The Project Gutenberg eBook of Life histories of North American woodpeckers
This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Life histories of North American woodpeckers
Author: Arthur Cleveland Bent
Release date: June 29, 2024 [eBook #73940]
Language: English
Original publication: United States: Dover Publications, Inc, 1939
Credits: Carol Brown, Chris Curnow, Joseph Cooper and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN WOODPECKERS ***
Transcriber's Note:
In Memory of
Chris Curnow
(1937-2023)
the Project Manager at Distributed Proofreaders
who selected this book,
and more than 2200 others,
to be preserved as free digital transcriptions
by Project Gutenberg.
* * * * *
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS
Arthur Cleveland Bent
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BIRDS OF PREY. (20931-8, 20932-6)
Two-volume
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN BLACKBIRDS, ORIOLES, TANAGERS, AND
THEIR ALLIES. (21093-6) $7.95
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN CARDINALS, GROSBEAKS, BUNTINGS,
TOWHEES, FINCHES, SPARROWS, AND THEIR ALLIES. (21979-8)
Vol. 3, $7.95
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN GALLINACEOUS BIRDS. (21028-6) $8.00
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN JAYS, CROWS, AND TITMICE.
(21222-X, 21223-8) Two-volume set $9.00
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN MARSH BIRDS. (21082-0) $6.50
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN NUTHATCHES, WRENS, THRASHERS, AND
THEIR ALLIES. (21088-X) $7.00
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN SHORE BIRDS. (20933-4, 20934-2)
Two-volume set $14.00
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN THRUSHES, KINGLETS, AND THEIR
ALLIES. (21086-3) $7.95
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN WAGTAILS, SHRIKES, VIREOS, AND
THEIR ALLIES. (21085-5) $6.00
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN WOODPECKERS. (21083-9)
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN WOOD WARBLERS. (21153-3, 21154-1)
Two-volume set $13.90
_LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN WOODPECKERS_
_LIFE HISTORIES
OF NORTH AMERICAN
WOODPECKERS_
_by
Arthur Cleveland Bent_
_Dover Publications, Inc.
New York_
Published in Canada by General Publishing Company, Ltd., 30 Lesmill
Road, Don Mills, Toronto, Ontario.
Published in the United Kingdom by Constable and Company, Ltd., 10
Orange Street, London WC 2.
This Dover edition, first published in 1964, is an unabridged and
unaltered republication of the work originally published in 1939 by the
United States Government Printing Office, as Smithsonian Institution
United States National Museum _Bulletin 174_.
_Standard Book Number: 486-21083-9_
_Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 64-20879_
Manufactured in the United States of America
Dover Publications, Inc.
180 Varick Street
New York, N. Y. 10014
ADVERTISEMENT
The scientific publications of the National Museum include two series,
known, respectively, as _Proceedings_ and _Bulletin_.
The _Proceedings_ series, begun in 1878, is intended primarily as a
medium for the publication of original papers, based on the collections
of the National Museum, that set forth newly acquired facts in
biology, anthropology, and geology, with descriptions of new forms and
revisions of limited groups. Copies of each paper, in pamphlet form,
are distributed as published to libraries and scientific organizations
and to specialists and others interested in the different subjects. The
dates at which these separate papers are published are recorded in the
table of contents of each of the volumes.
The series of _Bulletins_, the first of which was issued in 1875,
contains separate publications comprising monographs of large
zoological groups and other general systematic treatises (occasionally
in several volumes), faunal works, reports of expeditions, catalogs
of type specimens, special collections, and other material of similar
nature. The majority of the volumes are octavo in size, but a quarto
size has been adopted in a few instances in which large plates were
regarded as indispensable. In the _Bulletin_ series appear volumes
under the heading _Contributions from the United States National
Herbarium_, in octavo form, published by the National Museum since
1902, which contain papers relating to the botanical collections of the
Museum.
The present work forms No. 174 of the _Bulletin_ series.
ALEXANDER WETMORE,
_Assistant Secretary, Smithsonian Institution_.
WASHINGTON, D. C., _March 22, 1939_.
CONTENTS
Page
Introduction VII
Order PICIFORMES 1
Family Picidae: American woodpeckers 1
Campephilus principalis: Ivory-billed woodpecker 1
Habits 1
Distribution 12
Dryobates villosus villosus: Eastern hairy woodpecker 13
Habits 13
Distribution 23
Dryobates villosus septentrionalis: Northern hairy woodpecker 25
Habits 25
Dryobates villosus auduboni: Southern hairy woodpecker 27
Habits 27
Dryobates villosus harrisi: Harris’s woodpecker 29
Habits 29
Dryobates villosus hyloscopus: Cabanis’s woodpecker 33
Habits 33
Dryobates villosus monticola: Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker 35
Habits 35
Dryobates villosus picoideus: Queen Charlotte woodpecker 37
Habits 37
Dryobates villosus terraenovae: Newfoundland woodpecker 38
Habits 38
Dryobates villosus icastus: Chihuahua woodpecker 39
Habits 39
Dryobates villosus sitkensis: Sitka hairy woodpecker 40
Habits 40
Dryobates villosus orius: Modoc woodpecker 41
Habits 41
Dryobates villosus scrippsae: Lower California hairy
woodpecker 44
Habits 44
Dryobates villosus leucothorectis: White-breasted woodpecker 44
Habits 44
Dryobates pubescens pubescens: Southern downy woodpecker 45
Habits 45
Distribution 47
Dryobates pubescens gairdneri: Gairdner’s woodpecker 49
Habits 49
Dryobates pubescens leucurus: Batchelder’s woodpecker 51
Habits 51
Dryobates pubescens medianus: Northern downy woodpecker 52
Habits 52
Dryobates pubescens nelsoni: Nelson’s downy woodpecker 68
Habits 68
Dryobates pubescens turati: Willow woodpecker 69
Habits 69
Dryobates borealis: Red-cockaded woodpecker 72
Habits 72
Distribution 79
Dryobates scalaris symplectus: Texas woodpecker 79
Habits 79
Distribution 81
Dryobates scalaris lucasanus: San Lucas woodpecker 82
Habits 82
Dryobates scalaris cactophilus: Cactus woodpecker 83
Habits 83
Dryobates scalaris eremicus: San Fernando woodpecker 86
Habits 86
Dryobates nuttalli: Nuttall’s woodpecker 87
Habits 87
Distribution 91
Dryobates arizonae arizonae: Arizona woodpecker 91
Habits 91
Distribution 96
Dryobates albolarvatus albolarvatus: Northern white-headed
woodpecker 97
Habits 97
Distribution 104
Dryobates albolarvatus gravirostris: Southern white-headed
woodpecker 105
Habits 105
Picoïdes arcticus: Arctic three-toed woodpecker 106
Habits 106
Distribution 115
Picoïdes tridactylus bacatus: American three-toed woodpecker 116
Habits 116
Distribution 121
Picoïdes tridactylus fasciatus: Alaska three-toed woodpecker 122
Habits 122
Picoïdes tridactylus dorsalis: Alpine three-toed woodpecker 124
Habits 124
Sphyrapicus varius varius: Yellow-bellied sapsucker 126
Habits 126
Distribution 139
Sphyrapicus varius nuchalis: Red-naped sapsucker 141
Habits 141
Sphyrapicus varius daggetti: Southern red-breasted sapsucker 146
Habits 146
Sphyrapicus varius ruber: Northern red-breasted sapsucker 151
Habits 151
Sphyrapicus thyroideus thyroideus: Williamson’s sapsucker 154
Habits 154
Distribution 160
Sphyrapicus thyroideus nataliae: Natalie’s sapsucker 162
Habits 162
Ceophloeus pileatus pileatus: Southern pileated woodpecker 164
Habits 164
Distribution 170
Ceophloeus pileatus abieticola: Northern pileated woodpecker 171
Habits 171
Ceophloeus pileatus floridanus: Florida pileated woodpecker 189
Habits 189
Ceophloeus pileatus picinus: Western pileated woodpecker 191
Habits 191
Melanerpes erythrocephalus: Red-headed woodpecker 195
Habits 195
Distribution 208
Balanosphyra formicivora formicivora: Ant-eating woodpecker 211
Habits 211
Distribution 211
Balanosphyra formicivora bairdi: California woodpecker 212
Habits 212
Balanosphyra formicivora angustifrons: Narrow-fronted
woodpecker 222
Habits 222
Balanosphyra formicivora aculeata: Mearns’s woodpecker 223
Habits 223
Balanosphyra formicivora martirensis: San Pedro woodpecker 226
Habits 226
Asyndesmus lewis: Lewis’s woodpecker 226
Habits 226
Distribution 236
Centurus carolinus: Red-bellied woodpecker 237
Habits 237
Distribution 244
Centurus aurifrons: Golden-fronted woodpecker 245
Habits 245
Distribution 249
Centurus uropygialis uropygialis: Gila woodpecker 250
Habits 250
Distribution 256
Centurus uropygialis cardonensis: Cardon woodpecker 257
Habits 257
Centurus uropygialis brewsteri: Brewster’s woodpecker 258
Habits 258
Colaptes auratus auratus: Southern flicker 259
Habits 259
Distribution 261
Colaptes auratus luteus: Northern flicker 264
Habits 264
Colaptes cafer collaris: Red-shafted flicker 287
Habits 287
Distribution 294
Colaptes cafer cafer: Northwestern flicker 296
Habits 296
Colaptes cafer martirensis: San Pedro flicker 298
Habits 298
Colaptes chrysoides chrysoides: Cape gilded flicker 299
Habits 299
Distribution 300
Colaptes chrysoides mearnsi: Mearns’s gilded flicker 301
Habits 301
Colaptes chrysoides brunnescens: San Fernando flicker 305
Habits 305
Colaptes cafer rufipileus: Guadalupe flicker 306
Habits 306
Literature cited 309
Index 323
INTRODUCTION
This is the twelfth in a series of bulletins of the United States
National Museum on the life histories of North American birds. Previous
numbers have been issued as follows:
107. Life Histories of North American Diving Birds, August 1, 1919.
113. Life Histories of North American Gulls and Terns. August 27,
1921.
121. Life Histories of North American Petrels and Pelicans and their
Allies, October 19, 1922.
126. Life Histories of North American Wild Fowl (part), May 25, 1923.
130. Life Histories of North American Wild Fowl (part), June 27, 1925.
135. Life Histories of North American Marsh Birds, March 11, 1927.
142. Life Histories of North American Shore Birds (pt. 1),
December 31, 1927.
146. Life Histories of North American Shore Birds (pt. 2), March 24,
1929.
162. Life Histories of North American Gallinaceous Birds, May 25,
1932.
167. Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey (pt. 1), May 3,
1937.
170. Life Histories of North American Birds of Prey (pt. 2), August 8,
1938.
The same general plan has been followed, as explained in previous
bulletins, and the same sources of information have been utilized. The
nomenclature of the 1931 check list of the American Ornithologists’
Union has been followed, but it has seemed best to continue in the same
order of arrangement of families and species as given in the old check
list (1910).
An attempt has been made to give as full a life history as possible of
the best-known subspecies and to avoid duplication by writing briefly
of the others and giving only the characters of the subspecies, its
range, and any habits peculiar to it. In many cases certain habits,
probably common to the species as a whole, have been recorded for only
one subspecies; such habits are mentioned under the subspecies on
which the observations were made. The distribution gives the range of
the species as a whole, with only rough outlines of the ranges of the
subspecies, which cannot be accurately defined in many cases.
The egg dates are the condensed results of a mass of records taken from
the data in a large number of the best egg collections in the country,
as well as from contributed field notes and from a few published
sources. They indicate the dates on which eggs have been actually found
in various parts of the country, showing the earliest and latest dates
and the limits between which half the dates fall, the height of the
season.
The plumages are described in only enough detail to enable the reader
to trace the sequence of molts and plumages from birth to maturity
and to recognize the birds in the different stages and at the
different seasons. No attempt has been made to describe fully the
adult plumages; this has been done very well in the many manuals and
State bird books that are now available. The names of colors, when in
quotation marks, are taken from Ridgway’s Color Standards and Color
Nomenclature (1912), and the terms used to describe the shapes of
eggs are taken from his Nomenclature of Colors (1886). The boldface
type in the measurements of eggs indicates the four extremes of the
measurements.
Many of those who contributed material for previous bulletins have
continued to cooperate. Receipt of material from more than 430
contributors has been acknowledged previously. In addition to these,
our thanks are due to the following new contributors: Dean Amadon, E.
R. Forrest, Allen Frost, J. J. Hickey, Joseph Janiec, Melvin Johansen,
M. B. Meanley, Jr., R. L. Meredith, E. E. Murphey, A. G. Nye, Jr.,
R. T. Orr, R. S. Palmer, Cordelia J. Stanwood, Wendell Taber, A. E.
Thompson, and Mrs. L. J. Webster. If any contributor fails to find his
name in this or in one of the previous lists, the author would be glad
to be advised.
Egg measurements were furnished especially for this volume by Dean
Amadon, A. M. Bailey, C. E. Doe, J. R. Gillin, W. C. Hanna, H. L.
Harllee, R. C. Harlow, R. T. Orr, J. H. Riley, G. H. Stuart, 3d, and
Miss M. W. Wythe.
Through the courtesy of the Bureau of Biological Survey, the services
of Frederick C. Lincoln were again obtained to compile the distribution
paragraphs. With the matchless reference files of the Biological Survey
at his disposal, his many hours of careful work have produced results
far more satisfactory than could have been attained by the author, who
claims no credit and assumes no responsibility for this part of the
work.
Dr. Winsor M. Tyler rendered valuable assistance in reading and
indexing, for this group, the greater part of the leading periodicals
relating to North American birds, which saved the author many
hours of tedious work and for which he is very grateful. Dr. Tyler
contributed the life histories of the northern downy woodpecker and
yellow-bellied sapsucker, Dr. Arthur A. Allen wrote the life history
of the ivory-billed woodpecker, Bayard H. Christy that of the northern
pileated woodpecker, and Dr. Eugene E. Murphey that of the red-cockaded
woodpecker. Thanks are due also to F. Seymour Hersey for figuring the
egg measurements.
The manuscript for this volume was completed in June 1938.
Contributions received since then will be acknowledged later. Only
information of great importance could be added. The reader is reminded
again that this is a cooperative work; if he fails to find in these
volumes anything that he knows about the birds, he can blame himself
for not having sent the information to--THE AUTHOR.
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN
WOODPECKERS
ORDER PICIFORMES
By ARTHUR CLEVELAND BENT
_Taunton, Mass._
Order PICIFORMES
Family PICIDAE: American Woodpeckers
CAMPEPHILUS PRINCIPALIS (Linnaeus)
IVORY-BILLED WOODPECKER
PLATES 1, 2
HABITS
CONTRIBUTED BY ARTHUR AUGUSTUS ALLEN
The large size and striking color pattern, the mystery of its habitat,
and the tragedy of its possible extinction combine to make the
ivory-billed woodpecker one of peculiar interest to all Americans who
have any pride in the natural resources of their country.
Ever since the days of Mark Catesby (1731) this species has attracted
popular attention, and even at that time, as he stated in his Natural
History of Carolina, Florida, and the Bahama Islands: “The bills of
these Birds are much valued by the _Canada Indians_, who made Coronets
of ’em for their Princes and great warriors, by fixing them round a
Wreath, with their points outward. The Northern Indians having none
of these Birds in their cold country, purchase them of the _Southern
People_ at the price of two, and sometimes three, Buck-skins a Bill.”
At that time the species was found throughout the Gulf States as
far north as North Carolina and up the Mississippi Valley as far as
southern Ohio and Illinois.
Today it is almost extinct, and indeed during the past 50 years long
periods have elapsed when no individuals have been reported from any
part of its range. It apparently has been exterminated from all but
a few isolated localities in Louisiana, Florida, and South Carolina,
where it still clings on in a precarious position.
The ivorybill is primarily a bird of the great moss-hung southern
swamps, where mature timber with its dying branches provides a
bounteous food supply of wood-boring larvae, but its habits apparently
vary in different parts of its range, for the birds I observed in
Florida, although nesting in a cypress swamp, did most of their feeding
along its borders on recently killed young pines that were infested
with beetle larvae. They even got down on the ground like flickers to
feed among palmetto roots on a recent burn. In Louisiana, on the other
hand, the nesting birds observed confined their activities to a mature
forest of oak, sweetgum, and hackberry, and paid little attention to
the cypress trees along the lagoons.
_Spring._--At what time the winter groups of ivorybills break up and
spring activities commence is rather difficult to state, for there
seems to be considerable irregularity to the breeding season. Judged
from published records of its nests, the period of greatest activity
would seem to be late March and early April. According to Audubon
(1842): “The ivory-billed woodpecker nestles earlier in spring than
any other species of its tribe. I have observed it boring a hole for
that purpose in the beginning of March.” Scott (1881) reports taking an
incubating female in Florida on January 20, 1880, and (1888) of finding
a nest containing one young female about one-third grown on March 17,
1887. Ridgway (1898) likewise speaks of shooting a male that left its
nest hole February 15, 1898, and Hoyt (1905) states that “in Florida
they begin building the latter part of January, and if undisturbed the
eggs are laid by February 10th.” In 1937 James Tanner (MS.) discovered
a nest in Louisiana from which the fledgling left on March 30, fully
2 months earlier than any previous records from the same locality,
and in 1938 apparently the same pair of birds had young the last week
in February. In contrast to these dates we find 10 records of April
nesting, 5 for May, and 1 (Beyer, 1900) of a young bird just out of the
nest in July. The latter records might well constitute second attempts
at nesting. The Florida birds, in general, start earlier than those
in Louisiana, but at best there seems to be less regularity to the
commencement of the nesting period than is found with most of our North
American woodpeckers. In this, the ivorybill may register its affinity
with tropical birds in general, the ivorybill being the most northern
representative of an otherwise tropical or semitropical genus. There is
some evidence for believing that ivorybills wander over considerably
larger territories in winter than those to which they confine their
activities in the spring, but little definite information has thus far
been recorded on any of their before and after breeding activities.
_Courtship._--Nothing seems to have been written on the courtship of
the ivorybill except the observations of Allen and Kellogg (1937):
Our only observations were made In Florida about 6 a. m.,
on April 13, 1924. We had discovered this pair of ivorybills
at about the same time the preceding morning when they came
out of the cypress swamp and preened their feathers and
called a few times from the top of a dead pine before going
off together to feed. They had made such a long flight the
previous day that we were unable to find them again, but
that night, still traveling together, they had returned to
the same group of medium-sized cypress trees which they had
apparently left in the morning and in which there was one
fresh hole in addition to four or five other old ones in the
near vicinity. On the morning of the 13th, they called as
they left these cypress trees and flew to the top of a dead
pine at the edge of the swamp, where they called and
preened. Finally the female climbed up directly below the
male and when she approached him closely he bent his head
downward and clasped bills with her. The next instant they
both flew out on to the “burn,” where we followed their
feeding operations for about an hour.
_Nesting._--As before stated, while there are a few records of February
nesting, the most definite records are for March, April, and early May,
as follows:
April 6, ----. M. Thompson, Okefinokee swamp, Georgia. Laying.
April 9, 1892. E. A. McIlhenny, Avery swamp, Louisiana. Three fresh
eggs.
April 10, ----. Dr. S. W. Wilson, Altamaha swamp, Georgia. Four eggs.
April 15, 1893. A. Wayne, Florida. A young female about 2 weeks out
of the nest.
April 19, 1893. Ralph Collection, Lafayette County, Fla. Three eggs.
May 2, 1892. E. A. McIlhenny, Avery swamp, Louisiana. Three eggs.
May 19, 1892. E. A. McIlhenny, Avery swamp, Louisiana. Four eggs, a
second laying.
May (early) 1894. E. A. McIlhenny, Avery swamp., Louisiana. Five
young, 3 days old.
May 3, 1885. Capt. B. F. Goss, Jasper County, Tex. Three eggs.
July 1897. George G. Beyer, Franklin Parish, La.
March 4, 1904. Brown brothers (Hoyt), feeding young.
March 16, 1904. R. D. Hoyt, Taylor County, Fla. Large young.
March 4, 1905. E. D. Hoyt, Claremont County, Fla. Two eggs, incubation
advanced.
March 24, 1905. R. D. Hoyt, Claremont County, Fla. Two eggs slightly
incubated (second laying of the preceding).
April 13, 1924. A. A. Allen, Taylor Creek, Fla. Nest completed.
Incubation not yet started.
April (early) 1931. J. J. Kuhn, northern Louisiana. Incubating.
May 13, 1934. J. J. Kuhn, northern Louisiana. Probably small young.
April 6, 1935. A. A. Allen and P. P. Kellogg, northern Louisiana.
Incubating.
April 9, 1935. A. A. Allen and P. P. Kellogg, northern Louisiana.
Building.
April 25, 1935. A. A. Allen and P. P. Kellogg, northern Louisiana.
Incubating.
May 10, 1935. A. A. Allen and P. P. Kellogg, northern Louisiana.
Small young.
Again quoting from the report of Allen and Kellogg (1937):
The site of the Ivorybill’s nest seems to vary
considerably. Audubon states: “The hole is, I believe,
always made in the trunk of a live tree, generally an
ash or a hackberry, and is at a great height.” There
are, however, records of their nesting in live cypress,
partially dead oaks, a dead royal-palm stub, “an old and
nearly rotten white elm stump,” etc., indicating about as
great a variety as shown by the pileated woodpecker. The
lowest authentic nest of which we have found a record,
was that described by Beyer (1900) “about 25 feet up in a
living over-cup oak,” although Scott (1881) mentions what
he considered “an old nest evidently of this species,” in a
palmetto stub only fifteen feet from the ground. The nest
which we discovered in Florida, in 1924, was about thirty
feet up in a live cypress and there were other holes in the
vicinity in similar trees that had apparently been used in
years past. The bark had healed over in some cases and scar
tissue was apparently trying to close the wounds. Of the
four nests examined in Louisiana, three were in oaks and
one in a swamp maple. The maple, seven and a half feet in
circumference (breast high), was partially alive, but the
top where the nest was located, 43 feet from the ground,
was dead and pithy. Of those in oak trees, one was in a
dead pin-oak stub about ten feet in circumference and about
fifty feet high, standing in more or less of a clearing.
The nest was 47 feet 8 inches from the ground. The other
two were not measured accurately but were certainly over
forty feet from the ground. About the middle of May when it
was determined that the first two trees had been deserted,
they were cut down, careful measurements taken, and the
contents of the holes preserved. The hole in the maple was
5 inches in vertical diameter and 4⅛ inches laterally,
and was slightly irregular at the bottom, as shown in the
photographs; that in the oak was more symmetrical with a
similar vertical diameter of 5 inches and a transverse
diameter of 4 inches. The depth of the maple nest from the
top of the entrance hole was 19⅛ inches, of which 3 inches
was filled with chips and “sawdust.” This nest cavity was
8⅛ inches in diameter at the egg level, and the tree itself
18½ inches in diameter at the level of the hole. The nest
cavity in the oak was 20 inches from top to bottom with a
diameter of 8¼ inches at the egg level. The entrance hole
went in 3 inches before it turned abruptly downward; the
tree at this point was 22 inches in diameter. There was a
stub just above the hole in the maple about 4 inches long
representing a branch that had apparently died and been
broken off years before and started to heal over. The oak
was perfectly smooth at the entrance hole, but on either
side, slightly above, were the bases of two large branches
that could not have given the opening any protection from
the weather. The opening in the maple faced north, two of
those in the oaks east, and one west. Audubon states: “The
birds pay great regard to the particular situation of the
tree and the inclination of the trunk; first, because they
prefer retirement, and, again, because they are anxious
to secure the aperture against the access of water during
beating rains. To prevent such a calamity the hole is
generally dug immediately under the juncture of a large
branch with the trunk.” None of the nests examined by us
showed this desire for protection from rain, and the chips
at the bottom of the cavity were perfectly dry, though we
had had some very heavy rains shortly before they were
examined.
Audubon further states: “The average diameter of the
different nests which I examined was about 7 inches within,
although the entrance, which is perfectly round, is only
just large enough to admit the bird.” Beyer (1900) says:
“The entrance measures exactly 4½ inches in height and 3⅞
inches in width,” and McIlhenny (Bendire, 1895) gives the
measurements of a typical hole as “oval and measures 4⅛
by 5¾ inches,” and Scott (1888) as “3½ inches wide and 4½
inches high.” The corresponding measurements of the nests
of Pileated Woodpeckers are given by Bendire (1895) as
follows: “The entrance measures from 3 to 3½ inches in
diameter, and it often goes 5 inches straight into the
trunk before it is worked downward.” The additional one
to two inches in diameter of the nest hole should be kept
in mind when searching for reasons why the Ivorybill has
proven less successful than the Pileated Woodpecker in its
struggle for existence. Thompson (1885) states: “The depth
of the hole varies from three to seven feet, as a rule, but
I found one that was nearly nine feet deep and another that
was less than two.” He also claims that they are always
jug-shaped at the lower end.
Of two nests discovered by Hoyt (1905) in Claremont County, Fla., one
was 58 feet up in a live cypress about 20 yards from a nest discovered
in 1904 by the Brown brothers; the second nest built by the same pair
after the first eggs had been taken was in a cypress stub about 70
yards distant from the first and 47 feet from the ground. The opening
of the first nest was 6¾ inches by 3¼ inches, with the trunk of the
tree 15 inches in diameter at the nest cavity, which was 14 inches
deep. The second nest hole measured 6 by 3¾ inches and was likewise 14
inches deep. “The opening in both nests was uneven and rough, and just
inside the hollow was much enlarged, being 9 inches across, and unlike
the nests of other woodpeckers, was smaller at the bottom than at the
top. * * * One marked feature of the nest tree of which I have seen no
mention made is that the outer bark of those I have examined was torn
to shreds from a point some distance below the nest site to 15 or 20
feet above it. This made the nest tree noticeable for quite a distance.
The last nest taken this season had little of this work done.”
Allen and Kellogg (1937) say further:
According to McIlhenny (Bendire, 1895) the female does all
the work of excavation, requiring from eight to fourteen
days, while the male sits around and chips the bark from
neighboring trees. Audubon, however, states that “both
birds work most assiduously at this excavation, one waiting
outside to encourage the other.” Maurice Thompson (1896)
likewise reports that both birds work at the excavation. We
had no opportunity to check either statement but certainly
both birds take part in incubation and feeding the young.
The chips are not removed from the vicinity of the nest
for each one that we have examined has had piles of chips
directly below the opening though, since most of the trees
were standing in water, the chips were not very conspicuous.
