone to zone, will soon be heard no more. In
the ages to come, like the call of the Whooping Crane, they
will be locked in the silence of the past.

At the approach of the frost king, the Trumpeter leaves its
breeding grounds in the northwest and moves southward in
triangular flock formation. The flocks move on like those of
the Canada Goose, led by some old male, who, when tired of
breasting the full force of the air currents, calls for relief, and
falls back into the ranks, giving way to another. In migra-
tion they fly at such immense heights that often the human
eye fails to find them, but even then their resonant, discordant
trumpetings can be plainly heard. When seen with a glass at
that giddy height in the heavens, crossing the sky in their
exalted and unswerving flight, sweeping along at a speed
exceeding that of the fastest express train, traversing a conti-
nent on the wings of the wind, their long lines glistening like
silver in the bright sunlight, they present the grandest and
most impressive spectacle in bird life to be found on this con-
tinent. When at last they find their haven of rest they swing
in wide, majestic circuits, spying out their landfall, until, their
spiral reconnoissance ended and their apprehensions quite
allayed, they sail gently down to the grateful waters, to rest,
drink, bathe and feed at ease.

Fifty years ago in the far west great flocks of these birds, a
quarter of a mile in length, were seen massed like blankets of
snow on the river banks. On the water they move lightly
and gracefully. Their long necks and great size, taken in
connection with the mirage effects, sometimes seen in their
haunts, deceive the eye, until in the distance they present the
appearance of a fleet of ships under sail.
     
 
   

  

2 eee AG
et eae poh
Hi. NNO ON FOE
eee eee ie Mead ee
one

LY

; il gi oilla,. Za
NiGaee™ o) ME Aha a.

PLATE XXI.— WHOOPING CRANE.

Once a migrant through New England; now extirpated and nearly
extinct. (From a drawing by Annie E. Chase.)

»
y=
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 4/7

 

The Trumpeter is well able to protect: itself and its young
from the smaller prowlers, for it can deliver a terrible blow
with its powerful wing. Although it lays five to seven eggs,
some mortality must overtake the young, for comparatively
few young birds of the year are seen in the fall flights. The
Bald Eagle sometimes surprises it in flight, and, hurtling from
above, strikes it to the earth; otherwise it seems to have few
natural enemies powerful and swift enough to destroy it.

Little is known definitely about the food of the Trumpeter.
Dr. Hatch says that it feeds chiefly on vegetation, both
aquatic and terrestrial. It feeds like all Swans, by immersing
its head and neck and taking its food from the bottom. Its
food consists largely of water plants, but it also takes shell-
fish and crustaceans.

WHOOPING CRANE (Grus americana).

Length. — 50 inches or more; extent of wings about 90.

Adult. — Bill stout and slightly curved; head bare and red on top and on
each side to below the eyes, except for scattering hairs; plumage pure
white, with black primaries and primary coverts; bill waxy yellow; iris
yellow; legs and feet black. This is one of the largest North American
birds, far exceeding in size the Great Blue Heron.

Immature. — Head feathered, portions that finally become naked indicated
by dark feathers; general plumage whitish, stained with rusty brown.

Nest. — On ground in marsh or prairie.

Eggs. — Two or sometimes three, about 4 inches in length; light brownish
drab, rather sparsely marked, except at great end, with large irregular
spots of dull chocolate brown and lighter reddish brown, and other pale
obscure shell markings; shell rough.

Season. — Possibly this species formerly resided in Massachusetts through-
out the spring, summer and fall, but probably came here only irregu-
larly in the spring and fall migrations.

Range. — Formerly the greater part of North America, breeding from the
northern United States northward, is now found only in the interior
of the continent far from the shores of any ocean, sparsely and irreg-
ularly distributed; formerly migrated along the Atlantic seaboard, from
Florida to New England at least. It followed up the valley of the Hud-
son, and was common about the Great Lakes and from there to the fur
countries. It wintered in the southern States, from Florida to Texas
and Mexico, and still winters in some of them. It is now nearing
extinction.
478 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

History.

The Whooping Crane was named and described by Linné
in the eighteenth century.!. Previous to that time all three
American species were lumped together as Cranes.

Many of the narratives of the early voyagers and settlers
tell of Cranes migrating and nesting along the Atlantic coast.
During the first century after the discovery of the country,
Cranes evidently were more or less numerous all along this
coast, from Florida to New England, but the word has been
used so frequently to denote the larger Herons that one might
be inclined to place little faith in the statements of sailors and
colonists were it not for two facts: (1) In those days Cranes
were well known and conspicuous birds in England and other
countries of which these voyagers were natives, or which they
had visited, and undoubtedly they were familiar with these
birds, and could distinguish them from Herons. (2) In the
lists of birds given by these early adventurers Herons,
*Hearnes” and ‘‘ Hernshaws” or ‘‘ Heronshaws,” “ Bitterns ”
and ‘‘Egrets” or ‘“‘ Egrepes”’ are also referred to, showing
that they distinguished the Cranes from the Herons. The
common European Heron was a large species (resembling the
Great Blue Heron of America) which, at that time, was called
the Hernshaw, Hearneshaw or Heronshaw. It is often impos-
sible to determine which species of Crane was referred to in
these early narratives and lists of birds, as usually no descrip-
tion is given; but now and then we find a reference to a bird
that must have been the Whooping Crane. Since this bird is
now a bird of the interior, some of the evidence of its former
abundance on the Atlantic coast is here given.

The first unmistakable reference to the Whooping Crane is
made by Capt. Arthur Barlowe in describing a voyage to
America with Capt. Philip Amadas in 1584. They reached
Wokokon (one of the islands enclosing Pamlico Sound) in
July, and there climbed a hill. He says, ‘‘ having discharged
our harquebuz-shot, such a flocke of Cranes (the most part
white) arose under us, with such a cry redoubled by many

 

1 Syst. Nat., 1758, ed. 10, Vol. I, p. 142.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 479

 

echoes, as if an armie of men had showted all together.” !
These birds probably were breeding there, as otherwise they
would not have been there in such numbers at that season.
The great cry described could have been produced only by
Cranes.

Lawson (1709), in his History of Carolina, wrote that
Cranes “use the savannas, low ground and frogs;” and
that they “are above five feet high, when extended; are of a
cream color, and have a crimson spot on the crown of their
heads.” ? This description of the Whooping Crane is unmis-
takable. A hundred years later Wilson found the species in
South Carolina.

Latham (1775) says that the Whooping Crane appears at
the mouth of the Savannah, Aratamaha and other rivers in
spring, going north to breed, like the Common Crane.’

Wilson and Nuttall say that formerly it wintered near
Cape May, N. J. (probably about the last of the eighteenth
century), but its great size and conspicuous plumage made it
a tempting mark, and it was driven away.

Audubon says that in his time it seldom was seen in the
middle States and was unknown to the eastward of these
States, but Nuttall states that it was met with in almost every
part of North America.

Turnbull (1869) asserts that this Crane may be said to
have disappeared from east Pennsylvania and New Jersey, not
even a straggler having been seen for some years.

David Pieterszoon De Vries (1633-43), writing of the birds
in New Netherland, speaks of White Cranes and Gray Cranes.
These are given in a list of the birds which are found near the
entrance of the Hudson River and the Achter Col (‘‘ the, Back
Bay,” z.e.. Newark Bay), or in the vicinity of what is now
New York City and Newark.’ He tells also of white Herons
and gray ones, which shows that he distinguished them from
the Cranes.

 

1 Early English and French Voyages, 1534-1608, edited by H. 8. Burrage, 1906, p. 229.

2 Lawson, John: History of Carolina, 1860, p. 239.

3 Latham, J.: General History of Birds, 1821-24, Vol. IX, p. 44.

4 Turnbull, William P.: Birds of East Pennsylvania and New Jersey, 1869, p. 49.

5 Narratives of New Netherland, Am. Hist. Asso., edited by J, Franklin Jameson, 1909,
p. 221.
480 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

We have now traced the Whooping Crane along the
Atlantic Coast from the Carolinas to the borders of New
England.

W. Hubbard, in his General History of New England,
1610, gives Cranes among the birds of Long Island.!

In Roger Wolcott’s account of John Winthrop’s Agency,
1751-54, Cranes are given among the birds of Connecticut.?

William Wood of Massachusetts, writing of New England
in 1629-34, says: “ The Crane although hee bee almost as tall
as a man by reason of his long legges, and necke; yet is his
body rounder than other fowles, not much unlike the body of
a Turkie. I have seene many of these fowles, yet did I never
see one that was fat, I suppose it is contrary to their nature to
grow fat; Of these there be many in Summer, but none in
winter, their price is two shilling.” *

Unless Wood exaggerated he must have referred here to
the Whooping Crane, for that is the only bird in North
America that can be described as “ almost as tall as a man.”
The Whooping Crane stands about five feet high when
stretched to its full height, but being white it appears taller,
while the Sandhill Crane is not so conspicuous on account of its
color and does not appear so large. The Sandhill Crane
actually is smaller, but Wood probably referred to both species,
as they were confounded by early writers. Even Audubon and
Wilson considered both Cranes to be of one species, and re-
garded the Sandhill Crane as the young of the Whooping
Crane.

Morton (1632), who lived at Merrymount (Mount Wollas-
ton), near Boston, says: “‘ Cranes there are greate store, that
ever more came there at S. Davids Day [March 1], and not
before: that day they never would misse. These sometimes
eate our corne, and doe pay for their presumption well enough;
and serveth there in powther, with turnips, to supply the place
of powthered beefe, and is a goodly bird in a dishe and no dis-
commodity.” 4

 

1 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. VI, 2d ser., p. 672.

2 Ibid., Vol. IV, 1st ser., p. 270.

3 Wood, William: New England’s Prospect, Pub. Prince Soc., 1865, pp. 31, 32.
4 Morton, Thomas: New English Canaan, Pub. Prince Soc., 1883, p. 192.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED 481

 

Emmons, in his list of Massachusetts birds, published in
1833, marks the Whooping Crane as a rare but regular visit-
ant, breeding in this climate. In his list this is generally
taken to mean that the bird breeds in Massachusetts, and
possibly it may have bred here in earlier years, but there is no
reason to believe that it bred here at the time Emmons’s list
was made, although it then bred and has since summered in
several States to the westward. I am told by Mr. Ralph Hol-
man that an old hunter living near Worcester, Mass., claimed
to have killed a Whooping Crane in Worcester County in his
early youth, but as the bird was not preserved, and as all wit-
nesses are dead, it is impossible to investigate the statement.

De Kay (1844) includes it in his list of birds of New York,
but says that he never saw it in the State.’

Whether some of the Cranes that were found by the early
explorers along the coasts of Massachusetts and Maine were
of this species it is impossible now to determine definitely, but
Champlain (1615) found this species in the region about the
eastern part of Lake Ontario, for he says, “there are also
many cranes, white as swans.” ®

Dr. Thompson, in his Natural History of Vermont (1842),
says that this bird is known in Vermont only by being seen
occasionally during its migrations, but that it is common
in summer in the fur countries, where it breeds.4

Cranes were found about Hudson Bay by the early ex-
plorers, and this seems to indicate that their line of flight in
the east was from Hudson Bay to New England, and from
there down the Atlantic coast. The White Crane may never
have bred in Massachusetts and may never have existed in
the State in large numbers.

Dr. J. A. Allen, who has made a study of the history of
the birds of Massachusetts, says that this bird was “‘ perhaps”
formerly an inhabitant of the State. Whether or not it ever
bred here there can be no doubt that it passed through this
region in migration.

 

1 Hitchcock, Edward: Report on the Geology, Mineralogy, Botany and Zodlogy of Massachu-
setts, 1833, p. 549.

2 De Kay, James E.: Natural History of New York, Part I, Zodlogy, Ornithology, 1844, p. 218.

3 Champlain, Samuel de: Voyages, Pub. Prince Soc., 1882, Vol. III, p. 126.

4 Thompson, Zadock: History of Vermont, 1842, Part 1, p. 103.
482 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Probably there were few Cranes inhabiting Massachusetts
when the Pilgrim Fathers landed at Plymouth, except along
the coast, on the islands and on the meadows and marshes
of the river valleys, for most of the State was then covered
with primeval forest; and while Cranes are sometimes found
in open woods, they are shy and wary birds, and prefer the
open country, where they can discern their enemies from afar.

The statements of Wood and Morton probably refer to
both this species and the Sandhill Crane. Both would nat-
urally appear from the south in spring, but it is probable
that the Sandhill Crane was the one that remained in largest
numbers through the summer, for while the Whooping Crane
is known to have bred in this latitude in the western States,
it does not seem probable that it summered in any numbers
in a forested region like Massachusetts.

The fact that, as Morton states, they sometimes ate the
corn proves that they were actually Cranes, not Herons, and
also helps to explain their early disappearance from Massa-
chusetts. They paid with the death penalty for eating the
corn. Also, as these birds occupied the only natural open
lands, — those that were first sought by settlers, —they were
driven out within a few years after settlement began. Even
had they not attacked the corn they must soon have succumbed,
because of their large size, their white color and their general
conspicuousness. In the early days the Indians used to steal
upon the Cranes and shoot them with arrows. Now the few
survivors of this species in the west will hardly come know-
ingly within a mile of the white man.

Lawson says that Cranes are sometimes “ bred up tame,”
and are excellent in the garden to destroy frogs and other
vermin.!

This bird is long lived and grows wary as the years go by;
it now frequents prairies, marshes and barren grounds, over
which it stalks, always alert and watchful. It flies low, its
wings sometimes almost brushing the grass tops, but in migra-
tion it rises to such tremendous heights that it may pass over
a large region unnoticed by man. It feeds on frogs, fish, small

 

1 Lawson, John: History of Carolina, 1860, p. 239.
‘i

Me

\R

aN
NOAA
Ly)

\t
ANS

 

 

PLATE XXIl.—SANDHILL CRANE.

Formerly common in New England; now extirpated.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 483

 

mammals and insects, and is said to take corn and other
cereals and the succulent roots of water plants.

Nuttall, describing the flights of the Whooping Crane up
the Mississippi valley in December, 1811, says ‘“‘ that the
bustle of their great migrations and the passage of their
mighty armies fills the mind with wonder.” It seemed, he
says, as though the whole continent was giving up its quota
of the species to swell this mighty host, and the clangor of
their numerous legions, passing high in air, was almost deaf-
ening. His statement, that this great host of Cranes was
passing nearly all night, will give some idea of the immensity
of this great flight. What a change has come in a century!

The Whooping Crane is doomed to extinction. It has dis-
appeared from its former habitat in the east and is now found
only in uninhabited places. It can hardly be said to be com-
mon anywhere, except perhaps locally in the far north. Only
its extreme watchfulness has saved thus far the remnant of its
once great host.

SANDHILL CRANE (Grus mexicana).

Length. — 40 to 48 inches; wing, about 22; bill, 6.

Adult. — Bill compressed; top of head bare, with short, straggling black
hairs; primaries dark plumbeous brown; rest of plumage bluish gray;
cheeks, throat and chin sometimes whitish.

Nest. — On ground, made of grasses and weeds.

Eggs. — Two to four, drab brown with varied markings; average about 3.88
by 2.63. Closely resemble those of the Whooping Crane.

Season. — Formerly summer.

Range. —- Temperate North America; now rare or casual east of the Missis-
sippi, except in Florida; still common in the west and part of the south;
breeds in the wilder parts of its range in the north, also in Louisiana
and Florida.

History.

The Sandhill Crane, was described by Miiller (Natursyst.
Suppl., 1776, p. 110), and thus first became known to science
long after it had become well known to the American colonists.
Many of the Cranes found by the early explorers and settlers
all along the Atlantic seaboard were of this species.

Possibly it formerly bred locally along the Atlantic coast
from Florida to New England. It still breeds in Florida and
484 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

a few of the States of the middle west. In the far west its
place is taken by the Little Brown Crane.

The first mention of Cranes in Massachusetts territory is
found in the accounts of Gosnold’s voyage, written by Archer
and Brereton. Both mention Cranes and Herons among
the birds found with young, May 21, 1602, on an island
that they called Martha’s Vineyard, but which appears to
have been No Man’s Land, lying south of that island.1 Cape
Cod and the marshes along the Atlantic coast of Massachu-
setts also undoubtedly were frequented by Cranes, most of
which may have been of this species. Therefore Wood, who
lived at Saugus, and Morton, who lived at Quincy, had good
opportunities to see and shoot these birds.

There is presumptive evidence that Cranes bred in early
days as far eastward as the Maine coast. In Rosier’s narra-
tive (1605) it is written that Captain Waymouth visited St.
George’s Islands in May, and there found a place where fire
had been made; and about the place were very great egg
shells, larger than goose eggs, and other remnants of a feast.
These great eggs were probably Cranes’ eggs, for he says
again: “‘ Here we espied cranes stalking on the shore of a
little island adjoining, where we after saw they used to
breed.” ?

In the account of Captain Levett’s voyage in 1623, it is
stated that on the shores of the Saco River they “had plenty
of crane, goose, ducks and mallard, with other fowl, both
boiled and roasted.” *

This evidence, like all narratives of the early voyagers, is
unsatisfactory and indefinite in regard to species. Neverthe-
less, it is all that we have.

Undoubtedly the Sandhill Crane was extirpated from New
England long before it was driven out elsewhere, for it was
destroyed or driven away from the Atlantic coast very early
in the history of settlement.

The learned Professor Kalm, when at Swedesboro, N. J.,
writes that a Swede more than ninety years old assured him

 

1 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. VIII, 3d ser., pp. 76, 87.
2 Ibid., p. 138.
3 Coll. Me. Hist. Soc., 1847, Vol. II, p. 82.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. A85

 

that in his youth hundreds of Cranes came to that region
during the spring, while “now” (1748) “ they are very few.” 4
Again he says (1749): “‘ cranes (Ardea canadensis). were some-
times seen flying in the day-time, to the northward. They
commonly stop here early in spring, for a short time, but they
do not make their nests here, for they proceed on more to the
north. Certain old Swedes told me, that in their younger
years, as the country was not yet much cultivated, an incred-
ible number of cranes were here every spring, but at present
they are not so numerous.” 2 The time to which he refers
when the Cranes were found in incredible numbers must have
been in the latter half of the seventeenth century, soon after
the settlement of the country.

C. Lowell, writing of the. birds of Lancaster, N. H. (1814),
mentions the Crane (Ardea canadensis), which was the name
then given to this species, among the birds found in the town
at that time. As he also lists Herons, it is quite probable
that his statement is based on fact.’

The most recent record of the occurrence of this bird in
New England is at Lovell’s Pond, Wakefield, N. H., where,
according to Brewster, a specimen was obtained in 1896 or
1897, and is now preserved in the State Agricultural College
collection at Durham.’

I well remember when, in my boyhood, on an expedition
to Florida, I first heard the raucous, resounding note of the
Sandhill Crane. It filled the spaces of the piney woods with
its hollow reverberations as the great birds sprang up beyond
gunshot and flapped slowly away. This species ordinarily
flies low, but in the west in the nesting season they may be
seen flying and sailing in wide circles high in the air, until lost:
to view, where, even at that great height, their powerful, pene-
trating cries still fall clear, but mellowed by distance, to the
listening ear.

In the mating season these birds assemble in some open
spot, where they hold their dances and indulge in various

 

1 Kalm, Peter: Travels in North America, 1770, Vol. I, p. 290.

2 Ibid., Vol. II, p. 72.

4 Coll. Mass. Hist. Soc., Vol. III, 2d ser., p. 101.

+ Allen, Glover M.: List of the Birds of New Hampshire, 1903, pp. 82, 83.
486 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

antics for hours at a time. The Whooping Crane has similar
habits.

In Florida the nest usually is placed in the wet margin of a
shallow grassy pond or in some savanna; but in the west it is
sometimes built on the dry prairie. Before many weeks the
young became such rapid runners that they will give one quite
a chase to catch them, and it requires fast work to run down
a broken-winged adult bird.

As an article of food no doubt the Sandhill Crane is very
palatable if taken young, but my only experience of its gastro-
nomic qualities was with an old bird, and I should have to be
nearer starvation than I then was to repeat the experiment.
This bird lives to a great age, and when old it is about as
tough and stringy as an old Swan. If taken young it becomes
very tame, and it is capable of defending itself against dogs,
cats, foxes and other mammals. Dr. Hatch had one which,
he asserts, repelled the attacks of the largest and most vicious
dogs.

The bird when feeding keeps its head down for but a short
period, and then, raising it high, sweeps the country with its
wary eye. When the head is raised the hunter must be well
concealed to avoid discovery.

Dr. Hatch writes that a young bird of this species which
he kept in confinement swallowed almost anything that it
could get hold of. All sorts of hard articles that had been
picked up were afterwards regurgitated with the indigestible
portions of the food.’

This species usually swallows its food whole. Fish, frogs,
snakes, shell-fish, field mice and other small mammals, birds
and even eggs make up a portion of its animal food.

My friend Mr. William S. Perry of Worcester, flushed a
Sandhill Crane from its nest on the Kankakee marshes and
shot the bird. He found two large lumps in its gullet, and on
opening it he found three eggs of the Sora Rail intact. The
shell of the first was bright and glossy; the next was some-
what faded, and the shell of the third, which was nearest the
stomach, had lost its smooth coating and some of its mark-

 

1 Hatch, P. L.: Notes on the Birds of Minnesota, 1892, p. 100.
 

 
  

 
   

 

 

 

    

 
 
 

 

 

 

  
        

Le Sages

gE

 

  

Les

 

 

 
 

gs

PLATE XXIIl.—WILD TURKEY.
Once abundant in New England; now extirpated from the Northern States and Canada.

 

op

oe
ee

 

Es

 

 

  
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 487

 

ings, apparently through the action of the digestive juices.
The stomach was full, which prevented the eggs from passing
down, but the first egg may have been attacked by the digest-
ive juices in the gullet or oesophagus.

Probably the only safe method by which this long-billed
bird could secure the entire egg contents was that of swallow-
ing the eggs whole. Mr. Perry showed me the neck and head
of this Crane, and the three eggs taken therefrom. He said
that Rails were very numerous in the marsh, and all marsh
animals fed upon them. .

The vegetable food of the Sandhill Crane includes corn,
potatoes and sweet potatoes. The destruction of these farm
crops is one indirect cause for the disappearance of the bird
from inhabited regions. It falls before the rifle of the farmer
and hunter, and is shot from blinds as it flies over the prairies.
It is killed at all seasons, and, like the Whooping Crane, it
probably is doomed. to extinction.

Note.— The Little Brown Crane (Grus canadensis) is a western
species which probably never was more than casual here. The only
record of its occurrence in New England is recorded by Brewster in The
Auk. It was taken on the 8th or 9th of October by Mr. Benjamin Bur-
lingame at Natick Hill, R. I., and was preserved for an educational col-
lection in Natick. Mr. Brewster says, in recording it: “As far as I am
aware this species has never previously been reported from any part of
New England, although the Whooping and Sandhill Cranes are supposed
to have occurred rather numerously in the early colonial days.” This
instance merely illustrates how large birds with great powers of flight
sometimes wander far from their normal range.

WILD TURKEY (Meleagris gallopavo silvestris).

Length. — 48 inches; wing, 21; tail, 9.

Adult Male. — Body plumage generally brilliant, metallic bronze, with
gold, green and red reflections; each feather tipped with a black band;
wings black and bronze green; quills white-barred; rump black, with
dark purple, metallic gloss; upper tail coverts chestnut, with metallic
red reflections; tail chestnut, black-barred, tipped with a deep buff
band and a subterminal black band; head and neck naked, red and
variegated; a bunch of coarse bristles suspended from center of breast.

 

1 Auk, 1890, Vol. VII, p. 89.
488 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Female. — Smaller and duller, with little of the brilliant reflections of the
male.

Nest. — On ground, usually under a log or bush.

Eggs. — Creamy white, finely spotted with light brown.

Notes. — Similar to those of domesticated Turkey.

Season. — Formerly resident entire year.

Range. — Formerly eastern United States and southern Ontario, mainly
in forested areas, except in Florida, where its place is taken by another
race, Meleagris gallopavo osceola (now confined to southern Florida).
Now extinct in Canada and most of the northern States, and decreasing
in the south and west.

History.

The Wild Turkey of eastern North America should not
be confounded with a Mexican species (Meleagris gallopavo
gallopavo), which was the progenitor of the domesticated
Turkey. The Mexican Turkey was domesticated first by the
Aztecs, and later was introduced into Europe by their Spanish
conquerors. The Mexican Turkey is a fine bird, but the white
spot on its rump rather detracts from its beauty. These white-
tipped feathers of the rump and tail coverts usually occur in the
domesticated birds of this species, and serve to distinguish
them from the Wild Turkey of the United States.

The discoverers and early explorers of North America
found this bird ranging almost the entire length of the
Atlantic coast line, from Florida to Maine, where it roved
in great flocks, and often migrated in multitudes in search of
food. It seems to have been particularly numerous in Massa-
chusetts and New England. The first settlers found it a vital
asset of the land and a substantial source of food supply.

Champlain (1604) says that the Indians of the Massachu-
setts coast described a large bird that came to eat their corn.
From their description he judged it to be a Turkey.! He
landed on Cape Cod, and as the Cape was then well wooded,
it doubtless was inhabited by this bird.

Capt. John Smith in 1622 reports “‘great flocks of turkies”
in New England.

Thomas Morton (1632, Massachusetts) says: “Turkies

 

1 Champlain, Samuel de: Voyages, Pub. Prince Soc., 1878, Vol. II, p. 88.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 489

 

there are, which divers times in great flocks have sallied by
our doores; and then a gunne, being commonly in a redi-
nesse, salutes them with such a courtesie, as makes them take
a turne in the Cooke roome. They daunce by the doore so
well.””! He asked his Indians what number they found in the
woods, and they answered ‘“‘neent metawna,” more than they
could count, which Morton interprets as “a thousand that
day.”

William Wood (1629-34, Massachusetts) writes: ‘the
Turky is a very large Bird, of a blacke colour, yet white
in flesh; much bigger than our English Turky. He hath the
use of his long legs so ready, that he can runne as fast as a
Dogge, and flye as well as a Goose: of these sometimes there
will be forty, threescore, and a hundred of a flocke, sometimes
more and sometimes lesse; their feeding is Acornes, Hawes,
and Berries, some of them get a haunt to frequent our English
corne: In winter when the Snow covers the ground, they
resort to the Sea shore to look for Shrimps, & such smal
Fishes at low tides. Such as love Turkie hunting, must
follow it in winter after a new falne Snow, when hee may
follow them by their tracts; some have killed ten or a dozen
in halfe a day; if they can be found towards an evening and
watched where they peirch, if one come about ten or eleaven
of the clocke he may shoote as often as he will, they will sit,
unlesse they be slenderly wounded. These Turkies remaine
all the yeare long, the price of a good Turkie cocke is foure
shillings; and he is well worth it, for he may be in weight
forty pound.”’?

Several Massachusetts town histories refer to the Turkey.
Many hills and small streams of the Commonwealth have
received their names from the Turkeys which once frequented
them. We can form little idea to-day of the almost incredible
abundance of these noble birds.

Lawson (1709) states that he has seen about five hundred
in a flock.®

 

1 Morton, Thomas: New English Canaan, Pub. Prince Soc., 1883, p. 192.
2 Wood, William: New England’s Prospect, Pub. Prince Soc., 1865, p. 32.
3 Lawson, John: History of Carolina, 1860, p. 244.
490 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Dr. Lewis (1855) says that in former times they wandered
in vast armies from one end of our country to the other; but
even in his day scarce one was to be found on the whole
northern Atlantic sea-coast.?

In the west it was still numerous, however, for some time
after the transcontinental railroads were built, and Col. W. F.
Cody (Buffalo Bill), who acted as a scout for the United States
army, speaks of a grand Turkey round-up, in which two or
three hundred soldiers surrounded a grove of timber, where
they killed, with guns, clubs and stones, from four hundred
to five hundred of these birds.?

““Nessmuk”’ writes that on a long tramp in the woods of
Michigan, which must have occurred some time during the
middle of the last century, he met with droves of Wild
Turkeys, and on one occasion saw a great army of these birds
extending through the woods as far as he could see in front
and on both sides.?

From these comparatively recent experiences in the west
we may get some idea of the number of Turkeys that once
lived in our Massachusetts woods. Turkeys were shot and
trapped at all seasons.

Beverly (1720) writes: “they have many pretty devices
besides the gun to take wild turkeys; and among others, a
friend of mine invented a great trap, wherein he at times
caught many turkeys and particularly seventeen at one time.”’!

Shooting and trapping the birds at all times soon had its
inevitable effect, and the Turkey retired rapidly before the
advance of settlement, and soon it could be found only in the
wildest parts of the country.

Josselyn (1672, Massachusetts) says: “‘I have also seen
threescore broods of young Turkies on the side of a marsh,
sunning of themselves in a morning betimes, but this was
thirty years since, the English and the Indians having now
destroyed the breed, so that ’tis very rare to meet with a wild
Turkie in the Woods.”’®

1 Lewis, Elisha J.: The American Sportsman, 1855, pp. 120, 121.
2 Huntington, Dwight W.: Our Feathered Game, 1893, p. 47.
3 Sears, George W. (Nessmuk): Woodcraft, 1891, pp. 124, 125.

4 Beverly, Robert: History of Virginia, 1855, p. 256.
5 Josselyn, John: New England’s Rarities, 1865, p. 42.

 
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 49]

 

In Massachusetts Turkeys were most numerous in the oak
and chestnut woods, for there they found most food. They
were so plentiful in the hills bordering the Connecticut valley
that in 1711 they were sold in Hartford at. one shilling four
pence each, and in 1717 they were sold in Northampton,
Mass., at the same price. From 1730 to 1735 the price of
those dressed was in Northampton about one and one-half
penny per pound. After 1766 the price was two and one-
half pence, and in 1788, three pence. A few years after 1800
it was four pence to six pence a pound, and about 1820, when
the birds had greatly decreased, the price per pound was from
ten to twelve and one-half cents.

In the last part of the eighteenth century most of the Wild
Turkeys had been driven west of the Connecticut River, but
there were still a good many in the Berkshire Hills and along
the Connecticut valley on both sides of the river.

Belknap (1792) says ‘“‘they are now retired to the inland
mountainous country.”! In Connecticut in 1813 the last
recorded bird was seen, and a few were still left in Vermont in
1842.2

De Kay (1844) wrote that the Turkey had disappeared
almost entirely from the Atlantic States, but that a few were
still to be found about Mt. Holyoke in Massachusetts, and in
Sussex County, N. J., as well as in some of the mountainous
parts of New York.’

Brewster states in his Birds of the Cambridge Region, that
the Wild Turkey was not exterminated in Concord, Mass.,
only twenty miles from Boston, until after the beginning of
the nineteenth century.

Emmons (1833) gives the Wild Turkey in his list as a rare
resident in Massachusetts, ““now become scarce and nearly
extinct;”’ but in a footnote Dr. Hitchcock states that the bird
is frequently met with on Mt. Holyoke.‘

It generally is believed that the last specimen actually

 

1 Belknap, Jeremy: History of New Hampshire, 1792, Vol. IIT, p. 170.

2 Chamberlain, Montague: Handbook of Ornithology, United States and Canada, 1891, Vol. II,
p. 21,

3 De Kay, James E.: New York Fauna, 1844, Part II, p. 200.

4 Hitchcock, Edward: Report of the Geology, Mineralogy, Botany and Zodlogy of Massachu-
setts, 1835, p. 531.
492 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

known to have been captured in Massachusetts was shot on
Mt. Tom in the winter of 1850-51.}

Thompson (1842) states that the Turkey had then become
exceedingly rare in all parts of New England, but that it still
bred on the mountains in the southern part of Vermont.?

Wild Turkeys are believed to have existed on Mt. Tom and
Mt. Holyoke longer than anywhere else in Massachusetts.
There was a flock on Mt. Tom in 1842, a few in 1845 and a
single Turkey in 1851. Some remained on Mt. Holyoke nearly
as long.®

In the History of the Sesqui-Centennial Celebration of
South Hadley, the statement is made that a few Turkeys
were left on Mt. Holyoke later than 1851. It is said that a
year or two before the outbreak of the Civil War a party of
hunters from Springfield and Holyoke went to Rock Ferry,
and there divided, a part ascending the north peak of Mt.
Tom and the others crossing the river to Mt. Holyoke, north
and east of the well-known roosting place of the birds. The
latter party beat the woods and drove the few surviving Turkeys
to the southerly end of the mountain, whence they took flight
for Mt. Tom, but before the poor creatures could alight, the
guns of the ambushed hunters had exterminated them.

Wild Turkeys were reported on Mt. Holyoke in 1863, when
one was said to have been killed by a hunting party. Dr.
T. M. Brewer says that some were shot at Montague and other
towns in Franklin County a few years before 1874,* but Mr.
Robert O. Morris believes that these later Turkeys had escaped
from domestication, and that the last of the native wild birds
was that recorded as killed in 1851. The (supposed) last New
England specimen now preserved, taken on Mt. Tom or Mt.
Holyoke, is in the Peabody Museum at New Haven.

Since then the Wild Turkey has disappeared from Canada
and from the Atlantic seaboard, although a few are still to be
found in Virginia and other southern States, and it is still
common in some western localities.

 

1 Howe, Reginald Heber, and Allen, Glover Morrill: Birds of Massachusetts, 1901, p. 132.
2 Thompson, Zadock: History of Vermont, 1842, p. 101.

3 Judd, Sylvester: History of Hadley, 1863, p. 358.

4 Baird, Brewer and Ridgway: North American Land Birds, 1905, Vol. III, p. 405.
SPECIES EXTINCT OR EXTIRPATED. 493

 

The habits of this Turkey have been well described by
Audubon, and no extended notice of them is necessary.
Although it is a bird of the woods, where it roosts high in the
tall timber, in the deep fastnesses of which it hides, it likes
to come out in the open and search in the tall grass of field,
meadow or prairie for insects of which it is fond. When
discovered in such a situation it usually tries to steal away
through the long grass; if followed it runs rapidly, and if
closely pressed rises and flies, often a long distance, generally
making for timber if possible, where it disappears like magic
in the thickets. I well remember when I started my first old
gobbler from the long prairie grass. The rising sun at my
back was just throwing its level beams across the grassy sea
as I emerged from the timber, between the bird and its retreat.
At the sound of my gun the great bird rose resplendent from
the grass, gorgeous with metallic reflections, its broad wings
throwing off the sun rays like polished bronze and gold, —a
sight, as it sailed away, to be long remembered.

At early morning the Turkey leaves its roost and often
-hunts about in the “scrub.” The gunner who knows its
habits arrives at its haunts before daybreak, and, taking his
place quietly, remains immovable, awaiting his opportunity,
which often comes before sunrise. Turkey hunters conceal
themselves in trees in the mating season and imitate the note
of the hen Turkey by drawing the breath through a “call”
made from a wing bone of the bird. As the males are polyg-
amous this call is calculated to attract them to their doom.
This is a destructive method which should have been pro-
hibited long since, as well as all killing of the bird in the
breeding season, when the males are thin in flesh and hardly
fit for food. Formerly the Turkey was one of the most unsus-
picious of birds, and would sit on the trees and gaze at the
hunter. Now it is one of the wildest of all the wild things of
the woods.

In the mating season the males strut, gobble and fight in
the manner of the domestic Turkey. The female steals away
by herself to make her nest, and guards her secret carefully
from her many enemies, of which the male is not the least, for
494 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

he will destroy the eggs or the young birds if he finds them.
The young are very weak when first hatched and will hardly
survive a good wetting; Audubon says that when the young
have become chilled and ill the female feeds them the buds of
the spicebush (Benzoin benzoin); but, however she manages,
she often succeeds in rearing the brood. The fox and lynx are
among her most dangerous enemies at this time, but later,
when the young birds have learned to fly and to roost in the
trees, the Great Horned Owl takes its toll from their numbers.

The Wild Turkey adapts itself to circumstances in regard
to food, eating acorns, berries, buds, weed seeds, grass seeds
and other vegetable food. It is aiso fond of grain, and
this no doubt led to its extirpation in Massachusetts. The
gunners watched in the cornfields, or laid Jong lines of corn in
ditches, where they could rake the whole flock, or baited the
birds into pens, in which whole broods were captured. But
the birds, both young and old, often are useful to the farmer,
for they are very fond of insects, particularly grasshoppers.
Dr. Judd makes an excellent contribution to the literature on
the food habits of the Wild Turkey, including an examination
of sixteen stomachs and crops of Turkeys, made by the Biolog-
ical Survey. These contained 15.57 per cent. of animal mat-
ter and 84.43 per cent. of vegetable matter. The animal
food comprises insects, 15.15 per cent.; miscellaneous inver-
tebrates (spiders, snails and myriapods), .42 per cent. Of
the animal food, 13.92 per cent. consisted of grasshoppers.
Beetles, flies, caterpillars and other insects made up the
residue of 1.23 per cent. The list of animal and vegetable
food as given by Dr. Judd is favorable to the Turkey, as it
contains insect pests, wild berries and no vegetable food of
value to mankind.

The varied food of this bird gives it the finest flavor of
any fowl that I have ever tasted, and its great size and beauty
contribute to make it, to my mind, the noblest game bird in
the world. It is destined to vanish forever from the earth
unless our people begin at. once to protect it.

 

1 Judd, Sylvester D.: The Grouse and Wild Turkeys of the United States and their Economic
Value, Bulletin 24, Bureau of Biol. Surv., U. S. Dept. of Agr., pp. 49, 50.
 

 

PART III.

THE CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS, WILD-
FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

 
 

 

 

 

PLATE XXIV.— PROPAGATION.

A pair of Bob-whites as kept in a breeding cage by Prof. C. F. Hodge.
(Photograph by the Author.)

 

 
        

Ten

 

 

 

PLATE XXV.— PROTECTION.

This photograph, taken at Palm Beach, Lake Worth, Fla., shows how wiid-
fowl respond to perpetual protection. The Ducks shown are Scaups,
commonly known as Bluebills or Creek Broad-bills. (From Bird-Lore.)
PART III.

CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS.

THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND
SHORE BIRDS.