We camped within three hundred feet of our first Ivorybill
nest in Louisiana, in 1935. A pair of 24-power binoculars
set on a tripod was trained on the nest opening, and from
daylight, April 10, until 11 a. m., April 14, continuous
observations during the hours of daylight were made either
by the writers or by James Tanner. The nest had been found
the morning of April 6, when the female was incubating, but
how far along incubation had proceeded we made no effort
to determine for fear of disturbing the birds. Contrary
to most published accounts, however, the birds were not
particularly wary and soon became so accustomed to our
presence that they would enter the nest-hole with one of us
standing at the base of the tree and later even when one
of us was descending from a blind which we built on April
9 in the top of an adjacent rock elm, twenty feet distant
from the nest. On April 9, we located a second pair of
Ivorybills in the vicinity of a fresh hole about fifty feet
up in a dead oak, some two miles to the south of the nest
in the maple. The following morning, however, the nest was
occupied by a black squirrel and the birds had disappeared.
Briefly summarizing our five-day vigil at the occupied
nest, we learned that the birds took turns sitting on
the eggs, working in approximately two-hour shifts when
not alarmed, but changing places more frequently when
disturbed. Activities usually commenced about six o’clock
in the morning, three-quarters of an hour after Cardinals
and Carolina Wrens started singing. At this time the female
relieved the male after his having spent the night on the
eggs. Activities ceased about four o’clock in the afternoon
when the male relieved the female on the eggs and went in
the nest for the night. This was nearly three hours before
dark, which came about seven o’clock.
_Eggs._--According to Bendire (1895):
The eggs of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker are pure china
white in color, close grained, and exceedingly glossy, as
if enameled. They vary in shape from an elongate ovate to
a cylindrical ovate, and are more pointed than the eggs of
most of our Woodpeckers. They appear to me to be readily
distinguished from those of the Pileated Woodpecker, some
of which are fully as large. From three to five eggs are
laid to a set, and only one brood is raised in a season.
* * *
The average measurement of thirteen eggs is 34.87 by 25.22
millimetres or about 1.37 by 0.99 inches. The largest egg
measured 36.83 by 26.92 millimetres, or about 1.45 by 1.06
inches; the smallest, 34.54 by 23.62 millimetres, or about
1.36 by 0.93 inches.
The eggs described by Hoyt (1905) measured 1.46 by 1.09 and 1.43 by
1.07 inches in the first set and 1.43 by 1.10 and 1.43 by 1.08 inches
in the second set.
From my own experience and the observation of others, it seems to
me that the number of eggs laid by the ivorybill would not normally
exceed three, and one or two of these are often infertile. Frequently,
if the bird is successful in rearing any offspring at all, a single
youngster is the result rather than two or three. Allen and Kellogg
(1937) describe three nests in which no young were successfully reared,
although at least some of the eggs apparently hatched, while Scott
(1888), Beyer (1900), and Tanner (1937 and 1938 MS.) each report single
young, and in the type set of three eggs (Ralph collection, Lafayette
County, Fla.) two were infertile, and both of Hoyt’s sets contained two
eggs each. On the other hand, J. J. Kuhn reports seeing one pair of
ivorybills with four young in 1931 and again in 1936 in the same forest
where Allen and Kellogg made their studies. In 1932, 1933, and 1934 he
observed a pair of ivorybills with two young.
_Plumages._--So far as I have been able to find, no one has ever
published a description of the natal or juvenal plumages of the
ivory-billed woodpecker. The probability is that natal down is
absent, although. Scott (1888), who found a nest containing one young
in Florida March 17, 1887, says: “The young bird in the nest was a
female, and though one-third grown had _not yet opened its eyes_. The
feathers of the first plumage were apparent, beginning to cover the
down, and were the same in coloration as those of the adult female
bird.”
During April 1937, James Tanner, recipient of the Audubon fellowship
at Cornell University for the study of the ivory-billed woodpecker
(MS.), was able to follow a young ivorybill for over 3 months after
it left the nest, and though he never had the bird in his hands, his
description is much more complete than Scott’s and the most accurate
one available: “March 10, 1937: The young ivory-billed woodpecker just
out of the nest resembled an adult female in general pattern but with
the following differences: The black crest was short and blunt; the
tail was short and square; the outer primaries were all tipped with
white, instead of being wholly black as in the adult; the bill was
shorter than that of an adult and was chalky white instead of ivory;
the eye was a dark brown or sepia. One month later the crest was long
but still blunt and black, the tail was almost as long and pointed as
an adult’s, and the eye and bill were beginning to turn color.
“The bird developed gradually from then, until at three and a half
months out of the nest (July 14, 1937) its size, proportions, bill, and
eye color were the same as those of an adult. By then, scarlet feathers
had appeared in the back of the crest. The white wing tips to the outer
primaries were almost worn away.”
Since Tanner’s bird began to show red in the crest when it was three
and a half months old, it is probable that the postjuvenal molt is
completed by early fall and that thereafter young and adults are
similar.
The chief difference between adult male and female ivorybills lies in
the crest, which in the male is a brilliant scarlet, not including the
uppermost feathers, which are black, like the top of the head, while
the somewhat recurved crest of the female is entirely black. Females
average somewhat larger than males in most of their measurements,
except those of bill and feet, as the following figures (length in
millimeters) given by Ridgway (1914) for 15 males and 11 females
indicate:
ADULT MALES: Skins, 420-493 (454); wing, 240-263 (255.8);
tail, 147-160.5 (154.4); culmen, 63-72.5 (68.2); tarsus,
42.5-46 (44.2); outer anterior toe, 30-34 (32.1).
ADULT FEMALES: Skins, 452-488 (471); wing, 240-262 (256.4);
tail, 151-166 (159.5); culmen, 61-67.5 (64.3); tarsus,
40.5-44 (42.6); outer anterior toe, 30-33.5 (31.7).
In both sexes the general color is a glossy blue-black, with the tail
and primaries duller or with the gloss less distinct. A narrow stripe
on each side of the neck, starting below the eye and continuing down
to the folded secondaries, is conspicuously white, as are also the
secondaries, all but five or six of the outermost primaries, and the
under wing coverts. The white nasal plumes and anterior edges of the
lores more or less match the ivory-white bill and help to emphasize its
size. The iris is pale, clear lemon-yellow in both sexes, and the tarsi
and toes are light gray.
_Food._--Audubon (1842) mentions grapes, persimmons, and hackberries as
food of the ivorybills in addition to beetles, larvae, and large grubs.
McIlhenny, in his communication to Bendire (1895), mentions their
feeding on acorns, but Maurice Thompson (1885) asserts that “it is
only woodpeckers which eat insects and larvae (dug out of rotten wood)
exclusively.” Allen and Kellogg (1937) report:
We were never able to follow a bird continuously through
the forest of either Louisiana or Florida for more than
an hour before it would make a long flight and we would
be unable to find it again. Ordinarily upon leaving the
nest-tree or its immediate environs the bird would fly at
least a hundred yards before stopping. Then it would feed
for from a few minutes to as long as half an hour on a dead
tree or dead branch before making a short flight to another
tree. It might make a dozen such short flights and then,
without any warning and for no apparent reason, it would
start off on a long flight through the forest that would
take it entirely out of sight.
Audubon states that “it seldom comes near the ground”;
but the birds we have watched behave no differently from
pileated woodpeckers in this respect, sometimes working
high up in the trees but at other times within five or ten
feet of the ground. The female of the Florida pair which we
watched for over an hour on a “burn” sometimes got down on
the ground around the seared, prostrate trunks of the saw
palmettos, hopping like a Flicker, while her mate stayed on
the trunks of the pines five to ten feet up. We never saw
the Louisiana birds on the ground but there was plenty of
evidence, both in Florida and Louisiana, that a bird will
continue scaling the bark from recently killed trees for
the beetle larvae beneath, clear to the base of the tree,
until the tree stands absolutely naked with the bark piled
around its base.
Frequently they return again and again to the same tree
until they have entirely stripped it. At one time we
thought this was their chief method of feeding, but we have
since watched them digging for borers exactly like hairy
or pileated woodpeckers. At one time we watched the female
working at a deep gash in the tall stub of a dead gum,
which was apparently a favorite feeding place. She clung
to the spot for about five minutes, occasionally picking
hard, but never chipping off any large flakes that would
account for the depth of the hole which was exactly like
that made by pileated woodpeckers,--about four inches deep
and eighteen inches long. Finally she flew and disappeared
in the direction of the nest which was about two hundred
yards away. In a few minutes the male ivorybill came to the
same spot where the female had been working and he, too,
picked at the hole and stayed there for several minutes. At
the time we decided that either the ivorybills or perhaps
the pileateds had made the gash in the tree for carpenter
ants and that the ivorybills were returning each time for
more ants. Since the stub was rather rotten and full of
woodpecker drillings, we decided to cut it down the next
day and make certain of what the ivorybills were securing.
Upon examining the hole made by the birds there was,
however, no evidence of carpenter ants, and the deep gash
followed the tunnels of large, wood-boring beetle larvae
(Cerambycidae) of which there were a great many in the
tree; the only other available woodpecker food was termites
of which there were comparatively few.
Certainly the ivorybills did not do enough digging while
we were watching them to uncover any additional borers, so
they may have been picking up such termites as appeared in
the gash. The birds, while we watched them in Louisiana,
divided their time between dead branches of live trees and
completely dead trees, but more time was spent knocking off
the bark for whatever could be found immediately beneath
it than was spent digging deeply for borers. The forest
was made up primarily of oak, gum and hackberry, and the
woodpeckers showed no preference for species so far as we
could determine. In Florida, while the nest was located
in a cypress swamp in a live cypress tree, the birds
apparently did most of their feeding in the dead pines
at the edge of the swamp, scaling off the bark of those
small and medium-sized pines that had been killed by fire,
or actually getting down on the ground like Flickers, as
already described.
The ivorybills are, therefore, apparently somewhat adaptable in their
food and feeding habits, but forests of mature trees with their dying
branches seem to give them the best habitat for securing their food.
The fruits of these trees may likewise add considerably to their
attractiveness. The only definite stomach analyses published are of two
birds examined by the United States Biological Survey, and reported
upon by Beal (1911): “One stomach contained 32 and the other 20 of
the wood-boring cerambycid larvae, which live by boring into trees.
These constituted 37.5 per cent of the whole food. The remainder of
the animal food consisted of engraver beetles (_Scolytidae_) found
in one stomach. Of these, three species were identified--_Tomicus
avulsus_, _T. calligraphus_, and _T. grandicollis_. The total animal
food amounted to 38.5 per cent. The vegetable food consisted of fruit
of _Magnolia foetida_ in one stomach, and of pecan nuts in the other.
The average for the two was 61.5 percent.”
The ivory-billed woodpecker is represented in the Biological Survey’s
collection by the stomachs of three birds. Two of these were males
collected on November 26, 1904, at Tarkington, Tex., by Vernon Bailey,
and the third was shot at Bowling Green, West Carroll Parish, La., on
August 19, 1903, by E. L. Moseley.
The first two stomachs were well filled, and though only the content of
the third was received it was apparently well filled also. This last
stomach alone contained a trace of gravel. Forty-six percent of the
food was animal in origin, long-horned beetles (Cerambycidae, including
_Parandra polita_ and _Stenodontus dasystomus_) comprising 45.33
percent, while the remaining 0.67 percent consisted of 3 different
species of engraver beetles (_Tomicus_ spp.). Southern magnolia seeds
(_Magnolia grandiflora_) formed 14 percent of the vegetable food,
hickory (_Hicoria_ sp.) and pecan (_Hicoria pecan_) nuts formed 27
percent, and poison ivy (_Rhus radicans_) equaled 12.67 percent.
Fragments of an unidentified gall formed 1 percent of the content.
_Behavior._--The uniform direct flight of the ivorybill resembles that
of the red-headed woodpecker more than it does the swooping undulating
flight of the pileated, and this general resemblance is emphasized
by the large amount of white in the wings. When viewed from below,
the long pointed tail is quite conspicuous and the wings seem very
narrow because the black portion is so much more conspicuous than the
white, which apparently cuts off the whole rear of the wing. This is
perhaps not so conspicuous when viewed from the side, but even so it
is remarkable how ducklike the bird can appear as it flies swiftly
and directly up a lagoon, so much so in fact that certain Louisiana
hunters have told me that they have even shot at them under such
circumstances, mistaking them for ducks. In this connection Audubon’s
(1842) description of the flight of the ivorybill is quite misleading:
“The flight of this bird is graceful in the extreme, although seldom
prolonged to more than a few hundred yards at a time, unless when it
has to cross a large river, which it does in deep undulations, opening
its wings at first to their full extent and nearly closing them to
renew the propelling impulse. The transit from one tree to another,
even should the distance be as much as a hundred yards, is performed
by a single sweep, and the bird appears as if merely swinging itself
from the top of the one tree to that of the other, forming an elegantly
curved line.”
_Voice._--Concerning the voice of the ivorybill there seems to be
considerable agreement in that the ordinary note sounds like a single
blast from a tin trumpet or a clarinet. In the words of Audubon, “Its
notes are clear, loud, and yet rather plaintive. They are heard at a
considerable distance, perhaps half a mile, and resemble the false,
high note of a clarinet.” According to Hoyt (1905): “It is a single
note and resembles the word Schwenk, at times keyed very high, again
soft and plaintive, it lacks carrying capacity and can rarely be
heard over 100 yards on a still morning, while the harsh notes of the
pileated woodpecker can be heard a full mile.” Allen and Kellogg (1937)
state that anyone can produce the sound very accurately by using only
the mouthpiece of the clarinet. They question whether the loudest calls
can be heard half a mile:
It is doubtful, however, if the loudest calls can be heard,
under normal conditions, for a quarter of a mile, and some
of the weaker ones are scarcely audible at 300 yards.
However, when we tested the carrying power of one of our
recordings of the common alarm note, _kent_, amplified
until it sounded to our ears normal at about one hundred
feet, the call was distinctly recognizable at a distance
of 2,500 feet directly in front of the amplifier with no
trees or buildings intervening. At a 45-degree angle the
sound was not recognizable at half this distance. The
birds are so often quiet for such long periods that we can
scarcely agree with Audubon’s statement that “the bird
spends few minutes of the day without uttering them.” They
seem much more likely to call when they are alarmed, as
when they discover an intruder in their haunts. Both birds
give the call, but that of the female is somewhat weaker.
In addition to this _kent_ note, as it is called by the
natives of Louisiana, and because of which they call the
birds “Kents,” they have a variety of low conversational
notes when they exchange places at the nest, which are
suggestive of similar notes of the Flicker; but they
never, so far as we know, give a call at all similar to
the _pup-pup-pup_! of the pileated, nor have we ever heard
them sound a real tatoo like other woodpeckers, such as
described by Thompson (1885), and which McIlhenny (Bendire,
1895) compares to the “roll of a snare drum.” The birds
in Florida and all those in Louisiana telegraphed to each
other by single or double resounding whacks on the trunk
or dead branches. Mr. Kuhn who has had years of experience
with them, likewise has never heard any notes or tatoos
that were comparable with those of the Pileated. Our
observations agree with Audubon’s, rather than with those
of some others, in that “it never utters any sound while on
the wing.”
Tanner (MS.) reports, however, that in his studies during 1937 he
occasionally heard a rapid succession of “kents” given on the wing as
one bird flew in to join another.
The calls of the two large species of woodpeckers are so distinct
that they should not be confused with each other or with those of any
other birds. The fact, however, that ivorybills are continually being
reported, even from the Northern States, indicates how unobservant many
people are and how necessary it is to stress even such conspicuous
differences as those mentioned above.
_Winter._--Ivory-billed woodpeckers are apparently not only
nonmigratory but also sedentary and perhaps spend their entire lives
within a few miles of the spot where they were hatched. At least, once
a pair has established a territory it seems to cling to that area
winter and summer, and Tanner (MS.) reports one pair using the same
roosting hole in December that they used the preceding April. These
territories are doubtless several miles in diameter, but the tendency
was for the birds to build up small communities in certain areas
until in former years, when their distribution was normal, they were
reported as fairly common by observers who happened upon one of these
communities. On the other hand, there were perhaps always large areas
of similar timber uninhabited by them, so that with equal truth by
equally competent observers they were called extremely rare. How much
farther they range during the winter than during the nesting season has
not yet been worked out, but doubtless the area covered at such times
is considerably larger, and this accounts for sporadic records of birds
in the nonbreeding seasons in areas where no nests have been located
and where no one has been able to find the birds subsequently.
The family groups apparently keep together until the following nesting
season, and Mr. Kuhn has reported seeing groups of from three to five
birds even as late as early March. Hoyt (1905) states that “after the
young leave the nest in April they and the parents remain together
until the mating season in December. During the summer they are always
found in bands of three to five, and I have never seen more than the
latter number.”
_Conservation._--Arthur T. Wayne (1910) records having “encountered
more than two hundred of these rare birds [in Florida] during the years
1892, 1893, and 1894.” Today it is doubtful if there are a fourth of
that number left alive in its entire range.
A number of theories have been advanced for the increasing scarcity
of the ivorybill, that most often mentioned being the destruction of
its natural habitat, the virgin cypress and bottomland forests of the
South. Commercialization, avarice of collectors, shooting for food by
natives, predation by natural enemies that can enter its hole (but not
the pileated) are likewise suggested, while Allen and Kellogg (1937)
suggest that with increasing scarcity because of their sedentary
habits, inbreeding and lack of sex rhythm resulting in weak young and
infertile eggs have become increasingly important. At this writing the
National Association of Audubon Societies has established a Fellowship
at Cornell University for the study of the ivorybill, and it is hoped
that the incumbent, James Tanner, may ascertain such facts regarding
the bird and its habits that constructive measures for its preservation
can be undertaken.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--The Southeastern United States; nonmigratory.
The range of the ivory-billed woodpecker extends =north= to
northeastern Texas (Gainesville); southeastern Oklahoma (Caddo);
northeastern Arkansas (Newport and Osceola); southeastern Missouri
(Little River); southeastern Illinois (Mount Carmel); southern Indiana
(Monroe County and Franklin County); and southeastern North Carolina
(Wilmington). =East= along the coast from North Carolina (Wilmington)
to southeastern Florida (Cape Florida). From this point the southern
limits of the range extend westward along the Gulf coast to Texas
(Guadalupe and New Braunfels). =West= to eastern Texas (New Braunfels,
San Marcos, Brazos River, and Gainesville).
The range of the species has been so restricted in modern times that
periodically it is feared the bird is on the verge of extinction. It
is now known to exist only in a very few remote areas, chiefly in
Louisiana.
_Egg dates._--Florida: 4 records, March 4 to April 19.
Louisiana: 5 records, March 6 to May 19.
Georgia: 2 records, April 6 and 10.
Texas: 2 records, April 11 and May 3.
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS VILLOSUS (Linnaeus)
EASTERN HAIRY WOODPECKER
PLATE 3
HABITS
The hairy woodpecker, with its various subspecies, ranges throughout
practically all the timbered regions in North America, but the type
race, the subject of this sketch, is confined, during the breeding
season at least, to the Transition and Upper Austral Zones of
Northeastern United States and extreme southern Canada.
In the region where I am most familiar with it, southern New England,
it is not an abundant bird at any season, quite rare in summer and
oftener seen in winter. It is essentially a retiring, forest-loving
bird, being found with us in summer in the dry deciduous woods, or
occasionally in rural districts in old orchards near the borders of
wooded areas. In winter, it is given more to wandering into villages
and towns, or may be seen even in the shade trees in larger cities.
I remember having found it only twice in swampy woods, but Dr. George
M. Sutton (1928b), in his paper on the birds of Pymatuning Swamp,
Crawford County, Pa., says: “The hairy woodpecker occurs only rarely in
the higher deciduous woods outside the borders of Pymatuning during the
nesting season, but it is abundant everywhere in the wooded Swamp, and
in the restricted area, closely examined in 1922, was considered one of
the most numerous species.”
_Courtship._--Francis H. Allen has sent me the following notes on this
subject: “The courtship dance consists of a weaving motion of the head,
as with the flicker, accompanied by a high-pitched _ch’weech, ch’weech,
ch’weech_, repeated over and over vociferously. The note is much like
that of the flicker, but higher-pitched and more rapidly delivered.
Three and sometimes four birds may be seen so engaged together, but I
have no observation as to the sexes. In quiet intervals in courtship,
the head is held with bill parallel with the axis of the body, not at
right angles as in feeding.”
Edward H. Forbush (1927) writes:
On bright March days this bird begins to practise what
is either a love song, a challenge, a call to its mate,
or all combined. This is no vocal music but instead a
loud drumming on some resonant dead tree, branch, or
pole. This long roll or tattoo is louder than that of the
downy woodpecker, not quite so long, and with a slightly
greater interval between each succeeding stroke. It takes a
practiced ear, however, to distinguish between the drumming
of these two species. In courtship the male chases the
female from tree to tree with coaxing calls, and there is
much dodging about among the branches and bowing to each
other before the union is consummated.
Rex Brasher (1926) writes:
Seated under a cluster of small maples, one day in early
May, I watched the interesting courting antics of the
pair. The jaunty male’s favorite position was one in which
he appeared to be almost standing on his tail. With bill
upright, wings thrown forward, and tail wide-spread he
repeated over and over what was undoubtedly intended for a
love-song, a series of notes divided between chuckles and
whistles. But the strangest, most mystifying performance
was a series of backward drops on the under side of a limb
inclined about forty-five degrees. * * * Why didn’t the
little acrobat fall when he released his claws? Studying
his movements carefully through the binoculars, I came to
the conclusion that at the instant of releasing his grip he
jerked his body toward the limb with sufficient impetus to
catch the bark six inches or so below.
Lewis O. Shelley says in his notes: “I have watched the act of
copulation of the hairy woodpecker and noted its dissimilarity to the
downy. For the hairy invariably instills a follow-up procedure to the
display, the male coming to her call and, soon thereafter, hopping up
the branch toward her with a short jerking movement, in which he calls
_wick-up, wick-up, wick-up_, wings agitating, this immediately followed
by copulation.”
_Nesting._--The hairy woodpecker is rather rare, as a breeding bird,
in my home territory in southeastern Massachusetts, but I have the
records of 12 local nests. It shows a decided preference for deciduous
woodlands, six of the nests being in dry, upland woods and two in
maple swamps; of the other four nests, three were in apple orchards,
close to extensive woodlots, and the fourth was in a small, living,
red maple in a swampy meadow, some distance from any woods. The birds
showed no decided preference for any one species of tree; three nests
each were found in maples and apple trees, two each in chestnuts
and poplars, and one each in a dead oak and a dead beech. Only four
nests were in dead trees or dead branches; the others were all in
living hardwoods. The heights from the ground varied from 5 feet in
a dead poplar stub to 30 feet, or more, in tall chestnuts or maples.
The entrance to the nesting cavity often appears nearly, or quite,
circular, but on careful measurement will usually be shown to be more
or less elliptical, higher than broad; a typical entrance hole that I
measured was 1⅞ high by 1½ inches wide. The depth of the cavity was
found to vary from 10 to 12 inches, but Mr. Shelley (1933) measured
one that was 15 inches deep, and even deeper holes have been reported.
Owen Durfee’s notes give some very careful measurements of two of our
local nests, one of which is worth quoting as showing an unusually
elliptical entrance: “The entrance to the nest was on the northeast
side of the trunk of a live chestnut and 22½ feet from the ground. The
tree leaned toward the east about 2 feet. At the butt it was 9 inches
in diameter and at the opening about 6½ inches. The opening had the
usual elongated appearance, 2⅝ high by 1⅞ inches wide. The top of the
hole went straight in across the cavity for 4½ inches, the bottom edge
of the opening slanting up ¾ of an inch while going in 1½ inches. Then
the cavity went nearly straight down below the hole for 12 inches,
enlarging only a trifle, so that the base was about 4½ inches in
diameter. The shell of the tree was only about ⅞ inch thick on one side
but on the other was 2 inches thick.”
Dr. Sutton (1928b) says of the nests in Pymatuning Swamp, Pa.: “The
cavities were drilled near the tops of dead trees which nearly always
stood in water. It was impossible to climb many of them because their
bases were weak; but the clamoring of the young birds could be heard
some distance away. On May 30, 1922, I located six nests within a half
hour by watching the parent birds and listening for the young. * * *
The twenty-six nests averaged roughly over thirty feet from the ground.”
T. E. McMullen mentions in his notes a Pennsylvania nest that was 50
feet from the ground in a large maple in some woods. J. Claire Wood
(1905) reports some very high nests in Michigan; one was in the “trunk
of very large barkless dead elm about 50 feet above ground”; another
was in the trunk of a “dead beech 55 feet up and just under a large
limb.”
The female probably selects the nesting site, but both sexes work
alternately at the labor of excavating the cavity. This work requires
one to three weeks, depending on how hard the wood is; a cavity in the
soft wood of a poplar, which is a favorite with this species in some
localities, might be excavated in a very short time, but I have known a
pair to take over three weeks to excavate a nest in a hard maple; the
trunk of a living tree may have a soft center, and some of the birds
seem to be clever enough to select such a tree. A new nest may often
be recognized by the presence of fresh chips on the ground around the
tree, as the birds are not very particular about removing them.
The male sometimes digs out another shallower hole near the nesting
tree, which he uses as a sleeping place. Usually a fresh hole is
made each season, but I have seen occupied holes that were very much
weathered, as if they had been occupied for more than one season; in
such cases, the cavity may be deepened somewhat and the bottom covered
with fresh chips. I once found a pair of these woodpeckers excavating
their domicile, which they later abandoned, as I found on a later visit
that the hole was partly full of water and sap. They are not always
successful in their first attempt, for this and other reasons, and may
have to start two or three holes before they find just the conditions
they want. The eggs are laid on a soft bed of fresh chips at the bottom
of the cavity and are usually half buried in it; no nesting material is
carried in.
_Eggs._--The hairy woodpecker lays three to six eggs, but four seems
to be the commonest number. The eggs vary in shape from oval to
elliptical-oval, usually more nearly oval. The shell is smooth and
often quite glossy. The color is pure white, but in fresh eggs the
yolk shows through the translucent shell, giving the egg a beautiful
orange-pink color. The measurements of 47 eggs average 23.81 by 18.04
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =29.50= by
18.80, 28.70 by =18.90=, and =20.57= by =16.26= millimeters.
_Young._--Only one brood is raised in a season, but, if the nest is
robbed, the female will lay a second set after an interval of 12 or 14
days, and sometimes even a third set; often subsequent layings may be
in the same nest hole.
Bendire (1895) says:
The duties of incubation are divided between the sexes
and last about two weeks. The young when first hatched
are repulsive-looking creatures, blind and naked, with
enormously large heads, and ugly protuberances at the base
of the bill, resembling a reptile more than a bird. They
are totally helpless for some days, and can not stand;
but they soon learn to climb. They are fed by the parents
by regurgitation of their food, which is the usual way in
which the young of most Woodpeckers are fed when first
hatched. * * * The young remain in the nest about three
weeks. When disturbed they utter a low, purring noise,
which reminds me somewhat of that made by bees when
swarming, and when a little older they utter a soft “puirr,
puirr.” Even after leaving the nest they are assiduously
cared for by both parents for several weeks, until able to
provide for themselves.
_Plumages._--The young hairy, like all other young woodpeckers, is
hatched naked, and the juvenal plumage is assumed while in the nest, so
that when the young birds emerge they are fully fledged. In the juvenal
plumage the sexes are sometimes much alike, though oftener there is
a decided difference. In both sexes the bill is decidedly smaller,
weaker, and more pointed than in the adult; the color pattern is almost
exactly like that of the adult, but the plumage is softer and fluffier;
the white markings are more or less tinged with yellowish, the two
inner primaries are dwarfed, and the innermost white tail feather is
usually tipped with black. The colored markings in the crowns of both
sexes are very variable in color and in extent. L. L. Snyder (1923)
has made a careful study of the crown markings of young hairy and
downy woodpeckers of both sexes. He found that 90 percent of the young
male hairies had more or less red, pinkish, or yellowish markings in
the crowns, and only about 14 percent of the young females were so
marked. But only 10 percent of the young males and about 43 percent of
the young females had white markings only on a black crown; and about
43 percent of the young females had the entire crown black. There is
great individual variation in the amount and in the distribution of
these colors; the white spots are often mixed with the other colors;
the reddish and yellowish colors may invade nearly the whole crown,
exist in one or two large patches, or appear on only a few scattered
feathers.
The juvenal plumage is worn but a short time; the molt into the first
winter plumage is accomplished between July and October. This first
winter plumage is much like that of the adult in both sexes, but the
white spots are not quite so pure white, and the red nuchal patch
of the male is duller and often interrupted. Adults have a complete
postnuptial molt in August and September and perhaps a partial
prenuptial molt in spring.
_Food._--Various studies of the food habits of the hairy woodpeckers
show that these birds are among our most useful birds and especially
valuable as protectors of our forest and shade trees and orchards.
More than 75 percent of their food consists of injurious insects,
while the amount of useful insects and cultivated fruits that they
destroy is insignificant. Prof. F. E. L. Beal (1911) has published
the most exhaustive report on this subject, based on the study of 382
stomachs collected during every month in the year and from many parts
of the range of the species, including practically all of the races.
He says: “In the first analysis the food divides into 77.67 percent
of animal matter and 22.33 of vegetable. The animal food consists of
insects, with a few spiders and millepeds; the vegetable part is made
up of fruit, seeds, and a number of miscellaneous substances.” Of the
animal food, he says: “The largest item in the annual diet of the hairy
woodpecker consists of the larvae of cerambycid and buprestid beetles,
with a few lucanids and perhaps some other wood borers. These insects
constitute over 31 percent of the food and are eaten in every month
of the year. * * * One stomach contained 100 of these larvae and 83
and 50, respectively, were taken from two others. Of the 382 stomachs,
204, or 53 percent, contained these grubs, and 27 of them held no other
food. Other beetles amount to a little more than 9 percent.”
Ants rank second in importance, amounting to a little more than 17
percent, and are taken every month in the year; other Hymenoptera are
eaten in very small quantities and irregularly. Caterpillars are the
next most important item, many of them wood-boring species, amounting
to a little less than 10 percent. “Prof. F. M. Webster states that
he has seen a hairy woodpecker successfully peck a hole through the
parchment-like covering of the cocoon of a Cecropia moth and devour
the contents. On examining more than 20 cocoons in a grove of box
elders, he found only 2 uninjured,” according to Professor Beal (1911),
who adds that bugs (Hemiptera) and plant lice (aphids) form only a
small part of the food, and says: “Orthoptera, that is, grasshoppers,
crickets, and cockroaches, are rarely eaten by the hairy. A few
eggs, probably those of tree crickets, and the egg cases (oötheca)
of cockroaches, constitute the bulk of this food. These with a few
miscellaneous insects amount to a little more than 2 percent for the
year. Spiders with their cocoons of eggs, including one jointed spider
(Solpugidae), and a few millepeds, were eaten to the extent of about
3.5 percent, which completes the quota of animal food.”
He says further:
The vegetable food of the hairy woodpecker may be
considered under four heads: Fruit, grain, seeds, and
miscellaneous vegetable substances. Fruit amounts to 5.22
percent of the food, and was contained in 54 stomachs, of
which 13 held what was diagnosed as domestic varieties,
and 41 contained wild species. Rubus seeds (blackberries
or raspberries) were identified in 4 stomachs, and were
counted as domestic fruit, but it is perhaps more probable
that they were wild. * * * Of wild fruit 18 species were
identified. It constitutes the great bulk of the fruit
eaten, and is nearly all of varieties not useful to man.
Corn was the only grain discovered in the food. It was
found in 10 stomachs, and amounted to 1.37 percent. * * *
The seed of poison ivy and poison sumac (_Rhus radicans_
and _R. vernix_) were found in 17 stomachs, and as they
usually pass through the alimentary canal uninjured,
the birds do some harm by scattering the seeds of these
noxious plants. * * * Cambium, or the inner bark of trees,
was identified in 23 stomachs. Evidently the hairy does
but little damage by denuding trees of their bark. Mast,
made up of acorns, hazelnuts, and beechnuts, was found in
50 stomachs. It was mostly taken in the fall and winter
months, and appears to be quite a favorite food during the
cooler part of the year.
Illustrating the quantities of insects eaten by individual birds, F.
H. King (1883), Wisconsin, writes: “Of twenty-one specimens examined,
eleven had eaten fifty-two wood-boring larvae; five, thirteen geometrid
caterpillars; ten, one hundred and five ants; six, ten beetles; two,
two cockroaches; two, nine oötheca of cockroaches; two, two moths;
one, a small snail; one, green corn; one, a wild cherry; and one, red
elder berries. * * * One of the above birds had in its stomach eleven
wood-boring larvae (Lamides?) and twelve geometers; another, thirteen
larvae of long-horn beetles and four cockroach oötheca; another, nine
wood-boring larvae; and two others together had three wood-boring
larvae, and nine larvae not coleopterous.”
V. A. Alderson (1890) published the following interesting note: “Last
summer, potato bugs covered every patch of potatoes in Marathon County,
(being my home county,) Wis. One of my friends here, found his patch an
exception, and therefore took pains to find the reason, and observed a
hairy woodpecker, making frequent visits to the potato field and going
from there to a large pine stub a little distance away.
“After observing this for about six weeks, he made a visit to the pine
stub and found, on inspection, a large hole in its side about fifteen
feet up. He took his axe and cut down the stub, split it open, and
found inside, over two bushels of bugs. All had their heads off and
bodies intact.”
The woodpecker’s method of locating tree-boring larvae and its
specialized apparatus for extracting them are so well described by Dr.
Thomas S. Roberts (1932) that I cannot do better than to quote him, as
follows:
The hairy woodpecker possesses in its tongue one of the
most remarkably developed and perfectly adapted instruments
for extracting the tree larvae from their tunnels. The
tip is a rigid, barbed spear and can be thrust out to
an astonishing distance by reason of greatly elongated,
posterior horns which pass up over the back and top of
the head and run together down in front of the right
eye, around which they are coiled for almost the entire
circumference of the socket! So that, the drilling into
the tunnel accomplished, the tongue darts out, the inner
ends uncoil, the spear transfixes the grub, and with little
ado the larva is dragged from its retreat into the bill of
the bird, pounded perhaps for a moment or two, swallowed
forthwith or carried to the young, and this most perfectly
contrived and highly efficient engine is once more ready
for action. There has been considerable discussion as to
how the woodpeckers locate the larvae, active or dormant,
which are hidden deeply in the wood and for which they
drill so unerringly. All the special senses of birds are
very highly developed, and it seems probable that in this
case hearing, touch, and smell all may play a part. The
active grub, as it crunches the wood, makes a sound that
would surely be audible to a bird with its keen sense of
hearing. The tunnel produces a cavity which would give both
a different sound and feeling on tapping over it. Such
things as grubs have a strong odor, and it is probable that
this plays a part also.
Forbush (1927) says: “Maurice Thompson asserts that the hairy
woodpecker strikes its bill into the wood and then holds the point of
one mandible for a moment in the dent thus made. He believes that the
vibrations produced by the insect in the wood are then conveyed through
the beak and skull of the bird to its brain.”
In winter this woodpecker comes readily to suet or meat bones hung up
on our trees or feeding stations to attract birds. It is also said
to feed on the carcasses of animals left in the woods by trappers or
hunters and to pick the fat from fresh skins that the trapper has hung
up to dry. Although often called a sapsucker, there is practically no
evidence that it ever does any injury to trees in this way; any sap or
cambium eaten is probably taken incidentally in its search for insects.
_Behavior._--The hairy woodpecker is a much shier, more retiring bird
than the confiding little downy; it is also more active and noisier; it
usually will not allow such close approach but will dodge around the
trunk of a tree or fly away, if an intruder comes too near, bounding
through the air in a series of graceful dips and rebounds. Rex Brasher
(1926) followed one for four hours that alighted “on two hundred and
eighteen different trees, an average of nearly one a minute! The
longest time he remained on one tree was seven minutes. This was a
dead chestnut with most of the bark still adhering. By far the larger
proportion of the trees were old chestnuts, and under their loosely
attached covering he found most successful hunting. Rough-bark species
were preferred--chestnuts, oaks, old maples and hickories, about in the
order named. Smooth-barked ones received little notice.”
Dr. Morris Gibbs (1902) says: “Have my readers carefully watched a
Woodpecker leave its perch on the trunk or limb? The bird throws itself
backward from its vertical position by a leg spring, together with a
tail movement, turns in the air in the fraction of a second and is
sweeping away to the next perch. Arriving at the next resting place it
makes a single counteracting stroke of the wings against the air, and
perches lightly on the bark of limb or trunk.”
Like all woodpeckers, the hairy is an expert climber, perfectly at home
on the trunk of a tree, or even on the under side of a branch, where
its strong claws enable it to cling in almost any position or to move
about with astonishing rapidity and skill in any direction. Its stiff
tail feathers act as a prop and help to support it while hammering away
at the bark with its powerful beak. Forbush (1927) says that it “is the
embodiment of sturdy energy and persistent industry. Active, cheerful,
ever busy, its life of arduous toil brings but one reward, a liberal
sustenance. It sometimes spends nearly an hour of hard labor in digging
out a single borer, but commonly reaches the object of its quest in
much less time.”
_Voice._--The ordinary call of the hairy woodpecker is louder and
shriller than that of the downy. Francis H. Allen says, in his
notes, that it bears “about the same relation to it as the solitary
sandpiper’s _peet-weet_ does to that of the spotted sandpiper. I hear
it most frequently from the female. In fact, a female of the species
that visits my place at all times of the year often utters this note
continually, as if calling for a mate or claiming territory, but she
never nests very near.”
Bendire (1895) describes its ordinary note as “a shrill, rattling note,
_triii, triii_;” and again as several loud notes uttered on the wing,
like _huip, huip_. Forbush (1927) calls the ordinary note “a high,
sharp, rather metallic _chink_ or _click_.” Aretas A. Saunders (1929)
says: “The call is a loud ‘keep,’ like that of the downy woodpecker,
but louder. Another call is a loud rattle, suggesting that of the
Kingfisher, but slurring down the scale. Another call, ‘kuweek kuweek
kuweek kuweek,’ is used during the mating season, and suggests the
Flicker’s ‘oweeka.’”
_Field marks._--The hairy woodpecker is a large edition of the downy
woodpecker, a black and white woodpecker, white below and black above,
spotted with white on the wings, and with a broad white stripe down the
center of the back. Only the male has the red patch on the back of the
neck. It can be distinguished from the downy by its much larger size,
its more restless behavior, its relatively longer and larger bill, and
by the lateral tail feathers, which are pure white in the hairy and
somewhat barred with black in the downy.
_Enemies._--B. T. Gault, in his notes from Marshall County, Ill.,
states: “The hairy woodpecker is now a very rare breeder here owing to
the fact that the English sparrow appropriates almost every nest hole
as soon as it is excavated. I once saw one of these sparrows enter the
hole of one of these birds, take a newly hatched bird out in its bill,
flutter for an instant over the water (the nest was in a dead willow
snag standing in the overflowed Illinois River bottoms), and drop the
young bird into the water to drown. It then returned into the nest and
soon appeared with another newly hatched woodpecker in its bill. As it
fluttered over the water for an instant, my gun cracked and the sparrow
died.”
Verdi Burtch (1923) writes: “April 16, 1922, when in a thin wood I
heard a female hairy woodpecker making a great fuss as they do when one
invades the vicinity of their nest. As I neared the place I saw the
nest hole about twenty feet up in an elm stub. About ten feet away,
sitting erect on a limb of another tree, was a red squirrel eating
something that it held in its fore-paws. My 8-power binoculars showed
this to be a naked baby bird, presumably a hairy woodpecker and not
more than two or three days old.”
Mr. Shelley (1933) tells of a pair of hairy woodpeckers that were
twice, in the same season, driven out of their nest by starlings and
their eggs destroyed.
_Fall._--The Hairy woodpecker has often been said to be a permanent
resident on its breeding grounds, but this is not strictly true. The
species may be present all through the year over much of its range, but
there is evidence to indicate a general southward movement in fall; the
individuals seen in winter are probably not the same as those seen in
summer. Moreover, there is a noticeable increase in numbers in certain
localities in winter.
Lewis O. Shelley has sent me some full notes on the migration of hairy
woodpeckers, as he has observed it near East Westmoreland, N. H., from
which I quote as follows: “For four years I have watched, in the autumn
months, passing hairies that go through, some dropping down into the
valley to feed as they go along, but others passing over the valley
from hill to hill (2 miles) without stopping. In passing through,
they traverse in general the same route each year. They come from an
eastern and continue on in a western direction at an oblique angle
to the Connecticut River, which they must cross in the vicinity of
Brattleboro, Vt.
“These migrants usually appear here late in August or early in
September and continue to arrive at irregular intervals until late in
October. It is common for one, or two, rarely more, to pass together;
but such occurrences have happened, as on October 24, 1934, when,
beginning soon after noon and lasting until four o’clock, the birds
continued to pass through. At least 12 were seen as I walked up a
roadway parallel to their course; and other moving birds were heard. It
was also noticed that they kept spaced 40 to 50 yards apart, keeping
abreast of one another, traversing in a leisurely manner; and as they
approached a rock maple woods, the tendency was to close in like
passing through the neck of a bottle and, once through the woods, again
to spread out. Their progress was rather fast; and they fed little,
if at all. They often called, as though to locate each other, since
they were keeping about 40 yards apart, as was easily noted when they
crossed pasture and mowing land.
“I followed and watched in particular a male that continued keeping
along ahead of me. He repeatedly crossed the road in a zigzag manner.
Climbing to the top of a fence post or stump, he made lengthy
observations, probably noting the progress of the other birds, and
often answered their ringing calls. He, as well as the others, gave the
appearance of a stranger in a new environment, truly a migrant. I noted
how low the birds were passing, quite frequently flying not over 2 feet
from the ground over open spaces, where long, bounding flights were
made.”
L. McI. Terrill told Mr. Forbush (1927) that the few local breeding
birds disappear from the vicinity of Montreal early in autumn, and
others, in a very noticeable wave, appear toward the end of October or
early in November.
_Winter._--Aside from the regular migratory movements, the hairy
woodpecker is much more given to wandering about in winter. It is apt
to forsake its woodland haunts and travel about in search of food,
coming frequently into the farmer’s orchard, into rural villages, and
even into thickly settled communities in some of our larger cities.
Here it often joins the merry parties at our winter feeding stations,
feeding readily on the suet or scraps of meat provided for our
insect-eating birds; and here the smaller birds show due respect for
its larger size, or perhaps for its formidable beak, and it is usually
allowed to eat alone. It seems to be a solitary bird at this season,
for we seldom see more than one at a time. I find it not so constant
and regular a visitor to my feeding station as the downy woodpecker and
some other birds; it probably wanders about more.
Mr. Forbush (1927) writes: “During the inclement season it is said
to require a sheltered place in which to sleep and, like the downy
woodpecker, to excavate a hole in a tree for a sleeping chamber, but
there is evidence that it does not always seek such shelter, as the
late Charles E. Bailey and myself watched one for several winter
evenings in a grove, clinging upright against a tree trunk in the usual
woodpecker position. Night after night, the bird was there at dusk,
remained there until dark, and was there also at daybreak each morning
in precisely the same place.”
Joseph J. Hickey tells me that, around the lower Hudson River Valley
in winter, woodpeckers obtain much of their food by deliberately
scaling the bark off trees in search for their insect food. The Arctic
three-toed woodpeckers work mainly on pines and hemlocks, but the
hairies appear to confine their work to the hemlocks, using the same
methods as the three-toed.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Northern and Central America; not regularly migratory.
The range of the hairy woodpecker extends =north= to Alaska (Kenai
Peninsula, Fairbanks, and Fort Egbert); Yukon (Forty Mile, Fort
Reliance, and Macmillan River); Mackenzie (Fort Wrigley, Lake Hardisty,
and Fort Resolution); northern Saskatchewan (mouth of the Charlot River
and Poplar Point); northern Manitoba (Grand Rapids, probably Fort
Churchill, and probably York Factory); Ontario (Hat Island and Cobalt);
Quebec (Blue Sea Lake, Quebec City, Godbout, Eskimo Bay, and Anticosti
Island); and Newfoundland (Nicholsville and Raleigh). From this point
the range extends =southward= along the Atlantic coast to southern
Florida (Eau Gallie); the western Bahama Islands (Great Bahama, Abaco,
and Andros); and Panama (Boquete). The =southern= boundary of the range
extends westward from Panama (Boquete); Nicaragua (San Rafael); western
Guatemala (Tecpam); Chiapas (San Cristobal); to Guerrero (Chilpancingo
and Omilteme). From this point, =northward= through the mountains of
western Mexico, northern Baja California (Sierra San Pedro Martir
and Sierra Juarez); and the coastal districts of California, Oregon,
Washington, and British Columbia, to Alaska (Chilkoot, Chitina Moraine,
and the Kenai Peninsula).
As outlined, the range is for the entire species, which has, however,
been so divided that no less than 13 subspecies are currently
recognized as occupying the range north of Mexico, while still others
occur in Central American countries. The typical eastern hairy
woodpecker (_D. v. villosus_), occurs in the Eastern United States
and southern Canada west to Manitoba, North Dakota, and Colorado
and south to North Caralina and central Texas. The northern hairy
woodpecker (_D. v. septentrionalis_) occupies the zone to the north,
from southeastern Quebec, northwestward to western Mackenzie, Yukon,
and central Alaska. The Newfoundland woodpecker (_D. v. terraenovae_)
is found only on the island of that name. The southern hairy woodpecker
(_D. v. auduboni_) occupies the southeastern part of the range from
Missouri, Illinois, and western Virginia south to southeastern Texas
and southern Florida. The Sitka hairy woodpecker (_D. v. sitkensis_) is
found in southeastern Alaska and northern British Columbia. The Queen
Charlotte woodpecker (_D. v. picoideus_) is found only on the group
of islands of that name off the coast of British Columbia. Harris’s
woodpecker (_D. v. harrisi_) occupies the coastal regions of southern
British Columbia south to northwestern California. Cabanis’s woodpecker
(_D. v. hyloscopus_) is confined to certain coastal and mountain areas
of California, chiefly in the southern part. The Lower California hairy
woodpecker (_D. v. scrippsae_) is restricted to the Sierra Juarez and
the Sierra San Pedro Martir of Baja California. The Modoc woodpecker
(_D. v. orius_) is found in the Sierra Nevada of central California
north to Oregon and Washington and east to Nevada. The Rocky Mountain
hairy woodpecker (_D. v. monticola_) is found through the Rocky
Mountain region from central British Columbia south to northern New
Mexico and east (in winter) to western South Dakota and Nebraska. The
white-breasted woodpecker (_D. v. leucothorectis_) is found chiefly
in Arizona and New Mexico but also east to central Texas and north
to southern Utah. The Chihuahua woodpecker (_D. v. icastus_) occurs
principally in western Mexico but occurs also in southern Arizona and
southwestern New Mexico.
_Migration._--As stated above, the hairy woodpeckers are generally
nonmigratory and may be found in midwinter even in the northern parts
of their range, as Alaska, Mackenzie (Fort Simpson), and Manitoba
(Aweme, Minnedosa, and Roseau River). Nevertheless, some individuals
are given to a certain amount of wandering during the winter months,
which explains the occasional records of some subspecies far outside
of their normal range. There also is more or less vertical migration
in the mountainous regions of the north and west, the birds descending
into the lower valleys during the winter season. This is noted
particularly in the Rocky Mountain form, which in winter has been taken
east to Nebraska and South Dakota.
Despite the fact that during the past 18 years several hundred
individuals of this species have been marked with numbered bands, and
many have been subsequently recaptured, there is no evidence that any
of these moved at any time more than a few miles from the point of
banding.
_Egg dates._--British Columbia: 8 records, April 27 to June 24.
California: 43 records, March 23 to June 21; 22 records, April 28
to May 29, indicating the height of the season.
Colorado: 10 records, May 5 to June 18.
Florida: 18 records, April 10 to May 16; 9 records, April 22 to 28.
Illinois: 8 records, May 1 to 23.
Iowa: 8 records, April 21 to May 15.
Labrador: 5 records, May 26 to 30.
Massachusetts: 17 records, May 1 to June 5; 9 records, May 10 to 19.
Ontario: 8 records, May 6 to June 16.
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS SEPTENTRIONALIS (Nuttall)
NORTHERN HAIRY WOODPECKER
HABITS
This large northern race of the hairy woodpecker inhabits the Canadian
Zone of northern North America, north almost to the limit of trees,
from central Alaska and northern Canada southward. In the eastern
portions of southern Canada it intergrades with typical _villosus_, and
in northwestern Montana with _monticola_, where the ranges of these
races meet. Specimens have been taken as far north as Fort Simpson, on
the Mackenzie River, in latitude 62° N., and at Fort Reliance, on the
upper Yukon River, Alaska, in about latitude 66° N. It may occur as
a straggler farther north, where it can find sufficient tree growth,
but it is said to be rare north of latitude 56° N., and apparently
it does not reach the Arctic coast or the coast of Bering Sea. It is
a decidedly larger bird than typical _villosus_, the white markings
average rather larger, and the white is purer. In the southern portion
of its range, where it begins to intergrade with _villosus_, these
characters are, of course, less pronounced and many individuals are
difficult to name.
Living in a region over much of which coniferous forests predominate,
this woodpecker frequents and breeds in this type of forest. Winton and
Donald Weydemeyer (1928) say that it is an abundant permanent resident
in Lincoln County, Mont., where it intergrades with _monticola_. They
also say:
In the valleys it is most numerous, during summer,
in forests containing a large percentage stand of
western larch (_Larix occidentalis_). The next trees
in attractiveness seem to be Douglas fir (_Pseudotsuga
taxifolia_), western yellow pine (_Pinus ponderosa_), and
Engelmann spruce (_Picea engelmanni_), in the order named.
In the Hudsonian zone it frequents trees of white-bark pine
(_Pinus albicaulis_) and alpine larch (_Larix lyallii_).
The species is noticeably rare or absent in forests
containing nearly pure stands of western white pine (_Pinus
monticola_), arborvitae (_Thuja plicata_), or lodgepole
pine (_Pinus contorta_), except where the woods have been
logged or injured by fire.
_Nesting._--The same observers say: “In Lincoln County this species
uses a wide variety of nesting sites. Of eight nests included in our
records, three were in live aspens; one in a live cottonwood; one in a
live larch; one in a dead larch, one in a dead Douglas fir; and one in
a woodpecker nesting box.”
Ernest Thompson Seton (1890) found a nest in a tall poplar tree about
30 feet from the ground, in Manitoba; the hole was about a foot deep,
3 inches wide inside and 2 inches at the entrance. John Macoun (1909)
quotes Rev. C. J. Young as saying: “Most of the nests I have seen have
been in wet places or near water, and almost all were in white ash
trees, from thirty to fifty feet from the ground. Two nests were in elm
trees and one in a telegraph pole by the roadside not more than ten
feet from the ground.”
Roderick MacFarlane (1908) writes: “On the 6th of May, 1885, Mr. Reid
discovered a nest in a hole in a dry standing poplar tree near Fort
Providence. There were eight eggs therein, and the parent was seen
and shot. * * * At Fort St. James, Stuart’s Lake, on the 25th of May,
1889, a native hunter found a nest holding four fresh eggs in a similar
position. Both parents in this instance were also observed near by and
shot. On 4th June, in the same locality, an Indian girl brought us
four eggs. * * * The nest was found in a hole in a dry pine tree, at a
height of several feet above the ground.”
Henry Mousley (1916) says that near Hatley, Quebec, “as a rule the nest
hole is somewhat high up but on one occasion I found one which was only
three feet above the ground in a birch stub, containing four eggs, the
entrance hole being two inches in diameter, extreme depth eleven inches
and average width two and three quarters inches.”
P. B. Philipp and B. S. Bowdish (1919), referring to northern New
Brunswick, say: “A nest with young was found in a dead maple stub in
a burnt barren, on May 29, 1917. On May 30 of the same year another
nest about fifteen feet up in a dead maple stub in a similar situation,
contained four eggs, very slightly incubated. On June 9, 1917, a third
nest in a cedar telephone pole beside a public road was examined. It
was at a height of about nine feet; cavity 14½ inches deep; entrance 2⅛
inches in height by 2¼ inches in width. This nest contained four nearly
fresh eggs.”
_Eggs._--The northern hairy woodpecker lays three to five eggs; the
eight eggs mentioned above by MacFarlane may have been the product
of two females or eggs of the boreal flicker; in the latter case the
collector may have shot the wrong parent. The eggs are like those
of the eastern hairy woodpecker but average slightly larger. The
measurements of 41 eggs average 25.39 by 20.10 millimeters; the eggs
showing the four extremes measure =28.45= by 22.10, 27.43 by =22.35=,
and =21.5= by =16.6= millimeters.
The plumage changes, food, behavior, voice, and other habits apparently
do not differ materially from those of its southern relative. It is
said to be a permanent resident throughout its range, but there is
probably some southward migration or wandering from at least the
northern portion of its range and perhaps from the southern parts also.
That some individuals remain far north in winter is shown by the fact
that the Fort Simpson specimen was taken on December 29, 1860. The
Weydemeyers (1928) say that during winter, in northwestern Montana,
“this woodpecker is commonly found in mixed broad-leaf and conifer
associations along streams, but it is most abundant at that season in
the larch woods of the valleys.”
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS AUDUBONI (Swainson)
SOUTHERN HAIRY WOODPECKER
PLATE 5
HABITS
In the Lower Austral Zone of the South Atlantic and Gulf States we find
this small race of the hairy woodpecker. In addition to being decidedly
smaller than its northern relative, the white of the under parts is
less pure, and the white markings of the upper parts are somewhat
smaller.