Game is one of the natural resources of the State. When
the game is exterminated a valuable asset is lost. When
game is conserved it increases the material wealth of the
State, gives value to waste lands, adds to the worth of farm
lands, attracts sportsmen to the State and gives employment
to many people.

An abundance of game birds is necessary to the prosperity
of many great business interests. A very large part of the
business of the gun makers and ammunition manufacturers
depends on keeping up a supply of game birds. Makers of
other sporting goods and clothing, breeders and trainers of
dogs, manufacturers of boats, country hotel keepers, guides,
marketmen, and a host of others, are dependent upon sports-
men or game for a part of their livelihood.

The economic value of game birds on the farm is so con-
siderable that it is well worthy the attention of all farmers
and owners of large tracts of land. The Bob-white ranks high
among the most valuable destroyers of insects and weeds (see
page 373). The Heath Hen, the Prairie Chicken, the Upland
Plover and the Killdeer Plover, all of which formerly were
common in many regions from which they since have been
extirpated, or nearly so, rank almost equally high as destroyers
of the insects of farm or field. A plentiful supply of such
birds would free the fields of many insect pests. Birds also
might be made to pay the taxes on the land. It is possible
now for any farmer or association of farmers owning or con-
trolling a large tract of land where game birds are plentiful
498 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

to let the shooting privileges on the property for a sum equal
at least to the amount of the taxes; and the lessees, while. pay-
ing for the shooting privileges, will see to it that the supply of
game is kept up.

A succession of game birds rearing their young in the woods
and fields is a perennial delight to the eye, and the good they
do in destroying pests far exceeds any injury that they ordi-
narily cause to the crops.

The Woodcock, Snipe and Upland Plover are commonly
included among game birds, but they are no better food than
some other closely related species among the shore birds. The
Sandpipers, Snipe and Plover all may be reckoned among the
useful species. Most of those known to feed about marshes
and pools probably destroy the young or larve of mosquitoes.
Mr. W. L. McAtee, in a recent bulletin entitled Our Vanishing
Shorebirds, published by the Bureau of Biological Survey,
lists the Northern Phalarope, Wilson’s Phalarope, the Stilt,
Pectoral, Baird’s, Least and Semipalmated Sandpipers, the
Killdeer and the Semipalmated Plover among the birds now
known to eat mosquitoes. Fifty-three per cent. of the food
of twenty-eight Northern Phalaropes consisted of mosquito
larve. The salt-marsh mosquito (Aides sollicitans) is eaten
commonly by shore birds. The State of New Jersey, where,
as elsewhere, gunning has decreased the numbers of shore birds,
recently has gone to great expense for the suppression of the
salt-marsh mosquito.

The following passages from Mr. McAtee’s paper will
give some idea of the value of the shore birds as insect eaters: —

“Cattle and other live stock also are seriously molested
by mosquitoes as well as by another set of pests, the horse-
flies. Adults and larve of these flies have been found in the
stomachs of the dowitcher, the pectoral sandpiper, the Hud-
sonian godwit and the killdeer. Two species of shorebirds,
the killdeer and upland plover, still further befriend cattle
by devouring the North American fever tick.

** Among other fly larvee consumed are those of the crane
flies (leatherjackets) devoured by the following species: north-
ern phalarope (Lobipes lobatus); Wilson phalarope (Steganopus
-CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 499

 

tricolor); woodcock (Philohela minor); jacksnipe (Gallinago
delicata); pectoral .sandpiper (Pisobia maculata); Baird sand-
piper (Pisobia bairdi); upland plover (Bartramia longicauda) ;
killdeer (Oxyechus vociferus). Crane-fly larvee are frequently
seriously destructive locally in grass lands and wheat fields.
Among their numerous bird enemies, shorebirds rank high.

‘Another group of insects of which the shorebirds are very
fond is grasshoppers. Severe local infestations of grasshoppers,
frequently involving the destruction of many acres of corn,
cotton, and other crops, are by no means exceptional. Aughey
found 23 species of shorebirds feeding on Rocky Mountain
locusts in Nebraska, some of them consuming large numbers,
as shown below: 9 killdeer stomachs contained an average of
28 locusts each; 11 semipalmated plover stomachs contained
an average of 38 locusts each; 16 mountain plover stomachs
contained an average of 45 locusts each; 11 jacksnipe stom-
achs contained an average of 37 locusts each; 22 upland
plover stomachs contained an average of 36 locusts each;
10 long-billed curlew stomachs contained an average of 48
locusts each.”

Nearly all shore birds are fond of grasshoppers and many
species feed also on weevils, wireworms, leaf beetles and other
pests of the fields. Along the shores large numbers of the
marine worms which prey upon oysters are eaten by shore
birds. Mr. McAtee says that commonly from one hundred to
two hundred of these worms are eaten at a meal. We have
been devoting too much of our time to shooting shore birds
and not enough to protecting them.

The economic value of wild-fowl is as great as that of game
birds. The term wild-fowl may include all wild birds, but
as commonly used it denotes merely water-fowl which are
hunted for food or sport. Wild-fowl were very important as
a source of food supply during the settlement of this country,
and later, when markets for game were opened, they became
a valuable asset to the people, and yielded vast sums annually
to settlers, hunters and marketmen. Even to-day, in parts of
the west and south where the sale of game is still legal, the
sums annually received by hunters from the marketing of
500 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

wild-fowl are very large. Mr. Frank M. Miller, chairman of
the Fish and Game Commission of Louisiana, estimates that
two and one-half million wild-fowl were killed in that State
in the season of 1908-09. His estimate is based on the reports
of gunners and game wardens, with a very liberal allowance
for exaggeration. Had the wild-fowl of this country been con-
served, they might have yielded a perpetual annual product
worth many millions of dollars.

In the older parts of the country, where wild-fowl are now
much diminished in numbers as compared with their former
abundance, much of their economic value to the inhabitants
consists in their attraction for sportsmen. Massachusetts
sportsmen frequently have asserted that in the pursuit of
Ducks and Geese they spend from five dollars to twenty-five
dollars for every bird they kill, and were wild-fowl numerous
throughout New England, large sums would be distributed
annually by sportsmen to hotels, boatmen, farmers and guides,
and the business of country merchants would be increased.
Many species of wild-fowl, if properly conserved, would do
good service to agricultural communities by destroying insects
and weed seeds.

Loons are not beneficial in this respect. They are believed
to feed mainly on fish and other aquatic animals, and there-
fore some people have regarded them as injurious to food fish.
No thorough study of their food has been made; but it seems
probable that they are beneficial rather than injurious to
game fish. They feed on the natural enemies of the fish as
well as on the fish themselves and thereby keep a healthful
balance among the forms of aquatic life, and help to maintain
rather than to decrease the numbers of food fish useful to man-
kind. The Mergansers or Sheldrakes, as they are commonly
called, evidently perform a similar office. The Scoters, or so-
called “‘Coots,” are regarded by some short-sighted persons
as detrimental to the shell-fisheries, because these birds are
known to eat edible shell-fish; but they devour also some of
the most destructive enemies of these shell-fish. The chief
utility of the Scoters and Old-squaws lies in their ability to
dive in deep water and feed on various forms of marine life,
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 501

 

thus assisting other forces to maintain the biologic balance
in the waters of bays, estuaries and lakes.

Dr. George W. Field, chairman of the Massachusetts
Commission on Fisheries and Game, informs me that mussels,
which are the principal food of Scoters, or ‘“‘Coots,’”’ and
Eiders, are among the chief enemies of the common clam.
They occupy clam flats to the exclusion of the clams, and
are difficult to eradicate. The Scoters feed on starfish also,
and Dr. Field says that they destroy the oyster drill (Uro-
salpinz cinerea). The starfish and the drill are the most de-
structive enemies of the oyster and the scallop, and are dreaded
by the oyster growers. Dr. Field declares that these animals
are certainly a hundred times as destructive to the oyster and
scallop industries as are all species of water-fowl combined.

While the Scoters feed on sea clams (Mactra solidissima),
quahaugs (Venus mercenaria) and scallops (Pecten irradians),
they take only the young or very small shell-fish,t and Dr.
Field states his belief that, other things being equal, these
birds select mainly those places where such shell-fish are most
abundant. Young shell-fish in their beds are so crowded that
were they not thinned out many would die from overcrowding
or lack of food. Dr. Field states that he has found young
clams set as thickly as two thousand to the square foot. In
such cases the removal of all but a dozen or twenty to the square
foot will be succeeded usually by a rapid increase in growth.
Thus the thinning done by the birds saves shell-fish from the
evils of overcrowding, and benefits the shell-fish industry
by inducing a quicker and better growth of the marketable
product. It seems probable that these birds are essential to
the success of the shell-fisheries, and that any serious reduction
in their numbers would be detrimental to the industry.

River Ducks require a large quantity of animal food in
spring, and devour such destructive insects as army worms,
cutworms, marsh caterpillars, grasshoppers and_ locusts.
Aughey in his report on Locust-feeding Birds, made to the
United States Entomological Commission in 1877, gives the

 

1 A small bivalve commonly eaten by these birds is very similar to the quahaug and usually is
mistaken for it. This is Gemma gemma, a favorite food of the Black Duck, which never grows
toa marketable size.
502 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

following notes on the stomach contents of wild-fowl: Ten
Mallard stomachs contained an average of twenty-two locusts
and twenty other insects each; seven Pintail stomachs con-
tained an average of eleven locusts and thirty-four other in-
sects each; nine Green-winged Teal stomachs contained an
average of four locusts and forty-eight other insects each;
nine Wood Duck stomachs contained an average of fifteen
locusts and twenty-three other insects each; four Buffle-
head stomachs contained an average of ten locusts and forty-
four other insects each. All these Ducks had eaten also some
seeds and mollusks, but had not disturbed the farmers’ crops.

The chief value of the wild-fowl to the people, however,
is not to be found in the place that they occupy on our tables,
nor in the sport that they afford. Even their utility to the
farmer is secondary to their esthetic value, which serves as an
added attraction to any country. Their beauty and grace,
their stirring calls and lively ways, their swift and winnowing
flight make the land that they inhabit a more interesting place
to live in. Game birds of all kinds have a very high educational
value. As objects of observation and study with field glass or
telescope they are of far greater service to the majority of
outdoor people, and to those who seek needed recreation in
the country, than they are to the gunner, the marketman or
the sportsman. Those who love nature for her own sake, who
take delight in the living bird, whose ears are attuned to
resonant cry and whistling wing, who have that quality of
mind which sees more value and more profit in the bird alive
in its native element than in the bloody and bedraggled carcass
hanging in the butcher’s stall, must see to it that these birds
are conserved.

Americans are turning to the country life. It is the life
to which we as a people must resort to maintain and increase
the vigor and virility of the nation. Our lakes and rivers have
now lost much of their former attractiveness. It will never
be fully regained until, as of old, they are again frequented by
flocks of beautiful and lively water-fowl. The great army
of outdoor people that is constantly recruiting — an army
destined soon to far out-number all others interested in
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 503

 

birds — will hold our wild-fowl at a greater value in the coming
age, and we may look forward confidently to the day when
again, as of yore, Americans will see our lakes and rivers re-
populated by their happy feathered inhabitants. Some, per-
haps, will be missing, — exterminated in our day, — but the
intelligent, educated people of our race will come in time to
see the folly of exterminating these useful birds for the profit
of the few. They will appreciate the many advantages of con-
serving them for the benefit of all mankind.

THE DECREASE OF GAME BIRDS IN MASSACHUSETTS.

The need of conserving the present supply of game birds,
wild-fowl and shore birds on the Atlantic seaboard, is indicated
by the following table, in which the results of my inquiries
regarding the decrease of such birds in Massachusetts are set
down, so far as they can be expressed in figures. The manner
in which the reports were obtained from which these figures
were taken is related on pages 33 and 34.

It should be noted that this table refers only to Massachu-
setts, and that, as stated on page 34, it represents an average
period of twenty-seven years and three months prior to the
year 1909. The number of years of experience credited to
these observers may be averaged in another way, closely
approximating the following tabulation: —

9 observers have had about 5 years’ experience.
27 observers have had about 10 years’ experience.
35 observers have had about 15 years’ experience.
48 observers have had about 20 years’ experience.
40 observers have had about 25 years’ experience.
41 observers have had about 30 years’ experience.
22 observers have had about 35 years’ experience.
23 observers have had about 40 years’ experience.
19 observers have had about 45 years’ experience.
19 observers have had about 50 years’ experience.

3 observers have had about 55 years’ experience.

4 observers have had about 60 years’ experience.

Two hundred and fifty-four of these observers have had
from fifteen to sixty years’ experience in the field. Most of
504 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

them are gunners, of whom a fair proportion might also be
ranked as ornithologists, and the list includes some of the
principal ornithologists of Massachusetts.

Table indicating the Decrease of Certain Game Birds, Wild-fowl and Shore
Birds in Massachusetts.

[Average time of observation, 27 years, 3 months.]

 

 

 

yg ize]¢ [ez las] ¢ | gel a | be
eelese| ef | gelase| £2 | 23] 28] 28
en gee Es a ee a> Br ae Ba
Merganser, . 10 6 5615 39 23 5338 24 16 194
Red-breasted Merganser, . 15 i 4416 34 25 475% 30 25 188
Hooded Merganser, 10 5 5528 31 16 4746 20 21 195
Mallard, 17 13 33% 63 39 6335 18 37 100
Black Duck, 40 22 411041] 126 95 41% 4 33 175
Breeding Black Duck, QT 13 33 83 52 574% 10
Baldpate, . i 9 7 3644 34 25 655% 9 15 217
Green-winged Teal, ' 6 1 30 7 46 651%, 7 27 172
Blue-winged Teal, fi 8 3 3314 100 71 651 9 21 148
Pintail, ‘ 6 3 1344 30 21 7456 7 21 223
Wood Duck, ‘ 13 3 3715 104 61 75 7 118
Redhead, c 15 6 55% 34 15 5528 10 35 202
Scaup, ; 16 8 8816 43 27 6258 22 11 207
Lesser Scaup, 2 5 1 100 27 16 6315 14 6 241
Golden-eye, k 10 8 50 62 43 302% 39 9 163
Buffie-head, 7 3 3636 53 36 6728 11 23 197
Old-squaw, # 11 9 241 47 33 5084 40 4 292
American Eider, 2 1 10 37 19 6356 24 5 223
Scoter, 7 2 17% 43 27 61 36 9 204
White-winged Scoter, 12 5 535% 52 35 535% 47 3 184
Surf Scoter, 11 4 476 46 30 49 42 7 191
Ruddy Duck, 9 6 181% 55 35 5956 11 10 214
Canada Goose, 19 9 4586 81 52 583438 35 8 128
Brant, cs . eg ‘ 15 6 37 41 29 58 15 il 163
Virginia Rail, 4 2 38 30 14 435% ll 11 221
Sora Rail, ‘ 5 3 50 40 26 4784 9 12 217
Coot, E 10 6 25 67 40 7136 28 23 165

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 505

 

Table indicating the Decrease of Certain Game Birds, Wild-fowl and Shore
Birds in Massachusetts — Concluded.

 

 

 

S lee || # |8h ) 3 | Sele | ba
Slee ele leo les |) Belts ae
2 igs | 5 | 8/82 | s | 82] B | Ba
eilscal ‘sa | se lséel Se | 2 ee/ 22
aless| €2 | Exlese| €2 | 23| 28] 2
en gas a= on his ze on on 38
Woodcock (breeding), 35 19 291g 150 98 5935 28 50
Woodcock (flight), 27 14 3946 136 92 52% 25 63
Wilson’s Snipe, . 9 3 1843 109 67 63104;; 18 36 120
Dowitcher, 2 61 37 69 5 11 210
Knot, 5 2 17% 40 20 675% 4 8 223
Purple Sandpiper, 4 1 | 25 a | 12 | 87% 2 7 | 24d
Pectoral Sandpiper, 7 4 621% 44 25 6234 3 5 205
White-rumped Sandpiper, . 8 6 29 62 24 5936 15 2 106
Least Sandpiper, 7 7 47 73 48 59841 33 6 175
Red-backed Sandpiper, 4 3 62 49 23 53% 6 7 218.
Sanderling, 4 3 23 55 25 6234 12 8 207
Marbled Godwit, 39 17 75% 1 9 242
Hudsonian Godwit, ‘ 1 1 80 25 13 75 3 12 242
Greater Yellow-legs, . 9 3 6046 91 61 50741 12 8 157
Yellow Legs, 9 3 3144 87 67 60140 14 20 146
Solitary Sandpiper, éj 5 4 26 38 21 4856 17 9 218
Willet, 2 31 18 6834 6 17 222
Upland Plover, . 6 4 57 76 54 79%41 8 31 174
Spotted Sandpiper, z 15 il 40 59 38 55% 46 4 160
Long-billed Curlew, . 38 15 7744 2 7 217
Hudsonian Curlew, z 7 3 2814 44 22 5116 8 7 223
Eskimo Curlew, i - 39 15 78 3 232
Black-bellied Plover, i 12 7 244% 68 43 455 15 5 185
Golden Plover, . F 4 1 100 54 38 7338 9 11 200
Killdeer, . ‘ ‘ 53 23 804% 6 if | ot
Semipalmated Plover, 6 4 95 71 46 56 21 6 288
Piping Plover, . 4 2 35 40 20 594, 8 10 228
Turnstone, 4 5 3314 47 26 755% 12 11 210
Bob-white, . | 26 10 | 563% | 232 | 166 | 78 4 13
Ruffed Grouse, : 19 16 284, 235 106 5914 15 6
Mourning Dove, ‘ : 33 18 384g 59 38 6744 33 174

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
506 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The average percentages of increase and decrease contained
in this table should not be given too much weight, since in
the nature of the case no estimate of this kind is authoritative
except in the few cases where records of the number of birds
seen have been kept annually for many years. The more
conservative observers hesitate to attempt such estimates
and some refuse to give any figures. Such as are given are
averaged above for the reason that such an average will prob-
ably approximate the facts; but as very few observers have
stated the exact time during which the increase or decrease of
each species has been observed, it is unsafe to attempt to analyze
the figures regarding each species or to make deductions
from them. It should be noted that a decrease of fifty per
cent. offsets a subsequent increase of one hundred per cent.
In other words, if a species has been reduced one-half, or fifty
per cent., in numbers, it must then double its numbers, or
increase them one hundred per cent., to reach its original
abundance. Therefore, in cases where birds have been diminish-
ing for years it will require a very large percentage of increase
to restore them to their former numbers. For this reason the
percentages of increase in this table are not very significant.

Long hours of study of the original reports on which the
above table is based lead me to believe that as it stands it
leaves too optimistic an impression of the present status of
game birds, shore birds and wild-fowl in Massachusetts. The
reasons for this belief follow: —

1. Many of the names of the rarer birds were not included
in the circular requesting information, hence they do not
appear in the table, and we get no record there of their decrease.

2. There are reports of increase in the numbers of all
species included in the circular except the Passenger Pigeon,
Eskimo Curlew, Long-billed Curlew, Marbled Godwit and
Killdeer Plover, all of which have been nearly and two quite
extirpated from Massachusetts. Many of the other species
are well known to be decreasing generally, and reports of
increase must be owing to local and exceptional conditions.

3. The number of those who regard certain species as in-
creasing or holding their own is larger than the facts will
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 507

 

warrant. (If all those who filled out the blanks had stated
the time during which they had observed that each bird had
increased or held its own it would have been possible to present
this phase of the subject more satisfactorily.)

4. There was no space provided in the information blanks
in which to record certain species as extirpated or extinct in
the region reported on. Had such a space been provided, there
is reason to believe it would have shown results.

5. The reports of decrease usually refer to long periods,
while those of increase mostly refer to brief, recent periods, and,
in some cases, they may record mere ordinary local fluctuations
in numbers. There is nothing in the table to show this.

6. When a species is not reported there is no way in which
to determine whether it is absent or merely overlooked. In
nearly all cases the number not reporting each species is large.
In general, this indicates that the species is not found, or is
rarely found over a large part of the State, but there is no in-
formation as to whether it was found there formerly. Un-
doubtedly many of these species were found formerly where
now they are absent, but the table does not show this.

The observers not reporting on the American Merganser,
the Black Duck, the Blue-winged Teal and the Wood Duck
number one hundred and ninety-four, one hundred and
seventy-five, one hundred and forty-eight and one hundred and
eighteen respectively. As these birds formerly were common
throughout most of the Commonwealth, these negative re-
ports are significant. On the other hand, the fact that two
hundred and twenty-three observers do not report the Eider
is not so significant, as the Eider always was rare inland.

The Ruffed Grouse is reported from nearly all parts of
the State and by all but six correspondents, while all but
thirteen report on the Bob-white. This is encouraging, as it
shows that the reduced breeding stock is widely distributed,
and that these popular game birds normally occupy most of
the State.

An examination of the reports of those who find species
increasing in numbers shows that twenty-seven come from
men who have had less than ten years’ experience. This is
508 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

too short a time to furnish authoritative data regarding the
increase or decrease of a species, as fluctuations in numbers or
local changes caused by an increase or depletion of the food
supply may form the basis of such reports. ‘Hope springs
eternal in the human breast,” and a temporary increase or
congestion of birds in a certain locality often is regarded as a
significant increase of the species.

Many ornithologists who in their published papers have
written of the numbers of certain species have been thus de-
ceived, and should have written in the past tense when de-
scribing the abundance of certain birds. They have failed to
realize how much conditions have changed. There are many
people who believe that the Passenger Pigeon still exists
somewhere in large numbers, and will come back. There
are others who believe that they recently have seen this and
other extinct species. It is difficult for the younger generation
of gunners to realize that birds are decreasing or to admit it
until the decrease has become very marked.

The Reproductive Powers of Nature.

The game preserver may be encouraged in his work by
the fact that, however rapid the depletion of game, its restora-
tion under natural conditions is sure and swift. Wherever a
species is reduced much in numbers the conditions become
more favorable for its increase. When birds become few the
supply of food per bird is increased greatly, which stimulates
the reproductive powers. The number of covers and suitable
nesting places is larger in proportion, owing to the decreased
numbers of the birds, and the competition for food and other
necessities is decreased. Thus, unless a species is subject to
undue persecution by mankind, a speedy increase commonly
follows any sudden decrease, except, perhaps, in cases where
the depletion has gone too far, when extermination results.
With the game preserver it is never too late to restock, ‘‘ While
there is life there is hope.”

The possible increase of a game bird under artificial propa-
gation may be illustrated in the following manner: if we
(01g eed eag) (sawieae "y ‘d fo Aseyinoo ayy yYSnosyy peulerqo ydesSojzoud e wo1j) “esnoy sly 4eeu puod e
OLU! 85905 PIM Pa!PUNY ealy} PoPRHI “ZUGC ‘SIIIASBU!y JO AOUIW “1 “PF MOY MOUS OF 9194 peonpo.qul s! UO!eAZSN||! e[qeyseurss S1Y |
‘"9S939 VOYNYO DNILOVULLY—"IAXX 3LV1d

ReneS REET

  
 

 

 

 
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 509

 

assume that each pair of Bob-whites can produce ten young
in a year, that each pair breeds only once in its lifetime, that
the length of life of the species is ten years, and that the progeny
of a single pair were all preserved to live until the tenth year
we should have at the end of ten years twenty-four million four
hundred fourteen thousand and sixty birds.

The increase of ten birds from each pair is a very moderate
one, as a female Quail in confinement has been known to lay
more than one hundred eggs in one season, nearly all of which
were fertile, and the probability is that a pair of Quail will
breed for several years, whereas our computation is based
upon only one brood during the lifetime of each pair. The
above increase in numbers merely gives possibilities. When-
ever the mind of man solves the problem of propagation,
some slight approach to such multiplication may be realized.

Man can assist the wonderful reproductive and recupera-
tive powers of nature, and the time will come — and that
soon — when he will have solved the problem of reproducing
certain species of game in unlimited quantities. Patient, single-
minded research, followed by applied science, will stock the
world again with such species of game birds and mammals
as will adapt themselves readily to the methods of the
propagator.

There is no limit to the productive capacity of nature
except the bounds set by nature herself, and man will learn
eventually to so control conditions that even those bounds will
be forced back. The time is coming when millions of game
birds will be propagated in this country. But it is probable
that comparatively few species will prove available for this
purpose, and that all the other species will require stringent
protection. Most of the species of the order Limicole, which
includes the Snipe, Woodcock, Sandpipers and Plovers, rear
but few young, and many species may soon require protection
at all times to save them from extinction; while, on the other
hand, we may be able to multiply indefinitely certain Grouse,
Bob-whites, Ducks and Geese. First, as a basis for game pro-
tection, we must understand thoroughly the causes of game
destruction.
510 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

THE CAUSES OF THE DECREASE OF GAME BIRDS.

What is regarded by my correspondents (mostly gunners)
as the relative importance of the various agencies for the de-
struction of Ruffed Grouse may be inferred from the following
tabulation, which shows the number who regard each of the
designated causes to be important. No suggestion was made
to any one of these observers and no leading questions were
asked regarding the causes of the decrease of game birds. The
information is voluntary, and the personal experience of the
number of observers assigning a cause of decrease may be
considered an index to the importance of that cause, pro-
vided that the observers are well qualified to judge, and that
they have not been unduly influenced by the writings or the
opinions of others. Those causes which relate to shooting are
starred.

AGENCIES OF DESTRUCTION AND NUMBER REPORTING THEM.

*Increase of gunners and overshooting, ge Ly . 110
Foxes, : : : ‘ ; 75
Cutting tinber or beach z . 66
Inclement weather and bad ieee s seasons, . 55

*Hunting with dogs, ‘ gs Fe ly .  . 80
Hawks, . . . .. . Se. we 29
Cats, ‘ ‘ : ; : 5 : ; . 8
Smaring, . . ee
Forest fires, . 4 5 : 2 ‘ 7 - : z .
Disease, . ae. Se Sa a er, BS
Skunks, . ; ; : : : : ‘ . 28

*Non-enforcement a Lave, : Soe oe Gg ow. QI
Wood ticks, . ; . 3 . . i é 2 16

*Pump and magazine guns,
*Long open seasons,
Owls, ‘ :
Dogs running at large, .
*Automobiles and electric cars,
Pheasants,
*Tlegal sale of birds,
Brush fires and campers,
Gypsy moths (causing cutting of woodland),
Draining of swamps,
Crows,

_
co

WW Www waned
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 5ll

 

Rats,

Raccoons, :
Lack of restocking,
Weasels, .

Snakes,

Hedgehogs,
Telegraph wires,
Intestinal worms,

pe eee

The chief causes of the decrease of game are market hunt-
ing, spring shooting, the sale and export of game, overshooting
generally and the destruction of the breeding places of birds
by settlement, agriculture and lumbering.

All these destructive influences have been augmented by
the great improvements in firearms, and their cheapness. The
improvement and extension of means of transportation have
widened considerably the activities of the gunner. Steamboat
lines, railroads, electric cars and automobiles are tremendous
factors in the destruction of game. The extension of the
rail service and of the telephone and telegraph, combined with
sportsmen’s journals as a medium of advertising, have opened
up the whole country, so that the gunner can get information
from all parts of it and follow the game wherever it appears.
Most settlers, many lumbermen and some farmers live more
or less upon game.

Lumbering has had considerable effect in decreasing the
Ruffed Grouse, by removing the cover and winter shelter
afforded by the pines. The portable steam sawmill has cut
away much of this cover in Massachusetts, to the great detri-
ment of the birds. Some of the destructive influences are
important enough to be considered in detail.

Market Hunting.

There is nothing more destructive to wild game of any kind
than hunting, netting, trapping or snaring for the market.
The skin, plume, feather, egg and meat markets are very
largely responsible for the depletion and extirpation of birds.
The high price paid for any game bird to-day is equivalent to
a bounty on its head. We might as well offer bounties for the
512 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

destruction of our wild game as to allow it to be sold in the
market. The wild birds which now stand in greatest danger of
extinction are mainly those whose flesh or feathers bring the
highest prices in the markets of the world. All that is necessary
to insure the extermination of a species is to put a liberal price
upon its head. It will then be pursued to the “uttermost
parts of the earth.” Laws will be broken, the officers of the
law will be evaded or intimidated, or, if efficient, will be over-
powered or murdered, and the demands of the market will be
supplied so long as the birds last. The experience of centuries
may be cited in proof of this statement. Market hunters are
not necessarily villains or lawbreakers. In many cases they
are “‘good fellows,” upright, law-abiding citizens, respectable
and respected; but in putting a price upon the heads of wild
game we offer a premium to the idle, the vicious, the irrespon-
sible and the criminal, who roam the woods, fields and shores
for the reward they may gain by killing and selling game.
The market hunter may not kill any more game in a day than
some expert sportsman, but where the sportsman shoots
occasionally the market hunter shoots continually. It is his
business to kill as many as possible while the birds last, and
to spare none. He feels that there is nothing reprehensible
in this, for if he does not kill them “‘some other fellow will.”
Market hunting stimulates the use of devices for capturing
game by wholesale. The snare, the net, the battery, the
“swivel cannon,”’ repeating and automatic guns, traps, live
decoys and all devices for killing or capturing large numbers of
birds are used to supply the market, and so long as wild birds
can be sold legally, illegal and destructive methods will be
used in procuring them.

It is difficult to enforce laws forbidding the use of such
devices until the sale of wild game is prohibited and the in-
centive for market hunting thereby removed. Many a law-
breaker will kill birds from dawn to dark, in season and out of
season, year in and year out, anywhere and in any way, so
long as there is a market to which he can ship his game.

Mr. Edward L. Parker tells me that market hunters on
the coast of Texas formerly were able to average more than
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 513

 

two hundred Ducks each daily, during the season. Some of
them quit when the Ducks had decreased to such an extent
that they could not get this number daily, as then they could
earn more money at farming. He says that a wealthy man,
who secured control of a lake frequented by wild-fowl, formerly
shipped Ducks enough to return him from ten thousand to
twelve thousand dollars a year. Mr. C. E. Brewster talked
with a half-breed market hunter at High Island, Texas, in
1910, who, with his partner, had just come in to the railroad
station with a day’s bag of birds. They had killed two hun-
dred and five Ducks that day. One of them said that for six-
teen years he had hunted every week day during the season
when the Ducks were there. He received $872.30 for the game
that he killed in the winter of 1909-10. These Ducks were
mainly shipped to northern markets. He “‘loafed’’ during
the remainder of the year. The sale of these birds was illegal,
as the law forbade shipment out of the State, and it was illegal
for any man to kill more than a limited number of birds in
a day; but so long as markets for wild game are open, men
will be found to supply them. This hunter said frankly that
the diminution of the game was very marked, and that he be-
lieved that at the present rate of decrease the Ducks would be
practically extinct within the next decade. Nevertheless, he
was doing all that he could to exterminate them, because, by
breaking the law, he could get more money with less exertion
than in any other way. To-day, by means of automatic guns,
live decoys and “batteries” or blinds, market hunters, under
favorable conditions, sometimes make enormous kills. Mr.
T. Gilbert Pearson, secretary of the National Association of
Audubon Societies, informs me that in one week in November,
1909, two men killed fourteen hundred Blue-bills on Currituck
Sound, and another shot four hundred from his battery in
one day.

Mr. Henry T. Phillips of Detroit, Mich., a former market
hunter, asserts that in his camp a party consisting of three
men shot seventy-two pounds of powder in thirty days, and
that two of them killed twelve barrels of Ducks in four days.
He himself in one week shot one hundred and two, one hundred
514 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

and nineteen, one hundred and forty-two and one hundred
and fifty-five Redheads on different days on the Detroit River.
He hunted for fifteen years prior to 1894. It needs little imagi-
nation to see how destructive such a market hunter can become.

Dr. D. G. Elliot states that a game dealer in New York
received twenty tons of Prairie Chickens in one consignment
in 1864, and that some of the larger dealers sold from one
hundred and fifty thousand to two hundred thousand birds in
six months. Prof. Samuel Aughey, who gathered statistics
regarding the destruction of Bob-whites and Pinnated Grouse,
or Prairie Chickens, in Kansas from 1865 to 1877, asserts
that about four hundred and fifty thousand of these birds
were killed each year in thirty counties of Nebraska alone.
Game Commissioner John H. Wallace, Jr., of Alabama states
that before the present game laws of that State were passed
no less than nine million Bob-whites were killed there in one
season. All kinds of stratagems are used to evade the law
and get birds to market. Tons of rabbits or hares have been
shipped to market with Bob-whites stuffed into the cavity
in each hare, from which the viscera had been removed.
During a time when Prairie Chickens and Bob-whites could
be sold legally in Massachusetts but could not be shipped law-
fully from the west, the law was evaded by sending birds east
in coffins. These birds finally reached our markets in Boston
and New York City. In Forest and Stream of March 11, 1912,
it is stated that on February 18 nine thousand Bob-whites in
one shipment were seized by a sheriff and a game warden in
Oklahoma. These birds were destined for the northern mar-
kets. Quantities of Ruffed Grouse have been marked as fish or
chickens and illegally shipped to Boston fish or poultry dealers.

The tons of Prairie Chickens, Quail, Pigeons, Eskimo
Curlews, Golden Plover and Upland Plover that once came
into Boston and New York markets in barrels are of the past,
and the marketmen are reaching out everywhere to find game.
They are now getting wild-fowl, rabbits, guinea hens, or any-
thing that can be legally sold. Mr. James Henry Rice, Jr., sec-
retary of the Audubon Society of South Carolina, writes me that

 

1 Mershon, W. B.: The Passenger Pigeon, 1907, p. 110.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 515

 

he has seen five thousand Mallards and Black Ducks brought
into Georgetown, S. C., for shipment to the north in one day.
He states that one firm in Georgetown has marketed two
hundred and forty thousand Rails and that seven hundred
and twenty thousand Bobolinks have been shipped in one
season. Probably millions of Robins have been sold in southern
markets.

Notwithstanding the many restrictions on the marketing
of native wild game, enormous quantities of game birds have
been sold, and the laws protecting them have been violated by
unscrupulous dealers. In 1903, forty-two thousand seven
hundred and fifty-nine birds were found illegally in the posses-
sion of a cold-storage house in New York City, thirty-four
thousand four hundred and thirteen of which were game birds,
eighteen thousand and fifty-eight were Snow Buntings and
two hundred and eighty-eight were Bobolinks.

The markets of the large cities draw their supplies from
many parts of the country and from foreign lands. Game birds
from European countries, from Siberia, Manchuria and the
West Indies are now sold in our markets. Many species of
Pheasant are now extinct or approaching extinction in their
native lands. Game first becomes scarce near the large mar-
ket centers and then at greater and greater distances from
them, as the demand increases and extends.

The modern demand for game is unlimited. Formerly the
market was sometimes glutted and the demand ceased. Now
facilities for cold storage make it possible for the marketmen
to preserve great quantities of game indefinitely. A firm in
Boston has been holding about four hundred Upland Plover in
cold storage for five years, during which time it has been illegal
to sell them in Massachusetts. When the law forbidding the
sale of all but foreign game and certain species raised on pre-
serves went into effect in New York City, September, 1911,
there were still one hundred and seventy-five thousand game
birds in cold storage in New York City, mostly left over from
the preceding year. August Silz, a large game dealer of that
city, asserts, according to Dr. W. T. Hornaday, that he has
sold a million game birds in one year. The markets of Chicago,
516 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

New York, Philadelphia and Boston are now the greatest game
markets in this country. Dr. Hornaday states that from
October 20 to March 1, inclusive, there were shipped from
Currituck Sound to northern markets, via Norfolk, Va., be-
tween fourteen hundred and fifteen hundred Wild Geese, and
from the Sound and its tributaries, approximately two hundred
thousand Ducks were shipped by the same route. The main
cause of the depletion of water-fowl is not far to seek. Dr.
Hornaday says truly that the greatest value to be derived
from any game bird lies in seeing it, photographing it and en-
joying its living company. ‘‘Who,” he says, “will love our
forests when they become destitute of wild life?”

Probably less than one per cent. of the people are able to
buy game in the market. Laws that permit the sale of wild
game, that belongs to all the people, are directly against the:
interests of the great majority. The principle of the law that
wild game belongs to the State has long been established.
How much longer will the American people allow the wild
game, which belongs to them, to be exploited for the interest
of the few who hunt, kill and sell it?

The sale of all or a part of the native wild game is now
(1911) prohibited in forty-three States and Territories, and
in nearly all the Provinces of Canada. If the markets of
New York, Boston, Philadelphia and Chicago could be closed
to the sale of wild game, many of the market hunters of the
south and west would be driven out of business, and millions
of birds would be saved yearly to rear young.

The export of game from one State to another should not
be permitted, for.this makes it easy to evade the law by kill-
ing game legally in one State where its sale is prohibited, and
selling it in another where its sale is legal. The prohibition
of export saves the game of a State for the people of that
State, and conserves the supply.

Spring Shooting.

In emphasizing the destructiveness of spring shooting it is
well to reiterate here the fact that when North America was
first settled, wild-fowl bred more or less numerously through-
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 517

 

out most of the region now known as the United States.
Twenty-four species still nest within our borders, but they
are now very few and far between in the east as compared to
their former abundance, which they can never approach until
market hunting and spring shooting are prohibited throughout
the length and breadth of the land.

Audubon (1835) says that he found Wild Geese breeding
sparingly about the lakes within a few miles of the Mississippi
and Missouri rivers and their tributaries. He believed that
they bred abundantly in the temperate parts of North America
before the settlement of the country, and his opinion was
founded on the statements of many old and respected citizens.

Gen. George Clark, one of the first settlers on the banks
of the Ohio (about 1760), said that Wild Geese were then so
plentiful at all seasons of the year that he was in the habit of
having them killed to feed his soldiers, then garrisoned near
Vincennes, Ind. Audubon’s father corroborated this state-
ment, and Audubon himself and many other persons residing
at Louisville, Ky., well remembered that about the first of the
nineteenth century it was quite easy to procure young Geese
in the ponds of that district. He found the nests, eggs and
young of the species near Henderson, Ky., as late as 1819.!