Arthur H. Howell (1932) says of its haunts in Florida: “The southern
hairy woodpecker, though not particularly shy, prefers the wilder
sections for its home. It occurs in a variety of situations--the open
pine forests, oak hammocks, and the hardwoods of the deep river swamps.
The birds are of a rather solitary disposition, and rarely is more than
a single bird or a pair found near together.”
_Nesting._--Mr. Howell (1932) says that “the nests are located 12 to 45
feet from the ground in holes excavated in dead oaks or willow stubs,
or in cypresses growing on the edge of a swamp.” S. A. Grimes (1932)
says: “A nest thirty feet up in a live cypress near Eastport [Florida]
held three eggs on April 13. Two well feathered young were found in
a hole fifteen feet up in a dead sweet gum in southern Duval County
on May 13. A nest eight feet up in a pine stub in northern St. Johns
County contained three heavily incubated eggs on May 11.”
Arthur T. Wayne (1910) says that in South Carolina “the nest is very
hard to find; indeed I have found but six nests, two which contained
eggs, and four which contained young. I have known this species to
excavate a hole and raise a brood in a limb of a living live oak tree,
but it generally excavates its hole in a dead tree and at a great
height. A set of three fresh eggs was taken April 7, 1898, from a hole
40 feet from the ground in a dead pine. This hole was 14 inches deep.
The young remain in the hole for more than a month after they are
hatched.”
Harold H. Bailey (1913) says that in Virginia “dead stubs of gum and
poplar treetops seem to be their favorite location for a nesting site,
varying from 25 to 60 feet up, the cavity from eight to twelve inches
deep. They are one of our earliest breeding birds, the drilling of the
nesting cavity beginning the last week in March, and by April 10th to
15th finds a full complement or set of eggs, numbering from four to
six.”
J. G. Suthard writes to me of a nest he found near Madisonville, Ky.
The cavity was “excavated in a dead crab apple stub in open woodland.
Only the female was observed excavating the hole and caring for the
eggs, which proved to be infertile. No male was ever observed near the
nesting stub, though it was carefully observed.” M. G. Vaiden tells me
of a nest 9 feet up in a chinaberry tree in a yard at Rosedale, Miss.,
and another that was 23 feet up in a pecan tree and 3 feet out in a
dead snag.
_Eggs._--The southern hairy woodpecker is said to lay three to six
eggs. The latter number must be unusual, as the set generally consists
of three or four eggs. The eggs are scarcely distinguishable from
those of other hairy woodpeckers, though they average somewhat smaller
than those of the more northern races. The measurements of 42 eggs
average 21.29 by 18.29 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes
measure =26.1= by 19.2, 25.8 by =19.8=, =21= by 19, and 23.8 by =16.6=
millimeters.
_Food._--Major Bendire (1895) says that this subspecies seems to be
fonder of fruit and berries than are the northern races and that “the
young are fed largely on figs.” Audubon (1842) says that in the salt
marshes about the mouths of the Mississippi “it alights against the
stalks of the largest and tallest reeds, and perforates them as it is
wont to bore into trees. * * * I have often observed it clinging to the
stalks of the sugar-cane, boring them, and apparently greatly enjoying
the sweet juices of that plant; and when I have seen it, in severe
winter weather, attempting to bore the dried stalks of maize, I have
thought it expected to find in them something equally pleasing to its
taste.”
Milton P. Skinner (1928) says of these birds, in the sandhills of North
Carolina: “In winter the hairy woodpeckers vary their diet of insects
with various berries and dried wild fruits. They are particularly fond
of the small black berries of the sour gum (_Nyssa sylvatica_). Soon
after the early frosts the birds flock to these swamp trees and feast
as long as the berries last.”
The main food supply of this and other woodpeckers consists of insects
and their larvae, which are obtained by searching in the crevices in
the bark of whatever trees are available, or drilling into the trunks
and branches to find the grubs. Mr. Skinner (1928) saw one working on
“a charred and dead stub of a shrub oak. Here it worked steadily for
fifteen minutes pulling out small white grubs and borers. It drove its
bill for three or four strokes up under a bit of bark and then pried
the bark off with its bill as a lever. Then it attacked the semi-rotten
wood so uncovered, directly. It did not seem to work so fast as a downy
woodpecker, but then it was so busy eating grubs that it did not have
to dig much.”
_Behavior._--The same observer says:
They do not show a preference for any one kind of tree but
are found on both living and dead shrub oaks, long-leafed
pines, loblolly pine, sycamore, sour gum and sweet gum.
They work on both trunks and limbs but usually at low
heights, from the ground up to twenty feet above. On a
vertical surface these birds work up, spiraling it and
tapping it as they go. They move by a series of short
hops, propping themselves each time with their tails. When
hopping lightly along a horizontal limb they still use
their tails as props. Perhaps their most astonishing feat
is to spiral horizontal limbs, and to cling beneath them
and hammer them with their backs down. Sometimes they work
their way up to the very tip of slender shoots.
Even in a heavy wind they cling to the violently swaying
twigs while eating, but they stay only a short time before
flying to a tree trunk to perch and rest before trying it
again. * * *
The flight of these birds is strong and undulating, with
fast beating wings, and generally only from one tree to
the next. Where the trees are not very close together,
they swoop down to within a few feet of the ground and
then fly with nearly level flight until they glide up to
their next stopping place. Where they have to fly out
across intervening open fields their flight becomes more
undulatory, at times deeply so.
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS HARRISI (Audubon)
HARRIS’S WOODPECKER
PLATES 4, 5
HABITS
The range of this well-marked subspecies is now restricted to the humid
coast belt from southern British Columbia southward to Humboldt County,
Calif. In 1895, Bendire wrote:
Until within the last few years all the Hairy Woodpeckers
from the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains to the
Pacific coast have been considered as belonging to this
subspecies. * * *
The breeding range of this race, as now considered, is a
very limited one, and is probably coextensive with its
geographical distribution. It is apparently confined to
the immediate vicinity of the coast, and is not found at
any great distance inland. Among the specimens collected
by me at Fort Klamath, Oregon (mostly winter birds),
there are two which might be called intermediates between
this and the more recently separated _Dryobates villosus
hyloscopus_, but the majority are clearly referable to
the latter. In the typical Harris’s woodpecker the under
parts are much darker, a smoky brown, in fact; it is also
somewhat larger and very readily distinguishable from
the much lighter-colored and somewhat smaller Cabanis’s
woodpecker.
Dawson and Bowles (1909) say: “Doctor Cooper judged the Harris to be
the most abundant Woodpecker in Western Washington; and this, with
the possible exception of the Flicker (_Colaptes cafer saturatior_),
is still true. The bird ventures well out upon the eastern slopes of
the Cascade Mountains, and is found sparingly in the higher mountain
valleys; but its favorite resorts are burns and the edges of clearings,
rather than the depths of the woods.”
Johnson A. Neff (1928) quotes Dr. I. N. Gabrielson as saying: “The
Harris woodpecker is found throughout western Oregon from the western
slope of the Cascades to the coast, altho in the Rogue River Valley
some specimens which are close to ‘orius’ have been taken. I have one
labeled ‘orius’ by Dr. H. C. Oberholser, also have typical Harris from
this district, so that this is probably the region of intergradation
between these two forms.”
Harris’s woodpecker, like many other races of the humid Northwest coast
region, is darkly colored, one of the most easily recognized of all the
hairy woodpeckers. Even in Audubon’s day it was recognized, described,
figured, and named by him in honor of his friend Edward Harris. Ridgway
(1914) describes it as “similar to _D. v. hyloscopus_, but under parts
(including lateral rectrices) light drab or buffy drab-gray, instead of
white or nearly white, the head-stripes and stripe on back also usually
more or less suffused with the same color, often uniformly light drab;
average size slightly larger.”
_Courtship._--Theed Pearse (1934) gives us the following interesting
description of the courtship display of this woodpecker:
There were two males on the limb of a small cedar and my
attention was first drawn to them by their note, which is
very similar to the flicker’s “wickety” note but softer,
and might almost be described as “caressingly soft.” Both
birds were calling.
The displaying bird would draw in its head so that no neck
was apparent, with beak pointed outwards and upwards and
would then slowly swing the upper part of the body from
side to side, thereby bringing into play the red nape
marking. Once the bird very rapidly lifted its wings into
an upright position, at other times there was a quivering
flicking motion of the wings as they lay against the sides.
The two birds flew to another branch, settling side by
side and instantly each froze, the neck drawn in and the
beak pointed upwards. They were perched sideways on the
branch and were displaying the white markings in the tail
which each of them would slightly spread and turn out
(to one side). The feathers of the back were at the same
time hunched up as though to show up the white markings
there also. They did this several times before flying off
together.
_Nesting._--Although this is evidently a common bird within its
restricted range, surprisingly little has appeared in print regarding
its nesting habits. Authentic eggs seem to be very rare in collections;
most of the eggs in collections, of which I have the records, that are
labeled _harrisi_, prove to be referable to one of the neighboring
subspecies.
D. E. Brown writes to me:
Its nesting cavities may be at any height from 4 feet to
well over 100 feet from the ground. I found a nest 8 feet
up in an 8-inch dead fir stub in a dry open locality. The
female flushed from the nest, and the date was just right
for fresh eggs, May 6. The cavity was carefully opened. It
was 16 inches deep and contained a single egg. This egg
was so fresh and the shell so clear that the yolk could be
plainly seen. The cavity was carefully repaired with bark
from the stub, held in place with black thread. Both birds
were near all this time, complaining loudly. I returned in
five days. The bark was still in place, but the egg was
gone. The dust from the decaying stub, where the egg had
been, was very dry, and I am of the opinion that the parent
bird had removed the egg.
G. D. Sprot has sent me a beautiful photograph (pl. 4) of a nesting
site of this woodpecker in a dead alder stump in a coniferous forest
clearing, near Mill Bay, Vancouver Island, taken May 23, 1928.
Dawson and Bowles (1909) say:
The nest of this bird is usually placed well up in a small
dead fir tree in some burn or slashing on dry ground.
It is about ten inches deep and has no lining save fine
chips, among which the crystal white eggs, four or five in
number, lie partially imbedded. Incubation is begun from
the last week in April to the last week in May, according
to altitude, and but one brood is raised in a season.
These Woodpeckers are exceptionally valiant in defense of
their young, the male in particular becoming almost beside
himself with rage at the appearance of an enemy near the
home nest.
S. F. Rathbun sends me the following note on a Harris’s woodpecker that
made an attempt to dig a nesting hole in a small young fir topped about
10 feet up: “The tree had been cut off so that it could be used as one
of the supports of a cross piece to which a swing was attached. The
woodpecker began to dig a hole in the topped upright, and the owner of
the place called me up and wanted to know what the bird was and what
it was up to. I told him all about it and suggested that he keep away
from the stub. Two weeks later, I asked him how the bird was getting
on. He said at first the bird was busy digging away every day, but of
late seemed to have something the matter with it, for ‘lately every
day it just sat with its head sticking out of the hole and did no work
on it.’ I cut a piece from the edge of the entrance and quickly found
out. When the crossbar for the swing had been nailed to the sapling,
a 10-inch spike was used to hold it; and this had gone nearly through
the sapling. The woodpecker ran into this spike, as it was digging the
hole, after progressing 6 inches or so downward. It did not seem able
to go around the spike, although it had enlarged the cavity an inch on
each side of the heavy nail and had cut away the wood for 2 inches or
more below the spike. But the job proved to be too much for the bird,
and it eventually gave up and disappeared. I told my friend to pull
the spike and maybe next year the bird would be back. He followed my
suggestion, and, the following spring, a Harris’s woodpecker showed up,
dug a hole in the stub, and raised its young. This was repeated the
next spring after, and then no return of the bird. So quite likely it
may have been the same woodpecker.”
_Eggs._--Harris’s woodpecker apparently lays four or five eggs,
probably seldom fewer or more. Bendire (1895) was evidently unable to
locate any properly identified eggs of this race, and I have not fared
much better. The eggs are probably indistinguishable from the eggs of
other hairy woodpeckers of similar size. The measurements of 34 eggs
average 25.29 by 18.91 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes
measure =27.9= by 19.6, 25.46 by =20.32=, =22.86= by 18.29, and 23.5 by
=17.5= millimeters.
_Food._--J. A. Neff (1928) says:
A total of 57 stomachs of hairy woodpeckers were taken for
the present study, over three fourths of them of the Harris
type. The months were represented by fairly even numbers of
specimens. Analysis of these stomachs shows a considerable
variation from the results of Professor Beal’s California
studies. The total animal food averaged 82.00 percent,
while vegetable matter made up the other 18.00 percent.
The larvae of wood-boring beetles, Cerambycids and
Buprestids, composed 49.00 percent of the total. This total
is unexceeded in Federal studies of birds. Since these two
groups of borers include species doing enormous damage to
both forest and ornamental trees, as well as to orchards,
this item of food alone almost settles the question of the
utility of having woodpeckers. * * *
The vegetable food was of little value economically.
Fruits, of small wild varieties, totaled 6.00 percent, and
seeds, mostly of coniferous trees, averaged 12.00 percent.
_Behavior._--Taylor and Shaw (1927) made the following interesting
observation:
As is well known, western Washington is a region of copious
rainfall. During the frequent downpours one can not help
speculating on the manner in which the different birds and
mammals avoid injury from the damp and chill of the storm.
The thick foliage of firs and hemlocks is well suited, in
many instances, to serve as a thatched roof: and in the
deep woods there are many big branches and large logs under
which birds--and mammals too--find dry retreats. During
the heaviest rain of the summer a Harris woodpecker was
frightened from its shelter beneath a huge log in the heavy
forest of Tahoma Creek Canyon. Here the bird was keeping
perfectly dry. One can imagine its displeasure at being
driven out from its comfortable refuge into the drenching
rain.
_Winter._--D. E. Brown says in his notes: “Early in fall Harris’s
woodpecker very often excavates a cavity that is its winter home. It
can be found there every night and quite often in the daytime on stormy
days. It is not always secure in this retreat. Such a cavity was made
in a partly dead stub, about 20 feet high, just back of my house.
Frequent visits were made to find out how much the nest was used. At
first the bird, a male, would fly to a nearby tree when I rapped on the
stub, but soon it contented itself with just coming to the opening.
One time, while I was in plain sight of the stub, a western pileated
woodpecker alighted at the cavity and proceeded to open it up, which it
did clear to the bottom in less than three minutes. It had taken the
Harris about a week to dig it out.”
Dawson and Bowles (1909) say: “The Harris woodpecker visits the
winter troupes only in a patronizing way. He is far too restless and
independent to be counted a constant member of any little gossip club,
and, except briefly during the mating season and in the family circle,
he is rarely to be seen in the company of his own kind.”
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS HYLOSCOPUS Cabanis and Heine
CABANIS’S WOODPECKER
HABITS
The hairy woodpeckers of the coast district of California from
Mendocino County southward, the mountains of southern California,
and the southern Sierra Nevada, as far east as White Mountains of
California, are now known by the above name. This race is somewhat
smaller than _harrisi_ and decidedly smaller than _orius_, its
neighboring races to the northward; its under parts are much lighter
colored than in _harrisi_; these parts are described by Ridgway
(1914) as “dull grayish or brownish white or pale drab-grayish or
buffy grayish.” This and the Sierra woodpecker (_orius_) seem to
form connecting links between the dark-breasted _harrisi_ and the
white-breasted Rocky Mountain forms, _monticola_ and _leucothorectis_,
both of which are decidedly larger also.
Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1908) says of the distribution of this woodpecker
in the San Bernardino Mountains in southern California: “This was the
most widely distributed species of woodpecker in the region, occurring
throughout the timbered portions, irrespective of zones. It was common
from Santa Ana Cañon to the summit of Sugarloaf, 9,800 feet, and nearly
to timber line on San Gorgonio peak. On the desert side the species was
noted as low as Cactus Flat, 6,000 feet, where one was seen in some
golden oaks in a ravine, August 16, 1905.”
_Courtship._--The drumming of woodpeckers in the spring on some
resonant limb or tree trunk is an important part of the courtship
urge, as a warning to any rival, or as a call to a possible mate. Dr.
Grinnell (1908) shows how the manner of drumming may also serve as
a recognition call; he says: “The resonant rattling drum identified
this species from any other of this region. Near Dry lake, 9,000
feet altitude, dead tamarack pines were selected for this purpose,
and on June 23, 1905, I listened for many minutes to a remarkable
demonstration of this kind. Different branches were tattoed in rapid
succession, so that a xylophone-like variety of tones was produced,
very impressive and far-carrying through the otherwise quiet forest.”
_Nesting._--Major Bendire (1895) writes:
In California Cabanis’ Woodpecker is common in the
mountains, but in the lowlands in the southern part of this
State Mr. F. Stephens considers it a rather rare summer
resident. He found it breeding in a cottonwood tree, near
San Bernardino, on March 21, 1885. Mr. Lyman Belding took
several nests of this subspecies in Calaveras County, in
the Sierra Nevadas; in one, found on June 6, 1879, which
had been excavated in a dead pine stump, 12 feet from the
ground, the eggs, three in number, were on the point of
hatching. In his notes he says: “I scared the female from
it and prevented her return by inserting a stick, the end
of which protruded for several feet. When she found she
could not enter she gave several cries, which brought
the male, who hopped up and down the stick a few times,
striking it with his bill and screaming angrily, pausing
occasionally, and apparently deliberating on the best
method of extracting it.” Another nest, found by him on
July 10, 1880, was located only 3 feet from the ground, and
contained young which were still in the nest on the 20th.
Mr. Charles A. Allen informs me that along the Sacramento
River, in California, it breeds in sycamores and willows,
but that it is not common there.
_Eggs._--Major Bendire (1895) says:
The number of eggs laid to a set varies from three to six;
those of four are by far the most common; sets of five are
only occasionally met with, while sets of six are very
unusual. * * * The eggs lie on the fine chips left in the
bottom of the cavity, and are occasionally well packed into
these, so that only about one-half of the egg is visible.
They resemble the eggs of _Dryobates villosus_ in color,
but those of an elliptical ovate shape are more common than
the oval and elliptical ovals, averaging, therefore, more
in length, while there is proportionally less difference in
their short diameter.
The measurements of 23 eggs average 24.49 by 18.38 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =25.7= by 18.2, 24.2 by =19.7=,
=22.8= by 18.1, and 24.9 by =16.5= millimeters.
_Young._--Mrs. Irene G. Wheelock (1904) says: “Both sexes share the
labors of excavating, brooding the eggs, and feeding the young.
Incubation lasts about fifteen days, and the young remain nearly four
weeks in the nest, being fed most of that time by regurgitation. After
leaving they are fed by the parents for at least two weeks, and usually
return to the nest at night to sleep.”
_Food._--W. Leon Dawson (1923) writes: “Nearly half of the Cabanis
Woodpecker’s food consists of the larvae of wood-boring beetles
(the _Cerambycidae_ and _Buprestidae_); and of the remainder the
caterpillars of various injurious moths form a large per cent. Wild
raspberries and blackberries are eaten in summer, and certain hardy
fruits, such as cornel berries, acorns, and the pits of the islay, or
evergreen cherry (_Prunus ilicifolia_), eke out the winter sustenance.”
Referring to its manner of feeding, Milton P. Skinner says in his
notes: “On August 10, 1933, I saw a Cabanis working on both the trunk
and the limbs of a small Douglas fir. It worked all around a horizontal
limb and really seemed to be under the limb more than above. It also
worked on upright branches as well. I have also seen a Cabanis feeding
on the bark of a lodgepole pine. One day I found one on a dead black
oak, scaling off dead bark to get at the insects beneath. So far as I
can tell, these birds, in the Sequoia National Park, seem to prefer to
pick food from the surface and furrows in the bark, and do not bore
into the bark and wood as much as other woodpeckers. During my work
among the Big Trees, I noticed that these birds seem to avoid the
sequoia’s bark; but at one place I found a living tree with many holes
bored in the old wood of its charred base, where it was unprotected by
bark.”
_Behavior._--Mr. Skinner’s notes say that “this woodpecker has quite a
few mannerisms of its own. One, seen flying across a meadow, went first
to the limbs of Douglas firs, then to a small dead limb of a sequoia,
then to the limb of a fir, and then to the trunk of the same fir. It
perched lengthwise of limb and trunk each time. And this procedure was
followed again and again on different days. Usually the Cabanis perches
crosswise on a horizontal limb, especially when resting or preening,
but lengthwise on erect, or nearly erect, trunks and limbs when feeding.
“Although this woodpecker almost always flies to the exact spot it
selects, its flight through the forest is undulatory. The undulations
are due to the fact that it progresses by a series of wing beats. At
the end of each series, it seems to actually close its wings and shoot
forward with the impetus gained.”
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS MONTICOLA Anthony
ROCKY MOUNTAIN HAIRY WOODPECKER
HABITS
This large, white-breasted hairy woodpecker inhabits the Rocky Mountain
region, in the Canadian and Transition Zones, from central British
Columbia and Montana southward to eastern Utah and northern New Mexico,
and eastward to western South Dakota and western Nebraska. Ridgway
(1914) characterizes it as “similar, in large size and whiteness of
under parts, to _D. v. septentrionalis_, but with white spots on
wing-coverts much reduced in size or number, or altogether wanting.” It
evidently intergrades with _septentrionalis_ in Montana and Wyoming
and probably with the more western races west of the Rocky Mountains.
Milton P. Skinner tells me that in the Yellowstone National Park it
“occurs at all elevations from the lowest at 5,500 feet to timberline
at 9,500 feet above sea level, but never far from a tree of some kind.
It is a resident bird here but moves down from the mountain heights at
the approach of winter.”
Aretas A. Saunders (1921) says of its status in Montana: “A common
permanent resident throughout the western half of the state in the
mountains. Winters mainly in the valleys in cottonwood groves, but does
not breed there. * * * The eastern limits of its range are evidently
in the eastern foothills of the mountains. Just what form breeds in
the more eastern mountain ranges is not definitely determined. In the
mountains this bird has been recorded by all observers. It is common
everywhere, and usually the commonest of the mountain woodpeckers.”
_Nesting._--The following remarks by Major Bendire (1895), under
_hyloscopus_, evidently refer to this subspecies: “Mr. Denis Gale found
it breeding in Boulder County, Colorado, on May 28, 1886, in a live
aspen tree, at an altitude of about 8,500 feet. The nest contained five
eggs, in which incubation was somewhat advanced. Mr. William G. Smith
also reports it as common in Colorado, coming down into the valleys in
winter. He says it is the earliest of the Woodpeckers to breed, that it
commences nesting in the latter part of April, and usually excavates
its holes in old dead pines, frequently at a considerable distance from
the ground, and that he has seen full-grown young by June 1.”
J. K. Jensen (1923) says of this woodpecker, in northern Santa Fe
County, N. Mex.:
Quite common in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, from 8,000
to 11,000 feet. June 21, 1920, I found a nest thirty feet
up in a large quaking aspen. This tree stands on the edge
of a place where an avalanche has plowed its way down
through the timber on the mountain side, depositing trees
and rocks in a great heap for hundreds of feet around the
tree. The nest contained young, and judging from the noise
they made, were quite well developed. The parent birds were
very noisy.
May 22, 1921, I made my way through four feet of snow to
the same tree. A new nest had been made, and the female
flew off when I was about 150 feet away. I cut into the
nest and found a set of four eggs on which incubation had
just commenced. The altitude at this point is 11,000 feet.
May 26, 1922, I found a nest with young about seventy-five
feet up in an aspen. This was in Santa Fe Canyon at an
altitude of 8,000 feet.
_Eggs._--The eggs of the Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker are similar to
the eggs of other hairy woodpeckers of similar size. The measurements
of 33 eggs average 24.89 by 18.49 millimeters; the eggs showing the
four extremes measure =28.08= by 18.03, 27.0 by =20.1=, =23.37= by
17.78, and 24.38 by =17.27= millimeters.
_Food._--Mr. Skinner says, in his notes, that this woodpecker “seeks
its food on the trunks of lodgepole and _flexilis_ pines, cedars,
firs, aspens, willows, and even electric-light and telephone poles; it
prefers dead and diseased trees and stubs to work on, probably because
of more borers and grubs. At Basin, and over 7,000 feet elevation,
I found a female where I could watch her, only 5 feet away from the
lodgepole trunk on which she was working. She worked down, tapping
here and there as she went. Whenever a tap revealed a borer, she
scaled off the bark with quick right and left strokes, having a slight
lever motion at the end, and always secured from one to six bark-borer
grubs. Evidently the tap told her whether it was worth while to search
further, for she never made a mistake and performed no useless labor.”
J. A. Munro (1930) writes: “During the winter of 1928-29 a male hairy
woodpecker frequently was seen feeding on Virginia creeper berries in
competition with several red-shafted flickers. On one occasion the same
bird visited an apple tree, attracted by a few apples that still clung
to the bare branches. Standing crossways on a branch, in the ordinary
position of a perching bird, he rapidly stabbed his bill downward into
the top of an apple. After doing this several times he flew to another
portion of the tree and repeated the performance.”
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS PICOIDEUS Osgood
QUEEN CHARLOTTE WOODPECKER
HABITS
Dr. Wilfred H. Osgood (1901) described the hairy woodpecker of the
Queen Charlotte Islands, as a full species, _Dryobates picoideus_. He
says it can be distinguished from all other members of the _villosus_
group by the black markings on the back and characterizes it as
“similar in general to _Dryobates v. harrisi_; bill slightly smaller;
middle of back barred and spotted with black; flanks streaked with
black.” He says that this woodpecker is not abundant on the islands;
during a period of over a month spent in active collecting he saw only
six, all of which were collected.
I cannot find that anything has been published on the habits of the
Queen Charlotte woodpecker, which probably do not differ essentially
from those of _harrisi_, to which it is closely related and which
inhabits a similar, humid coast environment. There are a number of
skins of this race in various collections, but, so far as I know, no
authentic eggs have ever found their way into any American collection.
Very little exploration has been done in the interior of the Queen
Charlotte Islands, and we know very little about the habits of its
birds.
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS TERRAENOVAE Batchelder
NEWFOUNDLAND WOODPECKER
HABITS
Charles F. Batchelder (1908), who discovered and described this race of
the hairy woodpecker, characterized it as--
Similar to typical _Dryobates villosus_, but slightly
larger, the black areas of the upper parts increased, the
white areas reduced both in number and in size, especially
in the remiges and wing coverts. * * * _Dryobates villosus
terraenovae_ is much smaller than _D. v. leucomelas_, and
is, of course, even more remote from it in coloring than
from true _villosus_. Between it and _D. v. hyloscopus_
and _D. v. monticola_ there is a striking resemblance in
coloring, but the wide area--occupied throughout its extent
either by _villosus_ or by _leucomelas_--that intervenes
between the ranges of these two Western subspecies and that
of _terraenovae_, precludes the possibility of immediate
intergradation, while the utter dissimilarity of the
climatic conditions of their respective habitats forbids
the supposition that like causes in environment have
developed like characters; apparently this is a case where
superficial resemblances have arisen entirely independently
of climatic influences.