Mr. A. W. Butler, in his Birds of Indiana (1898), states
that “thirty years ago” it was not uncommon to find on the
upland meadows of Franklin and other southern counties,
where great flocks of Geese had stopped during the March
migration, numbers of eggs dropped by them. Hon. George
Bird Grinnell asserts that in years gone by the Wilson’s Snipe
and many species of water-fowl bred in all the northern tier
of States in great numbers.” Prof. W. W. Cooke says that
one hundred years ago the Canada Goose bred commonly in
all the northern third of the Mississippi valley. It has been
known to breed of late years in Tennessee and Kentucky.
It formerly bred in Kansas and still breeds in Colorado and
Utah.* Even now wild-fowl nest in many parts of the country
where conditions are favorable.

 

1 Audubon, J. J.: Ornithological Biography, 1835, Vol. III, pp. 6, 7.
2 Grinnell, George Bird: American Duck Shooting, 1901, p. 589.
3 Cooke, W. W.: Bull. No. 26, Biol. Surv., U. S. Dept. of Agr., 1906, p. 72.
518 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Rev. Herbert K. Job informs me that Canada Geese bred
in Louisiana the past season (1909). Mr. Caspar Whitney,
editor of Outing, stated some years ago that Teal bred in large
numbers on club preserves in Currituck Sound, N. C., where
they were protected in spring, and that many Black Ducks
also bred on preserves there. In a special despatch to the
newspapers in Waco, Tex., April 17, 1905, it is stated that in
Refugio County, Wild Ducks lingered so late that they nested
numerously, and it was expected that thousands of young
Ducks would be hatched. Mr. Homer Wells of Waco stated
that in 1904 many Ducks nested in the country about Mid-
land, Tex.

Shooting and chasing the wild-fowl in the late winter while
they were mating, and in the early spring when they had
paired or nested, has resulted either in exterminating them
or driving them out of nearly all the great regions in the
United States where they formerly bred. Col. John E. Thayer
says that he is positive that Mallards, Black Ducks, Gadwalls,
Green-winged Teal, Blue-winged Teal, Shovellers and Pin-
tails begin mating at Currituck Sound, N. C., by February 15,
and are mated by March 1.1 Audubon believed that all wild-
fowl that nested in the United States were mated when they
came north.

The question often is asked, “why is it more destructive
to shoot birds in the spring than in the fall?” If this were
properly put it would need no answer. The question should
be, why is it more destructive to shoot birds in fall, winter and
spring, thus denying them all protection, than to shoot them
in the fall? (Those who desire to shoot birds in the spring
expect the privilege of shooting them in the fall and winter
also.) There are several answers that may be made to this
question; (1) a long shooting season of eight or ten months,
extending through the fall, winter and spring, gives the birds
practically no protection, and is far more destructive than a
fall season of only three or four months. (2) Fall shooting, if
not excessive, merely destroys a part of the annual increase
of the birds, most of which, if not shot, would succumb to the

 

1 Cooke, W, W.: Bull. No. 26, Biol. Surv., U. S. Dept. of Agr., 1906, p. 12.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 519

 

accidents of migration and to the attacks of their natural
enemies. (3) Spring shooting destroys the naturally selected
breeding stock, while mating or mated, and on the way to
the breeding grounds, or in the very act of reproduction.

The value of protecting birds in spring on their northward
migration and on their breeding grounds is shown in the cases
of the American Robin, the Bobolink and the Red-winged
Blackbird. All these birds have been shot in great numbers
in the southern States in the fall for more than two centuries.

Millions of Bobolinks have been shipped to market in the
southern and middle States. These birds are killed mostly
in the late summer and fall. The slaughter of Bobolinks in the
fall for so many years has not very greatly reduced their
numbers in the north, where they are protected by law in their
spring migration and in the breeding season. This protection
perpetuates the species.

The wild-fowl which come north in spring have survived
the hardships and dangers of the winter. They are in good
condition, and nearly every pair is fitted to be the parents of
strong, healthy young. To kill them then should be regarded
as reprehensible. A Massachusetts gunner who had been
accustomed to shoot Snipe in spring noticed something peculiar
about a bird which he shot, opened it and found an egg in
the oviduct, ready for laying. He never shot another Snipe
in spring. Two gunners in Rhode Island had killed about a
-bushel of Winter Yellow-legs in spring. A friend who opened
some of the females found eggs developing in their ovaries.

A Cape Cod gunner assured me that it was better sport
shooting Ducks in spring than in fall, for when one bird was
killed its mate would “hang around” and he could bag both.
A worthy citizen of Massachusetts shot a pair of Wood Ducks
(legally) in April. He was then a boy, and as the pair flew
past him he shot and killed the wonderfully beautiful male,
which fell into the stream. The little female circled about,
came back and alighted beside her dead mate, remaining
there until the boy reloaded his old single-barrelled, muzzle-
loading gun and killed her. He afterwards learned that the
pair had a nest and eggs in a hollow tree near by. Thus the
520 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

whole family was wiped out, and there was no law then on
our statute books to prevent it. Five years ago, when spring
shooting was permitted in Connecticut, Snipe shooters drove
Black Ducks from their nests in the meadows and killed them
as they rose.

Spring shooting exterminates the birds. Fall shooting, if
not excessive, may be said to take only the annual interest of
this great natural resource; but if shooting is continued in
winter and spring it wipes out the principal. No one would
think of advocating to-day a law legalizing the killing of the
Grouse or Bob-whites in the winter, when they are struggling
against the inclemency of the season, or in spring, when they
are mating and breeding. If any man should propose such
legislation his sincerity or his sanity would be doubted. Never-
theless, hundreds and thousands of gunners advocate and
support similar legislation which, if enacted, takes away
practically all protection from wild-fowl.

The argument often is made that it is futile for any one
State to pass laws prohibiting spring shooting until other con-
tiguous States pass similar laws. Experience with such laws,
however, shows that the results of even the most local protec-
tion are often immediate and very marked. A gentleman in
Rhode Island, who has a small pond on his place, prohibited
shooting there, and Black Ducks came at once and bred
there annually. Another in Massachusetts owns all the land
on one side of a large pond, and allows no spring shooting.
In August, 1909, I saw about seventy-five Black Ducks at
one time on his side of the pond, all of which and probably
more were reared there. By the first of September about two
hundred birds were gathered there, but none could be found
on the other side, where they were unprotected. In the San
Luis valley, Col., protection given Ducks in a small enclosure
about an artesian well resulted in the birds resorting to it in
large and increasing numbers year by year.

A local law in Jefferson County, N. Y., prohibiting spring
shooting and night shooting, soon showed its effect. Teal,
Wood Ducks, Mallards and Black Ducks began breeding there
at once. The increase and tameness of the Ducks and Geese
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 521

 

were very marked, and the shooting improved greatly in the
fall. When spring shooting was forbidden by law in New
York State the number of Black Ducks so increased on Fishers
Island that the young which they raised provided good shoot-
ing there in the fall, while on the nearby shore of Connecticut
where spring shooting was allowed at that time, there were
practically no breeding Ducks. The cessation of spring shoot-
ing in the interior of New York soon resulted in a general in-
crease of wild-fowl.

In 1907 the Connecticut Assembly passed a law protecting
wild-fowl and shore birds between January 1 and September 1.
The following extract from a letter from Mr. E. Hart Geer,
secretary of the Fish and Game Commission of Connecticut,
under date of February 19, 1910, shows the results secured
under that law: —

“The encouraging conditions prevailing in Connecticut at
the present time, as the direct result of stopping spring shoot-
ing, justify me in saying that the same conditions would
obtain the entire length and breadth of the United States and
Canada if uniform laws regarding spring shooting were enacted.

“During a period of nearly forty years of my own observa-
tion of wild-fowl on the Connecticut River, I have not for
many years seen or heard of so many Ducks as have been on
the river during the past year.

“Black Ducks have been more numerous and in larger
flocks during the past year than I have known of for many
years past. At one time last December eighteen Black Ducks
were taken out of a flock of thirty-five with four barrels — two
guns — in the hands of two hunters. This has been almost an
impossibility for a number of years past to accomplish. Broad-
bills were on the river in immense numbers all the time last
fall, and I have seen flocks, estimated to contain more than
one thousand, feeding within sight of my house.

“It is indeed gratifying to see the wild-fowl increasing in
such numbers, and there is but one way to account for it, and
that is that during the past two springs they have not been
shot into and driven away from our shores when on their
annual passage.
522 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

“Authentic reports come to this office of large numbers of
Black Ducks being seen in their favorite feeding places after
the close of the open season, January 1. It is estimated, by
careful computation, that larger numbers of Black Ducks
were shot and shipped from along the Connecticut River the
past season than have been shot previously during a period of
five years altogether.

“With all of these encouraging signs pointing to an abun-
dance of wild-fowl again, which will afford opportunity for
royal sport for four months of the year, we are not now hearing
the clamor for a longer open season.

“Those who were, for selfish reasons, most persistent in
asking our Legislature for a longer open season have had pre-
sented to their actual view an object lesson which cannot be
disputed, and they are convinced of the wisdom of prohibiting
spring shooting of wild-fowl for all time.”

Under this law similar conditions have been continued in
Connecticut, although the dry seasons of 1910 and 1911 have
been unfavorable for fall duck-shooting in the interior.

Mr. John H. Sage, secretary of the American Ornithologists’
Union, writes as follows regarding the effect of prohibiting
spring shooting in Connecticut: —

“In 1907 the General Assembly passed a wise and benef-
icent act, establishing an annual close season on Wild Ducks,
Geese and Swans, from January 1 to September 1. Experience
with such laws in other States had proved that their effect
was to increase the number of the birds. The game commission
of Minnesota made the following statement in 1906, after
several years’ experience with a similar law: ‘Every year our
aquatic fowl are increasing, and this year we have had local
Ducks: breed in every slough where water is found.’ Two
years’ trial of this law in Connecticut has shown a good be-
ginning toward a similar increase here. Black Ducks and
Wood Ducks have begun breeding in unusual numbers. Wild
Geese have alighted where they have not been seen before for
years, and Mallards are reported to have bred within the
State; also, the migratory wild-fowl, which remain along our
coast in winter and spring, have increased in numbers.”
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 523

 

Mr. W. T. Payne of Boston writes me that in some Ver-
mont marshes in which he is interested, and where spring
shooting has been prohibited for years, practically all the
wild Ducks are breeding, also Canada Geese. He names the
Black Duck, Mallard, Widgeon, Shoveller, Blue-winged Teal,
Green-winged Teal, Gray Duck, Wood Duck, Bluebill and
Whistler. He says that the careful protection of these marshes
during the spring and summer months has accomplished won-
ders in the numbers of Ducks reared there. Prior to the pro-
hibition of spring shooting there were very few Ducks in these
marshes on the opening of the season; now there are quan-
tities of Ducks there, and also in the other near-by marshes,
when the fall season opens on September 1. Others corrob-
orate his statement.

Mr. W. S. Bogert writes me from northern New Jersey
(1911) that during the past three years, since spring shooting
was prohibited, he has noted a considerable increase in the
number of Ducks in his vicinity. Previously they had decreased
until very few came to his neighborhood in migration, and
only a few Wood Ducks bred there. More were seen in 1909,
still more in 1910, and two pairs of Black Ducks and one pair
of Scaup bred near his place in 1911. He found Wood Ducks
rearing their young as usual, also four pairs of Scaup, five
pairs of Black Ducks and one pair of Whistlers. These Ducks
and their broods remained all summer and fall in a marsh
within a short ride of New York City, and in October a flock
of fifty Ducks remained in the marsh for a long time, and
large numbers came in at night and left at daylight. This
increase of wild-fowl so near New York City probably cannot
long continue, but it is significant.

On Long Island spring shooting has been prohibited
nominally for years, but an unfortunate provision allowing
the spring shooting of Brant has given the gunners an oppor-
tunity to shoot all kinds of wild-fowl under the pretense of
Brant shooting. They were not slow to seize this opportunity,
and spring shooting was common along the coast of Long
Island until 1910, when spring Brant shooting was prohibited
by law, leaving the gunner no excuse for being out with a gun
524 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

at that season. Among the results of the enforcement of this
law are the protection of the migratory wild-fowl which pass
north along these shores in spring and an immediate increase
in the numbers of Black Ducks breeding locally. Dr. Frank
Overton of Patchogue, N. Y., is given by Prof. T. Gilbert
Pearson as authority for the statement that over three hundred
Black Ducks remained last summer on the meadows near
Moriches, and many were reported as nesting. The photo-
graph reproduced on the opposite page shows about half of
a flock of these birds seen in this locality this year (1911).
This photograph was reproduced originally in Bird-Lore.

Massachusetts has now (1911) a law protecting all wild-
fowl from January 1 to September 15. Though passed in 1909,
it was placed on the statute books too late to have any effect
that year, but during the winter and spring of 1910 increased
numbers of several species of wild-fowl were seen along the
coasts and in the streams and ponds. More Wild Geese than
usual stopped here. Black Ducks and Wood Ducks bred in
many localities where they had not nested for many years.
If this law is allowed to remain in force for a few years
longer its benefits will be plain to all.

Within the past twenty years most of the Provinces of
Canada and many of the States of the Union have adopted
regulations forbidding spring shooting. Already this has re-
sulted in an increase in the number of birds breeding in many
of these States and Provinces, and, as a result, the fall and
spring flights along the Atlantic coast are beginning to increase.
This increase, to which Massachusetts has as yet contributed
very little, is now used by the advocates of spring shooting
as an argument for permitting it here. They say virtually,
“our neighbors have withheld their hands; they have pro-
tected and increased the birds,—so much the better for us.
Let us now have an open season in winter and spring, kill all
we can, and thus take advantage of the increase resulting from
the forbearance of our neighbors who are foolish enough to pro-
tect the birds for our benefit.” Comment on such reasoning
is unnecessary.

The advocates of spring shooting also point to the fact
(a107-pilg ul paonpoida puke ‘uoyeag yuRs4 ug Aq

‘L16] ‘8 4aquiaydag uaxey ydeusojoyq)

“purjs} Guo7 ‘sayouop 3e syonq yoeRI/g JUEpIsel pospuny sey] ‘Sulooys Buds Suiddojs jo yjnsai y¥
“HAXX = 3LV1d

  

‘ = es
4 wat =
seo :
x ? es Se x 22 4a, - oS 3 >
= oy Sete: a + S S Seu
| = ott wt ted 3 = 7 > sy wt os i 7 =
t SS OES Rs a + pres oe Bu a “as eS 7 74, 2 S
or . To gy tba Ce PSL oe ee
tT - so S r ‘ a at = Bi a Tet atte 2 oct q
A, Se + 7¥- y* x
re > a, 1 vy 2 oF <7 Aad se , “4
Me <3
5 ey e173 4 4g We t + a»
. s > > Tt > = Su aL x >»

T T att = 2 3s a 3

T : sx ;

>

T 4 = 1 3 * s+

a “7s #2 » AY
es 2 7
: >
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 525

 

that many more wild-fowl are killed in winter in the southern
States than are killed here. Their principal argument is that
we should permit spring shooting here because it still is allowed
in the south. Even from a selfish standpoint this is the weakest
possible argument for spring shooting. By killing wild-fowl
in the fall we certainly can prevent them from falling into the
hands of the southerners; but those which come back to us
in spring have escaped both northern and southern gunners,
if, indeed, they have been south at all. Why should we kill
them then, when they are going to their breeding grounds,
and when every mated pair killed cuts off the return to us in
the coming autumn of perhaps six to a dozen young? Self-
interest alone should prohibit spring shooting.

If the southern people were permitted by law to rob and
kill those of our citizens who visit them in winter should we
consider that a sufficient reason why we should plunder and
murder those, who, having escaped the dangers of the south,
return in safety to their homes in the north? Are we so short-
sighted that we cannot see that spring protection works to
our own advantage? When all is considered we find that the
shooting in the south does not affect our supply of birds here
nearly so much as is commonly supposed. The majority of
the wild-fowl which are killed in the south are birds which never
saw New England. They are bred in the northwest, and
reach the south in winter by journeying south or southeast
across the country, and never come here at all. Also, many of
the species which are shot along our coasts are rarely hunted
in the south. Wood Duck and Teal go far south, but many
Black Ducks and some of the bay and sea Ducks rarely go
very far to the southward of Massachusetts. The southern
gunner does not consider the Scoters or “Coots” and the
Mergansers or Sheldrakes worth the powder and shot necessary
to kill them, and he rarely shoots them. These birds are shot
mainly on the coast from Labrador to New Jersey, and they
must be protected here if at all. Many Black Ducks, some
Brant and many sea Ducks remain in winter off the coast of
southern New England and New York, particularly in mild sea-
sons, and if protection is continued here more will remain.
526 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS,

 

Some gunners, especially those on Cape Cod and Martha’s
Vineyard, claim that they have no chance to shoot certain
species except in the spring. While this is not strictly accurate,
still it has some foundation in fact, particularly on the island
of Martha’s Vineyard, where Geese appear more in spring,
and are less difficult to take than in fall. Since spring shooting
has been stopped, however, more Geese have appeared there
in fall. This island, also, is a natural breeding ground for
wild-fowl, and with spring shooting stopped there it should
be possible to raise Geese enough on the island to attract
others, and thus to afford the inhabitants good shooting in the
fall. Every species of wild-fowl which comes up our coast
in spring goes down it in the fall (there are a few, however,
which are rarer in spring than in fall). The opportunity is
open to all the people along our coasts to shoot these birds in the
fall or in December. Those who are not able to avail them-
selves of this opportunity because of the cares of business,
or peculiar local conditions, are in no worse case with spring
shooting prohibited than are the great majority of gunners of
the interior of the State who now get practically no wild-fowl
shooting, and who never will have any unless spring shooting
can be prohibited forever, that the birds may have a chance
to come back to rest, feed and breed along the rivers, on the
lakes and in the swamps of the State. All spring shooting
should be prohibited, because no shooting should be allowed
in the breeding season. Breeding birds must not be disturbed.
When “the law is off” on one or more species many lawbreakers
take advantage of this fact, and if they do not find what they
seek they shoot something else. I have known reputable men
who, failing to get Snipe in spring, shot Swallows on the
meadows for practice. Irresponsible, lawbreaking gunners,
when out shooting in spring or fall, will shoot at sight any
large bird that they see, and many small ones, whether pro-
tected by law or not. Spring shooting should be stopped,
that all useful birds may be protected in the nesting season.
Then a shot fired in spring will be a matter of inquiry for
every game warden, and nesting birds will have some
peace,
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 927

 

There are gunners along the New England coast who de-
plore spring shooting, but who believe that they should be
allowed to shoot during the months of January and February,
which, they argue rightly, are not spring months; but wide
experience has shown that our wild-fowl cannot be adequately
conserved and increased in numbers unless they are protected
from all shooting except during the fall migration. Prof. W. W.
Cooke of the Biological Survey, who will be conceded by all
who are conversant with the facts to be the foremost specialist
on bird migration in the United States, says that the fall
migration of wild-fowl ceases about December 1. If the
autumn has been mild, and is followed by extreme cold, there
may be later movements that are caused by the freezing over
of the fresh waters, which drives most Black Ducks, Pond
Sheldrakes, Whistlers, Broad-bills and other species farther
south or to the salt water. Usually such frosts occur in De-
cember, and if the shooting season is prolonged until January
1, the shore gunner has an opportunity to hunt all these birds.
The season should be closed then in order to protect during
the inclement season all the Ducks which remain in our waters.
It should be closed on all wild-fowl at that time, for the reason
that if any exception is made all species of wild-fowl will be
shot.

The killing of wild-fowl during January and February
should be prohibited absolutely on any coast where the fresh
waters become ice-bound during these months. Ordinarily in
New England most of the fresh ponds freeze in December,
and the pond and river Ducks are then driven to the salt
water. Because of the inferior nature of the food that they
find there their flesh soon loses its fine flavor, and they become
more or less “sedgy”’ or “‘fishy”’ to the taste. In hard winters,
when the flats are covered with ice, these Ducks are half
starved. They soon become very thin and have little food
value. In such winters Ducks of several species have been
picked up dead from starvation and cold. They have enough
to contend with at that season of the year, and no hunter
should be allowed to disturb them or take advantage of their
necessities,
528 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

When the ponds are covered with ice those fresh-water
Ducks which remain in the north are compelled to go to the
open springs, as they require fresh water to drink. Care for
their safety compels them to remain at sea or in some open
bay during the day, but at night necessity drives them to the
springs. Here the gunner lies concealed to kill them. Some
even cut holes in the ice to attract them. A gunner near
Boston told me that during a “‘cold snap”’ he fired both barrels
into a flock of Black Ducks on the ice, killing eleven, and
found them so nearly starved as to be reduced to “‘skin and
bones.”

The following letter from Dr. George Bird Grinnell bears
upon this point: —

“Ducks should not be shot after January 1, because many
of these birds mate in January, and in February and in the
following months are preparing for the nesting duties of early
summer. The birds which are chiefly shot for the market are
the non-diving Ducks, of which the Black Duck is the only one
found in considerable numbers in Massachusetts. These birds
in winter have the greatest difficulty in existing. The fresh-
water ponds and spring holes, where they naturally feed and
drink, are frozen, and the mud flats, where they might feed in
cold weather, are often covered with ice, so that food is
absolutely inaccessible. They cannot, like the sea Ducks,
dive to great depths in search of shell-fish. They therefore
seek out the few warm springs that may still be open, and
congregate there, searching for food, and the gunner who
learns of their presence at such a place may destroy the starving
birds in great numbers.

“T learned my lesson on this subject in Connecticut in the
winter of 1875-76. It was a very hard winter, and almost
all the feeding and drinking places were closed by the cold,
while the mud and sand flats were piled high with ice far out
into the Sound. I learned that a flock of two hundred or three
hundred Black Ducks came at night to an open warm spring,
and going there shot two or three as they came in, and prepared
to have great sport. When I got these birds in my hand I
found them a mass of feathers and bones, for the breast
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 529

 

muscles had shrunk away from starvation, so that it hardly
seemed that the birds could fly. I stopped shooting, and took
the trouble to show the birds to a number of local gunners, all
of whom agreed that it was a shame to shoot birds that were
having so hard a time, and no local gunners shot Black Ducks
again that winter.

“T believe that if the unprejudiced opinions of marketmen
could be taken on this point they would agree that birds shot
in New England in winter and spring are too thin in flesh and
too fishy in flavor to be a popular food, and the average gun-
ner — if the matter were brought to his attention and explained
to him — has too much sense of fair play to wish to destroy
the birds under such conditions.”

Even the diving Ducks, like the Old-squaws, sometimes
are reduced greatly by starvation and cold during unusually
cold seasons. At such times starving birds become reckless.
Mackay states that during the winter of 1888, when the sea
about Nantucket was covered with ice, two men covered them-
selves with sheets and lay down on the ice beside a crack near
a jetty on the north shore, and there killed with fishing poles
about sixty Old-squaws in a little over an hour. They found
on examining the Ducks that they were valueless, except for
their feathers, owing to their emaciated condition.. Let all
true sportsmen, then, join in the movement to close the shoot-
ing season on the first day of January, and let all men lay
aside the gun then and give the birds a chance.

Summer Shooting.

Summer shooting is nearly as destructive to game birds,
wild-fowl and shore birds as is spring shooting. No one now
advocates the summer shooting of upland game birds, but
many now living can remember when July and August Wood-
cock shooting was defended in the sportsmen’s journals by
both market hunters and sportsmen. As late as 1889 August
Woodcock shooting was permitted by law in the enlightened
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It was not until the breed-
ing Woodcock were nearly exterminated that laws finally were
530 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

passed prohibiting summer Woodcock shooting. All summer
shooting should be forbidden; it is too destructive to the birds.
In summer the schools and colleges are closed, and all the pupils
and teachers are on vacation. Professional men, store clerks,
office boys and thousands of employees in various industries
take their vacations then. Where it is legal to shoot any
game in July and August thousands of boys and men will be
in the field with guns shooting the birds. The great majority
of these people do not know the law. They only know that it
is legal to shoot, and they shoot ad libitum. Many idle people
camp out in summer and wander about with guns. Even the
sheep and poultry suffer at the hands of such campers. I
never yet have met a summer vacationist in the field with a
gun who, when questioned, knew the law under which he was
shooting, and not one in a hundred knows enough about the
birds to be able to comply with the law if he knows it. They
are largely boys and young men who, laboring under the im-
pression that they are shooting Plover, chase Peeps, or who
pursue Spotted Sandpipers supposing that they are shooting
Upland Plover. or Wilson’s Snipe.

Many of these summer gunners come from other States,
and have never taken the trouble to inquire what the game
laws of Massachusetts require. They shoot any bird of large
size, whether it is protected by law or not, and some of them
indiscriminately slaughter small birds. Summer shooting
gives an excuse for lawbreaking gunners, particularly the
foreign element, to be out after game, and it is well known
that these people kill birds of all kinds and their young.
Summer shooting has already destroyed or driven away most
of the shore birds which once bred or summered in New
England. A good part of the summer shooting is done by
campers along the shores and marshes of the sea-coast, or
about the inland lakes and rivers. Such shooting tends to
break up and destroy the breeding of Black Ducks and any
other Ducks which may chance to summer here, and on this
account alone it should be prohibited. Boys shooting in sum-
mer kill game birds of all kinds, old and young. Many native
Ducks or their half-grown young are killed by these gunners.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 531

 

Summer gunning along populous beaches, where little
Peeps and Ringnecks are the principal game, is annoying and
even dangerous to women and children who live there or go
there for recreation or bathing. One lady relates that a young
gunner shooting at some tiny Sandpipers on the beach wounded
her with some of the shot. Another states that a charge of
shot fired at a flying bird came into the window where she and
her sister were sitting. Two women were rowing in a boat
near the shore when a charge of shot was fired into the boat.
Women and children have been injured and killed by these
youthful gunners, and occasionally one shoots himself or one
of his companions. The majority of the people who now
summer on our beaches, and who do not shoot, prefer to see
the little Sandpipers and Plover running unmolested on the
sands, and to be spared the spectacle of boys afoot or men in
automobiles pursuing, crippling and slaughtering such innocent
little birds in the name of sport. The greater part of the birds
which are killed in summer belong to these smaller species,
which should be protected by law at all times. If they were
protected in summer they would soon become common on
our beaches throughout the warmer months. If they are not
thus protected it requires no prophet to foresee their final
extinction. There are so many chances for enjoyment in
summer with the fishing, tennis, golf, motoring, sailing, boat-
ing and bathing that shooting privileges at that season are
unnecessary.

Settlement and Agriculture as a Cause for the Decrease of
Wild-fowl.

Notwithstanding the fact that the unrestricted killing of
wild-fowl for the market at all seasons has been the chief cause
of their decrease, the breaking up of their breeding grounds
has assumed, in recent years, an importance almost as great.
Formerly the northern tier of States and a large part of the
Canadian northwest formed a great breeding place for wild
Ducks, Geese and Swans; but within the past thirty years all
this has changed.
532 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The prairie regions of central Canada, including large por-
tions of Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, join the north-
eastern part of Montana, the northern half of North Dakota
and the northwestern corner of Minnesota, all of which once
was a paradise for water-fowl. At the close of the war of the
rebellion this great region, two hundred miles wide by over
four hundred miles in length, with its countless lakes, ponds,
streams and marshes, was one great breeding colony of wild-
fowl, where hundreds of thousands reared their young in se-
curity, almost unmolested by man. From this great colony
the various species extended their breeding grounds in lesser
numbers as far as South Dakota, southern Wisconsin, the
Kankakee marshes of Jlinois and Indiana, parts of south-
western Minnesota and the lakes of north-central Iowa. “‘In
1864,” says Prof. W. W. Cooke, referring to southern Wiscon-
sin, “every pond hole and every damp depression had its
brood of young ducks.” ! Within the next fifteen years the
farmers changed from grain raising to dairying. The marshes
were drained and the breeding grounds for wild-fowl were
gone. The birds disappeared with them. Regions in Illinois,
Iowa and Minnesota, where a dozen or more species of duck
commonly bred as late as 1885, were almost deserted by them
in the year 1906. The great “duck paradise’? was invaded
by the railroads. The Northern Pacific cut across it in Min-
nesota and North Dakota. A line was built north to Winni-
peg; other branches were built later, and the Canadian Pacific
was pushed forward from Winnipeg to the Pacific, crossing
the most extensive breeding grounds of wild-fowl on the
continent.

From 1880 to 1900 the population of the States and Prov-
inces crossed by these railroads increased many-fold. When
in 1888 I passed through this vast region, via the Canadian
Pacific, many of the great duck grounds near the railroad
had become wheat fields, and most of the wild-fowl were gone.
Trainloads of immigrants were coming continually. Since
that time a flood of immigration from the United States has
augmented that from the Old World. The agricultural ex-

 

 

1 Cooke, W. W., U. 8. Dept. of Agr., Biol. Surv., Bull. No. 26, 1906, p. 11.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 533

 

periment stations of Canada have introduced and perfected
wheat that will mature in the short summers of the north.
Another railroad across the continent is projected and will be
built. Surveys for railways to Alaska and Hudson Bay have
begun. Steamboat lines have been established on the rivers
of the north. In all this region the shallow marshes and de-
pressions in the prairie will be drained wherever it is possible,
and the birds will be driven out, until in time there will be no
place left for them but the ponds in the Barren Grounds and
the tundra of the far north. It is probable that many of the
most valuable species are not hardy enough to breed in these
arctic and sub-arctic lands. Within twenty-five years, there-
fore, there will be few great breeding colonies of some of the
most highly prized food Ducks, such as the Canvas-back, the
Redhead, the Shoveller and the Blue-winged Teal. The drain-
ing of swamps and marshes, and their reclamation for agri-
cultural purposes, eventually will destroy many of the best
breeding places for wild-fowl throughout this continent. The
future supply must come largely from such small colonies and
scattered pairs as may be allowed to nest and rear their young
in favorable spots in settled regions.

Night Shooting.

There is good ground for the belief that night shooting at
any time or place should be absolutely prohibited, for noth-
ing is more certain to drive birds of any kind away from any
locality where it is practiced. Inland ponds where night
shooting is allowed are deserted by water-fowl eventually,
and none can be attracted to them except by the use of live
decoys. The Black Duck is one of the first to leave such ponds,
and old gunners say that it will not return to ponds where it
has been shot at in the night unless driven by necessity, as is
the case sometimes in winter, when most of its drinking places
are frozen over. If the birds are persecuted all day and all
night they soon will leave for some other region, where they
can find more safety and a chance to rest. Wild Ducks feed
normally during the day and in the dusk of morning and
534 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

evening. They prefer to feed by daylight, although many
species also feed on moonlit nights. The surface-feeding
Ducks, however, can feed better at night than the diving Ducks,
which must have a good light in order to see their food at the
bottom. Fresh-water wild-fowl are harassed so much in the
daytime in Massachusetts that many of them fly to the salt
water by day, where, in the sounds or larger bays, or even at
sea, they can find rest; or they hide in swamps or go to reser-
voirs, where they are protected. Under these circumstances
they go to the fresh-water ponds, marshes or rivers mainly at
night, or when driven in by storms in the daytime. If they
are harassed at night in these retreats, and so deprived of the
opportunity to feed and drink, they will desert our inhospitable
coast and pass on to regions where, in the larger swamps
and fresh-water bays, they may find a greater degree of safety.

Mr. E. T. Carbonnell writes that Geese were very plentiful
in the spring of 1909 on Kildare River, P. E. I. Day shoot-
ing merely frightened them up or down the river; but one
night a few shots were fired at them, and the next day not a
Goose was seen the whole length of the river. The same
thing happened in East River in the fall.

Mr. Tallett, president of the Jefferson County, N. Y.,
Sportsmen’s Association, says that from his experience he
believes that in no way can the Black Duck be driven away
from a favorite breeding place more quickly than by night
shooting. The great preponderance of testimony given by
experienced gunners before legislative hearings in many
States is against night shooting of water-fowl and game
birds, and night shooting is now forbidden by law in many
regions.

Audubon tells how night shooting where it was practiced
drove out the Prairie Chicken. It slays the Grouse while
budding and the roosting Wild Turkey, taking them at a
disadvantage at a time when they should never be disturbed
by the gunner.

Wherever night shooting has been prohibited for a series
of years there is no difficulty in securing a bag of birds in
daylight.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 535

 

Pursuing Wild-fowl in Boats.

The use of boats in chasing wild-fowl and in shooting at
them on their feeding grounds always results in driving them
away, and wherever this is practiced continually the birds
become scarce. This practice and night shooting have been
responsible, in part, for the disappearance of most wild-fowl
from the ponds and rivers of the interior of Massachusetts,
and from certain bays and harbors along the coast, and so
long as it is continued, we cannot expect numbers of wild-fowl
to remain in such places during the shooting season. This
fact was recognized early in the history of Massachusetts,
and a law to prevent it was enacted in 1710; but this lapsed
after the revolution.

The practice of shooting wild-fowl from sailboats is an
exhilarating sport, and often is quite successful with sea-fowl
in a stiff breeze and a choppy sea. Sometimes the birds are
slow to leave the water under such conditions. They are
obliged to rise against the wind, and if the boat is sailed down
wind in approaching them they must rise toward it, and so
give the gunner in a fast-sailing boat a close shot. I have
driven a small sloop in a squall within a few feet of a Red-
breasted Merganser. The excitement of handling the boat
skilfully and smartly, snatching the gun at the right moment
and shooting accurately from the unstable shifting deck, the
tension necessitated in steering, the swift and accurate sweep
down the tossing seas to pick up the dead birds — all tend to
make this a sport for men. Nevertheless, nothing will so
surely drive birds away from their feeding grounds, except
chasing them with power boats. The use of sailboats, row-
boats and canoes on ponds and rivers in pursuing and shooting
at Ducks has a similar effect. On the other hand, a reasonable
amount of shooting from the shore will not disturb them much
if they are not pursued. It is largely due to a recognition
of this fact, and to a special law prohibiting the pursuit of
wild-fowl in boats, that Martha’s Vineyard has now the
best duck-shooting in Massachusetts. Formerly the gunners
themselves observed an unwritten law forbidding the pursuit of
536 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

fowl on the ponds. One man (an outsider), defying public
sentiment, succeeded in driving most of the Ducks out of
one of the larger ponds in one day by pursuing them in a
boat and shooting at them. A law resulted, prohibiting this
pastime on the ponds of Martha’s Vineyard.

The Use of Live Decoys.

The use of live decoys for attracting wild-fow] is a practice
which, in America, seems to have originated in Massachusetts.
It has become a Massachusetts institution which has many
stalwart defenders, and much money has been invested in
shooting stands where shooting over live decoys is practiced.
Sir Charles Lyell (1842) speaks of a pond at East Weymouth
where he saw a single live Goose anchored in the water with
some wooden decoys. He here saw the industrious cobblers,
each sitting at his labor, stitching brogans for the southern
negroes, with his loaded gun lying by his side. The cobbler
worked an hour or two on his shoes, which brought but
twenty cents a pair, and then seizing his gun shot a Goose,
which brought, in the market, the price of several pairs of
brogans.'

Shooting over live decoys has come into general use. It
has spread over a considerable part of the Atlantic coast, and
unless checked by law it is destined to extend over the entire
country. As the game became less plentiful, and prices rose,
elaborate blinds were built, larger numbers of stool birds
were used and quarters were provided in the blinds where
several cobblers could work. The shooting stand became a
veritable fort, — each loophole supplied with its gun, and
all screened and hidden by trees or bushes, weeds and brush,
so placed as to disguise its purpose and construction. The
men ate, slept, lived and worked in it during the shooting
season. In some cases one man was kept busy much of his
time watching and tending the birds, liberating and calling in
the decoys, and in general caretaking. Finally, shoe ma-
chinery took away the cobbler’s occupation, and since then a

 

1 Lyell, Sir Charles: Travels in the United States; Second Visit, 1849, Vol. 1, p. 99.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 537

 

change has occurred in stand shooting. As the birds became
fewer and harder to obtain, sportsmen, perceiving the pos-
sibilities of these stands and decoys, began to invest their
money in them, until now many are in the hands of wealthy
or well-to-do sportsmen.

In some of these stands the keepers use electric signals to
call the gunners from bed or board to the outer walls. In
some cases more than a hundred live Geese or Duck decoys
are used, some of which are trained to fly out over the lake,
and so call the wild birds down and toll them in. The wild
birds seem to lose most of their natural caution under such
circumstances, and swim boldly up to the stand, even coming
out upon the shore, at times, almost under its walls. When
the greatest number of birds can be killed at one shot, all
the gunners make ready and fire at the word of command.

In some stands a second volley is given the birds as they
rise. In most of the stands the rule is to shoot only at the
sitting birds. If the gunners succeed in killing the adult birds,
the young, though frightened at the first discharge, may return
again to the place where the bodies of their parents are still
lying on the water, and give the sportsmen a chance for another
volley. It sometimes happens that the entire flock is taken
in this way. Huntington tells of watching a gunner with live
decoys who killed all but one of a small flock of Geese, and
finally got that one when it returned to investigate. Usually
this stand shooting was a form of market hunting. The plan
and purpose of the gunners seemed to be to kill as many birds
as possible. There was an intense rivalry between the stands
at the different ponds, each seeking to outdo the other. In most
of them, all the birds that could be marketed were sold, and if
one of the owners wished to have a bird that he had shot, he
paid for it. The game sold usually went toward paying the
expenses of up-keep. Since the above was written the sale
of wild-fowl has been prohibited by law in Massachusetts.

An account of this kind of decoying at Silver Lake was
published some years ago in Forest and Stream, by one of
the participants, wherein it was stated that sixty-eight Geese
were killed at one stand in twelve hours. Nothing is said
538 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

about how many were killed at the other stands, which also
were firing similar volleys.!

Night shooting is (or was) commonly practiced at these
stands. Many correspondents seem to believe that stand
shooting will exterminate all Geese and Ducks eventually, or
drive them out of the country. They therefore protest against
this kind of shooting.

Mr. Nathaniel A. Eldridge of Chatham writes: “I think
the greatest enemy the Black Duck has is the pond shooters
who use live Duck decoys, decoy them in to places which are
practical forts, and then clean up whole flocks. Ducks have
not the slightest chance.”

Mr. Fred F. Dill of North Eastham writes: “I am a pot-
hunter and make one-fourth of my living with my gun. I use
live decoys and shoot on fresh water. If laws were passed
prohibiting this it would cost me one hundred and fifty dollars
a year, but the preservation of the game demands that it
should be done.”

Mr. Edward B. Robinson, Jr., of Cataumet says that more
Ducks and Geese are killed by a few gunners at Snake Pond,
John’s Pond and Mashpee Pond by the use of live decoys
than all the other gunners kill in that section of the Cape.

Mr. Jonathan H. Jones of Waquoit says that if the people
of Massachusetts do not want to see all of the fresh-water
wild-fow] killed or driven away the use of live decoys must be
stopped. If the Black Ducks and Geese, he says, cannot go
to the fresh-water ponds in safety at night to drink and wash
up they will desert the region. He finds that now these birds
are nearly all shot at the fresh-water ponds, or driven away,
and that those which escape do not stop as they used to, but
pass on. He has a small stand and a large number of live
decoys, but is willing to give up all for the benefit of the sport.

Nevertheless, there is something to be said for the pond
shooters. Most of them oppose spring shooting. Mr. B. H.
Currier says that without live decoys it would be very diffi-
cult now to kill Ducks or Geese in these ponds, and that the
pond gunners of eastern Massachusetts would have to close

 

1 Grinnell, George Bird: American Duck Shooting, 1901, pp. 268-273.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 539

 

up their stands and go out of business were the use of live de-
coys prohibited. As it is, many flocks never stop at all. Dr.
John C. Phillips has kindly given me records from three stands
which show the number of Ducks and Geese shot, the number
alighting in the ponds and the number seen passing. These
records do not show such destruction of birds as one might
be led to expect from the accounts of those who do not par-
ticipate in this kind of shooting. None of these records, how-
ever, would compare in numbers killed with those seen or shot
at Silver Lake, or others of the larger ponds. In 1908 Dr.
Phillips finds that only fourteen Geese were killed at Wenham
Lake and ninety-six at Oldham Pond, while three hundred
and twenty-five were shot at Silver Lake. There are many
days when the pond gunner does not get a shot, and some
seasons when he gets few birds. The sport is often a costly
one, and the outgo probably far exceeds the income. Never-
theless, there can be no excuse for excessive shooting. Even
birds have some rights, and they should be given a chance for
their lives. They should have the opportunity to drink and
feed in these ponds unmolested at night, and the sportsmen
should see to it that any objectionable and unnecessary fea-
tures of pond shooting are eliminated. If the sale of wild-
fowl were prohibited by law it probably would reduce the
number of birds killed by stand shooting.

The Elements: Storms and Cold.

Unseasonable storms and cold winters sometimes destroy
tremendous numbers of birds, and their effect is felt period-
ically by the Woodcock and the Bob-white particularly. Cold
and wet breeding seasons terribly deplete the game birds. Any
species, the increase of which is destroyed every year by
shooting, will soon disappear if unable to raise its young. A
single cold, wet breeding season will reduce a species from
a condition of abundance to one of scarcity, as was the case
with the Ruffed Grouse in 1907. If the birds were unmolested
by the gunners for a few years thereafter they would soon
regain their former abundance; but if shooting is continued,
540 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

the increase in numbers comes moré slowly, and the bird may
never, equal its former abundance.

In 1895 nearly all the Bluebirds of New England were
destroyed by a great storm and cold wave in the south; but
as they were protected by law at all times they became almost
as plentiful.as ever a few years later, while the Woodcock,
which was less. affected by the freeze, but is shot in all the
States, hardly has begun to approach its former numbers.

Every gunner knows that forest fires during the nesting
season are destructive to game birds. This may be remedied
by the public care of our woodlands, better protection against
fires and the electrification of all our railroads. One of the
chief sources of forest fires in this country is the coal- penne
locomotive.

Epidemic Diseases.

There are rumors of disease among the Ruffed Grouse and
Bob-white, and occasionally some disease appears among wild-
fowl. A few years ago an epidemic was reported among wild-
fowl on the St. Lawrence River, and now (1910) we are told
that a disease exists in Utah which is said to affect Geese and
Ducks of all kinds, the smaller Herons, the. Plover, Snipe
and nearly all birds. This disease was first noticed in the feed-
ing grounds near or bordering the Great Salt Lake, and has
gradually increased and progressed until the infected area in-
cludes the entire Salt Lake valley, and the infection includes
practically all the birds there.

In a letter received by Forest and Stream from Dr. W. R.
Stewart he says, “our native birds are practically all dead.”
This refers to birds of all kinds; even chickens that were fed
on the viscera of dead Ducks died by hundreds. The infection
is a diarrhoea or cholera, with a watery discharge from the
eyes during its latter stages, and ends fatally in a few days.
When sick birds were put in clean pens and given clean food
and water most of them recovered.!

This disease is believed to be what is commonly known as
Duck cholera, which often affects domesticated water-fowl

 

1 Stewart, W. R.: Forest and Stream, October 15, 1910, Vol. Ixxv, No. 16, pp. 616, 617.
(‘sueaq ‘apy Aq paysiuins oze|q)
“II OUR YO ‘SURAT BdRIIEAA JO WE} BURT BY} UO [MOJ-PjIM Jay}O PUB SyONG POOAA ‘Spiele, ‘8S9ex) MOUs ‘aseer BpeURD PIM

‘Wuv¥d SWVYD Y NO IMOS-OTIM—'INAXX JLW1d

See. /)) Sie : E See

4 ~ \

 

        

wus ie

‘hy br

 

 
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 541

 

in summer when a sufficient supply of pure water is not avail-
able; it has been diagnosed as a form of coccidiosis, similar to,
if not identical with, that which is believed to cause white
diarrhcea in chicks and blackhead in turkeys, and is very
fatal to Grouse and Bob-whites (see page 383). As poultry.
raising increases, the danger of contagious diseases among game
birds is likely to increase also, as chickens and turkeys spread
coccidiosis. Its spread in Utah may have been facilitated by
a dry season and low water.

Natural Enemies.

Those who promulgate the belief that the depletion of
native game birds is due to their native natural enemies are
merely deluding themselves and injuring the cause of game
protection. We know from the accounts of the early explorers
and settlers that when this country was first settled, and
game of all kinds was abundant, Hawks, Eagles, panthers,
wolves, lynxes,. raccoons, minks, weasels and other enemies
of the game (some of which are now extirpated from our
covers) were far more abundant than they are to-day, and
we find now that where game is rare its natural enemies also
usually are rare. The same cause that has swept away the
game has destroyed its natural enemies also. Natural enemies
of the game are necessary. The Hawk and the fox tend to
keep the game in good condition. They break up the coveys,
keep the birds alert and active, and compel them to exercise
not only their muscles but their wits. They kill off the slow,
the feeble, the diseased and the unfit, for these are most easily
captured and killed. Probably they keep down the excess of
male birds, which so often occurs on game preserves where
the natural enemies have been killed off. All gamekeepers say
that an excess of male gallinaceous birds tends to prevent
breeding.

It is the mission of the native natural enemies to help
preserve birds, to keep them up to full efficiency and at
the same time to prevent their increase in numbers beyond
the limit of safety. An increase beyond this limit would
542 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

exhaust the food supply of the game and bring about starva-
tion. This the natural enemies of the game prevent by holding
its increase within a safe limit. Here we see the working out
of nature’s laws for the conservation of the game.

The larger natural enemies befriend the game by holding
in check the smaller enemies. The Hawk, Eagle and fox
keep minks, weasels, rats, field mice, shrews and other small
destructive mammals in check, which otherwise would destroy
most of the eggs and young of game birds. The natural
enemies of the game, therefore, are necessary to its prosperity.
Where they are too numerous they should be reduced in
number, but never exterminated. Hunters naturally kill
game enemies, and therefore the numbers of so-called vermin
are depleted as those of the game are reduced, and by the
same cause. All the fur-bearing animals which are regarded
as vermin by the sportsman and the gamekeeper are the game
of the trapper, and furs now bring so high a price that these
animals, including even the lowly skunk and muskrat, are
growing scarce. The decrease of the game cannot be laid at
their door. Nevertheless, these natural enemies, or vermin as
they are called, certainly help to keep down the numbers of
the game wherever man attempts to increase the game on a
small area to numbers far beyond what nature provides, as on
the game farm or preserve.

Many hunters regard the skunk as one of the most de-
structive game enemies because it sometimes steals the eggs
or young of game birds; but the skunk is very useful on the
farm, and feeds largely on mice, also on potato beetles, white
grubs, grasshoppers, crickets, cutworms and other destructive
insect pests, of which it destroys large numbers, and indirectly
it is one of the chief protectors of young wild Ducks. The
following statement by Dr. A. K. Fisher of the Biological Sur-
vey illustrates the close and intimate relations that diverse
forms of animal life bear to one another, and how harm, rather
than good, may sometimes result from the destruction of the
natural enemies of birds. Skunks frequent the shores of lakes,
rivers and sloughs in spring, and devour most of the turtles’
eggs that are deposited there.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 543

 

“‘An extensive marsh bordering a lake in northern New
York formed a suitable home for numerous ducks, rails,
snapping turtles, frogs and other aquatic life. The turtles de-
posited their eggs in abundance in the sand of the old beach.
These delicacies attracted the attention of the skunks of the
neighborhood, and their nightly feasts so reduced the total
output of eggs that only a small percentage of the young
survived to reach the protective shelter of the marsh. As
time went on conditions changed. Skunk fur became fashion-
able and commanded a good price. The country boy, ever
on the alert for an opportunity to add to his pocket money, .
sallied forth and captured the luckless fur bearer wherever
found, so that within a comparatively short time the skunks
almost wholly disappeared. When this check on their increase
was removed, the snapping turtles hatched in great numbers,
and scrambled off in all directions into the marsh. When
their numbers had been properly controlled by the destruction
of a large proportion of their eggs, their food supply was
adequate, but when they had increased many-fold the supply
proved insufficient. Finally, through force of circumstances,
the turtles added ducklings to their fare, until the few ducks
that refused to leave the marsh paid the penalty of their per-
sistency by rarely bringing to maturity more than one or two
young. It is not surprising that this great aggregation of tur-
tles, containing the essential of delicious soup, should have
attracted the attention of the agents of the marketmen and
restaurant keepers. The final chapter, the readjustment of
conditions, may be briefly told: The marsh became a scene of
great activity, where men and boys caught the voracious
chelonians, and bags, boxes and barrels of them were shipped
away. There was also a depreciation in the value of skunk
skins, with a corresponding loss of interest on the part of the
trapper, so the progeny of the surviving skunks congregated
at the old beach and devoured the eggs of the turtles that had
enjoyed a brief period of prosperity. The broods of ducks
now remained unmolested and attracted other breeding birds,
with the result that the old marsh reverted to its original

populous condition.”
544 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The maintenance of the biologic balance between the many
diverse forms of animal life cannot be adequately discussed
within the limits of this volume; but a few observations on
some of the natural enemies of game birds will not be out of
place.

There are a few animals which are so sagacious as to be
able to maintain themselves and become so numerous locally
at times as to do too much injury to the game in spite of the
ordinary hunter. Among these are the fox and the Crow.

Probably the fox is nearly as numerous now in Massa-
chusetts as it ever was. Its chief food supply of insects, field
mice and other small animals is abundant, for man does not
hunt them, but protects them by killing the Hawks and Owls
and other enemies that feed on them, and it can draw at
need on poultry and game for additional supplies. We have
destroyed the wolves and all other large natural enemies that
were wont to prey on the fox, and now we discourage fox
hunting and trapping by protecting and increasing the deer
and prohibiting the use of scented bait. There are now so
many deer in Massachusetts that many a hunter will not hunt
foxes with dogs lest his dogs get on the trail of a deer, —a
breach of the game laws for which he is likely to have his
dogs shot by a.game warden and himself haled into court and
fined as a lawbreaker. As a result of these conditions foxes
have so increased in parts of Massachusetts and other New
England States that they have become a menace to the poul-
try raiser and a scourge to the game. I spent a day in the
woods in the spring of 1910 in East Northfield, Hampshire
County, near the Vermont line, in a fine Grouse country, and
did not see a Grouse or hear one drum. I visited during the
day two fox dens, and found feathers of the Grouse scattered
about the entrance of each. Mr. A. O. Howard and other
gunners there informed me that Grouse were then rare in a
large section of that region, extending well up toward Brattle-
boro, Vt., and that foxes were abundant. Mr. Howard told
me that in the winter he had seen traces showing where the
foxes had caught Grouse in the snow, and showed me photo-
graphs exhibiting fox tracks and the remains of the feast. In
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 545

 

a country where foxes are so numerous and Grouse so scarce
foxes must check the increase of the game. Complaints re-
garding similar conditions have come from many sections of
the State, and poultry raisers complain loudly of damage to
their business by foxes. The fox is useful as a mouse destroyer,
but wherever its numbers are excessive the game will suffer.

The Crow, like the fox, is so astute that its numbers some-
times increase locally until it exercises a serious restraint upon
the multiplication of game. It destroys both eggs and young
of Grouse, Bob-whites, Ducks and other birds. Flocks of
Crows have been known to attack and kill full-grown Grouse
and hares. The Crow is useful as a destroyer of insects in
the grass-land, but it is not a bird for the game preserver to
protect.

The few bird-killing Hawks which inhabit Massachusetts are
always fair game for the gunner, and are kept within reasonable
bounds. The most pernicious enemies of birds come from the
ranks of those animals which are introduced from foreign
countries by man. In this list we may include the cat, the
dog, the rat and the hog.

Cats which have run wild are known to be most mis-
chievous. They roam the woods and fields in countless num-
bers. I have known fourteen, half fed, to be kept on one farm.
Thousands are abandoned every year at summer homes in
the country when the owners go back to the city. Cats are
so destructive that their introduction to islands in the sea
has been followed by the absolute extinction of certain birds,
rabbits and other small animals. European gamekeepers
say that nothing can be done on a game preserve until the
cats are killed.

A gentleman in Massachusetts who undertook to raise
Pheasants a mile from any village found that his gamekeeper
was obliged to kill a great number of cats. The cat, being an
introduced animal, is far more injurious to game than the
native natural enemies, and should be eliminated so far as
possible from the field.

Dogs, when allowed to run at large in the woods and fields
in spring and summer, destroy numbers of birds’ eggs and
546 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

young birds. Many farmers allow their dogs to roam at will.
Such dogs often hunt singly or in pairs. Hounds and bird-
dogs are given free range in spring and summer. Mongrel
curs are allowed to run loose everywhere. Some people do
not allow their dogs to eat meat, believing that meat has a
bad effect, but they permit them to run at will in the woods
and fields. One might as well turn out a ravening wolf among
the nesting game birds as to let loose such a meat-hungry
dog among them. Sometimes dogs catch full-grown Grouse
and Bob-whites. Several sportsmen have told me that they
have seen their dogs catch mature, unwounded Grouse, and
a Grouse was brought to me which showed on dissection
that it had been caught and killed by a dog. On inquiry it
was learned that a bird-dog, hunting in the snow, brought it
in. I once owned a dog that was seen to catch young Pheasants
and full-grown gray squirrels.

On the northern breeding grounds of the wild-fowl, near
the shores of the Arctic Sea, a short supply of fish results in
the Eskimo dogs being turned out to seek their own living,
with a consequent serious destruction of wild-fowl in the
nesting season. The general introduction of reindeer for beasts
of burden in arctic America would help in the preservation of
our wild-fowl.

Rats are very destructive to the eggs and young of game
birds during the summer. They roam a great deal in the
woods and fields. They are particularly pernicious on game
preserves where game birds are raised in large numbers, and
they are, in many cases, the most destructive enemies of the
game in such localities.

Hogs, when allowed to run at large, destroy many of the
eggs of game birds, and when enclosed in a field they get all
such eggs. The hog in New England, however, is not so de-
structive as in the south, where, in many cases, it still is allowed
to run at large.

A few species of bird-killing Hawks are destructive to game,
and any of the larger Hawks or Owls are likely to kill young
game birds at times. Snapping turtles, large fish, such as
pike, and large frogs often kill young ducklings. Whenever
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 547

 

game farming becomes established in this country all the
enemies of the game will be well held in check, and their in-
fluence on the increase of game will be negligible.

Telegraph, Telephone and Trolley Wires and Other
Obstructions.

Some of the improvements and inventions of this era
cause much mortality among birds. Lighthouses, electric
light towers and wires, trolley and telegraph wires, etc., maim
or kill thousands of birds, which, in nocturnal flight, especially
in migration, dash themselves against these obstructions
erected in the air. Fortunately, most of the game birds seem
to escape such collisions, but Rails and Woodcock, which fly
low in their migrations, suffer severely. High wire fences,
such as are used for deer parks, kill many Grouse, which dash
against them, as they often do against the walls of houses
situated among trees or near woods.

MINOR CAUSES OF THE DECREASE OF BIRDS.

There are many minor causes that are assigned for the
depletion of upland game birds, some of which appreciably
affect the numbers of birds. Among these are certain alter-
ations in agricultural conditions, such as changes from grain
raising to dairying, which have deprived these birds of a food
supply that they formerly utilized. The use of the mowing
machine and the early cutting of grass disturb their nests.

Lead poisoning is one of the minor causes of the decrease
of wild-fowl and game birds which may in time assume con-
siderable importance in localities where much shooting is done.

Lead Poisoning.

Hon. George Bird Grinnell, editor of Forest and Stream,
called attention to this unexpected danger in 1894, when its
effects were first noticed in America, although they were re-
ported in England in 1902 among Pheasants and Partridges,
and commented on in the London Field. Since 1894 cases of
548 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

lead poisoning have been reported from English preserves
where game is raised in quantities and much shooting of
driven game is practiced. Occasional articles have appeared
in the press calling attention to a disease among wild Ducks
called “croup,” which is caused by lead poisoning. The Ducks
are self-poisoned, and their condition is brought about by
picking up and swallowing shot. There are some favorite
shooting grounds where tons of shot have been fired at wild-
fowl. Here the birds, in their search for sand and gravel as
an aid to digestion, swallow quantities of shot, which have
been scattered over the marshes, along the shores, and in the
shallow waters, where Ducks feed. The shot is disintegrated
in the stomach by trituration and attrition, and lead particles
are absorbed into the tissues. The trouble is common in
certain localities among Ducks, Geese and Swans. The symp-
toms are a rattling in the throat and the dropping of a yellow-
ish fluid from the bill. The bird breathes hard, becomes weak
and helpless and finally dies.

Dissection reveals pellets of lead in the stomach or gizzard,
the lining of which becomes corroded and can be picked away
in pieces. The intestines and rectum become inflamed and the
liver is very dark. At Galveston, Stephenson Lake and Lake
Surprise, Tex., at points on Currituck Sound, N.C., and at the
Misqually Flats, Puget Sound, many Ducks have been found
sick and unable to fly from the effects of this poisoning.!

The Destruction of the Feeding Grounds.

Many correspondents attribute the decrease of wild-fowl
and shore birds in Massachusetts to the destruction of their
feeding grounds here. The gradual fillmg up of ponds and
estuaries, the damming of streams for commercial purposes,
the draining of swamps and meadows in the process of convert-
ing them into cranberry bogs, the drying up of small ponds as a
result of eutting off the forest cover, the digging over of flats
and bay bottoms in getting shell-fish, —all have more or less
local effect on the numbers of birds. On Cape Cod the building

 

1 Grinnell, George Bird: American Duck Shooting, 1901, pp. 598-600.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 549

 

of cranberry bogs has resulted in some depletion of breeding
Black Ducks, but the reservoirs established for the purpose of
flooding these bogs have in part compensated the birds for the
loss of their former feeding grounds. On the whole, while all
these changes have produced a local decrease of some species,
their influence has been very slight compared with that of
excessive and unregulated shooting in the same localities and
elsewhere.

ERRONEOUS OPINIONS REGARDING THE CAUSES OF THE
DECREASE OF WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

A few correspondents in Massachusetts express the opinion
that the wild-fowl and shore birds are still as plentiful as ever,
but do not come this way now in their annual flights.

It is a common expression that the birds have “changed
their line of flight.” This saying is applied more often to
those species which are approaching extinction. This popular
opinion is rarely, if ever, founded on fact. It seems to have
been formed in the mind of some one as a plausible explanation
of the decrease of birds, and then passed from mouth to mouth
until it has taken a strong hold of the popular mind. Wilson,
Ord, Bonaparte and Turnbull seem to have been responsible
for passing this idea down to their posterity. Turnbull, in
his Birds of East Pennsylvania and New Jersey (1869, p. 48),
voices this opinicn in the following words: “Since the eastern
provinces have become more densely populated, many of
the larger and more wary species of birds have changed their
course of migration, and now reach the arctic regions by a
route taking them toward the interior of the continent.”
This statement is, I believe, based on a misapprehension of the
facts. Practically all the species which go north by the in-
terior route always went that way. A few of the larger species
which also went up the Atlantic coast are not found here
now, not because they have changed their line of flight, but
because most of the eastern individuals have been extermi-
nated. The few which remained may have followed their
comrades to the west, for when the numbers of a species de-
550 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

crease it tends to contract its range, or to occupy only that
portion of it that is most suitable to its purposes. The bird
which Turnbull names to exemplify this change of flight is
the Whooping Crane, which once inhabited the entire con-
tinent and migrated up and down the Atlantic coast as well
as through the interior. The individuals along the Atlantic
coast were first killed off, then those farther west, until now
the species is nearing extinction. That is the manner in which
the line of flight of the Whooping Crane was changed. It is
of no avail to argue that the bird was so shy that it could not
have been killed off, but must have been driven to the west.
The fact remains that it is now so rare everywhere that it is
exceedingly difficult to get a specimen for a museum or zodlogi-
cal garden. Nevertheless, there is no rule without some ex-
ception. The Passenger Pigeon was obliged, by its great
numbers, periodical scarcity of food and constant persecution,
to change its location and its flight line frequently. Cross-
bills are very erratic in their flights, Robins are great wan-
derers, but I do not recall other remarkable exceptions to this
rule among land birds. It is noted often that a certain species
of Duck will be scarce in a locality for a year, or more. If this
scarcity is quite general and only temporary, it is looked upon
as probably the result of a poor breeding season; but if the
scarcity continues, it usually is assigned by the gunner to a
“change in the line of flight.”

We get our idea of the flight of birds largely from the
number which stop in our vicinity. Thousands of birds of a
certain species may pass over or by us unseen and unnoticed.
Wilson says that a vessel loaded with wheat was wrecked near
the entrance of Great Egg Harbor, N. J. The wheat floated
out in great quantities, and in a few days the “whole surface
of the bay”? was covered with Ducks of a kind unknown to
the people and never seen by them before. The gunners of
the neighborhood had great sport shooting these Ducks for
three weeks, and they sold them at twelve and one-half cents
each. They finally learned that the birds were Canvas-backs,
which they might have sold for from four to six times that sum.
Probably the Canvas-back passes near this coast every year,
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 551

 

but was unnoted by the inhabitants until it stopped on account
of an unusual supply of food. The fact that it was seen there
that year and not before or afterward does not indicate any
change in its line of flight in that particular year. It is stated
by George B. Sennett that an “unusual flight” of Swans
occurred in northwestern Pennsylvania on March 22, 1879
(see page 197); but upon reading the account we find that a
sleet storm brought them to earth. A large flight of Swans
undoubtedly passes across the State twice every year in the
migration from the fur countries to the south Atlantic sea-
board and back. Probably they usually fly so high that they
pass unnoticed. Here was no change in the “‘line of flight;”’ no
“unusual flight,” merely a stop at an unusual point. Probably
there is little change in the annual direction of the flight
pursued by any of these birds, except such as may be caused
by scarcity or abundance of food or the accidents of migra-
tion. Early wild-fowl may frequent a certain river one spring
because the ice breaks up earlier than in some other river.
The conditions may change the next year. There are occa-
sions when birds are overtaken by severe storms (which obscure
their outlook), accompanied by high winds, which deflect the
bewildered creatures sometimes hundreds of miles from their
course. Hence the ‘“‘flights” of shore birds, which sometimes
land on the coast during northeast storms. They are drifted
in by the gale, or are passing high overhead and, becoming
confused, alight. Such storms sometimes drive salt-water
fowl far inland. High winds from the west may sometimes
send to our shores flights of shore birds which are crossing the
country in their regular migration to or from the south Atlantic
coast. It is a well-known fact that as the migration along
the Atlantic coast has lessened in numbers, these flights on
westerly winds have become more noticeable, and this often is
advanced as another proof that the shore birds are not less
numerous but have ‘“‘changed their line of flight,’ and now
usually pass to the west. This is an error. There always has
been a great flight of birds from the great northwest to the
south Atlantic and Gulf States. The flight on the Atlantic
coast remains the same, except for the great diminution in
552 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

number and the practical extinction of some species from over-
shooting.

This so-called change of flight is easily explained. A few
families of Knots or Red-breasts, for example, reared in the
same locality in the far north, start down the Atlantic coast in
their migration. Gunners on the Bay of Fundy first decimate
the birds, which then cross to Cape Cod, pass a blind occupied
by an experienced gunner, who gets nearly all of them, and
the next gunner a little farther down the beach kills what
are left. There will be no more of those birds coming down
the Atlantic coast from that nesting place for some time.
This has happened all along the Atlantic coast.

Mr. William R. Sears tells of an instance where fourteen
Summer Yellow-legs came to decoys where two men were
shooting, and eleven were killed there, while the other three
were shot by a gunner at another stand not far away. Mr.
W. D. Carpenter of Nantucket tells me that one day he killed
all the Teal there were in a pond, — fifteen in number.

I know of an instance where a market hunter who was
very skilful called a “bunch” of shore birds and not one
escaped. This is one explanation of the so-called change
in their line of flight,—it is deflected into the pot,— but
there is another. A few birds shot at, injured perhaps, but
not mortally, manage to escape, and, recognizing the points
where their comrades were slain, keep well off shore in the
future, or fly high and perhaps induce their companions to do
likewise. Fishermen and sailors often see or hear such flights
off shore.

Undoubtedly the stream of migration widens or contracts
somewhat with the fluctuations in the numbers of a species.
A good breeding season in the northwest, or better protection
of the birds there, may result in an extension of the migration
wave to the eastward. Under such conditions wild-fow] in-
crease in numbers in New England, while opposite conditions
tend to contract the migration range of the species and narrow
the stream of migration. Undoubtedly the killing off of certain
species in the east has had the latter effect, and I believe that
in this way only have any great or permanent changes in the
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 553

 

migration routes of wild-fowl and shore birds taken place in
recent times. Nevertheless, during the winter and in the
season of migration, birds in moving from day to day often
change their daily ‘‘fly lines,” sometimes making wide detours
and avoiding places over which they formerly flew, or forsaking
old feeding grounds for new ones. These movements, which
in many cases seem inexplicable, rarely take the birds to such
a distance from their regular migration route that they cannot
readily recognize the familiar landmarks or shores. A de-
flection from their usual course of from ten to twenty miles
either way, caused by the wind, will not take them out of
sight of the familiar landmarks by which they travel.

The Destruction of the Eggs of Wild-fowl for Commercial
Purposes.

A most “grotesquely fantastic explanation”’ of the decrease
of wild-fowl was published years ago by the press of the
country, and fathered by a society entitled the National
Game, Fish and Bird Protective Association. A tale was
told of enormous destruction of wild-fowl eggs in the north-
west for commercial purposes. It was stated that millions,
shiploads and trainloads of eggs were gathered in Alaska for
shipment to points in the east, where they were manufactured
into albumen cake.

This fantastic tale, like Banquo’s ghost, will not down, and
we now have one to match it in the east. The statement is
gravely made that schooner loads of Ducks’ eggs have been
brought to T wharf in Boston from the coasts of Labrador and
the islands in the Arctic Sea, where the nests of Ducks and
Geese are rifled by thousands. These stories probably have
arisen because of the former commercial use of the eggs of
Murres and other sea birds.

In 1895 the management of Forest and Stream of New
York undertook a thorough investigation of the first story, and
found it to be absolutely unfounded.? Mr. James Henry

 

1 Sea birds, which do not depend upon landmarks, but seem to be directed in storm or fog, as
well ag in clear weather, by the power which guides the planets in their courses, are extreme excep-
tions to any rule of migration which may be laid down with regard to land birds.

2 Grinnell, George Bird: American Duck Shooting, 1901, pp. 576-581.
554 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Rice, Jr., informs me that he has heard similar stories from
lumbermen from the northwest, but I have been unable to get
any definite and authentic information on the subject.

The Decline of Agriculture.

Many observers along the Massachusetts coast are prone to
assign the decrease in the number of shore birds to the decline
of agriculture. Many farmers have given up cutting the salt-
marsh grass; sheep and cattle which formerly kept down the
grass on the hill pastures are no longer kept; ‘‘pastures are
growing up to brush;” and for all these reasons it is said that
the birds “do not come any more.” There is a little logic in
this reasoning. Of course, all observing persons know that
many birds prefer mowed meadow or marsh or close-cropped
pasture to tall and uncut grass, bushes or young trees. We
must admit that it makes some difference to the birds whether
the grass is cut or not, but when we see the decline of agricul-
ture put forward as a reason for the disappearance of such
birds as the Eskimo Curlew and the Golden Plover, which
have been killed off by market hunting and spring shooting
in the west, until one of them is practically extinct and the
other is in danger of extinction, the explanation loses force.
If we consider for a moment the fact that there were no mowed
meadows or cropped pastures when the first explorers came
here, and that the coasts and river banks then swarmed with
shore birds, such explanations of the diminution of the birds
seem puerile. On the other hand, the diking of marshes to
shut out the salt water might have a considerable effect on
some species; but this practice has not become general as yet
along the Massachusetts coast.

The Increase of Cottages and Camps.

The increase in the number of houses, cottages and camps
on beaches, lake shores and river banks frequently is advanced
as a reason for the decrease of game birds, shore birds and
wild-fowl. This in itself, however, has very little effect on the
birds, unless the houses cover and obliterate their feeding
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 555

 

grounds. Where birds are not molested or shot at they make
themselves at home in man’s neighborhood. In India, where
animal life is held sacred by the greater part of the population,
numerous birds, large and small, frequent cities, and build
their nests about the buildings and in the yards and gardens.
In some European cities the Storks build their nests on the
housetops. The American representative of the Stork family,
the Wood Ibis, has been extirpated from a large part of the
United States and driven to the inaccessible swamps of the
south. We can readily imagine what would happen to one of
these great birds should it venture to even perch on one of
our housetops. Birds have little fear of houses and people
provided the people do not molest them. Wild-fowl come
into ponds in cities where protected. Ospreys build their
nests in farm-yards in Rhode Island. I once saw three Summer
Yellow-legs about a puddle beside a street in the city of
Somerville, Mass. Shore birds have increased very much in
numbers on the populous, much-frequented beaches of Swamp-
scott, Lynn and Nahant since shooting has been prohibited
there. They would frequent them more than they now do
were they not molested by dogs, cats and children. There
are practically no houses on most of the salt marshes of Mas-
sachusetts, except a few gunning camps, and it is the shooting,
more than the houses or the people, that drives the birds
away.

If no shooting or molesting of beach birds were allowed in
summer it would not be many years before large troops of
Sandpipers and Plover would be seen running along the most
populous beaches.

The Shortening of the Open Season.

A few of the older gunners and sportsmen attribute the
decrease of game birds to the shortness of the present shooting
season. They believe that the hunters so throng the woods
in a short season that the birds have no chance. This theory
lacks logic. It cannot apply to wild-fowl or shore birds, as
the season for them always has been long. If carried to its
556 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS

 

logical conclusion its advocates must believe that an open
season of one week would be more fatal to the birds than a
perpetual open season, with all protection withdrawn, — a
proposition which hardly appeals to common sense. The
short open season may be more destructive to the birds than
the former extended hunting time, but if so it is because of the
increased number of hunters, dogs and decoys, and because
of the modern improvements in firearms, means of communica-
tion, and transportation, which make the gunner more destruc-
tive than formerly and put him quickly on the hunting grounds.

GuNS MosT DESTRUCTIVE.

It is impossible to consider the conservation of game birds
apart from the sport or the business of hunting them. Any
plan for increasing their numbers must take the shooter into
account. In this connection we must recognize the fact that
shooting will be continued so long as there is any game left.
The birds must be conserved in spite of it.

The following statements cannot be successfully refuted:
(1) American wild game is in danger of extinction unless effec-
tive measures for replenishing the supply are adopted and
enforced throughout the land. (2) The decrease has gone on
progressively ever since the country was settled, and is due to
civilized man. (3) The most destructive agency generally
employed by civilized man to-day is the gun. While there are
other contributory causes of game destruction, any attempt to
minimize the effect of shooting is an injury to the cause of
game protection.

A few years ago experts of the Biological Survey estimated
that there were then from two and one-half million to three
million hunters in this country. Their estimate was based,
on the statistics of hunting licenses issued in the States where
such licenses were then required. In 1910 the editor of the
American Sportsman estimated that there were then three
million hunters in the country, — an army much larger than
all the troops that were enrolled on both sides during the

American civil: war.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 557

 

An officer of a great ammunition company assures me that
over nine hundred million loaded shotgun cartridges were
sold in the United States in 1910, and about one hundred
million in Canada. Only a small proportion of these were shot
at clay pigeons, etc., for only thirty-six million of these in-
animate targets were made here that year. We do not know
how many loaded shells were shipped abroad or how many were
imported into this country; we have no means of knowing
how many shells were bought empty and loaded by the hunt-
ers; nor do we know how many rifle cartridges were used,
or how many shots were fired at birds from muzzle loaders and
other weapons, but nine hundred and sixty-four million prob-
ably approximates the number of shot charges actually fired at
birds and other game in the United States and Canada in one
year. If the increase of hunters, guns and ammunition con-
tinues, and the supply of birds continues to decrease, there
will come a year when there will be ten cartridges made and
loaded for every game bird in America.

If hunting is to be continued in this country it must be
regulated everywhere, and the supply of game must be in-
creased, otherwise shooting will come to an end eventually for
want of game to shoot, and the manufacturers of guns and
ammunition will have to find a market elsewhere or give up
business. American manufacturers of guns and ammunition
realize this and have formed a national association for the
protection and propagation of game, to which they will con-
tribute a large sum annually.

There are many excellent and humane people who believe
that there is but one remedy for the present condition. They
say, “if you want to save the birds you must stop killing
them.” If no game were killed by man in this country for a
series of years, all game would increase in numbers. The
recent rapid increase and spread of deer over southern New
England, in regions where deer were extinct for many years,
shows the value of the perpetual close season. Let us consider
this matter, however, from the standpoint of the sportsman

and the gunner.
558 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

The Viewpoint of the Hunter.

Were it possible to enforce a close season on all wild birds
and animals certain species would become so numerous in time
as to destroy the crops and drive human beings from the land.
In India, where animal life is considered sacred by the natives,
and where few people shoot animals or birds, hundreds of
thousands of people have been killed by wild animals and
venomous serpents. The progress of mankind has necessitated
competition with the other animals for the possession of the
land. There could have been no settlement of the prairie
States, and no agriculture there, had not the vast herds of
bisons been destroyed. They would have broken down the
farmer’s fences, ruined his crops and driven him from the
country. In regions like New England where we have ex-
terminated the natural enemies of the deer, and where we
now protect deer at all times, they are increasing so much
in number that eventually it may become necessary to kill
many of them to protect the crops of the farmers. Unless
this is done the deer may become so numerous that many
will starve during our long winters. I once studied the con-
ditions on an island where protected deer had increased so
much that they had destroyed nearly all shrubbery and had
eaten the foliage from the trees as high as they could reach.
No crops could be raised there unless surrounded by a high
wire fence, and many deer died each year from weakness or
disease. It would have been better for all concerned had more
of these deer been killed each year and utilized as food. Many
elks die from cold and starvation on government game pre-
serves.

No man can exist without destroying enormous numbers of
the smaller forms of animal life during his lifetime. Theodore
Roosevelt has said that no one, except a vegetarian, consist-
ently can object to the killing of animals for food; nor can the
vegetarian if he is shod or gloved with leather, or uses furs,
glue, animal fertilizers, feathers or any of the many animal
products which contribute to our comfort or welfare. Neither
the vegetarian, the humanitarian nor any who abhor the taking
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 559

 

of animal life can escape indirect responsibility for the destruc-
tion of thousands of insects, mammals and birds. If we eat
bread it is at the expense of the lives of the insects, birds and
mammals which feed upon the grain, and which the farmer
often is obliged to kill to protect his crops. Wild Geese are
killed in large numbers in the west to protect the sprouting
grain. Geese, Ducks, Blackbirds, Pigeons, Crows, Rooks,
Grouse, Sparrows and other birds, and mice, rats, gophers,
squirrels and other mammals, would destroy the grain crops
of the world were they allowed to become too numerous; and
the legions of insect enemies of grain must be fought con-
tinually. Ducks, Bobolinks and Blackbirds are killed in large
numbers on the rice fields. Mice, squirrels, rabbits and certain
birds are among the most destructive of fruit-tree pests.
Squirrels are the pests of the nut grower, while marmots
destroy garden vegetables. The vegetarian and the humani-
tarian, therefore, are not in a logical position to protest against
the killing of animals, since of necessity much of their own
food is procured at the expense of the lives of many creatures.

Therefore, let not those who shrink at the sound of a gun
be too intolerant of the man who gets enjoyment and recreation
in killing game legitimately, but let us devote our energies
to so regulating the killing and production of game that no
wild species will be exterminated, but that game will be so in-
creased that a reasonable amount of gunning may be provided
for those who find recreation in it. The killing of birds for
mere sport is abhorrent to many people. Still there are many
good and useful men who enjoy it. The hunting instinct
is inborn in many who are among the most efficient men now
in business life. It is inherited from a long line of hunting
ancestry. Men who have the combative and destructive
elements of their character fully developed are better fitted
for the battle of life than those not so endowed, and such
men often find their best recreation in hunting. I have
known business men whose useful lives have been much pro-
longed by field sports, — men whom no other form of outdoor
recreation could have so attracted. Many such men find
that a moderate indulgence in field sports gives them an errand
560 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

afield, cultivates the love of nature, ensures a sufficient amount
of outdoor exercise and greatly improves their health. Fur-
thermore, a violent death is the natural end of most birds.
Usually they are killed for food by their natural enemies if
not by man. This is a much quicker and less painful end,
on the whole, than the slower death which results from old
age, disease or starvation and exposure that otherwise would
be their fate. Legitimate hunting, then, if not carried to
excess, is, from the sportsman’s viewpoint, a benefit rather
than:an injury to the birds, particularly where the sportsman
himself is instrumental in increasing rather than in diminish-
ing the game which he hunts.