I found the Newfoundland woodpecker fairly common in the heavily
timbered valleys of the Fox Island and Sandy Rivers in Newfoundland
in 1912. The timber in the flat river bottom and on the islands in
the Fox Island River is almost wholly made up of deciduous trees,
mainly poplar, canoe birch, ash, mountain ash (which grows to a very
large size), and alder, mixed with a few spruces. On the surrounding
hillsides the forest growth consists mainly of firs and spruces, with
plenty of canoe and yellow birches, poplars, larches, and mountain
ashes. The Sandy River runs through a fairly level and heavily timbered
region, with forests of large firs, red, white, and black spruces,
mixed with some birches and poplars. These two regions were the only
places where we found this and the downy woodpecker, nesting in the
deciduous trees. It has been observed by others in other places,
and doubtless it occurs wherever there is heavy timber, with a fair
sprinkling of deciduous trees, mainly along the streams and about the
shores of lakes.
I can find nothing noted on its habits that is in any way different
from those of the other eastern races. So far as I know, its eggs have
never been taken.
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS ICASTUS Oberholser
CHIHUAHUA WOODPECKER
PLATE 6
HABITS
The hairy woodpeckers of the Canadian and Transition Zones in the
mountains of northwestern Mexico, southern Arizona, and southern New
Mexico are referable to this race. In describing and naming it, Dr.
H. C. Oberholser (1911a) characterized it as “similar to _Dryobates
villosus hyloscopus_, but bill much smaller, and wing slightly
longer. * * * This bird is decidedly smaller than _Dryobates villosus
leucothorectis_, as well as noticeably smoky-tinged on the under
surface, instead of pure white; and it is in size so very much inferior
to _Dryobates villosus orius_, that it is readily distinguishable.”
Harry S. Swarth (1904) says of the haunts of this woodpecker in the
Huachuca Mountains, Arizona: “Fairly abundant in the higher parts of
the mountains, from 7,000 feet upward. They may be seen almost anywhere
in that region, but for breeding purposes, seem to particularly favor
the dense thickets of quaking asp.” In 1922, Frank C. Willard and I
found them breeding mainly among the tall pines near the summit of
these mountains, above 7,500 feet. From here to the summit, about 9,000
feet, the land is rolling, mostly in gentle slopes, and covered with
a fine, open, parklike forest of tall pines of two or three species,
many of them from 80 to 100 feet high. The many dead, standing trees
and stumps offered suitable nesting sites for pygmy nuthatches, Mexican
creepers, and Chihuahua woodpeckers. We did not see any of these
woodpeckers in the spruce and fir belt, below 7,000 feet.
_Nesting._--On May 7, 1922, in the pine region near the summit of the
Huachuca Mountains, described above, we located two pairs of Chihuahua
woodpeckers and saw some new excavations in the dead pine stubs, in
which they seemed to be preparing to nest, but they evidently had not
yet laid their eggs. On May 15 we returned and found two of the nests
occupied (pl. 6). The first nest was about 40 feet from the ground in
a dead pine stub at an elevation of about 7,900 feet; the cavity was
about 15 inches deep and contained four fresh eggs. Farther up, near
the summit, at about 8,500 feet, we found the second nest; this was
only about 15 feet up in a large dead pine, in a hole we had previously
passed by as an old one; but we saw the female enter the hole and stay
there, so we chopped it out and found three heavily incubated eggs in
a cavity about 12 inches deep. Frank C. Willard (1918) tells of a
pair of these woodpeckers that “had nested for several seasons in the
dead top of a tall pine. One winter, this broke off and lodged in the
top of an adjoining pine. Even with their nest site in this apparently
insecure position the woodpeckers were unwilling to leave it, and
their new nest was found dug in the same old tree top in its inverted
position.”
_Eggs._--The eggs of the Chihuahua woodpecker do not differ materially
from those of other hairy woodpeckers of similar size. The measurements
of three eggs in the author’s collection are =24.6= by 17.2, =24.5= by
17.7, and 24.6 by =18.0= millimeters.
_Winter._--Mr. Swarth (1904) says: “They do not seem to remain through
the winter months; at any rate I saw none during February, 1903 nor did
any appear until March 17, when I secured two and saw one other. Ten
days later they were quite abundant. The winter of 1902-1903 was quite
cold, with a great deal of snow on the ground, and it is possible that
with a milder winter they might remain the year through. There does not
seem to be any vertical migration on the part of this woodpecker, for
I saw none below 7,000 feet, and but very few as low as that.” Bendire
(1895), however, writes: “In southern Arizona it does not appear to
breed in the lower valleys, but I have shot several near Tucson in
winter.”
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS SITKENSIS Swarth
SITKA HAIRY WOODPECKER
HABITS
In the coast region of southeastern Alaska and northern British
Columbia we find a race that Harry S. Swarth (1911b) says, in
describing and naming it, “differs from _D. v. harrisi_ mainly in the
very much paler, less smoky hue of the lower parts, and the more buffy
coloration of the nasal tufts. Somewhat like _D. v. picoideus_, but
paler colored below, and lacking the barred rectrices of that race.” He
says elsewhere (1922):
_Sitkensis_, in its relatively light ventral coloration,
is intermediate between the extremely dark _harrisi_ and
the white-breasted _monticola_. The dark-breasted type of
coloration reaches its extreme development in _picoideus_
of the Queen Charlotte Islands, interposed between the
ranges of _harrisi_ and _sitkensis_. Thus, while specimens
of _sitkensis_ as laid out in trays may be arranged to
illustrate a step between _harrisi_ and _monticola_, the
geographical distribution of the several forms is not in
accordance with this idea. The geographical chains appear
to lie as follows: Starting with the white-breasted races
of the interior of the northwest, _septentrionalis_ and
_monticola_, there is an extension westward on the coast
of a slightly darker breasted race, _sitkensis_. Starting
again with the dark breasted type, _harrisi_, of the Puget
Sound region, and going northward, we reach the extremely
dark colored _picoideus_. Thus, sitkensis and _harrisi_
are really far apart genetically, and the appearance of
_sitkensis_ as a seeming intergrade between _monticola_
and _harrisi_ must be explained on grounds other than those
of such actual intermediate relationship. _Sitkensis_, as
an offshoot of the white-breasted type of the interior,
may have arrived at the humid coast at too recent date to
be yet affected by its surroundings to the extent that
_harrisi_ and _picoideus_ have been; or it may be more
resistant to such an environment. In either case the slight
modification of the clear white breast of _monticola_
produced by the humid surroundings would result in an
apparent intergrade toward _harrisi_.
On the habits of this subspecies, which probably do not differ
materially from those of other hairy woodpeckers, I can find only the
following brief comment by Joseph Dixon, quoted by Dr. Joseph Grinnell
(1909): “At the three lakes back of Mole Harbor I saw more of these
birds than at all other places put together. Their slow drumming
sounded so similar to the clicking of a telegraph instrument that
we dubbed them ‘telegraph woodpeckers’ to distinguish them from the
sapsuckers.” So far as I know, the nest of this woodpecker has never
been reported. It is probably resident throughout its breeding range.
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS ORIUS Oberholser
MODOC WOODPECKER
HABITS
This race of the hairy woodpecker occupies a rather extensive range
in the interior of California, Oregon, and Washington, west of the
range of _monticola_ in the Rocky Mountains, north of the range
of _hyloscopus_ in southern California, and east of the range of
_harrisi_ in the above States. As might be expected, it is more or less
intermediate in size or coloration between the surrounding races. Dr.
H. C. Oberholser (1911a), who described and named it, characterized it
as “resembling _Dryobates villosus leucothorectis_, but larger; lower
parts usually brownish white, instead of pure white.”
Grinnell and Storer (1924) say of its haunts in the Yosemite region:
“As with most of the allied forms, the present race ranges through
several life zones, from the scattered digger pines at Pleasant Valley
eastward through the main forest belt to the sparse tracts of Jeffrey
pines in the vicinity of Mono Lake. It is nowhere really common, even
for a woodpecker; it reaches its greatest numbers in the upper part of
the Transition Zone and in the Canadian Zone.”
In the Lassen Peak region, according to Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale
(1930), “this woodpecker foraged over the trunks and larger limbs of
many kinds of trees both in the forests proper and where there were a
few trees or restricted tracts of trees in the mainly unforested parts
of the section. Much of each bird’s time was spent on coniferous
trees, either living or dead ones, but nesting excavations were many of
them in trunks of deciduous trees.”
Bendire (1895) says that, at Fort Klamath, Oreg., “it appears to be
especially abundant in tracts in which the timber has been killed
by fire, and where many of the slowly rotting trunks still remain
standing. Such burnings are frequently met with in the mountains, and
seem to attract several species of Woodpeckers, presumably on account
of the abundance of suitable food to be found.”
_Courtship._--Grinnell and Storer (1924) say: “At Chinquapin, on May
19, 1919, a pair of these woodpeckers was seen going through their
courting antics. A male was in a large yellow pine at the edge of a
logged-over area, calling almost incessantly. His usual _speenk_ had
become _spenk-ter-ter-ter_, a staccato run repeated every few seconds.
The female answered in like voice but uttered the trill less often. The
male changed his location many times, and after protracted calling on
his part, the female flew to the same tree.”
_Nesting._--Bendire (1895) writes:
I took my first nest near Camp Harney, Oregon, on May
29, 1875, in a canyon on the southern slopes of the Blue
Mountains, at an altitude of about 5,000 feet. The cavity
was excavated in the main trunk of a nearly dead aspen,
about 12 feet from the ground. The entrance hole was about
1¾ inches in diameter, and the cavity about 9 inches deep.
It contained four much incubated eggs. The female was in
the hole, and stayed there looking out until I had struck
the tree several times with a hatchet, when she flew off
and alighted on one of the limbs of the tree, uttering
cries of distress, which brought the male, who was still
more demonstrative, hopping from limb to limb, squealing
and scolding at me and pecking at the limbs on which he
perched. At Fort Klamath, Oregon, it was somewhat more
common, and here I took several of its nests. * * * Dead or
badly decayed trees are preferred to live ones for nesting
purposes, and deciduous trees to conifers; it also nests
occasionally in firs and madrone trees.
Milton P. Skinner says, in his notes, that “in the Yosemite National
Park, one nested in a living willow trunk about ten feet above the
ground.” Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) say that, in the Lassen
Peak region, “aspens and cottonwoods, dead at core, seemed to be
preferred nesting trees, although other kinds were also used. Nest
holes, when in conifers, were made in dead and decaying trunks or
stubs.”
_Eggs._--Three or four eggs make up the usual set for this woodpecker.
They are indistinguishable from the eggs of other hairy woodpeckers,
though Bendire (1895) says that “those of an elliptical ovate shape are
more common than the oval and elliptical ovals.” The measurements of
15 eggs average 24.70 by 18.80 millimeters; the eggs showing the four
extremes measure =26.4= by =20.6= and =21.5= by =16.2= millimeters.
_Young._--Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) write: “Near Eagle
Lake Resort on June 12, 1929, an adult was feeding a nestful of young
woodpeckers in a cavity three meters up in a yellow-pine stub close to
the lake. The nest hole had been freshly cut. Only the female was seen
to carry food. The young were large enough to be fed without the parent
entirely entering the cavity. When the observer walked near the nest
stub the parent became much excited and flew about calling loudly for
several minutes. The young birds called when the parent came with food.”
_Food._--Grinnell and Storer (1924) say:
The Modoc Woodpecker forages on both evergreen and
deciduous trees, favoring the latter, perhaps, during
the winter months. In summer it is usually rather quiet,
particularly so as compared with the noisy California
Woodpecker. It gains much of its food in the outer portions
of the bark, where a few strokes of moderate intensity
enable it to secure any insect or grub living near the
surface of the tree.
At the margin of the forest above Coulterville, May 31,
1915, a Modoc Woodpecker was seen foraging in a yellow
pine. The tree in question had recently been killed by the
boring beetles which were common in the western forests
that year. The woodpecker was going over the tree in
systematic manner, working out and in along one branch,
then ascending the trunk to the next branch where it would
repeat the performance. The bird was flaking off the outer
layers of the bark without much evident expenditure of
effort, for little noise of tapping was heard; it was
feeding presumably on the boring beetles or their larvae.
Bendire (1895) writes: “It is one of our most active Woodpeckers,
always busy searching for food, which consists principally of injurious
larvæ and eggs of insects, varied occasionally with a diet of small
berries and seeds, and in winter sometimes of piñon nuts, pine seeds,
and acorns. At this season I have often seen this species around
slaughter houses, picking up stray bits of meat or fat, and have also
seen it pecking at haunches of venison hung up in the open air.”
_Behavior._--Mr. Skinner says, in his notes, that “the Modoc hairy
seems very unsociable. One that was feeding on a cottonwood chased a
visiting red-breasted sapsucker away from that tree to another, and
then from tree to tree. But, when a California woodpecker came to its
tree, the Modoc hairy promptly flew away.”
_Voice._--Major Bendire (1895) says that this woodpecker “is very
noisy, especially in the early spring. It likewise is a great drummer,
and utters a variety of notes, some of which sound like ‘kick-kick,
whitoo, whitoo, whit-whit, wi-wi-wi-wi,’ and a hoarse guttural one,
somewhat like ‘kheak-kheak’ or ‘khack-khack’.”
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS SCRIPPSAE Huey
LOWER CALIFORNIA HAIRY WOODPECKER
HABITS
Laurence M. Huey (1927) who described and named this woodpecker,
characterized it as “similar to _Dryobates villosus hyloscopus_ Cabanis
and Heine, but decidedly smaller. In fully adult birds, the dusky white
of the breast extends farther down on the breast than does that on
examples from the northern mountains.” He gives, as its range, “the
pine clad slopes of the Sierra Juarez and Sierra San Pedro Martir,
Lower California, Mexico. * * * The range of this southern race does
not extend north of the International Boundary, as specimens examined
from the mountains of San Diego County, California, are in no way
inclined toward the race _D. v. scrippsae_, but are counterparts of
typical _D. v. hyloscopus_ from the northern localities. In fact, the
only variation that could point toward a ‘blending’ is found in the
Sierra Juarez birds, but their average falls so near that of the birds
from the Sierra San Pedro Martir that the name proposed herewith should
apply.”
This southern race probably does not differ materially in its habits
from other hairy woodpeckers, except in so far as it is affected by its
environment.
DRYOBATES VILLOSUS LEUCOTHORECTIS Oberholser
WHITE-BREASTED WOODPECKER
HABITS
Northward and eastward from the range of the Chihuahua woodpecker
(_icastus_) and southward from the range of the Rocky Mountain hairy
woodpecker (_monticola_) lies the range of this white-breasted race
of the hairy woodpecker, extending from southern Utah, through
Arizona and New Mexico, into central western Texas. It is evidently
a smaller edition of monticola, for Dr. Harry C. Oberholser (1911a),
in describing and naming it, says that it is “much like _Dryobates
villosus monticola_, but decidedly smaller; wing coverts practically
always without white spots.”
Dr. Edgar A. Mearns (1890b) says of its haunts in the mountains of
northern Arizona:
Breeds commonly throughout the pine belt, often ascending
higher in summer, then preferring aspens to the fir and
spruce woods of higher altitudes. It very rarely descends
to the cottonwoods of the Verde Valley to fraternize with
its smaller relative, Baird’s woodpecker, and only when the
mountain timber is icy or the weather uncommonly fierce;
then it is usually accompanied by flocks of Cassin’s Purple
Finches, Red-backed Juncos, and its boon companions, the
Slender-billed Nuthatches. About the middle of June the
young leave their nests, and soon after make a partial
migration downward towards the lower border of the pine
belt, in common with many other birds that breed at high
levels.
_Nesting._--I can find no references to the nesting habits or eggs of
this subspecies, which probably do not differ materially from those of
the Chihuahua woodpecker, except that J. S. Ligon told Mrs. Florence M.
Bailey (1928) that it nests “generally in small trees in canyon beds.”
_Eggs._--The eggs of this subspecies are apparently similar to those of
other hairy woodpeckers. They seem to be scarce in collections; I have
been able to locate only two sets of eggs, one set of four and one set
of three. These seven eggs show average measurements of 24.66 by 17.91
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =25.3= by 18.2,
24.6 by =18.6=, =24.2= by 18.2, and 24.6 by =17.2= millimeters.
_Food._--Mrs. Bailey (1928) quotes Maj. E. A. Goldman as follows:
One afternoon I found one pecking at a hole near the ground
in the trunk of an oak. It worked for a second or two and
then paused long enough to look in my direction, beginning
work again immediately. This was repeated several times and
it seemed disinclined to leave the spot, allowing me to
approach to within ten feet, when, instead of flying off,
it slid around to the opposite side of the trunk while I
examined the place and found the hole inhabited by numerous
small black beetles which were running excitedly about.
I moved off a short distance and watched the Woodpecker
return to the hole which seemed to be a rich find.
She goes on to say:
On Chloride Creek in May, 1916, when Mr. Ligon was standing
by a half dead box elder containing a woodpecker nest, the
mother came with her bill for half its length jammed full
of wood ants for the squawking young inside the hole. One
that Mr. Kellogg took at Silver City had recently eaten two
woodboring larvae, six caterpillars, and at least ten moth
pupae, besides other insects and mast.
DRYOBATES PUBESCENS PUBESCENS (Linnaeus)
SOUTHERN DOWNY WOODPECKER
HABITS
Because the Linnaean name _Picus pubescens_ was based on Catesby’s
smallest spotted woodpecker, of South Carolina, the southern bird
becomes the type race of the species, and the above scientific name,
which for many years was used for the more northern bird, is now
restricted to the downy woodpeckers of the Lower Austral Zone of the
South Atlantic and Gulf States, from North Carolina to eastern Texas.
William Brewster (1897) has given us a full review of the changes
that have taken place in the nomenclature of the downy woodpeckers of
eastern North America, to which the reader is referred.
The southern downy woodpecker, _D. p. pubescens_, is smaller, from
the more southern parts of its range decidedly smaller, than the more
northern bird, _D. p. medianus_, intergrading with it where the two
ranges meet; the under parts are more brownish, and the white markings
of the wings and tail will average of less extent.
The haunts of this woodpecker are similar to those of its northern
relative, due allowance being made for the difference in environment.
It is a more sociable species than the hairy woodpecker and less of a
woodland bird.
In Florida, according to Arthur H. Howell (1932), “it occurs alike in
pine woods, hammocks, orchards, roadside hedges, and dooryards.”
_Nesting._--Mr. Howell (1932) says that, in Florida, “the nest of the
downy is usually dug in a decaying limb of a tree or occasionally in a
fence post, and may be anywhere from 5 to 50 feet above the ground.”
Harold H. Bailey (1925) says that “for the nesting site, they usually
select a dead stub of some live tree, preferring a hard one to a soft
or decayed wood. The cavity is drilled each year anew by the birds,
the hole being about one and a quarter inches in diameter and eight to
twelve inches deep, varying in height from twenty to sixty feet above
ground.” John Helton, Jr., tells me of a nest he found on April 20,
near Troy, Ala., that “was drilled in a rotten oak limb, which had
fallen, been caught, and was suspended among the branches of a pine. It
contained three small young and one infertile egg. The mother bird fed
the young with great regularity every three minutes.” M. G. Vaiden, of
Rosedale, Miss., writes to me of a nest 35 feet up in a dead snag of a
pecan tree; the limb was four inches in diameter and the cavity only
five inches deep. George Finlay Simmons (1925) says that, in Texas, it
nests “10 to 20 feet from ground in small dead deciduous trees, or in
old stumps or telegraph poles.”
_Eggs._--The eggs are like those of the northern downy but slightly
smaller. The measurements of 25 eggs average 19.43 by 15.24
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =20.8= by 14.9,
20.6 by =16.7=, and =17.78= by =13.46= millimeters.
_Behavior._--Writing of the habits of these woodpeckers in the
sandhills of North Carolina, Milton P. Skinner (1928) says:
They are seen at times with Chickadees, red-cockaded
woodpeckers, Brownheaded Nuthatches, Kinglets and Juncos.
And these associations seem to be actual and usual, and
not temporary and accidental ones as they are between
most birds of different species. The downy woodpeckers
are peaceable little fellows but other birds will impose
on them. I have seen a yellow-bellied sapsucker and a mob
of three or four English Sparrows near Pine Bluff chasing
one about. But downy was a fast flier and outflew all
his tormentors each time. Their flight is undulating and
typical of the woodpecker family. These woodpeckers have
one trait of the Brown Creepers--they prefer to work _up_ a
tree and fly _down_ to the base of the next one.
Perhaps a downy woodpecker does not really work any harder
or faster for its food than any other bird, but somehow it
seems that it does. I found one once on an inclined limb of
a catalpa near the Highland Pines Inn and watched it work
up ten feet in thirteen minutes. During that time downy’s
blows fell good and hard at the average of a hundred
strokes each minute except for a dozen momentary stops when
a big bird flew over, or the downy scratched its head. It
was feeding on small white grubs which it secured at an
average rate of four per minute. * * *
These woodpeckers have the habit in the Sandhills of
digging holes in which to sleep. One found a suitable
place in the end of a dead limb of a large gum standing in
a flooded swamp near Mid Pines Club. This limb had been
broken and left a stub sticking out about five feet long
at right angles to the trunk of the gum and about forty
feet above the ground. It was about five inches in diameter
where the woodpecker began work on it. Work was started
on the under side of the limb about nine inches from the
outer end on February 11, 1927, and the bird dug at it for
forty-five minutes to such good purpose that the hole would
then admit all its bill and half its head. As it worked
it clung head down under the limb. Then it left its work
to go foraging but came back in thirty minutes to resume
work. During the next three days this woodpecker must have
worked steadily for it then had a hole into which it could
completely disappear. But the hole was not large enough nor
deep enough, and the bird was still at work, continually
popping in and out (backward) of its hole; usually when it
backed out it carried a bill full of chips and shavings
that it threw over its shoulder. As it did so, it glanced
once or twice to either side as if to assure itself that
all was well. Then back into the hole for another period
of steady hammering. Apparently this woodpecker worked
thus from thirty minutes to an hour after each half hour’s
foraging trip. Two more days of work completed the sleeping
quarters in a snug cozy retreat. When finished, the hole
was six inches deep, and the limb around it was a mere
shell. The opening being beneath the limb, it was sheltered
from storms, and from any water running into it.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--North America; nonmigratory.
The range of the downy woodpecker is =north= to Alaska (Russian
Mission, Tanana, and Fort Egbert); southwestern Mackenzie (Fort Simpson
and Fort Providence); northern Alberta (Fort McMurray); central
Saskatchewan (Big River and Prince Albert); southern Manitoba (Lake St.
Martin, Shoal Lake, and Indian Bay); Ontario (Lac Seul, Gargantua, and
Sudbury); Quebec (Lake Mistassini, Godbout, and Natashguan River); and
Newfoundland (Nicholsville and probably St. Johns). The =eastern= limit
of the range extends =south= along the Atlantic coast from this point
to southern Florida (Miami, Royal Palm Hammock, and Flamingo). From
this southeastern point the species is found westward along the Gulf
coast to Mississippi (Biloxi) and Louisiana (New Orleans), thence in
the interior to south-central Texas (Giddings and Pecos); southern New
Mexico (Mayhill, Cloudcroft, and Silver City); Arizona (San Francisco
Mountain and Fort Valley); and southern California (Escondido). The
=western= limits extend nearly or quite to the Pacific coast north
through California, Oregon, Washington, and British Columbia to Alaska
(Sitka, Sitkalidak Island, Bethel, and Russian Mission).
The range as above outlined is for the entire species, which has been
separated into six subspecies. The typical form, the southern downy
woodpecker (_D. p. pubescens_), is found in the South Atlantic and
Gulf States north to North Carolina and Oklahoma; the northern downy
woodpecker (_D. p. medianus_) ranges north from Virginia, Tennessee,
and Kansas (casually eastern Colorado) north to southern Alberta,
Manitoba, Quebec, and Newfoundland; Nelson’s downy woodpecker (_D. p.
nelsoni_) ranges southeast from northwestern Alaska to central Alberta
and is found casually even farther east; Batchelder’s woodpecker (_D.
p. leucurus_) is the Rocky Mountain form and is found from the Kenai
Peninsula of Alaska south to New Mexico and Arizona, casually east to
Nebraska and on the coast of British Columbia; Gairdner’s woodpecker
(_D. p. gairdneri_) is found on the Pacific coast from British Columbia
south to northern California; and the willow woodpecker (_D. p.
turati_) is confined to California, being distributed rather generally
over the State except in the desert areas and the northwestern part.
While the downy woodpecker is not migratory in the accepted sense of
the term, and during the months of November and December has been
recorded north to Mackenzie (Fort Simpson) and central Quebec (Lake
Mistassini), it appears to have some local movements and seems given
to a certain amount of wandering after the close of the breeding
season. In some of the more northern areas it is commoner in winter
than in summer, while in the mountainous regions of the West there is
apparently a vertical movement in winter to the valley floors.
While the files of the Biological Survey contain the data for more than
4,600 of these birds that have been marked with numbered bands, many
of which have been subsequently recovered, only one of these indicates
a flight of any distance from the point of banding. This bird (83460),
banded on February 2, 1925, at Elkader, Iowa, was found dead at Balsam
Lake, Wis., on October 25, 1925. The distance between the two points is
about 185 miles.
_Egg dates._--Alberta: 12 records, May 25 to June 14.
California: 82 records, April 7 to June 9; 41 records, April 24 to
May 13, indicating the height of the season.
Colorado: 9 records, May 4 to June 30.
Florida: 7 records, April 2 to May 14.
Illinois: 16 records, April 3 to June 3; 8 records, May 12 to 20.
New York: 12 records, May 10 to June 2.
Washington: 8 records, May 1 to June 2.
DRYOBATES PUBESCENS GAIRDNERI (Audubon)
GAIRDNER’S WOODPECKER
HABITS
This subspecies of our well-known downy woodpecker is one of those
well-marked dark-colored races that occur in the humid Northwest coast
region, ranging in the Transition Zone from southern British Columbia
to Mendocino County, Calif. It is practically a small edition of the
equally dark Harris’s woodpecker, which inhabits the same region.
Its characters are so well marked that it was recognized and named
by Audubon (1842). Ridgway (1914) describes it as “similar to _D. p.
turati_, but color of under parts darker (often light brownish gray or
drab), the white of back often tinged with brownish gray.”
D. E. Brown, in his notes from western Washington, says: “Gairdner’s
woodpecker is next to the commonest woodpecker in western Washington,
the northwestern flicker being the only one that outnumbers it. This,
the smallest of the woodpeckers in this locality, is fond of old river
beds, willow swamps, and the deciduous trees along streams. It is found
here at all times of year but seems to be more in evidence in winter,
probably because the leaves are off the trees where it is usually
found.”