These are facts that the altruistic nature lover who decries
field sports should consider; while, on the other hand, the
sportsman should be similarly tolerant of the desires of the
nature lover, that both may work together for the rational
protection and increase of the game in which both are equally
interested, even though they regard it from totally different
viewpoints.

The perpetual close season should be and must be utilized
to save those species which are now most in danger of extinc-
tion; but it is impracticable, if not impossible, to go farther
than that. A perpetual close season on all game could not be
enforced, as nearly all hunters and sportsmen who are now self-
ishly interested (if you will) in saving the game would lose their
interest in game protection, and the poacher and Jawbreaker
would continue to hunt. The vast sum now derived from
hunters’ licenses in this country would be lost to game protec-
tion. State game commissions would be unsupported, and
neither game laws nor bird laws would be so well enforced as at
present. How, then, shall we maintain and increase our game?

A close season enforced on all game on a limited territory
for a few years might make game plentiful there, but if that
territory were again opened to shooting, gunners would swarm
there and the last condition would be worse than the first.

If we look abroad we find that in countries that have been
settled for many centuries game is far more plentiful than
here. If we are to have birds numerous in our coverts and
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 561

 

abundant in our markets we must adopt some modification,
at least, of the system that has been in successful operation in
England for centuries.

The game in this country was amply sufficient for the wants
of the red men. It furnished them an abundance of animal
food. Only the tribes of Mexico and Central America, which
were somewhat civilized and lived in cities, found it necessary
to add to their meat supply by domesticating animals; but
as conditions changed after the advent of the Europeans, and
as civilization advanced, the people introduced foreign domes-
tic animals to provide a meat supply, and foreign plants for a
vegetable and fruit supply, but still depended upon nature to
furnish a sufficient quantity of wild game for a vast and grow-
ing population. At the end of the nineteenth century we were
less advanced in the propagation of game than was any other
civilized country. We are hardly beginning yet to realize
that the only way to produce a plentiful supply of game,
sufficient for the needs of all, in a settled country is to en-
courage the individual ownership and propagation of game.
If our people had elected to depend on the natural supply of
native wild animals and plants for food the country never
would have been settled as it is to-day. Even the Indians
found it necessary to cultivate and store corn to tide them over
times of famine in winter. It is only by the individual owner-
ship and cultivation of plants and the propagation of domestic
animals and birds for food that we have been able to feed our
own people, and in the future we must look largely to indi-
vidual ownership and propagation to supply our increasing
population with game. When it is made legal and profitable
for men to raise game and sell it in the markets, a supply will
be forthcoming as regularly as the crops of corn or potatoes, or
as the annual supply of shell-fish, eggs, poultry, hogs or cattle.

We are now sending millions of dollars to other countries
for game that easily might be produced here, and many
wealthy American sportsmen go abroad and pay enormous
sums for their shooting. An economic problem that we now
face is “how to keep at home the vast sum of money that
goes abroad for shooting rights and game.”
562 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

THE INTRODUCTION OF FOREIGN GAME BIRDS.

When civilization, the settlement of the country and the
overshooting which accompanies it have extirpated the native
game, it is folly to introduce imported game expecting it to
thrive in a wild state under the same conditions that have
brought about the destruction of the native game. If foreign
game is fostered and protected at all times it may increase for
a while, but whenever it is exposed to the same amount of
shooting that extirpates native game, it vanishes like mist
before the summer sun. Give the indigenous game the same
care and protection that must be given to foreign game to
establish it, and the results will be far more satisfactory. No
naturalist would expect any introduced game bird to thrive
better in this country than the native birds, which have become
exactly suited to their environment by centuries of natural
selection. Most of the attempts to foster foreign game birds
here in a wild state have failed or are doomed to failure. Often
apparent success deceives the importers for a few years, only
to be followed by sudden failure. The only instance where
unquestioned permanent success has followed such an intro-
duction is that of the Ring-necked Pheasant in the coast region
of Oregon, Washington and British Columbia, where the
climate is very favorable to the species. In ninety-nine cases
out of a hundred such introductions will fail in the end, unless
the introduced birds are protected by law at all times, and
even then many of them will fail. In the successful case there
are chances that the foreign species will either drive out the
native game birds or introduce some destructive disease among
them.

Nevertheless, there are certain foreign game birds which,
if artificially propagated, fed and cared for under condi-
tions similar to those to which they have been accustomed
in Europe, may thrive even better than native game birds
under such conditions. In regions where the forests have
been destroyed and practically all the land has been turned
into well-cultivated farms, certain foreign game birds may be
made to thrive where Ruffed Grouse, for example, will not
 

 

 

 

 

PLATE XXIXx.

A breeding pen for Bob-whites established on a Connecticut game farm.
(Photograph by Herbert K. Job.)

 

 

PLATE XXX.

Group of Bob-whites in confinement. A part of the breeding stock at the
Connecticut Agricultural College, at Storrs, Conn. (Photograph by
Herbert K. Job.)
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 563

 

live. Those who are killing the game of this country must
put back into the coverts at least two game birds for every
one which they kill if we are to continue to have game, and
this can be done only by means of artificial propagation on
game farms and preserves.

GAME PRESERVING.

If we ask why game is still plentiful in the British Isles
and some other long-settled European -countries, the private
game preserve answers the question. Game is plentiful be-
cause there are many persons interested in propagating, rear-
ing, shooting and selling it, and many thousands of game-
keepers are devoting their lives to it. The birds which form
the basis of game-bird preserving are the Ring-necked Pheasant,
the English Pheasant and the Mallard Duck, all of which are
not much more difficult to rear than domestic poultry. Pheas-
ants have been reared by man since before the time of the
Roman conquerors, and Mallards no man knows how long.
These two birds may be depended upon to do well on preserves
in this country. There is no difficulty in breeding them success-
fully in large numbers in New England, as has been demon-
strated by the Thayers, at Lancaster, Mass., and others in
this and other New England States. In addition to these
birds ‘the European Partridge may be reared successfully in
this country, with proper care and feeding, on game. farms.
The Hungarian Partridge is recommended for this climate as
it is believed to be more hardy than the English bird; but too
much dependence should not be placed on foreign Partridges,
for even in England, where the people have been propagating:
them for many years, there has been much complaint of a
recent scarcity of the birds. Objections to the killing and sale
of birds raised in this manner would apply also to the killing
and sale of poultry, sheep and hogs, and laws should permit
killing and sale of ‘rds reared on game farms, everywhere,
as in Massachusett . Under present conditions (1911) it is
not a profitable market industry. I asked a poultryman why
he did not raise wild Ducks for the market, and he promptly
564 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

replied that he could make more money raising Pekin Ducks;
but were both the sale of wild game and the importation of
cheap foreign game prohibited, the demand for game would
soon make the rearing of Pheasants, Mallards and Guinea
Fowl an important industry. Undoubtedly it would be
largely undertaken by well-to-do landowners of sporting pro-
clivities, who would look to the sale of game to pay part of
their shooting expenses. Even now the rearing of Pheasants,
Mallards and Wood Ducks for propagating purposes is a
profitable business for expert game farmers.

Success in game preserving depends mainly on the pro-
ficiency of the gamekeeper. Unless experienced gamekeepers
can be secured from England or Scotland, the chances of
immediate success are small, except, perhaps, with Guinea
Fowl and Mallards. State game officials are experimenting
in the propagation of game, and they will soon be able to
advise others how to guard against costly mistakes.

Gamekeepers find that it is very important to control the
natural enemies and diseases of the game, for nature resents
any attempt to interfere with her laws. The gamekeeper,
like the farmer, is working against nature, and, like the farmer
also, he will find that the enemies of his undertaking will
multiply whenever he attempts to raise on a certain piece of
land more of any species of plant or animal than nature would
grow there. Cats, Hawks, foxes and other “vermin” seek
the gamekeeper’s preserve as they do the poultry yard. The
gamekeeper must go gun in hand. The disinfection of brood-
ers, coops and ground also is important. Nevertheless, suc-
cess in rearing both foreign and native game is assured to those
who diligently follow right methods.

The European species most successfully preserved are
those of the open land or the heath. Wood Grouse, like the
Capercaillie and the Black Grouse, have become almost
extinct on the British Isles, while the heath Grouse, Pheas-
ants and Partridges are bred on farms and preserves in large
numbers. Our limited experiments with native American
game have given similar results. It seems not to be very
difficult to rear Bob-whites and Prairie Chickens, but no one
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 565

 

has had marked success as yet with the Ruffed Grouse or any
other of the woodland Grouse. Much may be done, however,
by stocking game farms with the favorite food plants of these
birds and protecting the birds from vermin.

Many game preserves already are established in this
country. In some cases the lands of farmers owning or leas-
ing contiguous farms are leased by an individual or a club
for shooting purposes. This does not interfere with the cul-
tivation of the land, and in some cases the lessee provides a
gamekeeper to watch for poachers and to destroy vermin, a
moderate amount of shooting is done and the game increases
on the preserve, while the overflow makes better shooting in
the surrounding country. Individuals and clubs have bought
large tracts of land for preserves. Many game farms have
been established along the Atlantic seaboard, varying in size
from a few hundred acres to twenty-five thousand acres.
These include preserves established solely for large game, and
others maintained entirely for water-fowl. Some are devoted
chiefly to native upland game birds, and others for the most
part to the propagation of Pheasants and other foreign game
birds. The propagation of game birds has only recently begun
in this country, but large numbers of Pheasants have been
reared, particularly in New Jersey. Some success has been
attained already with native game birds. We have learned
that we can propagate the Bob-white, Canada Goose, Wood
Duck, Black Duck, Mallard and Blue-winged Teal, and in
time we shall no doubt be able to produce these birds in large
numbers. Prof. C. F. Hodge has reared the Ruffed Grouse
in captivity, but only on a small scale.

Game farms provide a refuge for both game birds and song
birds; they increase all useful birds. The owner has an inter-
est in keeping up the stock, which also serves to replenish the
depleted covers of the surrounding unprotected country.

The principal objections to game preserves are that they
exclude the public and are unpopular. They are considered
un-American, as they give a few people a monopoly on hunt-
ing privileges within their borders. Preserves increase and
protect the game if properly managed. In’ this they are
566 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

un-American, for under the American plan of free shooting
everywhere for everybody we destroy the game and do noth-
ing to replenish the supply. There is so much land in this
country that millions of acres might be spared for preserves
and there would still remain enough for public hunting grounds,
where the supply of game from native breeding birds and the
overflow from the preserves would be greater than that which
the whole country now maintains.

The prejudice against game preserves arises largely from
the fact that too many preserves in this country are merely
lands from which the public is shut out, and on which the
owner enjoys exclusive opportunity of shooting wild game
which is, in law, the property of the people. In many cases
the landowner does nothing whatever to propagate the birds
or to increase them; but, instead, attracts them to his pre-
serve that he may shoot them. This is not the kind of game
preserving which should be advocated. The public has some
rights. The law should be so drawn that a person desiring
to establish a game preserve should be required to make it a
gamefarm. In that case he must secure his stock from some
private source, — some breeder of game birds in his own or
some other State, — and must engage in propagating the birds;
then they are as much his own as are poultry or cattle under
the same conditions, and there is no reason why he should not
prohibit other people from shooting them on his land, nor is
there any reason why he should not be allowed to sell them in
the market under proper restrictions. All birds which escape
from his land and run wild become public property, subject to
the same laws as any other wild game, and thus he becomes a
public benefactor. On the other hand, the public must recog-
nize the justice of the trespass laws, and the fact that the land-
owner has the legal right to exclude trespassers from his
holdings. The shooting public should be more considerate of
the rights of the property owner. If they were more regard-
ful of such rights far less land would be posted against tres-
passers. Any man who goes unbidden on the land of another
should regard himself as a trespasser, and should take no undue
liberty thereon.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS.. 567

 

The game farm is here to stay and in time will show benefi-
cent results, but it cannot be depended upon alone to increase
our game. Restrictive game laws will be doubly necessary to
conserve the wild game wherever free shooting is allowed.

There is one serious objection to the introduction of foreign
game birds, and that is the danger of introducing disease
which may be extremely fatal to our native game birds.
About the time that the European House Sparrow (Passer
domesticus) was introduced into Rhode Island, an enteric
disease called the blackhead appeared among Rhode Island
Turkeys. No satisfactory preventive or cure for the disease
has been found, and it almost has destroyed the Turkey indus-
try in New England. Investigations made under Dr. Philip
B. Hadley of the Rhode Island experiment station proved that
over sixty per cent. of the English Sparrows about the station
carried the germ of this disease. It was found also in chicks,
Pigeons and some other birds, and now is distributed generally
among poultry. The disease is ascribed by some authorities
to a coccidium and by others to an amceba, both of which
are present in diseased birds. The disease is identical with
a white diarrhoea of chicks, and is now quite generally dis-
tributed in the United States. It is extremely deadly to
Ruffed Grouse and Bob-whites in confinement, and is carried
by Pheasants as well as poultry. What effect this and certain
bacterial diseases have had or will have on the native Grouse
and Quail, in field and cover, can only be conjectured. Out-
breaks of a ‘Grouse disease” are well known in England and
Scotland. A very fatal Quail disease has appeared in the
southern States. It seems probable, however, now that so
many Pheasants and Partridges have been imported into this
country, that the harm has been done, that their diseases are
all here and that further importations can do no more than to
add to their dissemination.

Another objection to foreign birds, which often is brought
up, is that if they become too numerous they will drive out
the native birds; that the European Partridge and the Pheas-
ant will take the food that otherwise would support the Bob-
white in winter; and that the Pheasants, where numerous,
568 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

will drive out both Bob-whites and Grouse; but there need
be little fear of this, for short open seasons each year will
prevent any undue increase of any game bird outside of the
preserves. The main energy of the game preserver, however,
should be directed toward the conservation of native game
birds, which, from the sportsmen’s point of view, are far
superior to those of foreign origin.

What is called the “more game”’ movement, the exponent
of which in this country is Mr. Dwight W. Huntington, editor
of the Amateur Sportsman, has resulted in an increased inter-
est in game farms and a large demand for birds for breeding
purposes.

Among the many books on game and gamekeeping, Mr.
Huntington’s recent work Our Wild Fowl and Waders is par-
ticularly timely, as it deals largely with methods of preserving
American water-fowl. The United States Department of
Agriculture has issued some valuable papers on game preserv-
ing and game preserves which should be in the hands of every
prospective game breeder.?

The Game Preserve Increases Insectivorous Birds.

The question often is asked by bird protectors, ““Why
should we take an interest in conserving game birds?” And
the complaint goes on. “‘We protect them, feed them and
care for them, going to considerable trouble and expense,
only to see them exterminated by sportsmen and market
hunters during the next open season. The sportsmen, the
market hunters, the marketmen, the gunmakers and the
ammunition makers care nothing for the protection of birds.
Their only interest in bird protection is that they may have
more birds to shoot.” There is a grain of truth here, but,
nevertheless, the conservation of game birds is the most impor-
tant of all bird protection. As hereinbefore stated, the high-
est value of birds to man is their esthetic and educational

 

+ The following bulletins bear on the subject: Pheasant Raising in the United States, by Henry
Oldys, assistant, Biol. Surv., with a chapter on Diseases of Pheasants, by George Byron Morse, M.D.,
U.S. Dept. of Agr., Farmers’ Bulletin No. 390; Introduction of the Hungarian Partridge into the
United States, by Henry Oldys, from Year Book of Dept. of Agr. for 1909; Private Game Preserves
and their Future in the United States, by T. S. Palmer, U. 8. Dept. of Agr., Bureau of Biol. Surv.,
Circular No. 72.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 569

 

value, and the game birds possess qualities. and attributes
which in this respect place them high among other species.

The hunting instinct will not down. It is in the blood of
the European and the American. Game birds are among its
legitimate objects. Exterminate the game birds and other
species most certainly will follow. Protect and increase the
game birds and those most concerned in killing them, the
sportsmen, become the best friends of the nongame birds.

The greatest beneficiaries of an increased game supply and
the establishment of game preserves are the birds themselves.
They are well taken care of, well fed, and, as stated elsewhere,
game preserving increases the numbers of both game and
nongame birds.

Where the game birds are now most hunted they most
need protection to prevent extinction. I say most emphati-
cally to the bird protectionist, conserve the game birds. Here
is where all bird protection begins. Game conservation will
reduce the numbers of birds of prey, but it will not exterminate
them, as all intelligent game preservers eventually learn that
it is unwise to exterminate any bird.

Game conservation will increase the numbers of insectiv-
orous birds because of the better conditions it makes for
their protection. It gives them safe refuges from the hunter
and reduces their natural enemies. The great number of
small birds in the northwestern European countries — a much
greater number relatively than is found in the United States —
is in part the result of the system of game preserving, which so
protects and increases the smaller birds that, in spite of the
fact that millions of them are killed for food and sport in
southern Europe, they still are produced annually in such
enormous numbers that the slaughter in the south has no
noticeable effect in the north. The insectivorous birds are the
chief beneficiaries of the system of game preserving.

METHODS OF ATTRACTING WATER-FOWL.

Those who are accustomed to the presence of water-fowl
find that the inland waters of New England have lost much of
their attractiveness. They seem dreary and blank in their
570 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

lack of bird life. One may ride day after day through Massa-
chusetts, by train or car, and rarely, if ever, see a wild Duck
in inland waters.

This decrease of water-fowl is so unnecessary and so
readily may be remedied that it seems anomalous that an
intelligent civilized people should have allowed such a condi-
tion to continue so long.

When we have stopped spring shooting, night shooting and
the pursuit of wild-fowl in boats, decoy Ducks and suitable
food will bring back the birds to our inland waters. These
two essentials are almost equally important. Wherever water-
fowl are kept in a pond, wild-fowl will come in, provided they
are not too much disturbed. As hereinbefore stated, Grebes
never should be disturbed or shot, as they are worthless as
food and make excellent call birds. A flock of domesticated
Ducks of many colors is not usually effective in attracting
the shyer wild-fowl; but full-blooded wild Mallards or their
descendants are excellent. Pinioned Black Ducks, gray call
Ducks, a cross between the Mallard and Black Duck or any
native wild Ducks or Geese make good call birds. It is essen-
tial to have a rather large flock of call birds to en§iire success
in attracting wild ones. With such a flock many wild Ducks
or Geese may be lured to almost any country place where
there is water, or even into a village.

In the spring of 1908 Mr. J. T. Miner of Kingsville, Ont.,
had thirteen tamed Canada Geese at a pond near the build-
ings at his home. Eleven wild birds came in and joined them.
Although five of these were shot, the other six remained and
became so fearless as to follow the tame Geese into a shed.
On May 15 they flew very high in the air and left for the
north. In March, 1909, thirty-two came, and only ten of
these are known to have been shot, but two disappeared later,
and on May 1 the flock left for the north. In March, 1910,
eighteen came back, and two weeks thereafter there were
about three hundred; thirty-six of these were shot. About
April 16 between fifty and sixty left, and the next day the
photograph represented in the accompanying illustration was
taken. I am indebted to Mr. P. A. Taverner of the Geological
 

 

 

 

PLATE XxXxXI.

Wild rice in flower, (One-half natural size.)

 
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 571

 

Survey at Ottawa for the photograph and the facts connected
with it. (See Plate XXVI, facing page 509.)

Wild-fowl may even be attracted into suitable ponds in
the largest cities in this way, provided no shooting is allowed,
as in Central Park, New York, and in the smaller ponds of
Boston. Mr. Horace W. Wright has published in the Auk
for 1910 a paper on “‘some rare wild Ducks wintering at Bos-
ton,”’ in which he states that in Jamaica Pond, Willow Pond,
Leverett Pond and Chestnut Hill Reservoir wild Ducks remain
more or less through the winter. He illustrates his article
with some excellent photographs of Canvas-backs, Baldpates
and other wild-fowl taken in these ponds. Mr. Charlesworth
Levey also has photographed many of these birds in these
ponds and has published in Bird-Lore an article on the sub-
ject, with some illustrations. Some of his photographs are
reproduced in this volume. Mr. C. J. Maynard publishes in
his Records of January 20, 1912, a statement from Mrs. Levey
and Charlesworth Levey that on December 26, 1911, there
were two hundred and eighty-two Black Ducks, one Mallard,
one male and two female Golden Eyes, and four male and one
female Lesser Scaup, on Jamaica Pond, and that on Leverett
Pond there was a fine male Baldpate. These birds have been
attracted to the Boston ponds by. Mallard Ducks placed there
by park employees. Next to decoys, food is the best lure,
as wild-fowl will not stay very long where they can find noth-
ing to eat. Grain, such as corn, wheat or rice, scattered in
shallow water where the Ducks can get it from the bottom,
will attract nearly all species of river water-fowl; but there
are many water plants, which are of no value to man, from which
these birds will secure a large part of their sustenance, and
where such plants are not present it is well to introduce them,
provided conditions are favorable for their establishment and
growth. Chief among these are wild rice (Zizania palustris
and Zizania aquatica), wild celery (Vallisneria spiralis) and
many water plants called pondweeds.

It is important to know these plants, where they may be
obtained and under what conditions they will succeed. Most
of them, when once established, require no further care, and
572 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

produce a perennial supply of duck food indefinitely. Some
of them now grow commonly in our inland waters, and others
have to be introduced.

The Biological Survey recently has issued a very useful
circular written by Mr. W. L. McAtee, which describes and
illustrates wild rice, wild celery and pondweeds of the genus
Potamogeton. From this circular most of the information
given below regarding these plants is taken.1 Mr. McAtee
finds by examining the stomach contents of many individuals
of sixteen species of game Ducks, taken in different parts of
the United States, that wild rice, wild celery and certain pond-
weeds collectively compose 25.31 per cent. of the total food.
The percentage of these foods found in the stomachs of the
different species is given in the following table: —

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

si ||
Common Name. Scientific Name. Stom-

pines] Yue | Cau, weeds. | Tt

Mallard, . Anas platyrhynchos, 209 17.18 2.48 | 12.67 | 32.28
Black Duck, Anas rubripes, 51 12.05 2.37 8.35 | 22.77
Gadwall, Chaulelasmus streperus, 37 17.64 | 17.64
Baldpate, Mareca americana, 30 7.16 | 10.00 13.71 | 30.87
Green-winged Teal, Nettion carolinense, 126 4.56 -69 | 10.32] 15.57
Blue-winged Teal, . Querquedula discors, 86 3.46 .20 9.83 | 13.49
Shoveller, Spatula clypeata, 49 7.83 7.83
Pintail, Dafila acuta, 67 4.95 180 | 13.39 | 20.14
Wood Duck, Aiz sponsa, 75 11.62 3.17 6.72 | 21.51
Redhead, ‘ Marila americana, 60 4.41 | 11.71 | 24.38 | 40.50
Canvas-back, . Marila valisineria, 60 .83 | 23.71 | 42.35 | 66.39
Scaup, or bluebill, . Moarila marila, 67 1.25 | 14.46 |} 23.20 | 38.92
Lesser Scaup, or bluebill, | Marila affnis, 126 7.49 | 17.53 8.18 | 33.20
Golden-eye, Clangula clangula americana, 23 2.95 6.56 9.51
Bufflehead, Charitonetta albeola, 36 2.22 5.66 4.46 | 12.34
Ruddy Duck, Erismatura jamaicensis, 41 9.54 | 12.56] 22.10
Average, ’ - 4.78 6.65 | 13.88 | 25.31

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 McAtee, W. L.: Three Important Wild Duck Foods, Bureau of Biol. Surv., U.S. Dept. of Agr.,

Circular No. 81, 1911.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 573

 

The percentage of wild rice and wild celery taken seems
rather low; but probably many of these Ducks were shot in
places where no wild celery grows, or where there was little
or no wild rice to be obtained. It seems probable, however,
that the pondweeds, individually or collectively, are on the
whole more generally distributed, and hence more important,
throughout the United States than either wild rice or wild
celery. The latter plants, however, are generally considered
to be more attractive to wild-fowl than any other, and, though
locally restricted in distribution, may be grown in suitable
localities almost anywhere in the United States.

Wild rice is eaten in all stages of growth by one or more
species of North American Ducks and Geese, and practically
all of them feed on the seed. It is the main fall food of many
Ducks in the marshes where it grows. Usually it is picked up
by them from the mud under water, where its germination is
sometimes delayed for at least eighteen months by various
causes, and, consequently, sprouting grain may be found in
the stomachs of wild Ducks at any time of the year. Many
species eat the shoots; the leaves and stems are eaten by
Geese, and the flowers have been found in the stomach of the
Wood Duck. The Mallard, Black Duck and Wood Duck
appear to be the greatest consumers of this plant.

Wild rice is a tall, round-stemmed, flat-leaved plant. The
stem is hollow, with cross partitions between as well as at the
joints. The base of the stem is stoutly hook-shaped, and
from it extend numerous fibrous roots, which anchor it to
the bottom. The flowers may be found from late July to
November. The lower branches of the flower head which
bear the male flowers are widely separated and stand out from
the stem, but the upper branches of pistillate flowers are
grouped together and erect. The grain (Fig. 22 A) is from one-
half to three-fourths of an inch long, slender and uniform in
diameter, with ends rounded or pointed. A perceptible rib
runs along one side of the grain and a slight groove along the
other. The husk of the seed (Fig. 22 B) has six grooves along
it and a long pointed beard or beak, the whole grain and husk
being sometimes more than an inch and a half in length.
514 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Wild rice grows naturally from northern Lake Winnipeg
to middle Florida and from northern New Brunswick to the
Gulf coast in eastern Texas. It does not grow in every suit-
able place within its range, but in most cases it may be made to

 

 

 

Fic. 22.— Wild rice. (From Circular No. 81, Bureau of Biological Survey, United States
Department of Agriculture.)

do so by transplanting. It was transplanted often by Indian
tribes, who used it as food. It usually will not succeed in
small stagnant ponds or in the margins of swift running
streams, but is readily established along the borders of marshy
streams where the current is slow, and in large ponds where
there is a slight current. It thrives best on a mud bottom,
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 575

 

although it may sometimes succeed in sand. It will grow in
brackish tidewater, but will not thrive where the water is
appreciably salty to the taste, nor in stagnant water anywhere.
The seeds naturally fall into the water and mud about the
parent plant, and, being slightly barbed, work gradually into
the bottom.

Many people who have planted wild rice seed have been
disappointed in the result; but failures have been due in most
cases either to planting in unfavorable localities or to lack of
vitality in the seed. Seed gathered by the Indians is either
dried or baked and never germinates. The seed must be
kept cool and moist from the time it drops from the plant
until it is sown or planted. Seeds of wild rice ripen and drop
off a few at a time; therefore, preparatory to gathering it, it
is best to tie up the heads and thus save the seed on the stalk.
When the seed is gathered it should be packed in damp moss,
kept cool and sown broadcast as soon as possible in from one
to three feet of water. There is a disadvantage, however, in
planting seed in fall if any water-fowl frequent the locality,
as they are likely to destroy a large part of it. If it is kept
moist in cold storage at a temperature of from 32 degrees to
34 degrees F. until late spring, this danger will be minimized,

-and the effects of spring freshets will be avoided.

The method of preserving the seed has been carefully
worked out by the Bureau of Plant Industry of the United
States Department of Agriculture, and several reliable firms
now offer the seed for sale, and will deliver it properly packed
in good condition in either spring or fall. It should be sown
as quickly as possible after removal from cold storage, and
quite thickly, as the growing plants when near together sup-
port one another, and their root anchorage holds the mud in
place.

Wild celery is the food that has made the Canvas-back
famous; but many other Ducks feed upon it, and it betters
the quality of their flesh. The Redhead, the Scaups and other
diving Ducks easily can obtain the succulent buds of this plant;
but none feeds on it so habitually as does the Canvas-back.
The non-diving Ducks cannot, as a rule, secure the tender buds
576 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

and the rootstocks unless they steal them from the diving
Ducks, but all parts of the plant are eaten by Ducks, and it is
a very important duck food. Mr. McAtee found that even
the Scoters, or so-called ‘‘Coots,”’ on a Wisconsin lake in fall
lived mostly on this plant, and the real Coot (Fulica americana)
is fond of it and commonly dives for the buds. The non-diving
Ducks feed mainly upon the leaves.

— ;

=

 

Fic. 23.— Wild celery. (Reduced from Reichenbach.) (From
Circular No. 81, Bureau of Biological Survey, United States
Department of Agriculture. )

Wild celery is found in some of the best ducking ponds of
New England. It is a submerged plant, with long, flat, flexible
leaves of light translucent green, from one-fourth to three-
fourths of an inch in width. A leaf held up to the light shows
numerous fine, straight, parallel veins running along its entire
 

 

 

 

PLATE XXXII.
Winter buds of wild celery.

 

 

 

 

PLATE XXXIll.
Seed pods of wild celery.

 

 
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 577

 

length. There are also one middle vein and two veins
near the edge, all of which are more prominent than the rest.
These are connected at intervals by cross veinlets. Some-
times this plant is confused with eelgrass (Zostera marina),
which grows in tidewater, but the leaves of wild celery grow

in bundles from the rootstock, while
those of eelgrass grow singly and al-
ternately on opposite sides of the
stem. Wild celery is sometimes con-
founded with pipewort (Eriocaulon),
a fresh-water plant, and also with
certain stages of arrow-head. The
staminate flowers of the wild celery,
attached at the base of the plant,
shed pollen which floats on the water
and fertilizes the pistillate flowers,
which are attached to a long, slender,
rounded stem. This stem assumes a
spiral form, and by its contraction
draws the flower under water after
fertilization, where the seed pod is
developed. This seed pod and its
spiral stem distinguish this from all
other fresh-water plants. The pod is
more slender than a common lead
pencil, is from three to six inches
long and contains about fifty small
dark seeds to the inch, embedded in
a clear jelly within the pod.

Wild celery is not more difficult
to plant than wild rice and may be
grown anywhere in the United States
under the requisite conditions. It
may be propagated by seeds and by

i i

Ki

 

Fic. 24,— Leaves of wild celery,
showing venation. (Natural size.)

winter buds (Plate XX XI), or by fragments of the plant witha
little of the rootstock attached. Buds, plants or seeds must not
be allowed to dry or ferment before planting. The seed pods
ripen from September to November and fall to the bottom, from
578 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

which they may be collected by a rake or net on still days in
late October or early November. Winter buds may be taken
at the same season, or the plants may be taken up for trans-
planting as soon as they appear in spring. They may be kept
in damp moss for a short time or in water in cold storage for
longer periods. They may be planted on muddy or sandy bot-
toms, in from three and one-half to six and one-half feet of
water. A sluggish current is best adapted to the growth of
this plant, but it grows well in nearly stagnant fresh water.

If pods are used, they may be broken up into pieces half
an inch long and sown broadcast, but not too thickly, as the
plants spread rapidly. Winter buds or pieces of plants must
be weighted by tying stones to them or embedding them in
clay balls. Seed-pod sections also may be enclosed in clay
balls. They may be sown in the fall, but buds or rootstocks
or young plants should be kept in cold storage and sown in
May or June.

Dr. R. V. Pierce, in Forest and Stream of December 16,
1911, states that he has been very successful in planting wild
celery roots by using little rivet tongs with long handles.
Two men stationed in the bow of a light boat do the
planting, while another man in the stern furnishes the pro-
pelling power. With these tongs he says they can readily
push the roots into the soft muddy bottom, in four or five feet
of water, where they could not be so well planted by wading.
Stakes are put up for guides, and the planting of the bottom
is thoroughly done. It proved abundantly productive, and
produced, he says, thousands of tons of these valuable plants.
He has been successful in planting the sago pondweed (Pota-
mogeton pectinatus) in the same manner.

Ducks appear to be fond of all pondweeds, and any pond-
weed would be a valuable attraction to any duck pond. There
are no less than thirty-eight species of pondweeds of the genus
Potamogeton in the United States, of which at least nine (see
Fig. 25, and Plates XXXIV, XXXV) are distributed almost
universally. The seed of a plant called widgeon grass by Cape
Cod gunners has been identified for me by Mr. W. L. McAtee
of the Biological Survey as that of Potamogeton epihydrus.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 2.— Potamogeton lucens.

 

 

 

Fig. |, — Potamogeton natans.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 3.-— Potamogeton heterophyllus. Fig. 4. — Potamogeton lonchites.

PLATE XXXIV.— WIDE-RANGING SPECIES OF PONDWEEDS. (From Morong.)
(After Biological Survey.)
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 2.— Potamogeton perfoliatus.

Fig. |.— Potamogeton prelongus.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 4. — Potamogeton pusillus.

Fig. 3.— Potamogeton foliosus.

(From Morong.)

PLATE XXXV.— WIDE-RANGING SPECIES OF PONDWEEDS.

(After Biological Survey.)
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 5719

 

Wood Ducks and Black Ducks are fond of this pondweed and it
grows commonly in some of the ponds of Massachusetts. The
widgeon grass of the south Atlantic coast of the United States
is quite a different plant, — the ditch grass (Ruppia maritima).
The sago pondweed (P. pectinatus) (Fig. 25) appears to be the
most important duck food, and in some cases it forms from
sixty to eighty per cent. of the food of the Canvas-back. It
is known sometimes as fox-
tail grass. Itis asubmerged
plant, like the other pond-
weeds, and, like them, bears
small clusters of seeds or
nutlets near the surface.
They are formed somewhat
like little bunches of grapes.
They ripen at different
times, but in the north
may be looked for after
August. Figs. 25 and 26
show the threadlike leaves,
the slender rootstocks and
the tubers.

Pondweeds may be
planted by mowing them
with the seeds attached and Fic. 25.—Sago pondweed, a-very important duck
scattering them about the food. (Reduced.) (From Sunset Magazine,
lake; or the seeds may be ENS?
collected and sown broadcast or in clay balls. A mud bottom
is preferable, but sago pondweed and redhead grass (P. per-
foliatus) (Fig. 2, Plate XXXV) will grow in sand. Some
species, including sago pondweed, will grow in brackish or
even salt water. They will do well in water from two to six
feet deep. They may be planted immediately after gathering,
or the seed may be kept in cold storage until spring.

Deer, moose and cattle are rather fond of wild rice. Rails,
Bobolinks and Blackbirds eat the seed. Muskrats eat and
tear up all these plants. Some fish eat them, but the German
carp is the most destructive of all agencies. It absolutely

 
580 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

eradicates duck food and should never be introduced any-
where. It may be exterminated in small ponds by screening
outlets and inlets and draining the ponds dry. In large lakes
its extermination is impracticable.

In the western States the wappato is considered among the
best of duck foods. It is a tuber-bearing plant, and although
I have never had an opportunity to identify the western plant,
this name is given to Sagittaria latifolia, an arrow-head or
arrowwort. This and Sagittaria teres are found in ponds of
Massachusetts, and probably are quite as attractive as a duck

 

Fie, 26.— Tubers of sago pondweed. (Natural size.) - (From Circular No. 81, Bureau of
Biological Survey, United States Department of Agriculture.)

food as is S. latifolia in the west. The Indians of Oregon use
the tubers as food.

Mr. McAtee has identified for Dr. J. C. Phillips another
duck food which grows in Wenham Lake, and which proves
to be quillwort (Iswtes echinospora).

Smartweeds (Polygonum) are eaten by many wild-fowl,
and certain water grasses are favorite foods of some species.
Mr. Wilton Lockwood, who has had much experience in rear-
ing wild-fowl, recommends Poa aquatica, a European plant
which grows naturally here. Probably Glyceria grandis, the
reed meadow grass, which somewhat resembles P. aquatica,
would be equally attractive. It grows along the banks of
streams and in wet meadows.

Wild Geese eat the roots of certain reeds and are very
“OUIRE) PUR SA}JaYs!4 UO UO!ss!WWOD ynNd1}}9aUUOD ay} Aq payon.ysuo>

“UIVNO YOS JOW1d ONIGSSS ONY YIJLIFHS YILNIM V—"IAXXX JLW1d

 
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 581

 

fond of young and tender grass and grain. If a field, near a
pond or river, is sown with winter wheat or winter rye, the
young plants will attract Geese, because such plants offer
them a supply of green food later in the fall and early in spring,
when other green vegetation is not plentiful.

The Wood Duck sometimes may be attracted to nesting
boxes made to resemble hollow limbs.

ATTRACTING UPLAND GAME BIRDS.

The Bob-white prefers a rich farming and grain-raising
country to all others, but it is also very important to furnish
this bird good cover, and in a thrifty truck-farming region,
where clean cultivation prevails, there is little cover left for
the Quail. Thickets along fences, bushy swamps, weed-grown
fields or thick growths of cane, corn or other grains furnish
desirable cover, but winter cover is most important. Grain
raising helps fatten Bob-whites, as they pick up much waste
grain in the fields, but weeds where plentiful will take the
place of grain, as the birds will thrive on weed seeds.

Severe winters are so destructive to the Bob-white that it
will pay the game farmer to feed this bird well in winter. A
Pennsylvania plan is that of catching coveys and keeping
them confined during the severest part of the winter. This
has worked very well. In Connecticut and Massachusetts
shelters have been put up for feeding places, and goodly
numbers of birds have been brought through the winter by
this means.

Nothing attracts this bird more surely than a field of
buckwheat. The following list of food plants eaten by Bob-
white is drawn largely from the publications of the Biological
Survey, and shows what a wide range of food plants it affects.
In addition to these, it feeds on dried grasses in winter and
on the leaves of certain weeds which remain intact during a
part, at least, of the inclement season.

 

1 Valuable additional information on the food of wild-fowl may be found in the following publica-
tions: Circular 81, Biological Survey, Bulletins 58 and 205, U. 8. Dept. of Agr.
582 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Apple,

Bastard pennyroyal,

Bayberry,
Beggar-ticks,
Black alder,

Blackberry, high bush,

Blueberry,
Buttonweed,
Checkerberry,
Cherry : —
Cultivated,
Ground,
Wild black,

Climbing bittersweet,

Crownbeard, .
Dewberry,
Elder,

Marsh,
Everlasting,

Flowering dogwood,

Grape, frost,
Greenbrier,
Haw,

Black,
Holly,
Honeysuckle,
Huckleberry,
Mulberry, red,
Nightshade,
Orange hawkweed,
Palmetto: —

Cabbage,

Saw,
Partridge berry,
Poison ivy,
Ragweed,

Great,

Rib grass,
Rose,
Sarsaparilla,
Sassafras,
Solomon’s seal,

FRUITS EATEN BY THE BosB-WHITE.

Pyrus Malus.
Trichostema dichotomum.
Myrica carolinensis.
Bidens sp.

Ilex verticillata.

Rubus sp.

Vaccinium sp.

Diodia teres.

Gaultheria procumbens.

Prunus sp.

Physalis sp.

Prunus serotina.

Celastrus scandens.

Verbesina sp.

Rubus sp.

Sambucus canadensis.

Iva ciliata.

Anaphalis margaritacea and
Gnaphalium sp.

Cornus florida.

Vitis sp.

Smilax sp.

Crategus sp.

Viburnum prunifolium.

Ilex opaca.

Lonicera sp.

Gaylussacia sp.

Morus. rubra.

Solanum nigrum.

Meracium aurantiacum.

Sabal Palmetto.
Sabal serrulata.
Mitchella repens.
Rhus Toxicodendron.
Ambrosia artemisitfolia.
Ambrosia trifida.
Plantago lanceolata.
Rosa sp.

Aralia sp.

Sassafras varitfolium.
Polygonatum sp.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS, 583

 

Sour gum,
Strawberry,
Sumach: —
Dwarf,
Scarlet, .
Staghorn,
Sunflower,
Thimbleberry,
Trumpet creeper,
Virginia creeper,
Wax myrtle,

Nyssa sylvatica.
Fragaria sp.

Rhus copallina.
Rhus glabra.

Rhus typhina.
Helianthus annuus.
Rubus occidentalis.
Tecoma radicans.
Psedera quinquefolia.
Myrica cerifera.

SEEDS EATEN BY THE BoB-WHITE.

Acacia,
Ash,
Bean: —
Lima,
Trailing wild,
Pink wild,
Beech,
Bindweed,
Black,
Box elder,
Carpetweed,
Charlock,
Chestnut,
Chickweed,_ . . 3

Climbing false buckwheat, .

Clover: —
Bush, ,
Creeping bush,
Hairy bush,
Japan,
Red,
White,
Corn cockle, .
Cranesbill,
Dock,
Florida coffee,
Grass: —
Barnyard,
Barbed panicum,
Crab,
Green foxtail,
Sheathed rush,

Acacia sp.
Fraxinus sp.

Phaseolus lunatus.
Strophostyles helvola.
Strophostyles umbellata.
Fagus grandifolia.
Convolvulus sp.
Polygonum Convolvulus.
Acer Negundo.

Mollugo verticillata.
Raphanus raphanistrum.
Castanea dentata.
Stellaria media.
Polygonum scandens.

Lespedeza capitata.
Lespedeza repens.
Lespedeza hirta.
Lespedeza striata.
Trifolium pratense.
Trifolium repens.
Agrostemma Githago.
Geranium sp.

Rumez crispus.
Sesbania macrocarpa.

Echinochloa crus-gaili.
Panicum barbulatum.
Digitaria sanguinalis.
Setaria viridis.
Sporobolus vagineflorus.
584 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Grass — continued.
Slender finger-grass,
Slender spike,
Spreading panicum,
Tall smooth panicum,
Timothy,
Witch,

Yellow foxtail,

Gromwell,

Corn,

Hog peanut,

Hornbeam,

Jewelweed,

Knotweed,

Locust tree,

Lupine,

Morning glory,

Oak: —

Live,
Swamp,
White,

Pea: —

Cowpea,
Downy milk, .
Garden, .
Partridge,
Sensitive,

Persicaria, ‘
Pennsylvania,

Pigweed,

Rough,

Pine: —
Long-leaved,
Scrub,

Prairie rhynchosia,

Psoralea,

Puccoon,

Redbud, .

Red maple,

Rush,

Sedge,

Tussock,

Sida,

Skunk cabbage,

Slender paspalum,

Digitaria filiformis.
Uniola lara.

Panicum dichotomiflorum.
Panicum virgatum.
Phleum pratense.
Panicum capillare.
Setaria glauca.
Lithospermum officinale.
Lithospermum. arvense.
Amphicarpa monoica.
Carpinus caroliniana.
Impatiens sp.
Polygonum aviculare.
Robinia Pseudo- Acacia.
Lupinus perennis.
Ipomea sp.

Quercus virginiana.
Quercus palustris.
Quercus alba.

Vigna sinensis.

Galactia volubilis.

Pisum sativum.

Cassia Chamecrista.

Cassia nictitans.
Polygonum lapathifolium.
Polygonum pennsylvanicum.
Chenopodium album.
Amaranthus retroflexus.

Pinus palustris.
Pinus virginiana.
Rihynchosia latifolia.
Psoralea sp.
Lnthospermum canescens.
Cercts canadensis.
Acer rubrum.

Scirpus sp.

Cyperus sp.

Carex stricta.

Sida spinosa.
Symplocarpus fetidus.
Paspalum setaceum.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 585

 

Smartweed, Polygonum Hydropiper.
Spurge: —
Flowering, Euphorbia corollata.
Spotted, . Euphorbia maculata.
Sorrel: —
Sheep, Rumex Acetoselila.
Yellow,  Oxalis stricta.

Texas croton,

Croton texensis.

Three-seeded mercury, Acalypha gracilens.
Trefoil, Lotus sp.
Tick, Desmodium nudiflorum.
Tick, Desmodium grandiflorum.
Vervain, Verbena stricta.
Vetch, Vicia sp.
Violet, Viola sp.
Witch-hazel, . Hamamelis virginiana.

The only way in which a region can be made attractive to
Grouse is to provide dense thickets and thick pine groves for
shelter, and to cultivate or save from the woodman’s axe the
plants from which the Grouse get most of their food. The
Ruffed Grouse will eat grain sometimes in winter, but is not
often attracted by it.

A plentiful supply of winter berries, like the barberry, the
sumach and others which hang long on the stem, with such
evergreen plants as laurel and wintergreen, must be available.

The following list contains many of the food plants which
are attractive to the Ruffed Grouse, and this bird is known
to feed upon them all: —

Foop PLants

OF THE RuFFED GROUSE.

Acorns: —

Scrub oak, Quercus tlicifolia.

Scrub chestnut oak, Quercus prinoides.

White oak, Quercus alba.

Red oak, Quercus rubra.
Arbor-vite, Thuja occidentalis.
Aster, Aster sp.
Avens, Geum sp.
Azalea, Rhododendron (Azalea) sp.
Barberry, Berberis vulgaris.

Bayberry,

Myrica carolinensis.
586 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

Beech-drops,
Beechnuts,
Beggar-ticks,
Birch buds: —

Canoe,

Black,

Gray,

Yellow, .
Bittersweet vine,
Black alder,
Blackberry (leaves),
Blackberry lily,
Black haw,

Black huckleberry,
Bloodroot,
Blueberry (buds),
Blueberries,
Bunchberry, .
Buttercup,
Catnip,
Chestnuts,
Chickweed,
Cinquefoil,
Cockspur thorn,
Cornel,
Cudweed,
Cultivated plum,
Domestic cherry,
Elder,

Red, :
False goat’s beard,
Ferns (fronds),
Feverwort,
Flowering dogwood,
Frostweed,
Greenbrier,
Hazelnuts,
Hemlock (seeds),
Heuchera, :
High-bush cranberry,
Hornbeam (seeds),
Horsetail rush,
Jewelweed,
Live-forever,
Manzanita,

Epifagus virginiana.
Fagus grandifolia.
Bidens frondosa.

Betula papyrifera.
Betula lenta.

Betula populifolia.
Betula lutea.

Celastrus scandens.
Llex verticillata.

Rubus sp.

Belamcanda chinensis.
Viburnum prunifolium.
Gaylussacia baccata.
Sanguinaria canadensis.
Vaccinium sp.

V. pennsylvanicum.
Cornus canadensis.
Ranunculus bulbosus.
Nepeta Cataria.
Castanea dentata.
Stellaria media.
Potentilla argentea.
Crategus Crus-galli.
Cornus paniculata.
Gnaphalium purpureum.
Prunus domestica.
Prunus avium.
Sambucus canadensis.
Sambucus racemosa.
Astilbe sp.

Dryopteris spinulosa.
Triosteum perfoliatum.
Cornus florida.
Helianthemum canadense.
Smilax sp.

Corylus americana.
Tsuga canadensis.
Heuchera americana.
Viburnum Opulus.
Carpinus caroliniana.
Equisetum sp.
Impatiens sp.

Sedum sp.
Arctostaphylos sp.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 587

 

Maple (seeds),
Maple-leaved arrow-wood,
Mayflower (leaves and buds),
Meadow rue, .
Mountain ash (berries),
Mountain cranberry,
Mulberry,
Nannyberry, .
Partridge berry,
Pepperidge,
Persicaria,
Pitch pine (seeds),
Poisonous laurel,
Poplar (young leaves),
Raspberry,

Black,
Saxifrage,
Scarlet thorn,
Sedges, .

Silky cornel,
Smilax,
Snowberry,
Solomon’s seal: —
Hairy,
Smooth,
Sorrel: —
Sheep,
Yellow,
Speedwell,
Sumach: —
Dwarf,
Scarlet,
Staghorn,
Tick trefoil,
Vetch,
Violet,
Virginia creeper,
Wild black cherry,
Wild crab apple,
Wild grape,
Wild red cherry,
Witch-hazel, .
Withe-rod,

Acer rubrum.

Viburnum acerifolium.

Epigea repens.

Thalictrum sp.

(Sorbus) Pyrus americana.

Vaccinium Vitis-Idea.

Morus rubra.

Viburnum Lentago.

Mitchella repens.

Nyssa sylvatica.

Polygonum pennsylvanicum.

Pinus rigida.

Kalmia latifolia.

Populus balsamifera.

Rubus strigosus.

Rubus occidentalis.

Saxifraga sp.

Crategus coccinea.

Carex lupulina and Cy-
perus sp.

Cornus paniculata.

Smilax glauca.

Symphoricarpus sp.

Polygonatum biflorum.
Polygonatum commutatum.

Rumezx Acetosella.
Oxalis stricta.
Veronica officinalis.

Rhus copallina.

Rhus glabra.

Rhus typhina.
Desmodium sp.

Vicia caroliniana.
Viola sp.

Psedra quinquefolia.
Prunus serotina.
Pyrus rivularis.

Vitis sp.

Prunus pennsylvanica.
Hamamelis virginiana.
Viburnum. cassinoides.
588 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

STATUTORY BIRD PROTECTION.

In the year 1907 I went over the statutes of Massachusetts,
from the settlement of the Plymouth Colony to the beginning
of the twentieth century, and scanned the enactments framed
for regulating the destruction of game. These laws show that
from the beginning until recent years the attention of the law-
makers has been directed more toward granting special privi-
leges, or monopolies, for the killing of game than toward pro-
tecting it. Certain places were reserved for certain people
as fowling places, where nets were set. Penalties. were pro-
vided for interference with these privileges. Laws were passed
forbidding any one, except the owner of certain lands, to shoot
thereon.

It was not until 1818 that the Ruffed Grouse and Bob-
white were protected during spring and summer, and neither
these birds nor the Woodcock received adequate protection
until after the beginning of the twentieth century. It was not
until recent years that spring protection was given to shore
birds, and water-fowl never have been adequately protected
in Massachusetts. Spring shooting of wild-fowl was not pro-
hibited, except for one year, until 1909. Wild Turkeys never
were protected. Passenger Pigeons had no protection until
they were practically extinct, and the Heath Hen had no
protection until it was nearly extirpated from the mainland.
Other States have been behind Massachusetts, as a whole, in
the matter of bird protection, and some of them are still behind
(1910), although many have advanced beyond her.

Those who have had experience in game legislation know
that most persons who are persistent in introducing and
pressing game laws are working for some special privilege or
for their own profit, and not primarily for the public interest
and the preservation of the game. Our people have failed to
see the necessity of restrictive laws and to enact them in time.
When this is considered, we need not wonder that the game
laws have failed to protect the game. They have failed because
necessary restrictions have not been enacted or enforced at
all, or not until too late. It is useless to protect a bird per-
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 589

 

petually after it has become extinct, or to establish a close
season of a few months each year to protect a bird that is
nearing extirpation.

Again, our game laws have failed because they have had
no uniformity and no stability; they are constantly changing.
One State protects a certain migratory bird during stated
months; another, near by, does not protect it at all at any
time. It is only during recent years, through the co-opera-
tion of national bodies, such as the Biological Survey and the
National Association of Audubon Societies, that some sem-
blance of uniformity has been brought about in some of the
northern States. Through these agencies, and the efforts of
progressive sportsmen, game laws in the United States have
been improved considerably in the last decade. Shooting
seasons have been shortened; sale and export of game have
been prohibited; hunters’ license laws, which provide funds
for the enforcement of game laws, have swept the country;
game commissions have been appointed; game reservations
have been established, and in many ways the situation has
been much improved, but there is still great chance for im-
provement.

Much of the money collected for hunting licenses has
been diverted to other uses than the protection of birds
and the conservation and propagation of game. The system
of appointing game commissioners and wardens is wrong.
Under our present system a man need never hope to be a
game commissioner unless he is an astute, capable politician,
or has powerful political friends. The appointee may be a
good game commissioner (many of them are), but he must
be a keen politician first, last and all the time to secure and
retain the place. Having obtained it, he must be constantly
on guard, or he may lose it through some political change.
The effect which such a system produces on the appointment
of game wardens is well known.

The system of appointing game commissioners and war-
dens should be changed. Civil service principles should rule
in appointments. The game laws never will be properly
enforced until this is done, and until every good citizen who
590 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

is interested in the protection of game stands always ready
to lend a helping hand in their enforcement.

This condition can be brought about only by constant,
perpetual agitation and educational work, such as the Audu-
bon Societies are carrying on. In the meantime it should be
the aim of the game protective associations and game com-
‘missioners to initiate and advocate the propagation of game
and the establishment of game farms and reservations, not
alone for shooting purposes, but for the general increase of
the game of the land. When we have, in addition to the force
of game wardens in America, a hundred thousand gamekeepers,
game will be far more plentiful than now and the laws will be
far better observed.

Federal Supervision of the Protection of Migratory Birds.

Next to prohibiting the sale of wild game, this is the most
important step to be taken. The Bureau of Biological Sur-
vey, which now has charge of federal game protection, should
be given the power to regulate open and close seasons for
migratory birds, and to make such other regulations for their
protection as may be deemed necessary from time to time.
The personnel of the Bureau is in a position to know the con-
dition of the game throughout the country, to determine the
amount and kind of protection necessary, to make regula-
tions calculated to preserve and increase migratory game
birds, and to co-operate with other American governments
for the enforcement of needed regulations in the two American
continents.

It is proper for each State to regulate the killing of resi-
dent birds, such as the Ruffed Grouse and the Bob-white,
which pass their lives within its borders. All the conditions
regarding these birds may be ascertained by the State authori-
ties, and the State government advisedly may take measures
for their protection. How different is the case of migratory
birds!

As the matter stands now, the States, and, in some cases,
the counties within the States, have laws and regulations differ-
ing so widely that a species that is protected at all times in
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 59]

 

one State, through which it passes in migration, may have no
protection at ali in the next. Thus the State that desires to
protect any bird effectively can do no less than protect it at
all times, and even then its efforts for conservation may be
neutralized by its neighbors. Even the majority of States
working together for uniform protection will be unable to
accomplish what all might attain under uniform regulations.
What success could this country expect in repelling a foreign
invader were the conduct of the war left to individual States,
and were each State allowed to defend the government or
not, as it might see fit? It is folly to imagine that the con-
servation of migratory animals can attain that success under
the uncertain, ill-advised and constantly changing regulations
of the individual States that it might attain under control or
regulation by the federal government.

It is argued that such control is unconstitutional, but
whenever the American people are satisfied that it is necessary
and imperative, a way will be found to bring it about, and
migratory birds will be protected uniformly. (See Appendix B.)

Nevertheless, no protective efforts in any State should be
relaxed in anticipation of federal regulation until such regu-
lation has become an accomplished and permanent fact.

Public Game and Bird Reservations.

The quotation which follows is taken from my paper
entitled Statutory Bird Protection in Massachusetts, which
was published in 1907 in the annual report of the Massachu-
setts State Board of Agriculture: —

“Where all other measures promise only failure there is
still one resource left, and that is the setting aside of tracts of
reservations of woodland, lake, river or shore, within the
limits of which all killing of birds by man may be prohibited,
under heavy penalties. In such tracts or reservations the
resident game and birds may breed unmolested, and thus
replenish the surrounding country. Here migrants may find
safety to stop and rest from their long journeys.

“A chain of such sanctuaries established along the Atlantic
coast of North America probably would preserve our stock of
592 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

wild-fowl and shore birds indefinitely. The ‘sanctuary has
succeeded in Europe, and it is no new idea here. Already in
Massachusetts we have been experimenting with it in a small
way. One modification of the plan is to forbid the taking or
killing of all wild animals or all birds within certain limits,
after the plan adopted on Cape Ann in 1897 and in the town
of Essex in 1899. In these cases a time limit of five years was
set; but such an act might be made perpetual. Park com-
missioners are given police powers, and can prevent shooting
within the limits of their reservations, as the Metropolitan
Park Commission and many city park commissioners now do.
In 1899, three thousand acres of land were set aside on Wachu-
sett Mountain as a State reservation, and the commissioners
in charge were given police powers; this should ensure a per-
manent game sanctuary for Worcester County. The enact-
ment in 1907, by which the Commissioners on Fisheries and
Game were empowered to take one thousand acres of land on
Martha’s Vineyard as a reservation for the protection of the
Heath Hen and other birds, is an example of direct legislation
for this purpose, more of which will, sooner or later, become
necessary.

“The many bird reservations now established in this
country by the United States government and by the National
Association of Audubon Societies have been so successful as
to demonstrate the fact that public reservations would solve
the problem of game preservation if we could have enough of
them. Failing in this, we must depend largely on private
enterprise.”

A BRIEF SUMMARY OF NEEDED REFORMS FOR GAME
PROTECTION.

If we are to increase the supply of game birds all or most
of the following steps must be taken: —

Establish bird reservations for game birds, wild-fowl and
shore birds.

Legalize the propagation and sale of such game as can be
reared on game farms.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 593

 

Stop the sale and export of wild game birds.

Secure federal protection of migratory game birds.

Prohibit the sale or use of ultra-destructive or silent
guns.

Establish perpetual or long-term close seasons for all birds
now in danger of extinction.

Require registration of all native hunters under a license
system.

Establish a license fee for alien hunters so high as to be
prohibitive.

Prohibit shooting of all wild game birds and wild-fowl in
winter, spring and summer.

Limit the number of wild game birds that may be legally
taken in a day.

Make game seasons uniform so far as possible, and shorten
rather than lengthen them.

Prohibit night shooting and the pursuit of wild-fowl in
boats.

Stop forest fires.

Establish a system of town bird wardens in addition to
the State game officers.

Limit the number of wandering dogs and cats during the
breeding season of the birds.

Educate the people to respect and obey the game laws
and bird laws. For recent progress see Appendix B.

ENFORCEMENT OF THE GAME LAWS.

Everywhere we hear the complaint that the game laws are
not enforced. In this country the popular idea of a remedy
for any wrong condition seems to be legislation without enforce-
ment. We are fond of securing the passage of laws, but feel
that we are not concerned in enforcing them; our feeling of
responsibility seems to end with the enactment of the statute.
The rest is left to the officers of the law. Enforcement is their
business, and we are inclined to hinder rather than help them
to do their duty.

If any wrong is brought forcibly to our attention, we
attempt to pass a law to right it. We make strenuous efforts
594 GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

to enact a statute designed to correct an evil, and then we
promptly go off and forget all about it. The law then is
either repealed or becomes a ‘‘dead letter,’’ known to few and
soon forgotten; neither observed nor enforced.

There is little respect for the game and bird laws. Their
enforcement is lax, and many gunners know little and care
less about them. Many people consider it rather “smart” to
break the game laws or the trespass laws. It is looked upon
as rather the “sporting thing” to do. The feeling toward the
laws, and the officers who are designated to enforce them, is
quite different here from that prevailing in most parts of
Canada or in England, where the game laws are respected,
and the lawbreaker is looked down upon by decent people
and is as much abhorred as a thief.

It is not the fault of game commissioners that game laws
are neither enforced nor respected. It is the fault of the
system, or, rather, our own fault as a people, for we have per-
mitted and established the system. In criticizing it we are
merely criticizing our own handiwork. The whole matter of
game protection is in our hands. We do not take enough
interest in the game or the game laws; we neither know nor
care enough about them.

If every man applying for a hunter’s license were obliged
to pass an examination on the game and bird laws of his State,
or to identify by name specimens of all the birds that the law
allows him to shoot, and those that are protected under the
law, very few hunting licenses ever would be granted. Are
we to expect observance of the law when the gunners them-
selves do not know the law or the birds that are protected
under it? I know of three cases where game wardens have,
through ignorance, shot birds which were protected by law,
and another warden arrested by mistake an innocent man,
and haled him into court, only to find that the birds in
his possession were not protected by law. If game wardens
do not know the birds, what can be expected of the hunter?

Present conditions can be changed for the better by a
movement to awaken public interest in living game birds,
and to strengthen the sentiment for their protection.
CONSERVATION OF GAME BIRDS. 595

 

Game protective associations should employ detectives to
enforce the game laws, and to see that they are enforced by
the game wardens.

Most gunners are too much interested in dead birds and
too little in living ones. The most important work that can
be done for bird and game protection, and law enforce-
ment, is to teach, with both the spoken and the written word,
the value of the bird to man, — its educational, sesthetic and
recreative value. The study of the living bird will check the
evils of the present day. All who become interested in the
bird alive eventually become interested in its protection.
We must popularize the study of birds, bird drawing and bird
photography; stop legalized extermination, and enact and en-
force laws that are designed not to protect the gunner but to
protect the birds; we must promulgate the game laws and
post them in all public places; foster such organizations as
the Audubon Societies and other protective leagues that are
striving to interest the people in the bird alive, and to teach
popular ornithology.

Is it not far better, friend of the keen eye and ready hand,
to pick a few difficult shots and go home with a light bag well
earned, than to clean up all the birds, and not only spoil your
own sport for the future but also that of your brother sports-
men? The ethics of sportsmanship should consist of some-
thing better and higher than the making of a record or the
gratification of pampered stomachs. A photograph of the
living bird in all its strength and beauty is a far better and
more lasting trophy than the torn and mangled carcass of a
feathered friend.

Some self-denial on the part of the sportsman and an
aroused public interest and public sentiment, with liberality
in encouraging the propagation of game birds, will bring
about respect for the laws, and make the North American
continent again the greatest game bird country in the world.
If this volume shall contribute anything toward that end it
will have served its purpose.
 

 

A LIST OF THE NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED
OUT THE BLANK FORMS FOR INFORMATION,
WHICH FORM THE BASIS OF THE ESTI-
MATES ON THE RECENT DECREASE
OF GAME BIRDS, WILD-FOWL
AND SHORE BIRDS.

 

 
LIST OF NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT
BLANK FORMS FOR INFORMATION, WHICH
FORM THE BASIS OF THIS VOLUME.

Aiken, Judge John A.,
Allen, Charles F., .
Allen, Thomas,
Allen, William H.,
Ames, Willard,
Andrews, Henry P.,
Appleton, John L.,
Ashworth, John W.,
Aspinwall, Thomas,
Aspinwall, W. H.,
Austin, E. H.,

Babson, Edward, .
Bacon, Vaughan D.,
Bailey, Dr. John W.,
Baldwin, Frank F.,
Baldwin, William Ray,
Banning, Frank,
Bartlett, Henry,
Bartlett, Herbert W.,
Bass, Charles E.,
Bassett, Bartlett E.,
Bassett, Joseph E.,
Bassett, Nathan A.,
Bates, Charles,
Bates, N. W.,

Bean, J. W.,

Belcher, William B.,
Bemis, James E., .
Bent, A. C.,

Besse, Freeman T.,
Bigelow, Henry B.,
Binford, F. A.,

Bird, Charles S.,
Bishop, Dr. Louis B.,
Blood, Edmund,
Blossom, Irving L.,
Boutwell, Micah M.,

Greenfield, Mass.
South Duxbury, Mass.
Montague, Mass.
Dartmouth, Mass.
West Bridgewater, Mass.
Hudson, Mass.
Nantucket, Mass.
Gleasondale, Mass.
Brookline, Mass.
Chestnut Hill, Mass.
Gaylordsville, Conn.

Gloucester, Mass.
Barnstable, Mass.
Arlington, Mass.
Hopkinton, Mass.
Newton, Mass.
Hadlyme, Conn.
Acushnet, Mass.
Plymouth, Mass.
Warwick, Mass.
Chathamsport, Mass.
Bridgewater, Mass.
Bridgewater, Mass.
South Weymouth, Mass.
East Weymouth, Mass.
South Hadley Falls, Mass.
Holbrook, Mass.

South Framingham, Mass.
Taunton, Mass.
Wareham, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
Hyannis, Mass.

East Walpole, Mass.
New Haven, Conn.
West Groton, Mass.
Cohasset, Mass.
Lunenburg, Mass.
600 NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT BLANK FORMS.

 

Bowdish, B. S.,
Bowditch, James H..,
Boyle, Edward J.,
Bradway, O. E., ;
Brastow, Miss Amelia M..
Breck, C. A.,

Bremer, Theodore G.,
Brett, Franklin,
Brimley, C. S.,
Brocklebank, Oliver,
Brooks, Clarence M.,
Brown, Frank A..,
Bruen, Frank,

Bubier, George M.,
Buffington, Samuel L.,
Bullock, Alexander H.,
Burgess, John K.,
Burney, Thomas L.,
Burnham, J. A., Jr.,
Burns, John, Jr.,
Bursley, John,

Burt, Henry P.,

Cabot, Dr. Hugh,
Cahoon, Clement A.,
Campbell, Willis C.,
Carbonell, E. T.,
Carleton, Warren Elliot,
Carter, Edwin A.,

Case, Rev. Bert,

Casey, Neil,

Chase, Herbert F.,
Cheney, Col. Louis R.,
Churchill, Winslow W.,
Clark, A. B., .

Clark, C. A., .

Clark, George B., .
Clarke, Dr. Charles K.,
Cleveland, Miss Lilian,
Clogston, Henry W.,
Codman, Dr. Ernest Amory,
Coffin, Dr. Rockwell A.,
Colby, Francis T..,.
Coles, William E.,
Converse, Irving O.,

Demarest, N. J.
Boston, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Monson, Mass.
Wrentham, Mass.
Methuen, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
North Duxbury, Mass.
Raleigh, N. C.
Georgetown, Mass.
Keene, N. H.
Beverly, Mass.
Bristol, Conn.
Lynn, Mass.
Touisset, Mass.
Worcester, Mass.
Dedham, Mass.
Lynn, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Boston, Mass.

West Barnstable, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.

Boston, Mass.
Harwich, Mass.
Agawam, Mass.
Charlottetown, P. E. I.
Plymouth, Mass.
Springfield, Mass.
Richmond Beach, Wash.
Melrose, Mass.
Amesbury, Mass.
Hartford, Conn.
Cambridge, Mass.
Peabody, Mass.

Lynn, Mass.

Boston, Mass.
Toronto, Ontario, Can.
West Medford, Mass.
Bernardston, Mass.
Boston, Mass.

Boston, Mass.

Boston, Mass.
Attleborough, Mass.
Fitchburg, Mass.
NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT BLANK FORMS. 601

 

Coulter, Charles Sidney,
Cowing, D. T.,

Crafts, Clifford L.,
Cross, William J.,
Crysler, H. Stanley,
Cummings, Benjamin,
Cummings, W. W.,
Curtis, Benjamin F.,

~Daland, John, Jr.,
Damon, Wiley S.,
Davis, N. A., ‘
Davoll, Frank A.,
Day, Frederick B.,
Dean, Charles A..,
De Haven, T. N.,
De Meritte, Edwin,
Denmead, Talbott,
Dexter, Charles R.,
Dill, Fred P.,
Dolan, Edwin B., .
Douglas, Howard M., .
Dutton, Harry,
Dyke, Arthur C., .

Eaton, Edward W.,
Edson, Edward E.,
Edwards, Vinal N.,
Eldredge, Albert H.,
Eldredge, A. S.,
Eldridge, Nathaniel A.,
Ellis, Elisha T.,
Emerson, Raymond,
Enders, J. O.,.
Ensign, Charles L.,
Estabrook, F. B.,
Estabrook, Henry A.,
Ewell, Ralph C.,

Fales, Lewis A.,

Farmer, Walter B.,

Faunce, Carl C.,

Fay, Henry W.,

Fessenden, Judge Franklin G.,
Fish, Henry A., :

Cambridge, Mass.
Hadley, Mass.

East Whately, Mass.
Becket, Mass.
Lowell, Mass.

New Bedford, Mass.
Woburn, Mass.
Washington, D. C.

Salem, Mass.
Scituate, Mass.
Concord, Mass.
Dartmouth, Mass.
Lynn, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Ardmore, Pa.
Boston, Mass.
Baltimore, Md.
Rochester, Mass.
North Eastham, Mass.
Agawam, Mass.
Plymouth, Mass.
Medford, Mass.
Bridgewater, Mass.

Newburyport, Mass.
Scituate, Mass.
Woods Hole, Mass.
Ware, Mass.
Lincoln, Mass.
Chatham, Mass.
North Easton, Mass.
Concord, Mass.
Hartford, Conn.
Newton, Mass.

East Northfield, Mass.
Fitchburg, Mass.
Sea View, Mass.

Attleborough, Mass.
Brookline, Mass.
Kingston, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Greenfield, Mass.
South Duxbury, Mass.
602 NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT BLANK FORMS.

 

Fish, Thomas J.,
Fisher, C. L.,
Flanagan, John H.,
Floyd, John R.,
Fottler, John, Jr.,
Francis, Eben W.,
Fuertes, Louis Agassiz,
Fuller, Stephen W.,

Gafney, J. H., ,
Gardner, Howard &.,
Gates, Hon. Joseph S.,
Gerrett, Hon. Frank,
Gifford, John I.,
Gifford, Paul W.,
Gill, Howard W., .
Gilmore, Clinton G.,
Gould, Alfred E.,
Green, Horace O.,
Greenough, Henry V.,

Haines, George H.,
Haines, George L.,
Hales, Henry,

Hall, John A.,
Hallet, Charles W.,
Hallett, William F.,
Hamblin, A. J.,
Hammond, Charles F.,
Hammond, Gardiner G.,
Hammond, James L..,
Harlow, W. A.,
Harrigan, T. F.,
Harvey, Myron E.,
Harwood, Henry W..
Hatch, James P.,
Hathaway, Harry S..,
Hayden, Albert F.,
Herrick, J. T.,

Hill, Lewis W.,

Hills, Isaac,

Hodder, James B.,
Hodge, Dr. C. F.,
Holbrook, G. W.,
Holden, E. F,,

East Bridgewater, Mass.
South Deerfield, Mass.
Providence, R. I.
Rowley, Mass.

Boston, Mass.
Nantucket, Mass.
Ithaca, N. Y.
Yarmouthport, Mass.

Petersham, Mass.
South Swansea, Mass.
Westborough, Mass.
Greenfield, Mass.
South Westport, Mass.
Duxbury, Mass.
North Eastham, Mass.
Lenox, Mass.

Malden, Mass.
Stoneham, Mass.
Brookline, Mass.

Sandwich, Mass.
Sandwich, Mass.
Ridgewood Village, N. J.
Southbridge, Mass.
Barnstable, Mass.
Centerville, Mass.
West Falmouth, Mass.
Nantucket, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Mattapoisett, Mass.
Cummington, Mass.
Dighton, Mass.
Lunenburg, Mass.
Barre, Mass.
Springfield, Mass.
So. Auburn, R. I.
Roxbury, Mass.
Springfield, Mass.
Jamaica Plain, Mass.
Siasconset, Mass.
Blackstone, Mass.
Worcester, Mass.
Wellfleet, Mass.
Melrose, Mass.
NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT BLANK FORMS. 603

 

Holden, William,
Holmes, Clark W.,
Horsfall, Bruce,
Horton, Lawrence,
Howard, A. O.,

Howell, Benjamin F., .

Howland, George F.,
Howland, William F.,
Hoyt, William H.,
Hubbard, John S.,
Hylan, Rev. Albert E.,

Ide, Dr. Philip 5.,
Ingalls, Charles E.,

Jacobus, C. F.,
Jones, Jonathan H.,
Jones, Dr. L. C., .
Joyce, Edward F.,
Judkins, Dr. F. L.,

Keene, Walton E.,
Keene, Warren P.,
Kelley, Walter F.,
Kellogg, Dr. E. C.,
Kelsey, B. R.,
Keniston, Allan,
Keyes, Darwin T.,
Killum, Frank W.,
Kinney, A. B. F., .
Klaiber, Sigmund,
Knight, Ora Willis,

Lamb, Charles R.,
Lane, Lawton W..,
Larkin, Walter A.,
Latham, Charles R.,
Law, J. Douglas, .
Leonard, Cornelius H.,
Leonard, Edwin,
Leonard, William H.,
Leonard, Willis B.,
Lewis, Benjamin K.,
Linder, George,
Long, William B.,

Leominster, Mass.
Manomet, Mass.
Princeton, N. J.

Canton, Mass.

East Northfield, Mass.
Troy Hills, N. J.

South Framingham, Mass.
South Framingham, Mass.
Stamford, Conn.
Sturbridge, Mass.
Vineyard Haven, Mass.

Wayland, Mass.
East Templeton, Mass.

Turners Falls, Mass.
Waquoit, Mass.
Malden, Mass.
Lawrence, Mass.
Lynn, Mass.

Bourne, Mass.
Bourne, Mass.
Nantasket, Mass.
Swansea, Mass.
Waterbury, Conn.
Edgartown, Mass.
East Deerfield, Mass.
Topsfield, Mass.
Worcester, Mass.
Turners Falls, Mass.
Bangor, Me.

Cambridge, Mass.
Lynn, Mass.
Andover, Mass.
Windsor Locks, Conn.
Springfield, Mass.
Middleborough, Mass.
Feeding Hills, Mass.
East Foxborough, Mass.
Pittsfield, Mass.
Lynn, Mass.

Boston, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
604 NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT BLANK FORMS.

 

Look, John E.,
Lovell, Orville D.,
Lovell, Shirley,
Ludden, Dr. E. A.,
Luman, John F.,
Lund, Fred B.,
Lyman, A. M.,
Lyman, George H.,

Macfarlane, John,
Macker, Elmer A.,
Macomber, S. H.,

Manning, Warren H.,
Marsh, Dr. Franklin F.,
Martin, Dr. G. A.,
Maynard, C. J.,
Millard, George O.,
Miller, Fred H.,
Miller, Richard,
Mills, Harry C.,
Mills, James I.,
Milner, W. P.,
Mitchell, J. D.,
Mixter, George,
Moore, James W.,
Morris, Dr. M. A.,
Morris, Robert O.,
Morse, C. Harry,
Morse, George F.,
Moseley, B. P..,
Munn, Charles C.,

Nash, C. W., .
Nelson, George L.,
Nichols, Arthur M.,
Nicholson. John S.,
Nims, Charles W.,
Northup, L. J.,
Noyes, A. S.,

Nve, Russell S.,

O’Brien, D. H.,
Osborn, Francis B.,

Oak Bluffs, Mass.
Osterville, Mass.
Yarmouthport, Mass.
North Brookfield, Mass.
Thorndike, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Montague, Mass.
Boston, Mass.

Methuen, Mass.
North Grafton, Mass.
Central Village (West-
port), Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Wareham, Mass.
Franklin, Mass.
West Newton, Mass.
Blandford, Mass.
Hingham, Mass.
Turners Falls, Mass.
Unionville, Conn.
Ayer, Mass.
Concord, Mass.
Victoria, Texas.
Hardwick, Mass.
Agawam, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Springfield, Mass.
Belmont, Mass.
South Lancaster, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Springfield, Mass.

Toronto, Ontario, Can.
Groveland, Mass.
North Adams, Mass.
Hyannis, Mass.
Greenfield, Mass.
Cheshire, Mass.
Whitinsville, Mass.
Falmouth, Mass.

Rowley, Mass.
Hingham, Mass.
NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT BLANK FORMS. 605

 

Paige, Henry E.,

Paine, Charles J., Jr., .
Paradise, George C.,
Parker, Edward L.,
Parker, Harold,
Payson, Gilbert R.,
Payson, Samuel C.,
Pearson, Lyman,
Pearson, T. Gilbert,
Pease, Henry S.,
Peckham, Dr. Fenner H.,
Pennock, Charles J.,
Perkins, Charles L.,
Perry, Dr. Elton, Jr.,
Perry, Harry D., .
Perry, Nathan C.,
Peters, George G.,.
Pettey, Arthur E.,

Phillips, E. E.,
Phillips, Dr. John C.,
Pierce, A. N.,

Pierce, Edgar,

Pitman, A. B.,

Poland, George M.,
Poole, Chester M..,
Potter, Dr. William G.,
Pratt, A. L., . -
Pratt, Herbert A.,

Prentiss, William N.,

Ramage, Lawson, .
Raymond, Fred,
Remick, John A., Jr.,
Remington, Charles H.,
Rice, James Henry, Jr.,
Robbins, Willard W., .
Robinson, Edwin B., Jr.,
Rodgers, John B.,
Rogers, E. E.,

Ross, Augustus B.,

Sadler, Charles H.,
Sanford, Dr. Leonard C.,

Amherst, Mass.
Weston, Mass.
Fall River, Mass.
Concord, Mass.
Lancaster, Mass.
Belmont, Mass.
Brookline, Mass.
Byfield, Mass.
Greensborough, N. C.
Middlefield, Mass.
Providence, R. I.
Kennett Square, Pa.
Newburyport, Mass.
Austin, Tex.
Marshfield Hills, Mass.
Pocasset, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Central Village (West-
port), Mass.
Provincetown, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Greenfield, Mass.
Boston, Mass.
Siasconset, Mass.
Wakefield, Mass.
Chilmark, Mass.
New Bedford, Mass.
Belchertown, Mass.
North Middleborough,
Mass. .
Milford, Mass.