_Nesting._--Mr. Brown states further that “it digs its nesting cavity
usually in a dead willow stub of small size, but at times it excavates,
with much labor, a cavity in a growing tree. Nests have been found as
low as 3 feet from the ground, and they are seldom more than 30 feet
up. Three to six eggs are laid, five being the usual number. The first
week in May is the best time for fresh eggs. The incubating bird has
a habit that, I think, saves its eggs many times; when the stub that
contains the eggs is rapped, the sitting bird comes to the opening with
its bill full of chips from the bottom of the nest; these are dropped
outside, and the bird drops back into the nest, only to repeat this
action when the rapping is repeated. I have seen this performance not
once but many times, and I think it a regular occurrence when the eggs
are well incubated.”
Dawson and Bowles (1909) write: “Gairdners place their nests at
inconsiderable heights in deciduous trees, and those, if possible,
among thick growths on moist ground. Both sexes assist in excavation,
as in incubation. Partially decayed wood is selected and an opening
made about an inch and a quarter in diameter. After driving straight
in an inch or two, the passage turns down and widens two or three
diameters. At a depth of a foot or so the crystal white eggs are
deposited on a neat bed of fine chips. Incubation lasts twelve days and
the young are hatched about the 1st of June.”
_Eggs._--The eggs of Gairdner’s woodpecker resemble those of the
northern downy (_medianus_) in every respect but average slightly
smaller. The measurements of 34 eggs average 18.71 by 14.51
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =20.83=
by 15.24, 20.32 by =16.0=, =17.27= by 14.22, and 17.78 by =12.95=
millimeters.
_Food._--Johnson A. Neff (1928) had 68 stomachs available for study,
mostly Gairdner’s woodpeckers from the Willamette Valley, Oreg., and
states that--
the animal food items averaged 82.07 percent of the annual
food, and vegetable matter, 17.93 percent. * * *
At Peyton, in August, the Gairdner Woodpeckers were
observed working busily for several days removing the
larvae, pupae, and adults of weevils from the stems of
common mullen, _Verbascum thapsus_. * * *
During July, 1925, whole families of the Gairdner
Woodpecker were observed in the huge cottonwoods which
abound near the Willamette River, feeding on aphids and
scale. They often numbered as high as ten birds in one
tree, and worked from the lowest limb to the highest leaf.
While paying some attention to the branches, their chief
interest was in the clusters of leaves; they clambered out
each small branch to the group of leaves at the tip, peered
under each leaf intently, even swinging around sidewise
and up-side down in their efforts. Through the binoculars
it was easy to see them remove small objects and, later,
stomach analysis showed that most of the objects were scale
insects. * * *
These woodpeckers have yet to be observed doing any injury
to a living tree; the writer has been unable to find
any evidence of their doing so in this area. While they
nested abundantly in the river-bottom lands in very close
companionship with true sapsuckers, they were never seen to
visit the flowing sap pits. * * *
Fruit was hardly touched by these birds; elderberry
(_Sambucus_) and Madrona (_Arbutus_) were the only kinds
found, averaging only 0.46 percent of the diet. * * *
The Gairdner, Willow, and Batchelder Woodpeckers in the
orchard are worth their weight in gold to the fruit grower.
They should be strictly protected, and every known means of
attraction should be used in the attempt to persuade them
to remain about the ranches.
_Winter._--Anderson and Grinnell (1903) say that, in the Siskiyou
Mountains, Calif., “the Gairdner woodpecker is usually to be found in
company with the flocks of mountain chickadees which frequent the black
oak groves all winter. The oaks are their favorite working places, but
they are also to be seen among the pines and spruces. Six specimens
brought home are all quite near _gairdneri_. The smokiness of the lower
surface is not so intense as in skins from western Oregon, but the
size, especially of the feet, is decidedly that of the northwest coast
form.”
DRYOBATES PUBESCENS LEUCURUS (Hartlaub)
BATCHELDER’S WOODPECKER
HABITS
The downy woodpecker inhabiting the Rocky Mountains and adjacent
regions from southern Alaska to Arizona and New Mexico is described by
Ridgway (1914) as “similar in large size and whiteness of under parts
to _D. p. nelsoni_, but with less of white on wing-coverts, sometimes
with none, the spots, when present, only on terminal or (usually)
subterminal portion, and on only a few of the covert features.” It
also differs from it in a “tendency to reduction or absence of bars on
lateral rectrices.”
The common name of this woodpecker is in honor of Charles F.
Batchelder, who first (1889) called the attention of American
ornithologists to the characters of this race under the name _D. p.
oreoecus_. Batchelder’s name was used in the 1895 A. O. U. Check-List,
but it was later found to be antedated by _Dryobates homorus_ of
Cabanis and Heine, which was adopted in the 1910 Check-List. This was
found to be still further antedated by the name _Picus leucurus_, given
to the downy woodpecker of the Rocky Mountains by Hartlaub in 1852. It
seems rather strange that this race remained so long unrecognized in
this country. This may be due to the fact that this woodpecker seems to
be a comparatively rare bird throughout most of its range.
The Weydemeyers (1928) say of its occurrence in northwestern Montana:
A rather rare permanent resident, irregular in winter.
Occurs throughout the county, but is rare at high
elevations. It frequents mixed broad-leaf and conifer woods
along the lower streams, where it undoubtedly breeds in
preference to other locations. During winter it is often
seen about farmsteads and pastures, and in bordering woods
of Douglas fir, yellow pine, and larch. In the Canadian
zone it occurs sparingly in lodgepole pine and alpine fir
(_Abies lasiocarpa_) woods, usually along streams.
In the western half of the county, an observer may consider
himself fortunate to see an individual of this species
twice a week. In the eastern portion, during July and
August, along Transition zone streams, one or two birds may
be seen nearly every day.
We have obtained no definite nesting dates for this
species, although it evidently breeds in suitable
locations. On July 22, 1923, a brood of young on the wing
was seen near Fortine in woods of spruce and aspen, in the
Transition zone, at 2,960 feet altitude.
Major Bendire (1895) writes:
Dr. Edgar A. Mearns, United States Army, reports it
breeding sparingly throughout the _Pinus ponderosa_ belt,
ascending into the Spruce zone, on the San Francisco
cone, and considers it the rarest of the woodpeckers
found in Arizona. Mr. Denis Gale took a nest and eggs
of this subspecies in Boulder County, Colorado, on June
12, 1889. The excavation was found in a half-dead aspen,
30 feet from the ground, and presumably well up in the
mountains, as Mr. William G. Smith informs me that it is
only a winter visitor in the lower valleys, and is never
seen there during warm weather. I found it rare near Fort
Custer, Montana, and only obtained a single male specimen,
on November 23, 1884, among the willows and cottonwoods
on the Little Horn River. Dr. James C. Merrill, United
States Army, met with it breeding at Fort Shaw, Mont.,
early in June, 1879, and tells me that five or six eggs are
generally laid to a set, and that the nesting habits are
just like those of the downy woodpecker.
Lee R. Dice (1918) says that, in southeastern Washington, it is
“numerous throughout the year in the timber along the Touchet River
near Prescott.
“* * * On June 11, 1908, a nest containing young was found four feet
from the ground in an apple tree near Prescott. The female was seen
gathering large, red aphids from nearby golden-rod. She would gather
all her mouth could hold and until the aphids stuck out like a fringe
all around the edges of the bill. Then she flew in a direct line toward
the nest. This female was also seen to gather aphids from apple trees.”
A set of four eggs in the Thayer collection was taken near Fort Shaw,
Mont., on June 8, 1879; the nesting cavity was 12 feet from the ground
in a dead tree and was excavated to a depth of 10 inches. The eggs are
characteristic of the species, short-ovate in shape, dull white in
color, and only slightly glossy.
The measurements of 28 eggs average 19.86 by 15.29 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =23.37= by =16.00=, =19.0= by
14.8, and 18.4 by =14.4= millimeters.
DRYOBATES PUBESCENS MEDIANUS (Swainson)
NORTHERN DOWNY WOODPECKER
PLATES 7, 8
HABITS
CONTRIBUTED BY WINSOR MARRETT TYLER
The downy woodpecker, including six geographical forms, inhabits nearly
the whole of the wooded parts of North America. It is absent or rare
on the arid deserts and less common in the densely forested regions
than some of the larger woodpeckers; its favorite country is the open
woodland that covers a large part of the United States.
When civilized man invaded their territory, the downy woodpeckers of
the Atlantic coast--the northern and southern races--did not retreat
before his advance but accepted as a home the orchards and shade trees
with which man replaced the forest. At the present time it builds its
nest sometimes within sight from our windows and often in the parks
of our large cities. It is one of the best known of our permanent
residents.
The ornithologists of a century ago show unanimity in their
characterization of the bird. Audubon (1842) remarks that it “is
perhaps not surpassed by any of its tribe in hardiness, industry, or
vivacity”; Wilson (1832) says that “the principal characteristics
of this little bird are diligence, familiarity, perseverance” and
speaks of a pair of the birds working at their nest “with the most
indefatigable diligence”; and Nuttall (1832) characteristically shares
Wilson’s opinion even to the extent of employing his exact words,
“indefatigable diligence,” in his own account of the building of the
nest. Nearly a hundred years later Forbush (1927), when near the end
of his long life, put the seal of his approval upon this sentiment,
expressed long ago, by summarizing the downy as a “model of patient
industry and perseverance.”
Backed by these authorities we may regard the downy woodpecker as a
bird with a stable and well-balanced nature, a bird which, unconcerned
by the rush and traffic “of these most brisk and giddy-paced times,”
still perseveres in its “indefatigable diligence.”
_Spring and courtship._--As spring advances, the downy woodpecker
seems to wake up; it attracts our notice by its more frequent notes
and increased activity. During the cold months of the year the bird
has been comparatively silent, although even in the depth of winter we
may occasionally hear its single _chip_ and even the long whinny, but
in April, for so sedate a bird, it becomes a lively personality; it
moves about quickly--sometimes with lightninglike agility--and takes a
voluble interest in the members of its own species.
Francis H. Allen, in his notes, gives the two following graphic
accounts of the initial stage of the bird’s courtship: “April 10, 1904.
West Roxbury, Mass. I found two downy woodpeckers courting--at least, I
suppose that was what they were up to. They acted like mating flickers,
chasing each other about from tree to tree, keeping almost constantly
on the move and only pausing now and then to execute a sort of dance,
spreading their wings and tails. From time to time I heard from them a
long call resembling the flicker’s _whick, whick whick whick_, etc.,
but higher pitched than the flicker’s and, of course, not so loud. Less
often I heard another note--a softer, slighter, more hurried call,
similar in quality. I did not make out whether, these two calls were
made by different sexes, nor did I positively make out that the birds
were a pair, they kept in such constant motion. At least once one lit
crosswise of a twig. At last one flew off, and then the familiar and
characteristic long call of a downy sounded from another direction, and
the remaining bird flew over to the third bird, which was clinging to
the trunk of an elm. Then these two stayed in each other’s company but
did not conduct so elaborate a dance as the first couple.
“All this time a fourth bird had been drumming on a tree not far away.
I went up to the place and timed the drum calls, finding each roll to
last about two seconds. I could not count the taps, but thought they
numbered eight or ten to each roll. While I watched this bird, another
downy came along, sounding the flickerlike call, but rather faintly,
and the drummer flew to join her. They flew off together. I believe
it is only the male that drums, and I think it probable that the bird
that answered the drummer was the one that had taken part in the dance
before described, for that bird when she left her partner had flown off
in this direction.
“April 8, 1917. West Roxbury. Watched a pair courting this morning for
several minutes. Both sexes had a curious ‘weaving’ action, moving the
head and whole body from side to side on the tip of the tail as a pivot
with the neck stretched out and bill pointed on a line with the body,
and the whole body elongated. They did this both when clinging to the
side of a trunk and when on a horizontal or slanting branch. They were
silent but very active, flitting one after the other from branch to
branch and tree to tree, but making only short flights. The waving, or
‘weaving,’ motion of the head was rather rapid, perhaps two waves, that
is from left to right and back again, in about a second--but this is
stated from general impressions and memory only. These birds did not
spread the wings and tail as did the courting pair observed on April
10, 1904, and, as stated, they uttered no note.”
My notes refer to a bit of courtship observed during the actual
breeding season, May 11, 1911, in a wooded swamp in Lexington, Mass.,
where the species used to nest every year. The female bird was perched
motionless along a horizontal limb of a tree, and the male was poised
in the air just behind and a little above her. He was hovering. His
wings were more than half spread, I should say, and waving slowly up
and down, a maneuver which displayed finely the rows of white spots on
the flight feathers and coverts.
William Brewster (1936), in his Concord journal under date of May 5,
1905, notes another form of courtship. He says: “At 8 A. M. saw a
pair of Downy Woodpeckers in young oaks behind Ball’s Hill, behaving
very strangely. They kept flying from tree to tree, flapping their
wings slowly and feebly like butterflies, sometimes moving on a level
plane, sometimes in long loops, occasionally sailing from tree to tree
in a long _deep_ loop. Their wings had a strange fin-like appearance
due, probably, to the way they were held or flexed. They both uttered
a low, harsh, chattering cry, almost incessantly. No doubt this was a
love performance, but they were male and female and both ‘showed off’
in the same way.”
Lewis O. Shelley (1932), who, at East Westmoreland, N. H., has had an
extensive experience with banded birds throughout the year, describes
the courtship thus:
Courtship activities begin rather early with the male’s
tattooing commencing in the warm days of March. I believe
the most active mating display is given by a new male that
desires a mate, not by a male mated the previous year whose
mate is still living. The latter male seems to give a
protective display to its rival, seemingly just enough to
hold his mate’s trust.
In the spring of 1931, father and son * * * fought for and
sought the favor of the young female * * * the son finally
winning after days of courtship in our yard and vicinity.
* * * Courting lasted for upwards of two weeks, or perhaps
longer, before the female made her choice. Of the two
rivals the son finally was accepted, the older male shortly
disappearing. * * * The courtship display of these three
birds was the same as I have observed with other mating
Downy Woodpeckers elsewhere in past seasons. At my station
the mating activities began when the birds first met and
was continued more or less regularly thereafter. The
female is usually rather quiet, sometimes giving a _week,
week, week, week_, or again a squeaking note. The males
give forth a loud _wick, wick, wick, wick, wick, wick_,
sometimes with a rolling _k-k-k-k-k_ at the end. Very
little drumming on resonant objects is done by the male,
once a female is located, and in this case almost none was
done except when one male was out of sight and hearing
of the female and the other courting bird. To the casual
observer, the chasing of the female by the male to a tree,
and from tree to tree, in a seemingly idle manner (often,
but not always, by both males) is in reality a part of the
mating manoeuvres.
When it happens that both males are in pursuit, the
activities take on an added impetus. I have a number of
times seen one male dash headlong across a fifty-yard
opening to where the other two birds were, loudly uttering
his cry, and, when alighting, dash at his adversary, the
female squeaking intermittently, and swinging her body
from side to side. The display also consists of spread
wings nervously fluttered; raising and lowering of the
scarlet patch; mad dashes from one tree to another at the
fleeing female, who dodges to the opposite side of the
tree as the pursuing bird alights; loud calls at intervals
when he stops in his mad hopping up the limbs and smaller
branches. This activity may last from five to thirty
minutes, from the large elm in our yard, where the birds
feed, to a larger area either south or east of the house.
When two birds are alone together, it is common to find
them perching near together and motionless for considerable
periods of time, but let the second male appear and the
first male will drive the female from the tree and the
round is begun again. When two males come face to face in
a headlong rush, wings spread, crest raised, and beak open
in a challenging attitude, it is mostly sham, for they
soon quiet down unless one advances up the tree toward the
female clinging immovable above.
There is a period when the male is very active in his
rushing of the female--I suppose to make sure of his
desire, a mate--but this phase of courtship plays no part
in the act of copulation, which I have seen enacted early
in the morning, a quiet, matter-of-fact performance.
The first and last paragraphs of this quotation are taken from Mr.
Shelley’s manuscript notes.
_Nesting._--The downy woodpecker nests in a cavity that the birds
themselves drill in a branch or stub 8 feet (rarely less) to 50 feet
(rarely more) above the ground, generally in dead or dying wood,
sometimes in a solid branch. The entrance, one and a quarter inches
in diameter, is just large enough to admit the bird’s body, and is
perfectly circular unless some bits of soft wood chip off. The cavity
is roughly gourd-shaped, turning downward and widening soon after
penetrating the wood and extends to a depth varying normally from eight
to twelve inches. Generally a few chips are left in the bottom of the
cavity.
Lewis O. Shelley says (MS.) that according to his experience “the
female selects the nest site on her winter, or year-round, territory.”
He speaks of a female that in the fall “partly dug out a cavity,
supposedly for her winter quarters, but the following summer I found a
brood of young of this same bird occupying the nest.”
Writers are almost unanimously of the opinion that both birds of the
pair excavate the nest, but Shelley (MS.) states: “Of a number of nests
observed, I have never known the male downy to assist in excavating. He
often comes near when the female is working, but this seems to be an
understood signal for her to cease work and go off in his company.”
A. Dawes DuBois, in a letter to Mr. Bent, describes the behavior of a
pair working jointly on a nest in Ithaca, N. Y., about 15 feet up in
an old stub. He says: “These birds were working the lower depths. The
partners worked alternately. First the female lighted on the stub and
disappeared within the cavity. Immediately she thrust out her head,
and, with a quick shake, disposed of a billful of chips. She repeated
this a number of times. She was throwing out the loose chips from
the bottom of the cavity. Soon she began to chisel, remaining inside
where we could not see her. After she had been working for five or six
minutes, her mate flew to the stub and uttered a chirp, whereupon the
female came out and flew away.
“The male went in to continue the work by a somewhat different method.
He was never entirely lost to view--his tail was always visible--and he
backed out of the hole to dispose of the chips. He ruffled his feathers
considerably in squirming out backward, as his body was a snug fit
in the entrance hole. He threw out a quantity of loose chips in this
manner and then began chiseling, his tail meanwhile protruding from the
doorway. He worked for 22 minutes; then his mate came back.
“She went inside and came out with her mouth quite full of chips; but
instead of tossing the chips to the ground, she flew off with them to
another tree. She stayed away for several minutes, then returned and
went to work in her accustomed way, staying within the cavity, and
thrusting only her head outside. When she had worked about 15 minutes
the male came again to the entrance. She put her head out of the
doorway; they rubbed their bills together, and chirped a few remarks.
The female then flew away and the male took up the task again.”
Audubon (1842) says: “About the middle of April it begins to form
its nest, shewing little care as to the kind of tree it selects for
the purpose, although it generally chooses a sound one, sometimes,
however, taking one that is partially decayed. The pair work together
for several days before the hole is completed, sometimes perhaps a
whole week, as they dig it to a depth of a foot or sixteen inches. The
direction is sometimes perpendicularly downwards from the commencement,
sometimes transverse to the tree for four or five inches, and then
longitudinal. The hole is rendered smooth and conveniently large
throughout, the entrance being perfectly round, and just large enough
to admit one bird at a time.”
A. Dawes DuBois (MS.) writes that the male bird of a pair was caught in
a nest 6 feet from the ground, evidently incubating the six eggs well
advanced in development. This observation is in accord with the general
belief that the male takes his share in incubation.
Mrs. Alice Hall Walter (1912) states that “in the North, only one brood
is raised during a season; but it is not uncommon in the South for one
brood to be raised in May and a second in August.”
_Eggs._--[AUTHOR’S NOTE: The northern downy woodpecker lays ordinarily
four or five eggs, though sets of three or six are not rare, and as
many as seven or even eight eggs have been found in a nest. The eggs
are pure white, either dull white or more or less glossy, and they
vary in shape from ovate to rounded-ovate. The measurements of 55 eggs
average 19.35 by 15.05 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes
measure =22.35= by =16.26=, =17.78= by 14.73, and 18.80 by =13.97=
millimeters.]
_Young._--The incubation period of the downy woodpecker is 12 days,
according to Frank L. Burns (1915) and Dr. Arthur A. Allen (1928).
Whether in their earliest days the young birds, hidden in the depths of
their dark chamber, are fed by regurgitation has not been determined,
but very soon after they leave the egg food is brought directly to
them. Dr. Allen (MS.) says: “Certainly by the time the young are four
or five days old entire insects are brought in the parents’ bills and
given to the young; I have photographic proof of this.”
Craig S. Thoms (1927), in a study of the nesting habits in South
Dakota, says: “On June 9 the young were beginning to come up to the
door of their excavation to receive food. Presumably the largest and
strongest sticks his head clear out. When he fed he subsided and the
next came up, but not quite so far. He in his turn subsided and the
parent entered to feed the weaker ones still farther down. * * *
“On June 12 the last of the young left the nest, which upon being
measured was found to be 10 inches deep.”
A. Dawes DuBois (MS.) tells of the flight of the young birds from the
nest: “The young chattered most of the time during the last two days of
nest life. One at a time they looked out a great deal at the strange
outer world. They left the nest on June 11. The last two, a male and a
female, left during the afternoon, each after being fed at the entrance
and seeing the parent fly away. The young male flew from the nest hole
straight to a tree 60 feet away. His sister quickly followed, lighting
on the trunk of the same tree and following her parent up the hole in
the hitching manner of their kind as though she had been practicing
this vertical locomotion all her life.”
_Plumages._--[AUTHOR’S NOTE: Young downy woodpeckers are hatched naked
and blind, but the juvenal plumage is acquired before the young leave
the nest. In this first plumage, the young male is much like the adult
male, except that the red nuchal patch is lacking; the forehead is
black, spotted with white, but the crown and occiput are more or less
marked with various shades of red, pinkish, or yellowish, as well as
spotted with white; the black portions of the plumage are duller than
in the adult; the sides of the breast are streaked and the flanks
obscurely spotted with dusky; the white areas, underparts, and white
spots elsewhere, as well as the rectrices, are tinged with yellowish.
The young female is like the young male, except that there is no red on
the head, and the crown is clear black, or black spotted with white.
L. L. Snyder (1923) has shown that young males sometimes have only
white markings on a black crown and that young females sometimes have
reddish, pinkish, or yellowish markings on the crown.
The juvenal plumage is worn but a short time, for a complete molt,
beginning in September or earlier, produces a first winter plumage,
which is practically adult. Adults have a complete annual molt from
July to September. Both adults and young show a tinge of yellowish in
the white areas in fresh fall plumage, which gradually fades away.]
_Food._--F. E. L. Beal (1911) in an examination of the contents of 723
stomachs of the downy woodpecker found that 76.05 percent was animal
matter, the remaining 23.95 percent vegetable matter. The following
quotations are from his exhaustive report.
Beetles taken collectively amount to 21.55 percent, and are
the largest item of the food. Of these, a little less than
14 percent are wood-boring larvae. * * * They were found in
289 stomachs, or about 40 percent of all, and 10 contained
no other food. This is only about half the amount found in
the stomachs of the hairy woodpecker, and shows that the
downy pecks wood much less than the hairy. These larvae
are eaten at all times of the year, though the most are
taken in the cooler months. * * * The economic value of the
destruction of these larvae is very great.
Weevils amount to a little more than 3 percent, but appear
to be a rather favorite food, as they were found in 107
stomachs. * * *
Ants are eaten by the downy to the extent of 21.36 percent
of its diet, and are taken more regularly than any other
element of the food. * * *
Caterpillars appear to be a very acceptable food for the
downy woodpecker, as they constitute 16.50 percent of the
yearly diet. * * *
Fruit was eaten to the extent of 5.85 percent of the whole
food. Most of it is of useless wild varieties. * * *
The charge sometimes made that the downy injures trees by
eating the inner bark is disproved. It eats cambium rarely
and in small quantities.
Beal gives a list of 20 seeds and fruits found in the downy’s food.
Summarizing his findings, he says: “The foregoing discussion of the
food of the downy woodpecker shows it to be one of our most useful
species. The only complaint against the bird is on the score of
disseminating the poisonous species of Rhus. However, it is fortunate
that the bird can live on this food when it is difficult to procure
anything else. The insect food selected by the downy is almost all of
species economically harmful.”
Forbush (1927) lays stress on the usefulness of the downy to man; he
says that it “searches out the pine weevil which kills the topmost
shoot of the young white pine and so causes a crook in the trunk of the
tree, unfitting it for the lumber market.”
Mrs. Alice Hall Walter (1912) shows how well the downy is equipped to
secure its food. She says that the feet, two toes in front and two
behind, “serve to _clamp_ the bird to the tree.” She continues:
Additional support is furnished by the stiff, sharply
pointed tail-feathers, that act as a brace when the bird
delivers heavy blows with its beak. Effective as this
tool is for the work of _hammer_, _wedge_, _drill_ and
_pick-axe_, it could not obtain the deeply hidden grubs
known as “borers,” from their tortuous, tunneled grooves,
without the aid of the long, slender, extensile tongue. In
the case of the Hairy and Downy, as well as some others of
the family, this remarkable tool is provided with barbs,
converting it into a spear, which may be hurled one inch,
two inches or even more, beyond the tip of the beak.
A. Dawes DuBois says in his notes: “I have seen a downy woodpecker
industriously applying the percussion test to the dried stalks of
the previous summer’s horse weeds, which grow to prodigious size in
the creek bottoms near Springfield, Illinois. He went up each stalk,
tapping it lightly, and frequently stopping to pierce the shell and
extract a worm from the pith. I found that the weed stems he had
visited were punctured and splintered in numerous places.”
The following note by Elliott R. Tibbets (1911) shows how agile the
downy is on the wing. He was watching some birds at a feeding shelf. “I
was told,” he says, “to throw a cracked nut into the air and see what
followed--I did so, and, to my surprise, the Downy darted after it, not
allowing it to touch the ground, and then returned to the evergreen,
where he proceeded to pick the kernel from the hard shell.”
Henry D. Minot (1877) also mentions that they “catch insects on the
wing.”
_Behavior._--The downy woodpecker sits very still as it digs out a
grub from under the bark of a tree, or from the wood under the bark,
or as it dislodges a bit of bark in its hunt for a cocoon or a bundle
of insects’ eggs. We hear the gentle taps of its bill, and when our
eyes, led by the sound, catch sight of the bird, perched on a branch or
the trunk of a tree, we understand why it has been called industrious.
It is concentrated on its work; it works patiently, seriously, like a
carpenter working earnestly with his chisel, spending a full minute,
sometimes more, to secure a bit of food.
As it sits there quietly, working painstakingly at the bark, it gives
the impression of a rather sedentary bird, deliberate and staid,
but when it begins to move about--taking short flights among the
branches--alighting on little swaying twigs and flitting off again--we
see it in another mood. It is lively now; all deliberateness is gone.