Monroe Bridge, Mass.
Bourne, Mass.

Boston, Mass.

East Providence, R. I.
Summerville, S. C.
Medfield, Mass.
Cataumet, Mass.
Barnstable, Mass.
West Barnstable, Mass.
Millers Falls, Mass.

Auburndale, Mass.
New Haven, Conn.
606 NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT BLANK FORMS.

 

Saunders, Dr. Frederick H.,

Saunders, William E.,
Sears, William C.,
Sharrock, Richard J.,
Shaw, C. E., .
Shaw, Gilbert M.,
Shaw, John H.,
Sheldon, Israel R.,
Sherriffs, William E.,
Sibley, Myron E.,
Small, Reuben C.,
Small, Willard M.,
Smith, Arthur E.,
Smith, DeWitt,
Smith, John B.,
Smith, William M.,
Soule, Guy L.,
Sparrow, Samuel E.,
Staples, Edward F.,
Stapleton, R. P.,
Stone, Clayton E.,
Stone, William M.,
Storey, R. C.,
Stratton, A. L.,
Struthers, Parke, .
Stubbs, Arthur P.,
Sturgis, Moses,
Sturtevant, Harry P.,
Sugden, Arthur W.,
Swan, Alfred S.,

Taylor, George L.,
Tenney, Judge Sanborn G.,
Thacher, Frank G.,
Thayer, Bayard,
Thayer, Henry F.,
Tinkham, Horace W.,
Townsend, Charles W.,
Treat, Willard E.,
Tribou, Charles E.,
Tripp, George F.,
Trull, George W.,
Tuck, Herbert E.,
Tufts, Harold F.,
Turner, Henry A.,

Westfield, Mass.
London, Ontario, Can.
Hyannis, Mass.
Westport, Mass.

East Weymouth, Mass.
South Weymouth, Mass.
Plymouth, Mass.
Pawtuxet, R. I.

Hull, Mass.

Lynn, Mass.
Nantucket, Mass.
North Truro, Mass.
Milford, Mass.
Chester, Mass.
Springfield, Mass.
Winchester, Mass.
Duxbury, Mass.

East Orleans, Mass.
Taunton, Mass.
Holyoke, Mass.
Lunenburg, Mass.
Dennis, Mass.

Boston, Mass.
Gardner, Mass.
Alfred, Me.

Lynn, Mass.
Hyannisport, Mass.
Bridgewater, Mass.
Hartford, Conn.

‘North Eastham, Mass.

Gloucester, Mass.
Williamstown, Mass.
Hyannis, Mass.
Lancaster, Mass.
Bridgewater, Mass.
Touisset, Mass.
Boston, Mass.

Silver Lane, Conn.
Brockton, Mass.
West Harwich, Mass.
Tewksbury, Mass.
Bradford, Mass.
Wolfville, N. S.
Norwell, Mass.
NAMES OF THOSE WHO FILLED OUT BLANK FORMS. 607

 

Tuttle, Dr. Albert H.,
Tuttle, Harry E.,
Tweedy, John E.,

Underwood, A.,
Underwood, Loring,

Van Huyck, J. M.,

Walker, Arthur L.,
Walker, Howard L.,
Ward, John, .
Watson, B. M.,
Watson, R. C.,
Weekes, Charles H.,
Weeks, W. B. P.,
Weston, Francis M., Jr.,
Wharton, William P., .
Wheeler, Wilfred, .
White, George E.,
Whitin, Henry T.,
Whiting, Willard C.,
Willard, George O.,
Williams, J. A.,
Williamson, Barney P.,
Wilson, Thomas C.,
Wiltshire, Frank, .
Wing, Henry P.,

Winslow, John M.,
Wolfe, Philip W.,
Woodward, Dr. W. C.,

Zeigler, F. R.,
Zerrahn, Carl O., .

Cambridge, Mass.
Concord, Mass.
Attleborough, Mass.

West Falmouth, Mass.
Belmont, Mass.

Lee, Mass.

Brookline, Mass.
Leominster, Mass.
Cambridge, Mass.
Jamaica Plain, Mass.
Milton, Mass.
Providence, R. I.
Boston, Mass.
Charleston, S. C.
Groton, Mass.
Concord, Mass.
East Carver, Mass.
Northbridge, Mass.
Plymouth, Mass.
Blandford, Mass.
Northbridge, Mass.
Marshfield, Mass.
Ipswich, Mass.
Kentville, N. S.
Central Village (West-
port), Mass.
Nantucket, Mass.
North Weymouth, Mass.
Middleborough, Mass.

Pittsfield, Mass.
Milton, Mass.
 

 

APPENDICES.

 

 
APPENDIX A.

RECORDS OF THE OCCURRENCE OF RARE OR ACCIDENTAL
SPECIES NOT CONTAINED IN THE FIRST EDITION AND NOT
INCLUDED IN THE BODY OF THE SECOND EDITION.

SNOW GOOSE (Chen hyperboreus hyperboreus). See page 172.

Marne ReEcorps.

One was taken near Portland in December, 1880 (Brown,
Abst. Proc. Portland Soc. Nat. Hist., II, 1882, p. 2). A male
was taken at Toddy Lake, Hancock County, October 4, 1893,
and a male at Umbagog Lake on October 2, 1896 (Brewster,
Auk, 1897, p. 207); one at Pushaw Pond and one at Nicatous
prior to 1897 (Knight, fide Hardy, Bull. 3, Univ. of Me.,
1897, p. 36). Two were shot near Merrymeeting Bay, one
on October 10 and the other a short time later, in 1897 (Knight,
fide Day, Maine Sportsman, Sept. 1898, p. 14). The follow-
ing are Snow Geese, species unidentified: one at Glenburn,
October 18, 1881, and one near Hallowell, November 25,
1881. Mr. Alphzeus G. Rogers of Portland reports one which
he saw at Cape Elizabeth on October 9, 1911. One was taken
in Gorham in November, 19081! (Norton, Auk, 1909, p. 304).

Massacuvusretts Rrecorps.

Mr. Benjamin F. Damsell notes one shot October 7, 1888.
Another was shot by Mr. Albert Shaw in 1902. A flock was
seen February 18, 1902, at Amesbury.? A flock of thirty or
more was seen at Framingham on November 19, 1909. Five
were taken at Robbin’s Pond, East Bridgewater, on November
20, 1914. Three others are reported seen at Robbin’s Pond
in 1913.4 ,

 

1 Norton, Arthur H.: Auk, 1913, p. 575. 3 Bridge, Mrs. Lidian E.: Auk, 1910, p. 78.
2 Allen, Glover M.: Auk, 1913, p. 22. 4 Phillips, John C.: Auk, 1915, p. 367.
612 APPENDIX.

 

GREATER SNOW GOOSE (Chen hyperboreus nivalis). See page 173.

Maine Recorps.

On April 4, 1913, upwards of thirty Snow Geese were
seen at Pine Point, Scarboro, by Mr. I. W. Pillsbury and
others. The following day several smaller flocks were reported
in different parts of Casco Bay. From one of these flocks
four birds were taken, at Great Chebeague Island. One bird,
Heron Island, Phippsburg, April 7, 1889 (Batchelder, Auk,
1890, p. 284). One bird, Back River, Georgetown, April 25,
1903 (Spinney, Jour. Me. Orn. Soc., 1904, p. 69). One bird,
Lubec, April 30, 1906 (Clark, Jour. Me. Orn. Soc., 1906,
p. 48). A flock of about two hundred on the ice of Long
Pond between Bridgton and Harrison, April 13, 1908, and
a similar flock on Sebago Lake on the following day* (Mead,
Jour. Me. Orn. Soc., 1908, p. 59).

BLUE GOOSE (Chen cerulescens). See page 174.

An adult female Blue Goose was taken at Dyer’s Island,
R. L., by Mr. Sinclair Tucker on November 9, 1912. This
is the second record for Rhode Island, and the fourth for
New England. The skin is in the collection of the Boston
Society of Natural History.?

WHISTLING SWAN (Olor columbianus). See page 199.

A Whistling Swan was shot at Webb’s Pond, Ellsworth,
Me., in March, 1908, by Mr. Hamlin Kingman.* On Novem-
ber 21, 1914, two Swans were seen circling over Oldham Pond,
Pembroke, Mass. They were seen later at Silver Lake. These
probably were whistling swans, but many recent reports of
swans seen near Boston followed soon after the escape of some
European mute swans from the Boston park system.

KING RAIL (Rallus elegans). See page 204.

A specimen was noted on August 14, 1902, at Amesbury.®
A specimen in the collection of the Boston Society of Natural

 

1 Norton, Arthur H.: Auk, 1913, p. 575-576. 4 Phillips, John C.: Auk, 1915, p. 367.
2 Brooks, W. Sprague: Auk, 1915, p. 226. » Allen, Glover M.: Auk, 1913, p. 23.
8 Knight, Ora Willis: Auk, 1910, p. 78.
APPENDIX. 613

 

History was taken at Ipswich on March 13, 1908. Mr. Russell
Bearse took another King Rail at Chatham on December 28,
1908. This bird is in the collection of Mr. Warren E. Freeman
of Arlington, Mass.! Mr. Richard M. Russell took a King
Rail at Sandy Neck, West Barnstable, on December 30 or
31, 1909. This bird is owned by the Boston Society of Natural
History.2, One was taken by Mr. W. A. Carey, October 2,
1909, at Chatham. A setter dog caught one alive October 25,
1909, on the marsh at Chatham. Mr. Frank Eldredge took
a lone bird at Chatham on October 20, 1909. One spent the
month of May, 1910, in a swamp in Bennington, Vt. On
August 30, 1911, a King Rail was taken along the Connecticut
River below Springfield.© Another was taken August 22,
1913, in Longmeadow.®

Three winter records from Rhode Island are given in Howe
and Sturtevant’s Birds of Rhode Island. Since then a male
and a female were taken on May 3, 1904, and a male on May
9, 1904, all at Easton’s Pond, Newport, by Mr. C. B. Clark.
One was taken October 13, 1907, by Mr. H. S. Champlin.
Mr. Clark took four birds at Point Judith on the following
dates: a female August 26, an adult male September 3, a male
on September 12, and another male on December 12, 1909.7

WILSON’S PHALAROPE (Steganopus tricolor). See page 230.

Mr. Harry S. Hathaway took a male Wilson’s Phalarope
at Quonochontaug, R. I., on August 28, 1909.8 An adult
female was taken by a Mr. Whitlock at Quogue, Long Island,
N. Y., on September 4, 1911.°

MARBLED GODWIT (Limosa fedoa). See page 296.

A Marbled Godwit was taken at Amesbury, Mass., by Mr.
Benjamin F. Damsell on July 28,°1888, and another on July
30.1° One was taken by a gunner named Merritt on September
7, 1908, at Sakonnet Point, R. I. The specimen was mounted

 

1 Fay, S. Prescott: Auk, 1910, p. 220. 6 Morris, Robert O.: Auk, 1913, p. 580.

2 Howe, R. Heber, Jr.: Auk, 1910, p. 339. 7 Hathaway, Harry S.: Auk, 1913, pp. 549-550.
3 Fay, 8. Prescott: Auk, 1911, p. 121. 8 Ibid., p. 551.

4 Ross, Lucretius H.: Auk, 1913, p. 436. ® Kobbé, Frederick Wm.: Auk, 1912, p. 108.

5 Morris. Robert O.: Auk, 1912, p. 237. 10 Allen, Glover M.: Auk, 1913, p. 24.
614 APPENDIX.

 

and is in his possession.' Mr. Wm. Ganung shot an adult
female Marbled Godwit at West Haven, Conn., on August 26,
1909.?

RUFF (Machetes pugnax). See page 314.

Mr. Wm. T. Bowler took an immature female Ruff on
September 7, 1909, on the Point Judith marsh, which was in
company with two Pectoral Sandpipers. This is the third
record for Rhode Island. The specimen is now in the collec-
tion of Mr. Harry S. Hathaway.’ On October 16, 1912, a
female Ruff was taken on the Nonesuch River, Scarboro, Me.,
by Mr. I. W. Pillsbury. It is now in the collection of Mr.
Arthur H. Norton. This was taken but a short distance from
the spot where Mr. Everett Smith shot the first Maine speci-
men in 1870. This furnishes the fourth record for the State,
the others being: the Smith specimen referred to, April 10,
1870 (Smith, Forest and Stream, 1883, p. 85); a female taken
at Upton, Me., September 8, 1874 (the second specimen, but
the first to be published) (Brewster, Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club,
1876, p. 19); a specimen recorded as taken at Camden, Me.,
September 4, 1900 (Thayer, Auk, 1905, p. 409).4

LONG-BILLED CURLEW (Numenius americanus). See page 328.

A Long-billed Curlew was taken July 21, 1887, and another
on July 25, 1891, probably on the Salisbury marshes, by Mr.
Benjamin F. Damsell.®

ESKIMO CURLEW (Numenius borealis). See page 430.

Mr. Benjamin F. Damsell notes one taken on August 31,
1889, one on August 28 and one on the 29th, 1893, near Ames-
bury. A single bird was taken at Alberton, P. E. L., by Mr.
C. O. Zerrahn of Milton, Mass., in 1905. The skin is now in
his collection. In the history of this bird, as written for the
first edition, it was stated that it was not improbable that a
few more birds of the species or even small flocks might yet
be seen or taken. Apparently several birds have been taken

 

1 Hathaway, Harry S.: Auk, 1913, p. 551. 4 Norton, Arthur H.: Auk, 1918, p. 576.
2 Bishop, Louis B.: Auk, 1910, p. 462. 5 Allen, Glover M.: Auk, 1913, p. 24.
3 Hathaway, Harry S.: Auk, 1913, p. 552.
APPENDIX. 615

 

since. In his Birds of Oconto County, Mr. A. J. Schoenebeck
reports one taken near Oconto, Wis., April 27, 1899.1

The identity of this bird has been questioned.?

In a letter to Dr. Charles W. Townsend, Dr. W. T. Grenfell
reports seven Eskimo Curlew shot and one other seen on the
beach at West Bay, north of Cartwright, Labrador, in August
and September, 1912. The skins of five were saved and sent
to Cambridge, where they were seen and identified by Mr.
William Brewster.’ A single bird, a male, was taken at Fox
Lake, Dodge County, Wis., September 10, 1912. It is now
in the collection of Mr. W. E. Snyder.4 One was taken at
East Orleans, Mass., September 5, 1913, by Mr. John G.
Rogers, and is now in the collection of Mr. Charles R. Lamb.’

 

1 Coale, Henry K.: Auk, 1911, p. 276. 4 Snyder, W. E.: Auk, 1913, p. 269.
2 Hollister, N.: Auk, 1912, p. 398. 6 Lamb, Chas. R.: Auk, 1913, p. 581.
3 Townsend, Charles W.: Auk, 1913, p. 10.
APPENDIX B.

PROGRESS IN GAME PROTECTION SINCE THE FIRST EDITION
OF THIS VOLUME WAS WRITTEN.

Since the brief summary of needed reforms for game pro-
tection given on pages 592 and 593 was written, many of the
recommendations contained therein have been adopted in
Massachusetts and other States, where in fact some had been
put into practice before this book was written. Already laws
had been passed in Massachusetts and elsewhere under which
bird reservations could be established. Since then still other
States have followed this example, and the reservations now
established under these recently enacted statutes are too
numerous for enumeration here.

Many States in 1912 had prohibited the sale and export of
certain species of wild game birds, but now (1915) Massachu-
setts, New York and Illinois have forbidden the sale of wild
game birds, thus closing most of the greater northern markets
to wild-fowl and shore birds. These statutes embody pro-
visions allowing the sale, under suitable restrictions, of birds
raised in captivity or on preserves.

The third recommendation made on page 593 advocates a
federal law for the protection of migratory birds. Such a bill
has been enacted into law by Congress after a strenuous legis-
lative campaigri, led by the American Game Protective and
Propagation Society and ably seconded by many other asso-
ciations for the protection of wild life. It places the care of
migratory insectivorous and game birds in the hands of the
United States Department of Agriculture, and gives the
Department the power to make regulations, having the force
of law, for the protection of such birds. These regulations,
made by a committee of the Biological Survey at Washington,
and approved by the President, are now in force; but the law
may not be sustained by the Supreme Court of the United
States, or, if it be so sustained, Congress may fail to make
618 APPENDIX.

 

appropriations sufficient for its enforcement. Until its future
is assured as a constitutional statute, with ample means for its
enforcement, it will be premature to publish the law or the
regulations in this volume.

Some progress has been made in prohibiting the use of ultra-
destructive or silent guns. New Jersey has forbidden the
use of automatic guns and ten States and two Canadian prov-
inces have forbidden the use of gun silencers. Proposed
legislation for these purposes has been defeated in many
States by the agents of the manufacturers.

Massachusetts and several other States have established
long close seasons for birds that are in danger of extinction, and
some,such seasons are now made general under the federal law.
Long before this volume was written I had used every possible
legitimate influence to secure laws in New England requiring
the registration of all hunters, and every State but Maine has
adopted them as a means of regulating hunting and of securing
means for protecting the game and enforcing the law. Maine
was able to accomplish much by a system requiring registration
of nonresident hunters, which provided her with the means for
law enforcement. This system of hunting licenses has pro-
duced a revenue for protection, propagation and law enforce-
ment in all the New England States.

No license legislation for alien hunters has been established
with a fee high enough to be really prohibitive, but Pennsyl-
vania has forbidden shooting by aliens. The law has been
upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States, and Massa-
chusetts has followed the lead of Pennsylvania with a similar
prohibitive law, which, however, has some weak points. The
only way to prevent the bird-killing alien from shooting is to
prohibit it altogether and now that the Supreme Court has
sustained the law, other States should follow. New Jersey,
North Dakota and West Virginia have done so.

Connecticut forbade summer shooting of shore birds in
1907, and the law has remained on the statute books until this
day (1915). Under it the birds have increased considerably
within the State. The federal law for the protection of migra-
tory birds now prohibits the killing of most shore birds, and
so if enforced would do away with most summer shooting.
APPENDIX. 619

 

Laws limiting the number of birds that the hunter is
allowed to take in a day or in a season have been passed in
practically all the States. They help some, but it is difficult
if not impossible to enforce them.

Something has been accomplished toward making game
seasons more uniform in different States, but this cannot be
done certainly or permanently except under a federal law.
Seasons have been quite generally shortened in New England
and in some other States. The result in Massachusetts has
been excellent. The local game birds have increased steadily
over a large part of the State. Wild-fowl have multiplied and
many more breed here than when all winter and spring shooting
was allowed.

Night shooting was prohibited generally by the federal law
in 1914, but as this law never has been fully enforced the effect
in Massachusetts is yet to be seen. No recent attempt has
been made in Massachusetts to check the pursuit of wild-fowl
by hunters in boats, except that restrictions on the use of motor
boats have been enacted. That such protection is important
is shown by the numbers of wild-fowl in ponds where pursuit
by boat is not allowed.

Laws have been enacted in Massachusetts for the purpose
of preventing forest fires, and the State Forester has had some
success in enforcing them. It is very important for the Fish
and Game Commission or the Governor of the Commonwealth
to have the power to stop all shooting at any time in the open
season when the woods are so dry that they will be much
endangered by hunters. In Massachusetts and some other
States this power is now vested in the Governor.

The Legislature of Massachusetts has enacted statutes
under which each town may have both a game warden and a
bird warden, but as these laws are not mandatory, and town
governments may adopt them or not as they please, compara-
tively few towns have secured the appointment of either.
It is important to appoint officers in each town to act as war-
dens and to help the State wardens enforce the game and
bird laws, but they should be paid officers. The Massachusetts
law provides for this.

Legislation has been proposed annually for several years
620 APPENDIX.

 

to limit the numbers of wandering dogs and cats during the
nesting season of the birds, but so far (1915) the dog owners
and the cat owners have defeated all attempts to check the
game-and-bird-killing habits of their pets. Educational work
is needed here.

Education with a tendency to promote respect for the
game laws and bird laws has been woefully lacking until quite
recently; the National Association of Audubon Societies, co-
operating with the Massachusetts Audubon Society, has organ-
ized bird classes in the public schools of Massachusetts, aggre-
gating 8,463 pupils in 1914, and the work has been extended
throughout the country, enrolling 95,918 pupils. Since the
first edition of this volume was written the American Game
Protective and Propagation Society, organized in New York,
has undertaken a national propaganda for the protection of
game birds. It publishes a monthly bulletin devoted to this
interest. The Massachusetts Commissioners on Fisheries and
Game publish and put up posters containing abstracts of the
fish and game laws.

The Massachusetts Fish and Game Protective Association
has now in press a publication written by its secretary, Mr.
Bradford A. Scudder, which deals with the methods of attract-
ing, protecting and propagating birds, but there is no organiza-
tion in Massachusetts except the Commission on Fisheries
and Game which now even attempts to employ officers to
assist in the enforcement of the law. The National Association
of Audubon Societies and the American Game Protective and
Propagation Society have done much to assist State officers
and to apprehend offenders, but most State organizations
have done very little.

The Commissioners on Fisheries and Game in Miastacha
setts issue an annual report, but the edition is small. The
Legislature authorized the publication and sale by the State
Board of Agriculture of the History of Game Birds, Wild-
Fowl and Shore Birds, and the companion volume, Useful
Birds and Their Protection, as long as the demand shall con-
tinue, but there should be an educational propaganda by
posters and by mail, aiming to reach every citizen of Massa-
chusetts. Information about game and birds, the need for
APPENDIX. 621

 

their protection, and copies of the game and bird laws should
be put in the hands of every gunner and every other person who
takes any interest in game birds or gunning. Will not some
friend of the birds, well supplied with the means, generously
render such a propaganda possible? A great work was accom-
plished in New York when Dr. Wm. T. Hornaday, director of
the New York Zodlogical Park, wrote a book entitled Our
Vanishing Wild Life, and members of the Zodlogical Society
financed its production and placed a copy in the hands of each
member of Congress and each member of every Legislature
in the United States. Some similar but lesser publication
should be sent free of charge to a large number of people in
Massachusetts annually, but possibly such an undertaking
must wait for a philanthropist yet unborn.
 

 

INDEX.

 

 
INDEX.

{The numbers in heavy-faced type refer to the pages in Parts I and II on which the species are
described. All names of each species given in the text are indexed, —including most of those

commonly used by New England gunners.]

Abbott, C. C., 20, 21, 108, 317.
Actitis macularia, 322.
Aigialitis meloda, 354.
semipalmata, 352.
Agassiz, Louis, 406.
Agriculture, decline of, 554,
Aix sponsa, 105.
Allen, Arthur A., 232.
F. H., 293.
Glover M., 62, 90, 136, 147, 162, 176, 182,
206, 216, 218, 222, 232, 234, 256, 263, 271,
281, 292, 298, 304, 311, 317, 328, 332, 336,
355, 425, 443, 461, 462, 485, 492, 611, 612,
614.
J. A., 44, 77, 84, 92, 96, 100, 108, 171, 176,
184, 216, 234, 256, 263, 271, 279, 287, 292,
296, 298, 304, 311, 317, 321, 327, 331, 337,
343, 349, 355, 358, 376, 409, 410, 422, 481.
William H., 265.
Amadas, Philip, 7, 478.
Ames, C. H., 464.
J. H., 214.
Anas platyrhynchos, 71.
rubripes, 76.
rubripes rubripes, 80.
Anderson, R. M., 30, 462.
Angell, Walter A., 381, 461.
Anser albifrons gambeli, 175.
Appendix A, 611.
B, 617.
Archer, Gabriel, 9, 100, 403, 484.
Ardea canadensis, 485.
Arenaria interpres morinella, 359.
Argal, Sir Samuel, 7.
Arquatella maritima maritima, 268.
Atkinson, George E., 462.
Attracting upland game birds, 581.
water-fowl, 569.
Attwater, H. P., 424.
Audubon, J. J., 12, 13, 16,.19, 20, 21, 24, 26, 29, 42,
48, 53, 62, 68, 72, 87, 92, 94, 101, 104,
107, 114, 117, 132, 138, 149, 171, 173,
176, 211, 222, 226, 230, 234, 239, 261,
269, 271, 283, 286, 291, 295, 299, 304,
308, 310, 336, 342, 349, 355, 361, 363,
364, 365, 366, 367, 385, 387, 392, 404,
409, 411, 412, 413, 416, 419, 433, 443,
444, 445, 446, 451, 479, 480, 493, 494,
517, 518.
J. W., 53, 396, 411.

 

Aughey, Samuel, 308, 319, 351, 353, 356, 409, 514,
Auk, Great, 399.
Razor-billed, 399, 402.
Auks, 2.
Avocet, 230, 231.

Bacon, 8. E., Jr., 142.
Vaughan D., 338,

Badger Bird, 294.

Bagg, Egbert, 131.

Baird, 8S. F., 218, 230, 315, 409, 492.

Baldpate, 83, 84, 85, 86, 103, 571, 572.

Bangs, Outram, 84.

Bank-bird, 227.

Barlowe, Arthur, 7, 478...

Barnes, R. M., 54.

Barrows, Walter B., 424, 455.

Bartlett, H. W., 257.

Bartramia longicauda, 315.

Bartsch, Paul, 424.

Basset, J. E., 85.

Bates, F. A., 137, 156.

Batty, J. H., 216.

Baxter, J. Bert, 462.

Beach-bird, 290.

Beal, F. E. L., 327, 396.

Bearse, Russell, 204, 613.

Beebe, C. Wm., 474.

Beetle-head, 335, 340.

Belknap, Jeremy, 184, 385, 437, 473, 491.

Bendire, Charles, 377.

Bent, Arthur C., 90, 116, 136, 172, 199, 313.

Berteau, C. P., 420, 432.

Beverly, Robert, 490.

Beyer, George H., 422, 457, 461.

Bigelow, Henry B., 97, 186, 424,

Bird protection, statutory, 588.

Birds, causes of decrease of, 510, 531, 547, 549.

decrease of, 18, 32, 44, 47, 51, 61, 65, 68, 72,

77, 82, 87, 92, 96, 104, 107, 114, 122, 125,
130, 136, 140, 145, 149, 155, 164, 167, 171,
173, 179, 184, 185, 195, 208, 211, 222, 232,
234, 236, 237, 246, 248, 249, 250, 256, 257,
263, 264, 265, 269, 271, 272, 275, 279, 280,
283, 287, 292, 296, 298, 301, 304, 307, 311,
316, 317, 321, 323, 328, 332, 337, 343, 349,
353, 355, 362, 365, 372, 376, 379, 380, 386,
387, 388, 395, 409, 410, 413, 414, 415, 421,
424, 426, 436, 448, 456, 458, 475, 483, 491,
492, 504, 505.
INDEX.

 

Birds — Con.
erroneous opinions regarding decrease of,
549-556.

former abundance of game, 6, 14, 20, 30,
44, 47, 65, 68, 72, 77, 96, 107, 130, 136, 142,
149, 171, 173, 178, 184, 185, 195, 222, 236,
246, 256, 263, 271, 275, 278, 279, 283, 286,
291, 292, 310, 316, 331, 337, 341, 342, 349,
353, 354, 360, 364, 370, 378, 380, 385, 395,
401, 404, 405, 417, 420, 433, 444, 448, 452,
454, 469, 470, 473, 474, 475, 478, 483, 489,
490.
increase of, 78, 89, 116, 119, 120, 122, 313,
331, 370, 371, 384, 390, 395, 504, 505, 509,
520, 521, 522, 523, 524, 568.
insectivorous, on game preserves, 568.
large numbers killed, 14-22, 27, 28, 51, 52,
108, 140, 141, 149, 158, 179, 198, 211, 222,
238, 239, 240, 246, 247, 262, 264, 279, 280,
291, 342, 343, 344, 346, 379, 381, 402, 403,
405, 408, 409, 419, 420, 421, 427, 438, 439,
441, 448, 450, 454, 464, 513, 514, 515, 519,
521, 537, 539, 540.
Bishop, Louis B., 29, 256, 279, 296, 304, 311, 328,
337, 421, 614.
Watson L., 377.
Bitterns, 8, 9.
Blackbird, 351.
Blackbirds, 432, 579.
Blackbreast, 335.
‘i Little, 282.
Black-head, 16, 121.
Black-tail, 297.
Blatchley, W. S., 408.
Blommaert, Samuel, 9.
Blood, C. L., 206.
Edmund, 247.
Bluebill, Little, 124.
Bluebills, 115, 121, 125, 180, 166, 523.
Bluebird, 335.
Blue Peter, 221.
Blue-wing, 95.
Boardman, George A., 51, 53, 62, 68, 128, 131,
133, 214, 234, 365, 409.
Boats, shooting from, 535.
Bobolinks, 579.
Bob-white, 1, 6, 22, 32, 88, 251, 367, 368, 384, 509,
514, 545, 546, 565, 567, 581, 590.
fruits eaten by, 582.
seeds eaten by, 583.
Bogert, W. S., 523.
Bonaparte, Charles L., 549.
Bonasa umbellus togata, 377.
umbellus, 377.
Bottle-head, 335.
Bourne, Edward E., 437.
Boutwell, M. M., 345, 441.
Bowler, Wm. T., 614.
Bowles, J. H., 203, 204, 475.
Boyle, E. J., 373.
Brackett, Foster H., 203.
Bradford, William, 405.

 

Braislin, W. C., 199.
Brant, 2, 8, 9, 15, 183, 523.
Branta bernicla glaucogastra, 183.
canadensis canadensis, 177.
hutchinsi, 182.
leucopsis, 193.
nigricans, 192.
Brant-bird, 282, 359.
Brant, Black, 189, 192.
Braas-back, 340.
Break Horn, 60.

’ Brereton, John, 9, 484.

Brewer, T. M., 135, 145, 176, 182, 211, 212, 218,
230, 231, 234, 311, 327, 332, 349, 353, 355, 357,
358, 363, 365, 409, 492.

Brewster, C. E., 513.

William, 41, 44, 51, 69, 77, 84, 87, 90, 92,
96, 108, 114, 125, 133, 134, 136, 157,
158, 162, 176, 203, 206, 207, 214, 215,
218, 220, 228, 261, 264, 271, 273, 279,
285, 287, 304, 314, 217, 349, 355, 387,
391, 440, 441, 442, 454, 456, 457, 464,
485, 487, 491, 611, 614, 615.

Bridge, Mrs. Lidian E., 611.

Brimley, C. S., 441, 461.

Broad-bill, 166.

Brooks, Charles, 436.

W. Sprague, 152, 612.

Brown, C. B., 461.

Chas. H., 89, 115, 116.
Frank A., 272.
Neal, 462.

Brown-back, 253.

Brown Bank-bird, 225.

Brown, Marlin, 294.

Browne, F. C., 206.

G. E., 203, 206.

Brownie, 270.

Bruce, David, 58.

Bruner, Lawrence, 30, 461.

Bubier, G. M., 247, 298.

Buffington, S. L., 88, 130.

Buffle-head, 135, 168, 572.

Bull-head, 335.

Bull-peep, 274.

Bureau of Biological Survey, 75, 159, 162, 196,
235, 278, 365, 373, 396, 494, 498, 518, 568, 572, 578,
590.

Burlingame, Benjamin, 487.

Burrage, Henry S., 7, 401, 402, 479.

Burroughs, John, 200.

Bush, Ben O., 457, 464.

Butler, A. W., 517.

Benjamin F., 442.

Butter Ball, 135.

Butter-bill, 153.

Butter-nose, 153.

Button, Sir Thomas, 22.

Buzzards, 464.

Cabot, Mrs. Eliza, 387.
Samuel, 176, 440.
INDEX.

627

 

Cabot, S., Jr., 206.
Hugh, 380.
Cahn, Alvin R., 209.
Cahoon, C. A., 92, 130.
Cairns, J. S., 461.
Calidris leucophza, 290.
Campion, C., 462.
Camptorhynchus labradorius, 411.
Canachites canadensis canace, 375.
Cape Race, 57.
Cape Racer, 57.
Carbonnell, E. T., 97, 131, 188, 189, 200, 255,
430, 534.
Carey, W. A., 192, 613.
Carpenter, W. D., 552.
Carroll, W. J., 420.
Cartier, Jacques, 401, 402.
Cartwright, George, 409.
Casey, Neil, 257, 443, 461.
Cash, Harry A., 381.
Catesby, Mark, 408.
Catoptrophorus semipalmatus inornatus, 313.
semipalmatus,
309.
Chamberlain, Montague, 92, 96, 114, 199, 262, 269,
279, 304, 317, 349, 491.
Champlain, Samuel de, 363, 403, 434, 481, 488.
Champlin, H. S., 613.
Chandler, Clarence, 204.
Chapman, Frank M.,46, 61, 113, 129, 133, 135, 203,
205, 210, 227, 228, 229, 231, 233, 235, 281, 300, 461.
Charadrius dominicus dominicus, 340.
Charitonetta albeola, 135.
Chase, H. F., 158, 172.
Chaulelasmus streperus, 81.
Chen, cerulescens, 174, 612.
hyperboreus hyperboreus, 170, 611.
nivalis, 173, 612.
Cheney, L. R., 199.
Chicken, 359.
Chicken-bill, 210.
Chicken-bird, 359, 360.
Chicken-plover, 359.
Chuckle-head, 335, 338.
Clam-bird, 354.
Clangula clangula americana, 129.
islandica, 133.
Clark, A. B., 176, 232.
C. A., 240, 381.
C. B., 146, 613.
C. H., 201.
H. L., 77.
Clayton, John, &.
Coale, Henry K., 615.
Coburn, J. J., 110.
Cochrane, J. S., 281.
Cockawee, 139.
Cody, W. F. (Buffalo Bill), 490.
Coffin, R. F., 172.
Colinus virginianus virginianus, 368.
Columba leucocephala, 465.
Columbigallina passerina terrestris, 396.

 

Colymbus auritus, 43.
holboelli, 41.
Conservation of game birds, 497.
Cook, Sullivan, 454.
Cooke, W. W., 72, 93, 132, 159, 189, 251, 254, 273,
276, 319, 341, 365, 422, 428, 461, 517, 518, 527, 532.
Coolidge, Baldwin, 285.
Coot, 157, 158, 220, 221, 576.
Black, 153.
Broad-billed, 153.
Brown, 163.
Bumblebee, 166.
Butterboat-billed, 163.
Creek, 166.
Gray, 163.
Hollow-billed, 163.
Little Gray, 153, 157.
Patchpolled, 163.
Pied-winged, 160.
Pumpkin-blossom, 153.
Smutty, 153.
Uncle Sam, 160.
Whistling, 153.
White-winged, 160.
Coots, 111, 154, 155, 156, 165, 201, 500, 576.

| Copper-bill, 153.

Copper-nose, 153.

Cormorant, Great, 414.

Cormorants, 7, 8, 363.

Cory, C. B., 169, 192, 298, 328, 343, 417, 422, 424.

Coturnicops noveboracensis, 213.

Coues, Elliott, 261, 275, 296, 298, 310, 311, 317, 327,
331, 355, 357, 863, 384, 410, 412, 416, 421, 422, 432,
450.

Couture, Pacificque, 462.

Cowing, D. T., 248.

Crane, 485.

Common, 479.

Gray, 479.

Little Brown, 484, 487.
Sandhill, 480, 482, 483.
White, 479, 481.
Whooping, 477, 486, 487.

Cranes, 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 24.

Creciscus jamaicensis, 215.

Creddock, 359.

Crow-bill, 221.

Cucu, 300.

Large, 300.

Small, 303.

Curlew, Eskimo, 331, 341, 345, 416, 614.
Eskimaux, 417.
Hen, 325.
Hudsonian, 325, 326, 327, 330, 417, 423,
432.

Jack, 325, 330.
Long-billed, 294, 295, 325, 499, 614.
Old-hen, 325.
Pied-winged, 309.
Red, 294.
Sicklebill, 325.
Sicklebilled, 330.
628

INDEX.

 

Curlews, 3, 8, 9, 18, 31, 271, 318, 417.
Currier, B. H., 538.
Curtis, Benjamin F., 292.

D. T., 216.

Dabchick, 46.

Dabney, Alfred, 314.

Dafila acuta, 102.

Daland, John, Jr., 199.

Damon, W. &., 172.

Dameell, Benjamin F., 176, 232, 611, 613, 614.

Dapper, 135, 166.

Davis, S., 51, 405, 406.

Dawson, W. L., 45, 108, 200, 360, 462, 475.

Dean, Charles L., 266.

Deane, Ruthven, 168, 285, 410, 458, 461, 462.

Decoys, use of live, 536.

De Haven, I. N., 239.

De Kay, J. E., 82, 92, 96, 103, 141, 171, 184, 232,
234, 256, 271, 286, 292, 295, 298, 304, 311, 317, 343,
365, 412, 474, 481, 491.

De Laet, Johannes, 8.

Denmead, Talbot, 78, 92, 199.

De Rasieres, Isaack, 9.

Devil-diver, 43.

De Vries, David Pieterszoon, 9, 475, 479.

Didapper, 46.

Dill, Fred F., 372, 538.

Joseph, 193.

Dipper, 46, 166.

Dipper Duck, 135.

Diseases, 540.

Diver, Red-throated, 57.

Saw-bill, 67.

Doe-bird, 416.

Dopper, 135, 166.

Dough-bird, 360, 416.

Doughty, J. and T., 20.

Douglas, H. M., 240, 257.

Dove, Ground, 393, 396.

Mourning, 393, 394, 460, 472.
Turtle, 9, 394, 438.
Wild, 394.

Doves, 1, 393, 436.

. Dowitcher, 19, 253, 262, 264, 498.
Long-billed, 259.

Drake, Frank C., 182.

Driver, 253.

Duck, Baldpate, 86.

Barrow’s Golden-eye, 133.