It hops upward over the branches with quick jerky hops, rearing back a
little after each one; it may descend a little way by backward hitches;
it winds about the smaller branches, peering at the right side, the
left side, and around at the back; it flits to a twig no thicker than a
pencil for the space of a single peck, and then is off with the speed
of an arrow, weaving and undulating through a maze of branchlets,
cutting the air audibly with its wings.
We can watch the downy woodpecker best in winter when the trees and
shrubs are bare. But even in such an exposed situation as a leafless
tree, we do not find it a conspicuous bird--one hop and it is hidden
behind a branch, seeming almost to glide out of our sight. At the
slightest alarm it disappears; it uses a branch as a shield--slipping
behind it, safe from observation or attack.
The bird is at home also in shrubbery, moving easily among the smaller
branches, hitching along their slender length, picking at the bark, and
leaping from one branch to another with the aid of a flip of the wings.
It sits crosswise on a perch scarcely bigger than a twig, leaning
forward a little, bill outstretched, suggesting in position and outline
a tiny kingfisher.
Here, at close range, on a level with our eyes, we realize how rapid
the bird’s motions are. The beak strikes and draws back--the two
movements a single flash. The head turns to one side, to the other
side, bringing first one dark shining eye, then the other, to bear on
the bark; we see the head in the two positions, although we get only a
hint of the motion between.
Thus the day’s work goes on, until the downy, replete with the results
of its industry, rests motionless for a while on a high, sunny branch,
taking its ease.
The downy woodpecker, like most of its family, has an undulating flight
when flying any considerable distance. The undulations are not deep, as
in the plunging flight of a goldfinch; it gives rather the effect of a
ship pitching slightly in a head sea. A few strokes carry the bird up
to the crest of the wave--the wings clapping close to the sides of the
body--then, at the crest, with the wings shut, the bird tilts slightly
forward, and slides down into the next trough.
Besides employing its strong beak and the powerful muscles of its neck
to secure food and dig out a cavity for its nest, the downy woodpecker
makes use of them to beat a loud tattoo on the branch of a tree or some
other resonant object. This habit is oftenest noticed in spring, when
it appears to form a part of courtship or a prelude to it, but Lewis
O. Shelley says in his notes that “on February 3, 1934, a male downy
commenced its drumming on a dead elm branch near the house. A few hours
earlier the temperature had been 5° below zero. On the 6th, 8th, and
9th he was tattooing at the usual hour, about 8 a. m. On the 8th the
temperature registered zero, and on the 9th 18° below zero!”
Dr. Charles W. Townsend, in his Ipswich manuscript notes, under date
of March 16, 1930, speaks of “a male bird hammering a _rat-at-at-too_
on the apex of a telephone pole for three seconds. He then paused,
hunching up a little and looking about for from five to twelve seconds,
before resuming the hammering. He made a small round dent in the pole,
but there were no chips.”
A. Dawes DuBois tells in his notes the following anecdote: “One April
day I watched this avian drummer as he entertained himself by beating
on the wooden insulator-pins of an unused cross-arm on a telegraph
pole. From each pin he rang out a different tone--loud, clear, and
high-pitched. It was evident that this pleased him, for he hopped from
one pin to another to repeat the variations.”
I have found in the books no mention of drumming by the female downy,
but at the end of the extract from William Brewster’s notes, quoted
under “Courtship,” in which he describes a mutual display by a pair of
birds, he adds: “Both sexes drum, also.”
William Brewster (1876b) points out the difference between the tattoo
of the downy woodpecker and that of the hairy woodpecker and the
yellow-bellied sapsucker. He says: “_P. pubescens_ has a long unbroken
roll, _P. villosus_ a shorter and louder one with a greater interval
between each stroke: while _S. varius_ commencing with a short roll
ends very emphatically with five or six distinct disconnected taps.”
R. Owen Merriam (1920) gives, from Hamilton, Canada, an instance of
“snow bathing.” He says:
This morning a female Downy Woodpecker that I was watching
flew to a horizontal branch and proceeded vigorously to
bathe in the loose snow lying there. Like a Robin in a
puddle, Mrs. Downy ducked her head, ruffled her feathers,
and fluttered her wings, throwing some of the snow over
her back and scattering the rest to the winds. As all the
snow fell off one part of the branch, she moved along to
another, until she had cleared a place about two feet
long. Two forks held more snow than the straight limb, and
apparently Mrs. Downy enjoyed herself immensely when she
came to them.
Dr. Arthur A. Allen (1928) in his admirable “Downy Woodpecker’s Story,”
published in the School Department of Bird-Lore, says, letting the bird
tell its own story: “When cold weather sets in, * * * I begin drilling
roosting-holes where I can spend the nights. I usually have to drill
quite a number for they seem to be quite popular with other birds like
the Chickadees and Nuthatches, and sometimes when I get ready to retire
I find my hole occupied by a flying squirrel or a whole family of deer
mice, and it is easier to drill a new hole than to drive them out.
One winter I got tired of drilling holes and every night retired to a
bird-house and perched on an old Wren’s nest that was in it.”
Many ornithologists, even as long ago as the time of Wilson and
Nuttall, have believed that the rows of small holes, such as we
commonly see in the bark of our orchard trees, are drilled by the downy
woodpecker. These little holes, about three-eighths of an inch across,
circular when old, but oval when fresh, are arranged in fairly regular
rows parallel to the ground, and sometimes in tiers, when they have
the appearance of a waffle. In settled regions they are found oftenest
in the trunks and the larger branches of trees belonging to the rose
family--most commonly of all in apple trees. The holes may be within 3
feet of the ground or as high as 20 feet or more above it, depending on
the height of the tree. Oftentimes they are very close together; I have
counted as many as six of them in the space of an inch and a half. The
question has arisen whether the downy woodpecker ever makes these holes.
We know now, what the older ornithologists did not know, that it is a
regular habit of the yellow-bellied sapsucker to drill such holes, but
there are plenty of statements in the ornithological literature today
ascribing the work to the downy woodpecker as well.
Dr. Charles W. Townsend (1932) gives an able summary of the literature
on this question and, after carefully weighing the evidence, comes
“to the conclusion that these well known and characteristic circles
of holes are made by true sapsuckers and not by downy or hairy
woodpeckers.”
He throws a good deal of doubt on some seemingly definite observations
from correspondents quoted by Forbush in his “Birds of Massachusetts,”
when he says that “many leave one in considerable uncertainty as to
whether the correspondents actually saw the downy woodpecker making the
rings of holes, or merely tapping in the same region, or drinking the
sap, or eating cambium from holes whose origin was not ascertained. It
may be that some of the correspondents were unable to distinguish the
true species of woodpecker.”
Dr. Townsend cites several observations, two of which are quoted below.
If the first of these had not been correctly interpreted, and if the
other had not been seen in its entirety, they might have led to error.
He says:
There is one observation, however, which should be quoted
here, as it is of considerable interest in this discussion,
an observation made by a capable observer with great care.
Forbush says, _loc. cit._, vol. II, p. 268: “The first
trustworthy evidence, however, that I obtained regarding
the tapping of trees for sap by the Downy Woodpecker was
in 1899, when my assistant, the late Charles E. Bailey, on
April 6 watched one for several hours. His report reads:
‘At 12:30 I found a Downy Woodpecker, and watched him till
2:45; he took three larvae from a maple stub, just under
the bark. He next tapped two small swamp maples, four and
six feet from the ground, and spent most of the time taking
sap. He tapped the tree by picking it a few times very
lightly; it looked like a slight cut, slanting a little.
The bird would sit and peck the sap out of the lower part
of the cut. The cut was so small the sap did not collect
very fast. The bird would go and sit for a long time in a
large tree and not move, then it would come back and take
more sap. It did this three times while I was watching it.
It did not care to take any food but the sap.’ * * * Mr.
Bailey cut off and brought me the limb, the bark of which
was perforated by the bird. * * * The perforations passed
through the bark to the wood, but did not enter it and
they do not in the least resemble in shape those made by
the Yellow-bellied Sapsucker.” Here is just what we should
expect in a woodpecker not specialized as a sapsucker. * * *
The next record is of considerable significance in this
discussion, and had I seen only the latter half of the
drama, my conclusions might have been different. In the
Wenham swamp on May 11, 1906, my notes state that Glover M.
Allen and I found a Yellow-bellied Sapsucker drilling holes
in a white pine. His movements were slow and he paid little
attention to us standing below him at the foot of the tree.
When he departed, a female Downy Woodpecker visited the
holes.
Speaking of his own observations, Dr. Townsend says: “I may state that,
although I have long watched Downy Woodpeckers gleaning insects on
and in the bark and wood of trees at all seasons of the year, I have
never seen them dig circles of holes in the bark. * * * I have never
found fresh rings of holes except during the time of the sapsucker
migrations.”
_Voice._--The downy woodpecker is by no means a noisy bird; compared
to the red-headed woodpecker, with its loud rattling calls, or to the
shouting, boisterous flicker, it is quiet and demure. Nevertheless, we
cannot be for long near one of these little birds, hidden high among
leafy branches, before we learn of its presence. Within a few minutes,
long before we catch sight of it, we are almost certain to hear its
voice.
Its call note is a single abrupt syllable, like _tchick_. Although
this note is of sufficient volume to carry a considerable distance, it
is not a loud note even when heard at short range. As in the case of
many bird notes, it is recognizable from the voice of any other bird
hereabouts once we have become familiar with it, yet it is not easy to
say how it differs from numerous other calls that might be suggested by
the same letters. I believe one characteristic of the note that helps
us distinguish it is its shortness--it is over almost as soon as begun,
like a dot in the telegraph code. But in spite of being sharp, it is a
modest little sound; it does not ring through the woods like the wild
call of the hairy woodpecker.
Another note is a long whinny made up of a dozen or more _tchicks_.
These increase in rapidity soon after the beginning of the series, and
the pitch drops rather sharply. Near the close, the volume diminishes,
and the whinny ends with a “dying fall.”
Elizabeth Sampson (1934) brings this note very clearly to our mind when
she speaks of it as “a handful of his staccato notes * * * flung out in
a rapid run, gaining speed as they came, till they almost tumbled over
each other at the end.”
This whinny is also given, although not often, without any fall in
pitch.
The downy woodpecker has other notes in its vocabulary, some of
which are described under courtship, but, compared to the two noted
above, they are rarely heard. It may be that some of these notes are
only modifications of the call note, uttered with a slightly changed
inflection. One, a single short note, has a distinct vocal quality.
Of the young birds in the nest, Dr. Arthur A. Allen (1928) says that
they “keep up an incessant chippering, especially when they get the
least bit hungry, and at times they sound almost like a bee-hive, from
the ground.”
After the young birds have left the nest, I have often heard them give
a series of _tchicks_ similar to the whinny of the adults, but in a
weaker voice and _all on the same pitch_. However, this note evidently
varies, for Francis H. Allen says in his notes that the young have also
a rattle resembling the kingfisher rattle of _D. villosus_, but fainter
and falling in pitch like the similar note of the adult.
_Field marks._--The downy, the smallest of our woodpeckers, may be
separated at once from any other woodpecker, except the hairy, by the
broad white stripe down the back.
The hairy is half again as large as the downy, but in situations where
comparative size counts little, the downy may be recognized by its
short bill--no longer than its head. The hairy’s bill is longer even
in proportion to the size of the bird.
_Enemies._--Lewis O. Shelley, who as a bird bander has handled many
downy woodpeckers, says in his notes: “I find this species practically
free from parasites, but I have found among the feathers the two bird
flies, _Ornithoica confluenta_ and _Ornithomyia anchineuria_.”
Alexander Wilson (1832) shows that the house wren, although not an open
enemy of the downy, causes it a good deal of annoyance by stealing its
nest sometimes. He says:
The house wren, who also builds in the hollow of a tree,
but who is neither furnished with the necessary tools nor
strength for excavating such an apartment for himself,
allows the woodpeckers to go on, till he thinks it will
answer his purpose, then attacks them with violence, and
generally succeeds in driving them off. I saw some weeks
ago a striking example of this, where the woodpeckers we
are now describing, after commencing in a cherry-tree
within a few yards of the house, and having made
considerable progress, were turned out by the wren; the
former began again on a pear-tree in the garden, fifteen or
twenty yards off, whence, after digging out a most complete
apartment, and one egg being laid, they were once more
assaulted by the same impertinent intruder, and finally
forced to abandon the place.
Maurice Thompson (1885) describes thus the bird’s defense against the
attack of a goshawk:
I once saw a goshawk pursuing a downy woodpecker, when
the latter darted through a tuft of foliage and flattened
itself close upon the body of a thick oak bough, where
it remained as motionless as the bark itself. The hawk
alighted on the same bough within two feet of its intended
victim, and remained sitting there for some minutes,
evidently looking in vain for it, with nothing but thin air
between monster and morsel. The woodpecker was stretched
longitudinally on the bough, its tail and beak close to the
bark, its black and white speckled feathers looking like a
continuation of the wrinkles and lichen.
More commonly, when attacked by a hawk, the downy dodges behind a
branch and, if the hawk catch sight of it again, either winds round the
branch or dives behind another one. By this adroit defense the downy
has a fair chance of eluding the hawk’s attack.
_Fall and winter._--We see little change in the behavior of the downy
woodpecker at the approach of autumn, at the time when many of the
migratory birds are beginning to show a daily increasing restlessness,
seeming on tiptoe to start on their long journey, moving about actively
in their new feathers, and breaking out sometimes with a phrase of
postnuptial song. In the role of permanent resident, the downy remains
calm in the midst of the bustle of travel; it may join the hurrying
groups for a time, or become surrounded by them, but it does not catch
the contagion of departure, and soon drops behind to continue its local
round.
The downy is not forced to seek the sun and warmth and the
inexhaustible food of the Tropics, for the woodlands of New England and
southeastern Canada are stored with food that, with a roosting hole,
enables the bird to withstand the severest winter. But this food is
limited; the insects that have been multiplying all summer, thus adding
continually to the woodpeckers’ supply of food, stop multiplying when
the frosts come, and will add no more until spring.
The downy is not a bird that ranges widely in search of food; moreover,
for protection against the weather it is held to the vicinity of its
roosting hole. Therefore each bird, in order to be sure of sufficient
food for itself during the cold months, must maintain dominion over a
territory large enough to support it through the winter.
Thus it comes about that in autumn the downy _does_ perforce change its
habits, or rather its attitude toward other birds of its species. The
families disperse, and until the next breeding season each individual
becomes a solitary bird, living in a restricted region, which it
defends against trespass, resenting and repelling the approach of any
other downy woodpecker.
This reversal of attitude or character--the change from a member of a
family to an anchorite in fall, and back again in spring--takes place
gradually, we may suppose, and not exactly at the same time in every
bird. Hence one bird meeting another in autumn, while the change is
in progress, may underestimate the degree to which it has drawn away
from its fellows, or, in the spring, may overestimate the amount of
cordiality that has returned to the wintering anchorite. This lack of
understanding may give rise to behavior difficult or impossible for us
to interpret.
Sometimes the relationship between two downies is clear enough, as
when, on September 20, 1910, I saw a male fly repeatedly at a female
in a menacing way and drive her off; and when on November 3, 1935, I
saw a female bird fly toward a male, which was perched near a hole in
an electric-light pole, from which he did not retire, as a perched
bird commonly does when approached by a bird on the wing, but held his
ground while she flew away; and when Lewis O. Shelley (MS.) tells of a
female bird “rushing with antagonistic attitude at her two daughters”
and also driving off her granddaughters whenever they invaded her
winter territory in autumn, all these birds being identified by bands.
There are cases, however, in which the relationship between the birds
is very puzzling. In the following scene, from my notes, there is
a hint of hostility or remonstrance, but a suggestion of courtship
also--out of place, it seems, in autumn between two female birds.
“October 15, 1935. Two birds are in a large, bare maple tree; one is
noticeably larger than the other, but neither one has a red occipital
patch. They keep near each other, one following the other by short,
quick flights. They perch perfectly motionless for a moment a foot or
two apart; then both together sway their heads, swinging them quickly
down and up to one side, down and up to the other side. The swing is
very rapid, like the wink of an eye. They flit their wings upward and
outward, also with the speed of a wink, over and over--all this without
a sound. They fly behind a branch sometimes but keep mostly in sight of
each other, and, although neither attacks, each seems wary of attack
and dodges away when approached. They sometimes alight on very slender
branches, and once a bird goes to the ground where it stands with its
head held high up. They move very actively and lightly, with never
the slightest blundering, flitting silently and easily from branch to
branch.”
The following astonishing story, taken from William Brewster’s Concord
journal (1937), tells of a case in which antagonism of unknown cause
leads to the killing with brutal violence of a female downy by a male:
March 20, 1911. We were in the dining-room, consulting
about the day’s work, when we heard the _tchick_ note of
the Downy Woodpecker repeated almost incessantly and very
rapidly just outside. For a moment or more we paid no
attention to it. But something unusual in its quality and
its insistence soon led me to look out and this was what I
saw:
On the snow, among the outermost stems of the lilacs on
one side of the dense thicket that they form was a female
Downy with extended and quivering wings. About her hopped
or rather danced a handsome male, showing the red on
his occiput very conspicuously. He kept striking at her
head with his bill and occasionally he held on for a few
seconds, when the two birds fluttered about together and
perhaps rolled over once or twice, closely united. At
first I thought it an amatory encounter and I am still
almost certain that the male attempted to secure sexual
contact with the female once or twice. But if so it could
not have been his primary or at least sole object. For he
continued to peck her head even when she was lying almost
motionless on the snow. For a time she seemed to be trying
to escape and for fully two minutes her cries were piteous
and incessant. At length he left her and flew up into an
elm where he clung for a moment or two, making what seemed
to me a very unusual display of the red on his occiput.
Then of a sudden he swooped down on the female, who had
meanwhile been cowering in the middle of a cluster of
lilac stems, on the snow. Dragging her forth from this
slight shelter into an open space, he attacked her again,
this time with obvious fury, fairly raining a shower of
blows on the back of her head. She seemed too weak to make
any further attempt to escape and her cries, although
continued, were so faint that we could only just hear them.
I now realized for the first time that he was inspired by
the _lust of killing_ and not by sexual ardor. It was very
hard to refrain from rushing out and driving him away but
I restrained the impulse, not being willing to interrupt
a tragedy of such extraordinary, if repulsive, interest.
It would have made no difference anyway, for, this final
onslaught lasted only a very few seconds. During its
continuance the male Downy seemed literally beside himself
with rage. No Butcher Bird that I have ever watched
has shown, while dealing with a Mouse or Sparrow, more
murderous energy. After finishing the foul deed he left the
female lying perfectly motionless and flew up again into
the elm. We now went out and picked up the female. She was
still living but unable to move. The [back] of her head was
soaked in blood and her bare skull showed in places. She
died a little later. I skinned her and preserved her skull
which I have attached to the skin. It is _punctured in 10
or 12 places_. The bird was in normal condition physically
with healthy-looking ovary the ovules undeveloped. The only
injuries were to the skull.
Doubtless a few downy woodpeckers move southward in autumn or early
in winter, especially from the northern part of the bird’s range.
Dr. Charles W. Townsend in his Ipswich notes (MS.) says that he sees
“evident migrants not uncommonly in October and November.” But most
of our birds spend the whole year round with us, and in autumn we may
watch them as they make provision for winter. Even before the leaves
are off the trees--in September here in New England--we may hear, day
after day as we pass a certain tree, the tapping of a downy woodpecker
where, invisible from the ground, high up on a branch, it is digging
out a cavity, its roosting hole, in which it will sleep alone through
the long winter nights, and into which it may retreat in the daytime
whenever “the frost-wind blows.”
DRYOBATES PUBESCENS NELSONI Oberholser
NELSON’S DOWNY WOODPECKER
HABITS
This large race of the downy woodpecker inhabits the wooded regions
of northern Alaska and northern Canada, intergrading with _Dryobates
pubescens medianus_ in southern Canada and possibly in northern New
England.
Dr. H. C. Oberholser (1896a), in describing and naming it,
characterizes it as “similar to _Dryobates pubescens_ [=_medianus_],
but averaging larger; the under parts pure white instead of brownish;
the lower tail-coverts and outer tail-feathers averaging with much less
of black markings; red nuchal band of male averaging somewhat wider.”
Swainson and Richardson (1831) say: “This diminutive but exceedingly
industrious Woodpecker is a constant inhabitant of the fur-countries
up to the fifty-eighth parallel. It seeks its food principally on the
maple, elm, and ash, and, north of latitude 54°, where these trees
terminate, on the aspen and birch. Its researches are made mostly, if
not wholly, on live trees.”
Dr. E. W. Nelson (1887) writes:
Throughout the Territory [Alaska] where woodland or a
growth of bushes and small trees occurs the present bird is
certain to be found, and is a resident winter and summer.
It has been taken along the entire course of the Yukon as
well as at various points on the coast of Bering Sea, and
thence south at Kadiak and Sitka. In autumn it is a rather
common visitant to the coast of Norton Sound in spite of
the lack of timber, and it was not uncommon to see it
clinging to the sides of the houses, or to the flagstaff,
and other similar supports; after resting awhile, and,
perhaps, tapping a few times on the unproductive logs, they
would leave for a more promising field. They were seen
at times passing from one alder patch to another, on the
hill-sides, and they follow the spruces and other trees to
the shore of the sea.
While I was camping in spring, at the Yukon mouth, these
birds were rather common in the dense bushes along this
stream and its tributaries. Their holes were frequently
found in the decaying stubs, although I did not find a nest
containing eggs. This species appears to frequent deciduous
thickets and trees by preference, as, in addition to the
various times which I saw it in the interior in winter,
while at the Yukon mouth, I always found it about locations
where only deciduous trees and bushes were found, and its
holes were always made in cottonwood or birch-stubs.
Judged from what little is known about them, the nesting, food, and
other habits of Nelson’s downy woodpecker do not differ materially
from those of its more southern relatives, except as influenced by its
different environment. Living in the far north, where trees are small
and scarce, it has to be content to excavate its nest in small trees
or low stumps. There are very few eggs in collections; a set of five
eggs in the Thayer collection was taken from a hole 4 feet from the
ground in a rotten stump, near Fort Saskatchewan, Canada, on June 10,
1898. These eggs are like other eggs of the species, pure white, ovate
in shape, and somewhat glossy. The measurements of 31 eggs average
19.54 by 15.43 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure
=21.9= by 16.1, 19.4 by =16.4=, =17.5= by 15.0, and 18.65 by =14.28=
millimeters.
DRYOBATES PUBESCENS TURATI (Malherbe)
WILLOW WOODPECKER
HABITS
The downy woodpeckers of California were for many years all called
_D. p. gairdneri_, until Dr. Walter K. Fisher (1902) called attention
to the smaller and lighter-colored race, which inhabits much of the
coast region and nearly all the lowlands of southern California. For
this race, he very properly revived Malherbe’s name, as given above,
for this name was based on birds taken near Monterey. He gives as the
characters of the willow woodpecker:
Smaller than _Dryobates pubescens gairdneri_, with smaller
feet; under parts lighter; the elongated superciliary patch
and rictal stripe extending over sides of neck, pure white,
instead of smoky white of _gairdneri_; tertials always more
or less spotted with white. * * *
_Dryobates pubescens turati_ is a southern representative
of _gairdneri_, which it resembles in the smoky under parts
and restricted areas of white on the wings, and from which
it differs in its smaller size, much smaller feet, and
clearer white markings of head. The present form is near
true _pubescens_ of the Southern States, but differs from
it in having much less white on the wings, the coverts
and tertials of _pubescens_ being conspicuously and often
heavily marked with white. * * *
The willow woodpecker in a typical form breeds from Los
Angeles and San Bernardino counties north in the coast
ranges to San Francisco Bay, and along the west slope of
the Sierra Nevada at least to Yuba County. Intergradation
with _gairdneri_ occurs over the coast region north of
San Francisco Bay and in the mountains at the head of the
Sacramento Valley.
Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) say of the haunts of the willow
woodpecker in the Lassen Peak region: “Downy woodpeckers were seen most
often close to streams and in orchards. Their forage places included
the limbs or small trunks of willow, alder, cottonwood, sycamore,
valley oak, blue oak, digger pine, and yellow pine trees.”
_Nesting._--Major Bendire (1895) writes: “Mr. Charles A. Allen informs
me that it breeds in the oaks and willows along the Sacramento River,
Calif., but that it is not common. Its breeding sites seem to be
confined to deciduous trees, preferably dead ones, or old stumps,
and besides those already mentioned, sycamore and cottonwoods are
occasionally used. Their nesting sites are rarely found at any great
distance from the ground, usually ranging from 4 to 20 feet up and
rarely higher.”
W. L. Dawson (1923) says: “Willow woodpeckers, in the wild, place
their nests at considerable heights in deciduous trees, and those, if
possible, among thick growths on moist ground. Both sexes assist in
excavation, as in incubation. Partially decayed wood is selected, and
an opening made about an inch and a quarter in diameter. After driving
straight in for an inch or two, the passage turns down and widens two
or three diameters. At the depth of a foot or so the crystal white eggs
are deposited on a neat bed of fine chips. Incubation lasts twelve
days, and the young are hatched some time in May.”
_Eggs._--The willow woodpecker lays three to six eggs, more commonly
four or five; it may occasionally lay seven, as some of the other
western races have been known to do. The eggs are typical of
the species. The measurements of 40 eggs average 18.74 by 15.20
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =22.3= by 15.7,
18.4 by =16.3=, =17.3= by 14.5, and 18.0 by =14.4= millimeters.
_Food._--Mr. Dawson (1923) writes:
It is as an orchardist that the Willow Woodpecker deserves
the most careful consideration. Bird-lovers are, perhaps
prone to superlatives in commending their friends, but
it is safe to say that a more useful bird _for his
ounces_ than the downy woodpecker does not exist. He eats
not only ants and the larvae of wood-boring beetles,
but scale insects, plant lice, and the pupae of the
detestable coddling moth. The evidence is clear that these
incomparable tree experts, together with their friends, the
nuthatches, the chickadees, and the creepers, would insure
the health of our orchards if they were numerous enough.
It becomes of the highest importance, then, to study their
welfare in turn. In the northern and more elevated valleys
of the State, it may be worth while to offer them nuts or
to hang out a bit of suet in winter. In the South no such
precautions are necessary. A fundamental consideration,
however, is the provision of suitable nesting sites.
Experiment has shown that the downy’s forage range during
the breeding season is not extensive. The clamoring young
are fed by the product of nearby trees (fed, it may be, a
thousand insects a day). Their services, therefore, must be
secured in the orchard; and to this end the orchardist must
consent to leave certain dead branches--a foot or so at the
base of the larger ones will do--for a nesting site. Dead
wood, of course, invites insects; but the most serious and
frequent mistake which our California orchardists make is
to trim out all the dead wood from the fruit trees. A pair
of Willow Woodpeckers, or of Slender-billed Nuthatches,
will clean out all the dangerous pests from a dead tree,
and sixteen live ones to boot.