Black, 71, 73, 76, 153, 518, 528, 533, 565,
570, 571, 572, 573, 579.

Buffle-head, 135.

Bumblebee, 135.

Canvas-back, 113, 114, 118, 550, 572, 575.

Canvas-backs, 13, 14, 16, 17, 26.

Creek, 81.

Dipper, 135.

Dusky, 76.

Eider, 143, 146, 148.

Gadwall, 81, 518.

Golden-eye, 129.

 

Duck — Con.
Gray, 71, 81, 102, 103, 412, 523.
Harlequin, 144.
Isles of Shoals, 148.
King Lider, 151.
Labrador, 411, 455.
Mallard, 71, 515, 518, 523, 565, 570, 571, 573.
Mandarin, 106.
Masked, 169.
Northern Eider, 147.
Old-squaw, 139.
Old Wife, 139.
Pheasant, 102.
Pied, 411.
Pintail, 102, 518:
Raft, 124.
Redhead, 113, 572, 575.
Red-legged Black, 80.
Ring-billed, 127.
Ring-necked, 127.
Ruddy, 166, 572.
Sand Shoal, 411.
Scaup, 121.
Lesser, 124.
Sea, 148.
Shoal, 413.
Shoveller, 99, 518, 523.
Skunk, 411.
Spoonbill, 99.
Spring Black, 76.
Squam, 148.
Summer, 105.
Summer, Black, 76.
Wood, 68, 98, 105, 502, 565, 572, 573, 578,
581.
Duck shooting, 17.
Ducks, 8, 18, 24, 26, 27, 29, 32, 40, 55, 93, 109, 116,
119, 122, 130, 137, 140, 142, 150, 156, 165,
. 167, 169, 250, 251, 288, 333, 363, 484, 531,
545, 570, 573, 575, 576.
Black, 122, 154, 515, 523, 580.
Hider, 3, 147, 151, 152, 156, 363.
Wood, 3, 31, 145, 235, 523.
Dumb-bird, 166.
Dunbird, 166.
Duplin, 281.
Dutcher, William, 56, 107, 218, 327, 386, 415, 416.
Dwight, Jonathan, Jr., 430, 457, 461.
Timothy, 387.
Dyke, Arthur C., 85.

Eagle, Bald, 54.

Eagles, 451, 464.

Earle, 8. N., 255.

Eaton, Elon H., 58, 68, 80, 81, 82, 84, 87, 89,91,
93, 95, 96, 98, 100, 118, 122, 129, 131, 132,
141, 142, 151, 158, 162, 166, 178, 176, 192,
203, 206, 207, 216, 218, 275, 282, 285, 311,
328, 355, 357, 376, 380, 395, 396, 429, 430,
452.

E. W., 68, 199, 257, 265, 283.
Eckley, David, 387.
INDEX.

629

 

Ectopistes migratorius, 433.

Edible birds, decrease of, 22.

Edwards, David N., 97, 344.

V. B., 104.

Eggs, destruction of, 553.

Eider, King, 146.

Eldredge, A. S., 172, 250, 422, 456, 461, 475.

Frank, 613.

Eldridge, Nathaniel A., 265, 430, 538.

Elliot, D. G., 29, 64, 88, 98, 100, 104, 113, 114, 118,
122, 132, 135, 140, 144, 153, 170, 173, 183, 186, 194,
201, 226, 227, 232, 235, 236, 285, 296, 413, 415, 416,
514.

Emmons, Ebenezer, 360, 481, 491.

Engle, C. H., 454.

Ereunetes mauri, 289.

pusillus, 286.

Erismatura jamaicensis, 166.

Erolia ferruginea, 284.

Ewell, Ralph C., 257.

Fabricius, O., 410.
Farley, J. A., 193, 204, 218, 338.
Faxon, Walter, 429.
Fay, Henry H., 371.
Fay, S. Prescott, 176, 192, 204, 296, 613.
Federal protection of migratory birds, 590, 617.
Feeding grounds, destruction of, 548.
Ferry, John F., 461.
Field, George W., 385, 389, 392, 501.
Field Bird, 340.
Fisher, Albert K., 107, 235, 236, 542.

Richard, 403.
Viske, Arthur S., 357.
Fizzy, 153.
Flanagan, John H., 461.
Fleming, James H., 195, 198, 430, 441, 458, 462,

474,

Floyd, John R., 326.
Folger, Peter, 344, 420.
Food of game birds, 497.

shore birds, 498.

wild fowl, 499.

plants of the ruffed grouse, 585.
for attracting wild fowl, 569.
Forbush, L. E., 63.
Forester, Frank (Henry William Herbert), 13, 18.
Forster, J. R., 417.
Fottler, John, Jr., 285.
Frazar, M. Abbott, 228.
Freeman, J., 404, 413.
Warren E., 193, 613.

Fruits eaten by Bobwhites, 582.
Fuertes, L. A., 96, 119, 123.
Fulica americana, 221.
Fuller, 8. W., 243.

Gadwall, 81, 103, 572.

Gallinago delicata, 245.

Gallinula galeata, 219.

Gallinule, Florida, 202, 219, 223.
Purple, 217.

Gallinules, 202.
Game birds, foreign, introduction of, 562.
food of, 497.
quantities marketed, 514, 515.
Game found by explorers and colonists, 6.
laws, enforcement of, 593.
preserving, 563.
and bird reservations, 591.

Gannets, 402.

Ganung, Wm., 614.

Garefowl, 399.

Gates, J. S., 249.

Gavia arctica, 56.

immer, 50.
stellata, 57.
Geer, E. Hart, 521.
Geese, 3, 7, 10, 12, 13, 15, 24, 27, 31, 32, 58, 169,
173, 176, 178, 181, 184, 185, 190, 193, 333,
407, 475, 522, 531, 570, 581.
Canada, 3, 4, 184, 523, 570.
Snow, 3, 14, 15, 30, 171.
Wild, 9, 12, 13, 14, 26, 178, 181, 522, 524, 580.

Gerry, Elbridge, 185, 420.

Gifford, P. W., 176.

Gilbert, Sir Humphrey, 403.

Gillmore, Parker, 15, 18, 19.

Gilmore, Clinton G., 371.

Giraud, J. P., Jr., 19, 107, 184, 218, 261, 271, 283,
304, 317, 321, 327, 337, 343, 349, 355, 364, 386, 412,
416, 421, 463.

Glover, Thomas, 8.

Godwit, Hudsonian, 296, 297, 309, 326, 498.

Marbled, 294, 297, 325, 613.

Godwits, 1, 8, 271, 296, 299, 418.

Golden, Dr., 435.

Golden-eye, 113, 129, 131, 133, 135, 572.

Barrow’s, 134.

Goldfinch, 288.

Goodale, C. I., 213.

Goodwin, John, 58.

Google-nose, 163.

Goosander, 60.

Goose, 180, 484, 489.

Barnacle, 193.
Big Gray, 177.
Blue, 174, 612.
Canada, 177, 182, 476, 517, 565.
Greater Snow, 173, 612.
Hutchins’s, 182.
Lesser Snow, 173.
Little Gray, 182.
Mackerel, 227.
Mexican, 170.
Mud, 182.
Short-necked, 182.
Snow, 170, 611.
Southern, 182.
White, 170.
White-fronted, 175.
Goose-bird, 297.
Gorges, Sir Ferdinando, 12.

 

. Goshawks, 381, 282, 384.
630

INDEX.

 

Goss, N. S., 274.
Gosse, Philip H., 216.
Gould, A. E., 172, 292, 296.
Grass-bird, 271, 277.
Grayback, 262.
Greathead, 129.
Grebe, Holhoell's, 41.
Horned, 43.
Pied-billed, 42, 43, 46.
Red-necked, 41.
Grebes, 39, 44, 49, 222, 224, 570.
Green-back, 340.
reen-head, 71, 340.
Greenough, Henry V., 115, 186.
Green-wing, 91.
Grenfell, W. T., 425, 430, 615.
Grieve, Symington, 400, 404, 410.
Grinnell, George Bird, 13, 14, 16, 27, 68, 311, 396,
517, 528, 538, 547, 548, 553.
Gronberger, 8. M., 435.
Grous, 385.
Grouse, 1, 10, 20, 22, 24, 26, 30, 32, 33, 190, 251,
367, 370, 375, 377, 381, 384, 386, 389, 391,
494, 534, 545, 546, 585.
Black, 375.
Canada Ruffed, 377.
Pinnated, 6, 21, 22, 23, 385, 391.
Ruffed, 6, 20, 33, 109, 190, 369, 377, 391,
510, 511, 514, 540, 565, 567, 585, 590.
food plants of, 585.
Willow, 384, 385.
Grus, americana, 477.
canadensis, 487.
mexicana, 483.
Guillemots, 39.
Guinea Fowl, 564.
Gulf-bird, 225.
Gulls, 2, 9, 10, 52, 363.
Gump, 335.
Guns most destructive, 556.

Hadley, Philip B., 567.
Hematopus palliatus, 362.
Haies, Edward, 403.
Haines, George H., 380.

George L., 257.
Hairy Crown, 67.

Head, 67.

Hall, Irving A., 182.
Hallett, Charles W., 104,
Hammond, Gardiner G., 78, 88, 200, 304.
Hamor, Raphe, 434.
Hapgood, Warren, 183, 187, 190, 192, 419, 420.
Hardy, Fanny P., 404, 408.

John H., Jr., 74, 162.

Manly, 377.
Harelda hyemalis, 139.
Harwood, Henry W., 380.
Hatch, James P., 326, 380.

P. L., 14, 15, 53, 101, 102, 210, 221, 321, 477,

486.

Hathaway, Harry S., 146, 266, 613, 614.

 

Hawes, George, 242, 379.
Hawk, Duck, 288.
Pigeon, 288.
Sharp-shinned, 287.
Hawks, 47, 287, 381, 388, 440, 451.
Marsh, 390.
Hay, O. P., 408.
Hazzen, Richard, 437.
Headlee, Thomas J., 423.
Hearne, S. A., 15, 22, 30, 72, 171, 417.
Hearnes, 478.
Hearneshaw, 478.
Heath Hen, 9, 30, 385, 497.
Heathcocke, 385.
Hell-diver, 43, 46.
Helodromas solitarius solitarius, 306.
Henshaw, H. W., 232.
Herbert, H. W., 18.
Hernshaw, 478.
Hernshaws, 478.
Heron, European, 478.
Great Blue, 477.
White, 479.
Herons, 6, 32, 201, 224, 235, 478, 482, 485.
Heronshaw, 478.
Heronshaws, 478.
Hersey, F. Seymour, 85.
Higginson, F. L., 10, 436.
Hill, Alfred, 204.
L. W., 96, 115, 119, 136, 265, 272, 292, 420.
Hill Grass-bird, 320.
Hills, Isaac, 172.
Himantopus mexicanus, 233.
Hind, H. Y., 25.
Histrionicus histrionicus, 144.
Hitchcock, C. H., 408.
Edward, 481, 491.
Hoard, W. D., 142.
Hodge, C. F., 373, 374, 459, 565.
Hoffmann, Ralph, 92, 96, 108, 235, 262, 271, 279,
282, 283, 287, 290, 304, 332, 335, 343, 349, 352, 359.
Holbrook, G. W., 265.
Holden, Charles H., Jr., 462.
Hollister, G. H., 435.
N., 461, 615.
Holman, Ralph, 44, 443, 481.
Holmes, Charles E., 423.
Honker, 177.
Hore, Robert, 402.
Hornaday, W. T., 515, 516, 621.
Horner, Mrs. W. S., 218.
Horsehead, 163.
Horton, Lawrence, 96, 158.
Hough, Emerson, 27, 462.
Romeyn B., 384.
Howard, A. O., 544.
Edgar, 461.
James, 423.
Howe, C. D., 134, 443.
Reginald Heber, 62, 90, 136, 147, 162, 176.
182, 206, 216, 218, 234, 254, 263, 281, 298,
311, 317, 328, 336, 443, 492, 613.
INDEX.

631

 

Howell, B. F., 78, 102, 104.
Howland, John E., 389.
Hoyle, C. E., 387, 388.
Hubbard, William, 9, 480.
Hughes, C. M., 146.
Humility, 309.
Hunnewell, Charles S., 201.
Hunter, Alex., 15, 17.
Hunter, viewpoint of the, 558.
Huntington, Dwight W., 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 27, 28,
185, 317, 343, 490, 537, 568.
Hylan, Albert E., 199.

Ibises, 224.
Ingalls, C. E., 78, 107, 158, 443.
Tonornis martinicus, 217.

Jack, 330, 333.
Jameson, J. Franklin, 8, 9, 473, 479.
Jeffries, W. A., 174, 324.
Job, Herbert K., 343, 421, 430, 518.
Jones, Jonathan H., 66, 69, 538.
L. C., 185, 240, 257, 265, 430.
Lynds, 45, 200, 424, 462.
Josselyn, John, 10, 22, 220, 403, 404, 436, 490.
Judd, Sylvester D., 30, 374, 387, 438, 439, 492, 494.

Kalm, Peter, 23, 24, 434, 435, 443, 445, 447, 448,
450, 463, 484, 485.

Kennard, F. H., 204, 232.

Killdee, 348.

Killdeer, 348.

King, W. R., 19, 411, 412, 438.

Kingman, Hamlin, 612.

Klaiber, Sigmund, 171.

Knight, Ora W., 42, 62, 68, 80, 83, 89, 108, 123, 128,
129, 132, 138, 145, 148, 151, 201, 218, 245, 262, 263,
288, 285, 311, 315, 328, 355, 376, 430, 611, 612.

Knot, 262, 284.

Knots, 264, 267.

Kobbé, Frederick Wm., 613.

Krieker, 270.

Lahontan, Baron de, 12, 20, 438.
Lamb, Charles R., 266, 615.
J. H., 461.
Lane, L. W., 240, 298.
Langille, James Hibbert, 315, 354.
Lapwing, 351.
Latham, J., 143, 479.
Lawson, John, 7, 348, 417, 434, 445, 447, 467, 473,
479, 482, 489.

Lead-back, 282. ~
Lead poisoning, 547.
Learo, A., 462.
Lebaron, J. F., 195, 206.
Leffingwell, W. B., 14, 22, 184, 343, 447.
Leonard, C. L., 264.

Edwin, 172.

H. C., 442.

W. H., 242, 379.
Levett, Christopher, 11, 484.

 

Lewis, Alonzo, 10, 437.

Elisha J., 13, 16, 19, 22, 211, 256, 386, 490.
Limosa fedoa, 294, 613.

hemastica, 297.

Linder, George, 199, 371.
Line of flight, supposed changes in, 549.
Linsley, J. H., 82, 205, 310, 327, 357, 365.
Live decoys, 536.
Lobipes lobatus, 227.
Lockwood, Wilton, 580.
Long, W. B., 93, 97, 265.
Long-tail, 139.
Loon, 50.

Black-throated, 56.

Little, 57.

Red-throated, 50, 57.
Loons, 3, 32, 49, 407.
Lophodytes cucullatus, 67.
Lord and Lady, 144.
Lovell, Orville D., 187.
Lowell, C., 485.
Lucas, Frederic A., 404, 409.
Lund, Fred B., 292.
Lyell, Sir Charles, 536.
Lyford, C. Allan, 407.
Lyman, Theodore, 206, 406.

MacFarlane, R., 276, 299.

Machetes pugnax, 314, 614.

Mackay, Geo. H., 52, 140, 143, 154, 156, 162, 164,
165, 226, 230, 262, 263, 264, 266, 267, 332, 333, 339,
340, 346, 347, 416, 425, 427, 429, 431, 432.

Macker, E. M., 249.

Macrorhamphus griseus griseus, 253.

scolopaceus, 259.

Mallard, 4, 8, 71, 76, 81, 102, 484, 564, 572, 573.

Black, 76.

Manning, Warren H., 440.

Marble, Richard, 85.

Mareca americana, 86.

penelope, 84.

Marila affinis, 124.

americana, 113.
collaris, 127.
marila, 121.
valisineria, 118.

Market hunting, 511.

Marlin, 294.

Marsh, Othniel C., 215.

Marsh-hen, 221.

Marsh-hen, fresh-water, 207.

Marsh-plover, 270.

Mayhew, Ulysses E., 389.

Maynard, C. J., 77, 87, 92, 96, 103, 184, 195, 206,
234, 256, 271, 279, 280, 288, 286, 292, 296, 298, 304,
317, 321, 325, 327, 331, 337, 349, 355, 366, 379, 413,
421, 442, 571.

McAtee, W. L., 159, 162, 165, 498, 499, 572, 576,
578, 580.

McCoun, John, 456.

Mcllhenny, F. A., 254.

McLellan, Isaac, 343.
632

INDEX.

 

Meadow-chicken, 210.
Meadow-hen, 221.
Meadowlark, 392.
Mease, James, 445.
Megapolensis, Johannes, Jr., 9.
Meleagris gallopavo gallopavo, 488.
silvestris, 487.
Merganser, 60.
Buff-breasted, 60.
Hooded, 67.
Red-breasted, 60, 62, 64.
Mergansers, 58, 61, 159, 407, 500.
Mergus americanus, 60.
serrator, 64.
Merriam, C. Hart, 82, 131, 186, 141, 473.
Merrill, Harry, 384, 462.
Mershon, W. B., 446, 449, 452, 453, 455, 462, 469,
514.
Micropalama himantopus, 260.
Migratory birds, federal protection of, 590, 614.
Miller, F. H., 459, 462.
Frank L., 500.
Gerritt S., Jr., 168, 203, 226.
Milner, W. P., 172.
Miner, J. T., 570.
Minot, Henry D., 387, 442.
Mitchell, J. D., 172, 196, 250, 422.
Mongrel, 260.
Mocdy, Levi, 387, 438.
Moore, James W., 441.
N. B., 360.
Morris, George Spencer, 130, 136.
Robert O., 61, 62, 88, 96, 104, 115, 125,
126, 171, 199, 204, 206, 211, 216, 222, 248,
272, 441, 442, 492, 613.
Morse, C. Harry, 379.
Hugene E., 379.
Morton, Thomas, 10, 92, 173, 178, 291, 385, 412,
413, 474, 480, 482, 484, 488, 489.
Moseley, B. T., 74.
Mourning-bird, 354.
Mud-hen, 219, 221.
Red-billed, 219.
White-billed, 221.
Muddy-breast, 340.
Mud-peep, 278, 281.
Munsell, Joel, 466, 475.
Murphy, John Mortimer, 13, 14, 15, 16, 21, 317, 475.
Murres, 2, 402.

Nash, Charles W., 347, 351.
Natural enemies, 541.
Nelson, Edward W., 57, 144, 164, 225, 259, 270,
278, 336, 340, 432.
Nettion carolinense, 91.
crecca, 90.
Newcomb, Madison, 439.
R. L., 285.
Newell, 345.
Newhall, J. R., 11, 437.
Alfred, 411, 413.
Nice, Mrs. Margaret Morse, 373, 374.

 

Nicholson, J. S., 241, 243.
Night shooting, 533.
Nomonyx dominicus, 169.
Norton, Arthur H., 152, 611, 612, 614.
Nourse, Henry S., 474.
Numenius americanus, 325, 614.
borealis, 416, 614.
hudsonicus, 330. :
Nuttall, Thomas, 51, 65, 92, 132, 138, 162, 184, 213,
258, 260, 263, 271, 279, 288, 286, 287, 298, 304, 317,
321, 324, 331, 336, 337, 343, 355, 359, 378, 386, 479,
483.

Ochtodromus wilsonius, 357.

Oidemia americana, 153.
deglandi, 160.
perspicillata, 163.

Old Injun, 139.

Old-squaw, 139.

Old-squaws, 2, 500, 529.

netted in the Great Lakes, 142.
killed with fishing poles, 529.

Old Wife, 139.

Oldys, Henry, 31.

Olor buccinator, 472.
columbianus, 194, 612.
cygnus, 201.

Open season, shortening of, 555.

Ord, George, 231, 549.

Osborn, E., 453, 454, 464.

Francis B., 257.

Osgood, Fletcher, 232, 299.

W. H., 365.

Otis, Amos, 414.

Overton, Frank, 524.

Owl, Barred, 392.

Great Horned, 126, 494.
Oxyechus vociferus, 348.
Oyster-catcher, 295, 362.

Black, 365.

Oyster-catchers, 361.

Packard, A. S., 179, 419.
Paine, Charles J., Jr., 172, 281.
W. T., 523. \
Pale-belly, 340.
Pale-breast, 340.
Parker, Edward L., 73, 512.
Foster, 82, 84.
J. G., 348.
Parkhurst, Anthonie, 402.
Paroquet, Carolina, 428.
Partridge, Birch, 377.
Canada Spruce, 375.
Hungarian, 563.
Spruce, 375.
Swamp, 375.
Partridges, 1, 9, 10, 12.
American, 367, 385.
European, 33, 563, 567.
Passer domesticus, 567.
Pasture Bird, 340.
INDEX.

633

 

Patch-head, 163.

Patterson, George, 204.

Payne, Charles, 423.

Payson, Gilbert R., 304.

Peabody, W. B. O., 141, 149, 184, 218, 220, 256, 263,
269, 271, 295, 298, 317, 327, 337, 343, 349, 355, 357,
386, 421.

Pearson, Lyman, 110, 371.

T. Gilbert, 18, 513, 524.

Pease, W. C., 204.

Peep, 275, 278, 286.
Black-legged, 286.
California, 282.

Sand, 286.
Web-footed, 227.
Pelicans, 7.
Pelidna alpina alpina, 281.
sakhalina, 282.

Penguin, 39, 399, 402, 407, 409.

Percy, George, 6.

Perkins, C. L., 172, 326.

‘ G. H., 134, 443.

Perry, N. C., 93.

William S., 486, 487.

Peterson, William C., 126, 185.

Phalacrocorax perspicillatus, 414.

Phalarope, Northern, 226, 227, 498.

Red, 225, 227, 228.

Wilson's, 229, 498, 613.
Phalaropes, 201, 224, 226, 334, 429.
Phalaropus fulicarius, 225.

Pheasant, 378, 390, 515, 564, 565, 567.

Asiatic, 33.
English, 563.

Ring-necked, 563.

Pheisant, 385.

Phillips, E. E., 90, 104, 430.

Henry T., 446, 453, 513.
John C., 44, 58, 68, 85, 110, 125, 128, 167,

179, 206, 539, 580, 611, 612.
Philohela minor, 235.

Picket-tail, 102.

Pictured-bill, 163.

Pidgeons, 436.

Pierce, R. V., 578.

Piers, Harry, 425.

Pigeon, Passenger, 9, 31, 109, 187, 317, 346, 394,

395, 417, 419, 423, 427, 428, 433, 550.
Prairie, 423, 465.
White-crowned, 465.
Wild, 22, 279, 878, 394, 395, 433, 436, 439,
444, 455, 459, 465.
Pigeons, 1, 4, 9, 10, 334, 363, 370, 393, 434.
Band-tailed, 460.

Pike, Nicolas, 217, 327, 415.

Zebulon Montgomery, 450.

Pillsbury, I. W., 612, 614.

Pintail, 102, 572.

Pisobia, bairdi, 277.

fuscicollis, 274.
maculata, 270.
minutilla, 278.

 

Plaster-bill, 163.
Plautus impennis, 399.
Plover, 1, 3, 18, 31, 384, 360, 418, 427, 431, 465,
498.
Plover, Beach, 290.
Black-bellied, 264, 335, 340.
Black-breasted, 267, 335, 422.
Blue, 262.
Golden, 31, 305, 337, 339, 340, 418, 420,
423, 427, 428, 429, 430, 431.
Grass, 316.
Green, 340, 342.
Killdeer, 348, 497, 498, 499.
Mountain, 499.
Piping, 354.
Red-breasted, 262.
Semipalmated, 352, 499.
Silver, 262.
. Upland, 315, 320, 336, 346, 427, 497, 498,
499, 515.
Wilson’s, 357.
Plummer, Gordon, 285, 314.
Podilymbus. podiceps, 46.
Pokagon, Chief, 460, 469, 471.
Pond-hen, 221.
Porzana carolina, 210.
Praeger, William G., 462.
Prairie Chicken, 26, 387, 388, 391, 392, 514, 534,
(see also Grouse, Pinnated).
Prairie Hen, 30.
Pray, J. W., 218.
Preble, E. A., 196, 425.
Prentiss, William N., 380.
Price, Sir Rose Lambert, 17.
Prime, N. §., 185.
Pring, Martin, 9.
Pringle, J. J., 238, 246, 247, 250.
Protection, statutory, 588.
Ptarmigans, 22, 381.
Willow, 384.
Purchas, Samuel, 8.
Purdie, H. A., 203, 206, 216, 232.
Putnam, F. W., 218, 376, 404.
Pye, Wm., 425.

Quail, 9, 10, 22, 25, 27, 367, 368, 509, 581 (see also
Bob-white).
Quandy, 139.
Querquedula cyanoptera, 98.
discors, 95.

Rail-bird, 210.

Rail, Black, 214, 215.
Carolina, 210.
Clapper, 202, 205.
King, 202, 612.
Little Black, 215.
Long-billed, 207.
nocturnal notes of, 212.
Sora, 207, 210, 486.
Virginia, 202, 203, 207, 211.
Yellow, 213.
634

INDEX.

 

Rails, 1, 208, 209, 211, 212, 214, 216, 224, 334, 487, 579.
Rallus crepitans crepitans, 205.
elegans, 202, 612.
virginianus, 207.
Ralph, W. L., 131.
Reagh, A. L., 204.
Recurvirostra americana, 231.
Redback, 282.
Red-breast, 262, 266, 267, 284.
Red-heads, 4, 14, 16, 28, 79, 89, 127, 129.
Redlegs, 359. 7
Reed, C. A., 76.
Reeve, 314.
Reforms, needed, 592.
Remington, Howard, 88.
Reservations, game and bird, 591.
Rice, James Henry, Jr., 77, 239, 250, 514, 553.
Rich, W. E., 128, 140, 149, 155, 182.
Richard, William, 315.
Richardson, John, 417.
Ridgway, Robert, 218, 230, 409, 492.
Ring-neck, 113, 352, 353, 357.
Robbins, W. W., 141.
Robin-snipe, 262.
Robinson, Edward B., Jr., 538.
W. R., 216.
Rock-bird, 268.
Rock-plover, 268.
Rock-snipe, 268.
Rodgers, John G., 206.
Roney, H. B., 446, 453.
Roosevelt, B., 107.
Theodore, 558.
Rosier, James, 11, 484.
Ross, August B., 441.
Lucretius H., 613.
Rosser, J. G., 462.
Ruff, 314, 614.
Russell, Richard M., 613.

Sage, John H., 461, 522.

Samuels, E. A., 77, 90, 92, 96, 103, 108, 114, 132,
136, 138, 149, 171, 181, 184, 235, 256, 263, 269,
283, 285, 292, 296, 311, 317, 321, 327, 328, 331,
332, 343, 349, 355, 421, 442.

Sand-bird, 274, 279.

Sanderling, 226, 272, 290.

Sanderlins, 291.

Sand-lark, 322.

Sand Oxeye, 286.

Sand-peep, 277.

Sandpiper, Baird's, 2T7, 499.

Bartramian, 315.

Bonaparte’s, 275.

Buff-breasted, 320.

Curlew, 284.

Least, 18, 278, 287, 288, 498.

Pectoral, 270, 277, 498, 499, 614.

Purple, 268.

Red-backed, 226, 281, 282.

Semipalmated, 275, 277, 278, 279, 286,
293, 498.

 

Sandpiper — Con.
Shintz’s, 275.
Solitary, 306, 322.
Spotted, 306, 307, 322.
Stilt, 260.
Western, 289.
White-rumped, 274, 277.
Sandpipers, 1, 18, 19, 31, 226, 263, 268, 269, 278,
287, 307, 319, 322, 323, 324, 353, 498.
Sanford, Leonard C., 29, 116, 120, 199, 256, 266,
279, 296, 304, 311, 328, 337, 421, 430.
Saunders, F. H., 379, 383.
Savage, James, 158, 436.
Scape-grace, 57.
Scaup, 4, 113, 121, 126, 127, 572, 575.
American, 122.
Black-head, 125.
Greater, 124, 125.
Lesser, 121, 122, 124, 128, 571, 572.
Ring-necked, 127.
Schaff, Morris, 455.
Schoenebeck, A. J., 615.
Schoolcraft, Henry R. L., 463, 464.
Scoldenore, 139.
Scolder, 139.
Scoter, 111, 153, 161, 165, 166, 500, 501, 576.
American, 153.
Surf, 163.
White-winged, 158, 160.
Scott, W. E. D., 254, 336.
Scudder, Bradford A., 620.
Sea-crow, 221.
Sea-goose, 225, 227.
Sea Mouse, 144.
Sea-quail, 359.
Sea Robin, 64.
Sears, Geo. W. (Nessmuk), 490.
William R., 552.
Sea-snipe, 227.
Seeds eaten by Bob-white, 583.
Sennett, George B., 197, 198, 551.
Seton, Ernest Thompson, 91, 456, 462.
Sharples, J. J., 119.
Sharrock, Richard J., 265.
Shaw, Albert, 611. .
Henry, 345.
Louis A., 430.

Sheldon, Israel R., 88, 104, 116, 136, 141, 161.
Sheldrake, 59, 60, 63, 64, 66, 130, 500.
Freshwater, 60.

Hooded, 67.
Long Island, 64.
Mud, 67.
Pond, 60.
Spring, 64.
Swamp, 67.
Winter, 60.
Wood, 67.
Shelduck, 64.
Shell-bird, 64.

Shore birds, food of, 498.

Shoveller, 95, 99, 572.
INDEX.

635

 

Sicklebill, 325, 327.

Silverback, 262.

Simpleton, 282.

Skimmer, Black, 363.

Skunkbill, 163.

Skunkhead, 163.

Skunk-top, 163.

Small, Willard M., 243, 265.

Smith, Arthur, 206.

Everett, 614.

John, 7, 15, 488.
Smyth, Charles H., 423.

Fred G., 423.

Snights, 8.

Snipe, 1, 3, 9, 19, 31, 245, 498.
Crooked-billed, 282.
English, 245.

Jack, 245.

Red-breasted, 19, 253.
Wilson's, 19, 228, 245, 253, 272.
Winter, 268.

Snuff-taker, 163.

Snyder, W. E., 615.

Somateria dresseri, 148.

mollissima, 147.
borealis, 147.
spectabilis, 151.

Sora, 207, 210.

South Southerly, 139.

Sparked-back, 359.

Sparrow, European House, 567.

Sparrow, Samuel E., 266.

Spatula clypeata, 99.

Spaulding, William H., 430.

Speckle-belly, 81.

Spence, Miles, 456.

Spinney, H. L., 155.

Spoonbill, 99.

Spotrump, 297.

Sprigtail, 102.

Spring shooting, 516.

Squatarola squatarola, 335.

Squatter, 270.

Squealer, 144.

Staples, E. ¥., 107, 379.

Statutory bird protection, 588.

Stearns, W. A., 275, 296, 298, 311, 317, 382, 422.

Steenstrup, J. J. S., 404.

Steganopus tricolor, 229, 613.

Stevens, S. S., 454, 456, 464.

Stewart, George, 461.

W. R., 540.

Stib, 282.

Stilt, 232, 260.

Stilts, 230.

Black-necked, 233.

Stone, Clayton E., 439, 440, 441.
Lewis, 327, 345.
Stillman, 439.

William N., 430.

Witmer, 30, 68, 108, 275, 317, 425, 441, 461.

Storms, destruction of birds by, 539.

 

Stork, William, 434.

Strachey, William, 8, 434.

Strater, Hermon, 116.

Streaked-back, 359.

Sturtevant, Harry P., 85.

Suckley, George, 475.

Sugden, A. W., 247.

Sullivan, Richard H., 423.

Summer shooting, 529.

Sumner, William H., 418, 419, 421.

Surfer, 163.

Swainson, W., 417.

Swan, Alfred S., 104, 243, 257, 265, 429.

Swan, Trumpeter, 472.
Whistling, 194, 475, 612.
Whooper, 201.

Swannes, 8.

Swans, 3, 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 58, 169, 193, 195, 473, 474,

475, 531.

Destruction of, 196, 197, 198, 199.
Dying song of, 200, 201.

Swenk, Myron H., 423.

Tarr, A. F., 228.

Tattler, 300.

Taverner, P. A., 570.

Teal, 3, 4, 8, 9, 12, 17, 24, 93, 97, 221, 475, 518.

Blue-winged, 28, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 97, 98, 99,
518, 523, 565, 572.

Cinnamon, 98.

European, 90.

Green-winged, 28, 91, 93, 97, 502, 518, 523, 572.

Mud, 91.

Spoonbill, 99.

Summer, 95.

Winter, 91.

Teeter, 322.

Teeter-peep, 322.

Temminck, C. J., 363.

Thacher, F. G., 243.

Thayer, Gerald H., 307.

H. J., 443.
John E., 69, 200, 314, 430, 518, 614.

Thomas, A. B., 480.

Thompson, E. H., 387.

Zadock, 317, 439, 481, 492.

Thoreau, H. D., 58, 156, 263, 440.

Three Toes, 340.

Thrushes, 316.

Thurlow, G. F., 199.

Thwaites, R. G., 434, 448.

Tinkham, Horace, 172.

Tip-up, 322.

Toad-head, 340.

Tocque, Philip, 408, 409.

Totanus flavipes, 303.

melanoleucus, 300.

Townsend, C. W., 55, 69, 73, 87, 92, 95, 103, 108,
114, 128, 136, 149, 172, 199, 203, 204, 218, 228, 260,
267, 268, 269, 277, 278, 279, 280, 285, 288, 293, 300,
309, 324, 328, 336, 337, 340, 349, 356, 357, 360, 414,
425, 426, 428, 429, 430, 436, 615.
636

INDEX.

 

Tringa canutus, 262.
Tripp, George H., 372.
Troop-fowl, 121.
Trumbull, Gurdon, 167, 298, 327, 332, 422, 427.
Tryngites subruficollis, 320.
Tucker, E. W., 419.

Sinclair, 612.
Tufts, H. F., 255.
Turkey, Mexican, 488.

Wild, 487.
Turkeys, 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 21, 24, 25, 370, 383.

Wild, 6, 10, 22, 28, 24, 26, 30.
Turnbull, W. P., 77, 107, 136, 171, 184, 231, 263,
292, 295, 298, 304, 311, 331, 387, 421, 473, 479, 549.
Turner, Obadiah, 11.
Turnstone, Ruddy, 359.
Turnstones, 264, 267, 358, 360, 361.
Tuttle, Albert H., 88, 265.
Tyler, L. G., 6.
Tympanuchus americanus americanus, 383.
cupido, 385.

Ullrich, J., 461.
Uplander, 315, 318.

Van Cleef, J. S., 452, 466.

Van Dyke, Theodore S., 29, 256, 279, 296, 304,
311, 328, 337, 421.

Vibert, C. W., 45.

Vickary, N., 193.

Vivian, W. H., 199.

Vultures, 451.

Wallace, John H., Jr., 514.

Wamp, 148.

Warblers, 316.

Ward, G. C. Tremaine, 464.

H. L., 424.

Warren, B. H., 42, 55, 138, 275, 308, 323, 356.

Wassenaer, Nicolaes van, 8.

Water-chicken, 219, 221.

Water-hen, 221.

Water-witch, 46.

Watson, John, 457.

Wayne, Arthur T., 68, 132, 204, 214, 215, 216, 220,
239, 249, 254, 256, 264, 275, 295, 312, 336, 360, 366,
461.

Webb, W. W., 420.

Webster, Daniel, 365, 413.

Welch, George O., 203, 230.

Weld, Isaac, Jr., 437.

Wells, Homer, 518.

Wendel, Robert, 218.

Whale-bird, 225.

Wharton, William P., 206, 257, 292, 303, 380.

Whip-poor-will, 369.

Whistler, 113, 129, 134, 523.

White, Asher, 199.

White-belly, 86.

Whiterump, 297.

Whitey, 290.

Whitin, H. T., 249,

 

Whiting, Willard C., 82.
Whitman, G. P., 218.
Whitney, Caspar, 518.
Widgeon, 4, 9, 83, 86, 523.
American, 86.
Blue-billed, 121.
California, 86.
European, 84.
Southern, 86.
Stiff-tailed, 166.
Widmann, Otto, 30, 424, 456, 458, 462.
Wild-fowl, food of, 499.
pursuit of, in boats, 535.
Willet, 271, 308, 311, 312, 363, 431.
Western, 310, 313.
Williams, Edward, 8.
H. H., 418, 419.
Roger, 436.
Samuel, 437.
Williamson, B. T., 172.
Wilson, Alexander, 19, 20, 23, 42, 51, 77, 87, 135,
149, 167, 231, 232, 234, 255, 283, 299, 304,
310, 327, 329, 331, 349, 355, 362, 364, 365,
366, 417, 443, 444, 451, 479, 480, 549.
T.C., 206, 265, 326, 429.
Winch, C. S., 430.
Winslow, John M., 74, 97, 115, 123, 141, 149, 191,
327, 344, 345, 420.
Winthrop, John, 436.
Wires and other obstructions, 547.
Wobble, 399, 403, 404.
Wolcott, Roger, 480.
Wood, C. C., 218.
C. Irving, 461.
William, 10, 11, 171, 173, 178, 385, 435, 480,
482, 484, 489.
Woodcock, 20, 235, 248, 249, 252, 312, 498, 499, 529,
547.
Wood-hen, 20.
Wood-pigeon, 434.
Woodruff, E. Seymour, 381.
S. D., 464, 465.
Worth, H. G., 149.
Worthington, W. W., 336.
Wren, Long-billed Marsh, 288.
Wright, Albert Hazen, 467.
Horace W., 85.
Wyman, Jeffries, 406.

Yellow-leg, Bastard, 260, 261.

Big, 300.

Little, 303.

Summer, 303, 305.
Yellow-legs, 19, 230, 253, 261, 303, 316.

Greater, 300, 304, 305.

Lesser, 303.

Winter, 300, 301, 302.
Young, Curtis C., 281.

W. #H., 15.

Zenaidura macroura carolinensis, 394.
Zerrahn, C. O., 88, 257, 265, 614.