Grinnell and Storer (1924) made some studies of the feeding habits of
the willow woodpecker in the Yosemite region, of which they say:
A pair of Willow Woodpeckers proved to be regular tenants
of Curry’s apple orchard on the floor of the Yosemite
Valley. They, or their ancestors, had evidently worked
there for some years, with the result that most of the
150 trees in the orchard showed marks of their attention,
and many of the trunks were fairly riddled with drillings
somewhat like those of the sapsucker. * * *
However destructive this drilling may seem to be, it does
not seriously affect the vitality of the trees; the pits
are but 4 to 5 mm. deep, penetrating only those outer
layers of the bark which after a time scale off. We should
judge that all evidence of this woodpecker’s work is thus
removed through natural process within about three years.
The heartwood of the tree therefore seems not to be damaged
at all by the woodpecker’s work; it _is_ damaged, however,
by the work of the true sapsucker. Our inference from
these facts is that the willow woodpecker feeds on the
inner layers of bark, which the bird exposes through the
perforations described above. We watched a bird at work;
moreover, bits of inner bark-fibers were found adhering to
the bristles around the bill of a bird shot.
Evidently this observation and report started the same old controversy
that arose in connection with the eastern bird, which has been referred
to under that subspecies. Charles W. Michael intimated, in course of
conversation with Dr. Grinnell, that they were mistaken in ascribing
these drillings to willow woodpeckers rather than to red-breasted
sapsuckers. This led to the publication, by Dr. Grinnell (1928a), of
the evidence produced by Mr. Michael and himself, to which the reader
is referred. In spite of some evidence, and more supposed evidence,
to the contrary, it now seems to be generally conceded that the downy
woodpeckers seldom, if ever, drill these holes for themselves, but that
they often feed from holes drilled by sapsuckers. The small amount of
drilling done by the downy woodpeckers seems to do the trees no great
harm.
_Behavior._--Grinnell and Storer (1924) write:
The quietness of the willow woodpecker, as compared with
most other species in its family, is noteworthy. We heard
no single call note from it, and only at long intervals
did we hear the indescribable short trill characteristic
of this bird. Individuals are much restricted in range,
foraging along a relatively short line of cottonwoods or
willows day after day. Once a bird is located, it can
usually be found in the same place regularly. When foraging
it moves about with very little commotion, and even when
drilling for insects works so quietly that only a keen
auditor can detect its presence. No matter what the season
of the year, a pair of these birds is to be found usually
within hearing of each other. The bird’s close adherence
to deciduous trees makes it more conspicuous and easier to
observe in late fall and winter than in the summertime when
the trees are fully leaved out; but even in winter, our
experience with the willow woodpecker led us to consider
it about the most elusive of all the diurnal birds of the
Yosemite region.
We had always supposed that the rapid series of notes
uttered by this species were given only by the adult male
and hence constituted a sort of song. But on June 24, 1920,
in Yosemite Valley a juvenile male was found, with his head
out of a nest hole eight feet above the ground in a dead
branch of a live willow, giving every few moments this very
series of notes. The large _crown_ patch of red on this
bird established its age and sex clearly. There was every
indication that the notes were being given as a food call.
M. P. Skinner contributes the following note:
One seen in Sequoia National Park in August was drilling
at the bases of willow shoots near a river. It perched
lengthwise of the stems. It managed to keep well hidden,
but worked industriously and did not change its position
much during the short time that I could see it. Later,
I caught a glimpse occasionally of the woodpecker’s red
head, although the bird kept hidden most of the time. This
reminded me that I had often wondered why red usually
marked a woodpecker’s head. Certainly it makes a wonderful
recognition mark. In that way it might well be that red on
the constantly moving head of the woodpecker would be of
value to the race.
DRYOBATES BOREALIS (Vieillot)
RED-COCKADED WOODPECKER
PLATES 9, 10
HABITS
CONTRIBUTED BY EUGENE EDMOND MURPHEY
Introduced to ornithology by Wilson under the name of _Picus querulus_,
the red-cockaded woodpecker is locally common throughout the open
pine country of the South Atlantic and Gulf States and extends its
range into the pine country of Oklahoma and Missouri. Its preference
is very definitely for the open woods, shunning the dense thickets
of second-growth pine and the deep recesses of the cypress swamps
even when the latter are only a few hundred yards away from its
chosen environment. These open pine woods, which abound both in the
Austro-Riparian and Carolinian Zones of the South Atlantic and Gulf
States, represent not a normal growth of pine forest but an original
pine forest modified by the pernicious custom of annually burning the
woods under the impression that in that way next year’s pasturage will
be improved.
As a result, the younger trees and seedlings are killed off. Only the
hardier and more resistant survivors remain, so that there is little or
no underbrush and the general appearance of these woods is more that
of an open glade or park than of typical pine forest. William Brewster
(1882) comments on the character of these forests as follows: “The pine
lands of the South have an open park-like character that is a continual
surprise to one accustomed only to New England forests. The trees
rarely stand in close proximity to one another, and they are often so
widely scattered that the general effect is that of an opening rather
than a forest.” These pines are chiefly _Pinus palustris_ Miller,
_Pinus ellioti_ Engelmann, and _Pinus taeda_ Linnaeus.
From many sections of the South where it was formerly common, the
red-cockaded woodpecker has disappeared by reason of the ruthless
destruction of pine forests by the lumbermen. When the large timber is
cut out, the birds leave the locality and apparently do not return.
However, there is still a considerable amount of pine forest suitable
for its nesting that is held in private hands and not about to be
destroyed. In fact, such timber holdings are largely on the increase,
particularly in the “low country” of South Carolina and Georgia and
in certain zones around Thomasville, Ga., and Aiken, S. C., where vast
tracts are being conserved by private ownership as game refuges and
shooting preserves.
There is also a very considerable amount of intelligent reforestation
being carried out, which in time will also furnish adequate and
suitable breeding grounds. This species is so highly specialized at
least in the South Atlantic States in its habits and its choice of
environment that the destruction of the pine forests would probably put
its existence in serious jeopardy.
_Nesting._--Audubon (1842) stated that “the nest is not unfrequently
bored in a decayed stump about thirty feet high.” G. W. Morse (1927)
found the bird nesting in a willow tree in a pasture in Oklahoma. M.
G. Vaiden (MS.) reports from Collins, Miss., the taking of a nest
from a pine tree, the top of which was dead and the nest hole about 8
feet from the top. Arthur T. Wayne (1906), who has probably had more
intimate experience with this bird than any other observer, states:
I have seen perhaps a thousand holes in which this
woodpecker had bred or was breeding, and _every one_ was
excavated in a _living_ pine tree, ranging from eighteen
to one hundred feet above the ground. This bird never lays
its eggs until the pine gum pours freely from beneath and
around the hole, and in order to accelerate the flow the
birds puncture the bark to the “skin” of the tree thereby
causing the gum to exude freely. This species, unlike the
Pileated Woodpecker, returns to the same hole year after
year until it can no longer make the gum exude. But like
the Pileated Woodpecker, it is much attached to the tree
in which it has first made its nest, and as long as it can
find a suitable spot it will continue to excavate new holes
until the tree is _killed_ by this process of boring. I
have frequently counted as many as four holes in one tree,
and in two instances I have seen as many as eight. These
birds seem to know by instinct that the center of the tree
is rotten, or what lumber men call “black-heart,” and they
never make a mistake when selecting a tree! The hole is
bored through the solid wood, generally a little upward,
and to the center of the tree (which is always rotten).
The overwhelming majority of observers who have studied the
red-cockaded woodpecker in its normal habitat concur in the opinion
that the site of selection for the nest hole is in a living pine that,
however, has begun to rot at the core, and this condition of the
heart of the tree the birds seem to be able to discern with unfailing
accuracy. All the nests I have seen and studied were in living pines,
and other ornithologists have made similar observations. T. Gilbert
Pearson (1909) says: “So far as I have observed, always excavated
in the trunk of a living pine tree. The site chosen varies from
twenty-five to fifty feet from the earth.” H. L. Harllee (MS.), of
Florence, S. C, writes: “It nests in the same hole each year in close
proximity to several pairs, usually from two to four.” The observations
of Gilbert R. Rossignol (MS.), writing from Savannah, Ga., agree with
the foregoing. He states: “Before the lumberman invaded our great pine
forests, the red-cockaded was fairly common, for I have found 10 or 12
pairs nesting in a 50-acre tract, provided, of course, that the pine
trees were not too close to one another. These little woodpeckers did
not like dark heavily timbered forests. The bird drills a hole in a
living pine ranging from 25 to 80 or more feet high, and it is almost
impossible to get the eggs without full equipment. It takes a brace
and bit to bore holes a little above where you think the bottom of the
nest is located, and then sometimes you strike below it, or again right
into it on an incomplete set or no eggs at all. The eggs I have found
were always more or less sticky with pine gum. This bird will nest in
the same hole for several years and use the same tree probably during
its entire life, but if the tree dies, or the gum does not flow freely,
the birds will desert their old home.” Henry Nehrling (1882), writing
from Texas, states that “it usually excavates its nesting sites in
deciduous trees,” and E. A. McIlhenny (Bendire, 1895) that “in southern
Louisiana it generally nests in willow and china trees.” The nesting
hole is bored usually slightly upward for several inches then straight
through into the softer unsound heart of the tree and downward for 8
inches to a foot or more. The nest cavity is gourd-shaped, and the
eggs are laid upon fine chips and debris in the bottom of the cavity.
The most striking thing about the nesting site, however, is due to the
bird’s custom of drilling numerous small holes through the bark of the
tree until the resin exudes freely. This glazed patch of gum around
the nesting hole is unmistakable and when once seen becomes an easy
landmark for the location of the nests, inasmuch as it may be discerned
through the open woods for a distance of several hundred yards. During
the period of incubation, the birds are a sorry spectacle, the abdomen
being largely denuded of feathers, as is customary with many birds,
and the breast feathers from the clavicle to the end of the sternum
begaumed and matted together with resin, and, in fact, they remain
permanently unfit to be taken as specimens until the next molting has
been completed.
The nidification is earlier along the coast and southward than in
the interior and toward the northern limits of its range, beginning
sometimes as early as February, but the major nesting season may be
said to be the last week in April and the first week in May.
S. A. Grimes tells us that old nests of this species are used by
red-bellied and red-headed woodpeckers, white-breasted nuthatches,
bluebirds, crested flycatchers, and flying squirrels.
_Eggs._--The eggs vary from three to five in number, the latter being
unusual; they are elliptically ovate in shape, pure glossy white,
and semitranslucent when fresh. Not infrequently they are stained or
smeared with resin from the breast feathers of the incubating bird. As
a rule only one brood is raised in a season unless the first set has
been taken, and both parents participate in incubation. There is some
evidence tending to show that the eggs and even the unfledged young
are sometimes thrown out of the nest by the birds when it has been
disturbed.
The measurements of 50 eggs average 24.04 by 17.86 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =26.42= by 18.54, 26.4 by
=19.8=, =21.38= by 17.46, and 23.77 by =16.66= millimeters.
_Plumages._--The young in their first plumage bear the general color
pattern of the adults with this important exception--the young male has
a dull crimson oval central crown patch. However, while the pattern is
identical with that of adult birds, the black is replaced by a dark
sepia merging at times into an aniline black, and the bluish gloss
evident on the crowns of the mature birds is lacking. Similarly, the
feathers of the cheek patch in both sexes lack the fine silky gloss and
texture that are later attained. The underparts show uniformly a buffy
or ochraceous wash everywhere, and the barring of the tail is more
pronounced. During this phase, the plumage is much softer and looser
than it subsequently becomes.
With the first molt, the red crown patch is lost.
It is the belief of the writer, without sufficient specimens properly
to verify it, that the cockades of the full adult male plumage are not
attained until at least the third molt. Without careful dissection
and sex determination of the immature birds, a fact notoriously
difficult to the average ornithologist, the young of both sexes, after
the crown patch is lost and the cockades have not appeared, would be
indistinguishable.
_Food._--The food, like that of most woodpeckers, consists primarily of
larvae of various wood-boring insects, although beetles and grubs of
other kinds as well as ants, grasshoppers, crickets, and caterpillars
are frequently taken. An interesting habit of the red-cockaded
woodpecker is that of going into the cornfields throughout the South
at the time when the corn is at the roasting-ear stage and when many
of the ears are infested with a worm that damages the grain to a very
considerable extent. This habit is reported by Billy Ward (1930), of
Timmonsville, S. C., and by Edward Dingle (1926), of Mount Pleasant, S.
C., who says, “The Red-cockaded Woodpecker (_Phrenopicus borealis_) is
very commonly found in cornfields during the time the corn is in the
ear; in fact, the bird spends a large part of its time at this season
in extracting the worms that bore into the ears of corn. I have often,
at short distance, watched them engaged in this valuable work.” They
also feed on pine mast, the small wild grape, pokeberries, and other
small wild fruit. I have never seen them in orchards or in fig trees,
where the red-headed woodpecker is frequently found feeding.
As far as is known, this species does not visit cultivated fields,
except as above referred to, or orchards and is not destructive to
fruit and deserves to be regarded as wholly beneficial. This statement
takes into account the fact that a number of observers say that they
will continue to bore into certain pines that they have selected for a
nesting site until the tree is killed. The fact is, however, that the
tree is diseased and unsound before the woodpecker begins to utilize it
and is already worthless for lumber, so that this species seems worthy
of complete protection.
_Behavior._--The bird is strikingly gregarious as compared with other
woodpeckers and is ordinarily to be found in small groups of six,
eight, or even ten individuals, which seem to keep in continuous touch
with one another, calling back and forth, sounding their drum roll on
resonant timber and apparently not satisfied unless assured of the near
presence of the group.
This behavior is no doubt due to the fact that the family remains
together until early in winter, although family groups are probably
joined by other individuals until the number above referred to is
attained. Numerous observers speak of the frequent association of the
red-cockaded woodpecker with other birds. This to the mind of the
writer, however, is purely accidental and is due to the fact that
there are certain species of birds that inhabit the open pineries and
have common feeding ground and habitat. It is true that one often sees
bluebirds, tufted titmice, white-breasted and brown-headed nuthatches,
and red-cockaded woodpeckers in the same woodland and that when
sitting quietly and concealed all the species mentioned pass in review
before the observer, but probably it is not a true gregariousness that
embraces all these various species; rather the restlessness that so
frequently seems to possess the avian population of a given tract of
woods communicates itself from one to the other and the entire avifauna
of a limited patch of woodland begins to move in a certain direction
perhaps because of some alarm which has been communicated from one
member of the group to the others.
These woodpeckers are exceedingly active, galloping from one tree to
another and rapidly ascending it in quest of food or apparently often
merely to secure a better observation point somewhere near the top of
the tree. Their usual custom is to ascend the tree in spirals, although
they have frequently been observed to continue a straight course up
the trunk particularly when feeding. The bird may be described as wary
rather than shy and is most adept at the familiar woodpecker trick
of keeping the trunk of the tree between an approaching observer and
itself.
As a rule they do not feed close to the ground, nor have I ever
observed one on the ground even after the burning of a woodland, at
which time the flicker and the red-bellied woodpecker may both be
observed on the ground searching for grubs and insects killed by
the blaze. Dr. Irving Phinizy (MS.) states that he has on several
occasions observed the red-cockaded woodpecker descend a tree in a
series of backward hops. This the writer has never observed. Arthur H.
Howell (1932) states that the ivorybill inches backward down a tree,
a somewhat different procedure. Frequently also they are observed,
particularly when feeding near the top of a pine and out toward the end
of a limb, to descend the hanging limb nuthatch fashion. Much of their
feeding is done in the highest branches of the trees, and they seem
to have a predilection for remaining there, spending a considerable
portion of their time in the very crown of the tree, where they are
very difficult to see.
They are exceedingly quarrelsome, particularly during the breeding
season, yet their quarrels do not seem to be so serious or so prolonged
as those of the red-headed woodpecker; and not infrequently, after the
lapse of a very little time, birds that have been scolding one another
most extensively again alight on the same pine tree and go about their
respective businesses in perfect amity.
C. J. Maynard (1896) states, concerning its habits, as follows:
Wilson called the Cockaded Woodpeckers, _Picus querulus_,
and this seems, at first glance, to be a most appropriate
name, for, of all the family, these are not only the most
noisy, but their notes are given in a decidedly fretful
tone as if the birds were constantly in an irritable state
of mind. It must have been upon the impulse of the moment,
however, that the Pioneer Ornithologist gave them the
name of Querulus Woodpeckers, for a close study of their
habits gives a very different impression of them. They
are, in fact, a most jovial class of birds, being almost
constantly engaged in sporting about the tops of tall pines
or chasing one another from tree to tree, uttering their
peevish sounding notes very frequently when in the best
humor. The noise is more noticeable because they congregate
in flocks, and it is quite rare to find even a pair without
other companions. They are also fond of the company of
other members of the family and will even associate with
the Jays, Blue Birds, or Warblers. This gregarious instinct
does not forsake them during the breeding season, for
they build in detached communities. The nests are almost
always in living pines, often thirty or forty feet from the
ground; thus, as the trunks of these trees are covered with
a smooth bark, it is quite difficult to climb them and,
when the nests are reached it is not easy to cut the hard
wood, especially as the straight trunks afford no foot-hold.
In flight, the cockaded woodpeckers resemble the downy
but when they alight they strike the object upon which
they wish to rest very hard. Like the preceding species,
they are also exceedingly agile, moving spirally up the
tall tree trunks with great celerity. Although they will
occasionally alight near the ground, yet they spend the
greater part of their time in the tops of the lofty pines;
in fact, they pass a large portion of their lives there,
for they are seldom, if ever, found elsewhere than in the
piney woods and they inhabit this kind of woodland even to
the extreme southern portion of the main-land of Florida.
The bird is resident throughout its normal range, although David V.
Hembree, of Roswell, Ga., in the very foothills of the Appalachian
Range, a lifelong student and collector of birds, writes me, “This
bird does not breed in this locality. I have never seen a nest. A few
are found here, nearly always males in April or May, and I have always
thought them to be migrants or strays from their regular range.”
In common with the other small black and white woodpeckers, this
species carries the vernacular name of sapsucker and in the main is
not differentiated from the others, although one astute lumberman once
said to me: “Speaking of sapsuckers, there _is_ a piney-woods sapsucker
which is different from the others, leastways he acts different.”
_Voice._--The voice is variously described by different observers--
“harsh and discordant,” “almost exactly resembling the calls of the
Brownheaded Nuthatch,” “resembling the yank-yank of a White-breasted
Nuthatch,” “they have sharp calls more like loud sparrow alarms than
woodpecker notes,” “resembling the querulous cries of young birds.”
The bird is noisy, and its call notes and scolding notes are to the ear
of the writer quite radically different, the scolding note being more
prolonged, somewhat rolling in character and lower in pitch. There is
a definite nasal character to a note that to that extent does resemble
the notes of the nuthatch. The note is quite characteristic and when
once learned is distinguishable with ease from that of the other small
woodpeckers. It resembles more the high note of some small woodwind
instrument than anything else, having a definite clarinetlike quality.
Descriptions of bird notes are notoriously variable because of
the variability of the human ear, and many attempts at phonetic
reproduction of the bird notes are unsuccessful, and when, as is so
often done, the attempt is directed to reproduction in syllables, the
result is usually a futile and meaningless onomatopoeia.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Southeastern United States; nonmigratory.
The range of the red-cockaded woodpecker extends =north= to
northeastern Oklahoma (Copan); southern Missouri (Shannon County);
Tennessee (Beersheba and Allardt); and North Carolina (Red Springs and
Beaufort). =East= on the Atlantic coast from North Carolina (Beaufort)
to southern Florida (Long Pine Key). =South= on the Gulf coast from the
Florida Keys (Long Pine Key) to southeastern Texas (Houston). =West= to
Texas (Houston); northwestern Louisiana (Mansfield); probably western
Arkansas (Mena); and eastern Oklahoma (Tulsa and Copan).
_Casual records._--It seems probable that this species may breed or
upon occasion has bred in the vicinity of Raleigh, N. C., as it was
noted there several times in April from 1890 to 1898. It also has
been reported as seen at Piney Creek, N. C., on July 6, 1932, and on
September 12, 1933.
A specimen in the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia was
collected near that city in 1861; one in the collection of the Ohio
State University was taken near Columbus, Ohio, on March 15, 1872.
According to Stone (1909) the collection of George N. Lawrence
contained a specimen taken near Hoboken, N. J.
_Egg dates._--Florida: 30 records, April 3 to May 28; 15 records,
April 29 to May 20, indicating the height of the season.
South Carolina: 14 records, April 27 to May 28.
DRYOBATES SCALARIS SYMPLECTUS Oberholser
TEXAS WOODPECKER
HABITS
This is the subspecies that was formerly known as Baird’s woodpecker,
_Dryobates scalaris bairdi_, which was then understood to be the
resident bird of Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. But when Dr. H. C.
Oberholser (1911b) revised the _scalaris_ group, the name _bairdi_
was restricted to the bird of central Mexico, and the Texas bird
was described, as a new subspecies, under the above name. It was
characterized as follows:
Resembling _Dryobates scalaris cactophilus_, but male
smaller; upper parts lighter, the white bars wider, the
black bars narrower, and with more white on pileum; and
sides of breast less often _streaked_ (mostly spotted). * * *
This new subspecies differs from _Dryobates scalaris
bairdi_, from Hidalgo, much as does _Dryobates scalaris
cactophilus_, except that it is smaller, and still more
extensively white on all the upper parts.
This race reaches its extreme development in Texas; and
specimens from central Tamaulipas and central Nuevo
Leon are not so light above, showing a tendency toward
_Dryobates scalaris bairdi_. They are also somewhat more
smoky below. There is, however, no difference in size
between examples from Texas and Tamaulipas.
The range of the Texas woodpecker extends northward into southeastern
Colorado and southward into southern Tamaulipas. George Finlay Simmons
(1925) says that in Texas it is “rather general in distribution and in
choice of habitat; somewhat open post oak woods and oak upland gravel
terraces; mesquite forests; hackberry shade trees in town; mesquite
association pasturelands; open woods not far from water; marginal
timber along streams. In the hills, cottonwoods and oaks along stream
bottoms; wooded slopes of gorges. In winter, leafless city shade
hackberry trees.”
The Texas woodpecker is widely distributed and fairly common all over
Texas, except in the extreme eastern and extreme western portions;
it is a well known and familiar bird, just as our eastern downy
woodpecker is in the East; it is locally known as the “Texan sapsucker”
or “ladder-backed woodpecker.” Most of its habits are similar to
those of the cactus woodpecker, but it seems to enjoy a somewhat more
diversified habitat and is more inclined to forage and nest in larger
trees; it is not so strictly confined to the deserts and their environs.
_Nesting._--Mr. Simmons (1925) says that the nest is located from “4 to
25, average 12, feet from ground, in rotten stubs or dead and partly
decayed branches of oak, mesquite, hackberry, and willow trees, usually
alongside lake, river, creek, or ravine; when suitable trees are not
to be found, nests in cedar fence posts or telegraph poles along
roadsides; when in mesquite tree on mesquite-covered prairie, entrance
of cavity on under side of low, drooping limb. * * * Entrance diameter
1.50. Depth of cavity 7 to 8, rarely 10.”
_Eggs._--The Texas woodpecker lays 2 to 6 eggs, Usually 4 or 5,
rarely as many as 7. These are indistinguishable from the eggs of
the cactus woodpecker. The measurements of 51 eggs average 20.50 by
15.83 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =22.86=
by 15.75, 20.32 by =17.02=, =17.27= by 15.49, and 19.05 by =14.73=
millimeters.
_Food._--Mr. Simmons (1925) says that it “searches high up on the
knotty trunks of oak trees in open groves for larvae and eggs of
injurious wood-boring insects, for the adults of similar as well as
other insects, and for weevils and ants.”
_Voice._--Simmons (1925) says that this is “usually a thin,
high-pitched, shrill _cheek_; _tcheek, queep_ or _queep-queep_,
uttered as the bird gives a hop in its progress up the
tree-trunk. Sometimes an incredibly rapid, shrill, ringing, even,
not-so-high-pitched _cheeky-cheeky-cheeky-cheeky-cheeky_ or
_tchee-dee-dee-dee-dee-dee-dee-dee-dee-deet_; less commonly, _chickp,
chickp, chick-chick-chick-chick-chick-chick-chick-chick_. Drums rapidly
with its bill on dead limb of tree at any time of year.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Southwestern United States, Mexico, and British Honduras;
nonmigratory.
The range of this woodpecker extends =north= to southern California
(Hesperia and Needles); southern Nevada (Upper Cottonwood Springs);
southern Utah (Virgin River Valley); and probably southeastern
Colorado (Swink). =East= to probably southeastern Colorado (Swink and
Springfield); western Oklahoma (Kenton and Hollis); Texas (San Angelo,
Kerrville, Boerne, San Antonio, Corpus Christi, and Brownsville);
Tamaulipas (Presas and Ciudad Victoria); Yucatan (Chichen-Itza);
Quintana Roo (Cozumel Island); and British Honduras (Manatee Lagoon and
Ycacos Lagoon). =South= to British Honduras (Ycacos Lagoon); Jalisco
(Zapotlan); Nayarit (Tres Marias Islands); and Baja California (Cape
San Lucas). =West= to Baja California (Cape San Lucas, San Jose del
Cabo, El Sauz, San Fernando, and Cocopah); and southern California
(Paint Canyon, White Water, and Hesperia).
The range as above outlined applies to the entire species, which has,
however, been divided into 15 or more subspecies or geographic races.
Most of these, including the typical variety (_Dryobates scalaris
scalaris_), are found only in regions south of the Rio Grande. The four
races found in North America are distributed as follows: The Texas
woodpecker (_D. s. symplectus_) is found from southeastern Colorado
south and east through east-central Texas, to Coahuila, Tamaulipas,
and Nuevo Leon. The cactus woodpecker (_D. s. cactophilus_) ranges
from western Texas through New Mexico, Arizona, and southern Utah and
Nevada south to northern Durango. The western edge of the range of
this race cuts across southeastern California and northeastern Baja
California. The San Fernando woodpecker (_D. s. eremicus_) is found
in northern Baja California except for the northeastern part. The San
Lucas woodpecker (_D. s. lucasanus_) occurs in southern part of Baja
California north to about latitude 29° N.
_Egg dates._--California: 7 records, April 11 to May 9.
Baja California: 12 records, April 16 to June 2.
Texas: 45 records, April 14 to June 22; 23 records, April 20 to
May 7, indicating the height of the season.
DRYOBATES SCALARIS LUCASANUS (Xantus)
SAN LUCAS WOODPECKER
HABITS
The ladder-backed woodpecker of the southern half of the peninsula
of Baja California, Mexico, has long been recognized as a distinct
subspecies under the above name. It inhabits the Lower Austral deserts
from Cape San Lucas north to about latitude 29° N. William Brewster
(1902) says: “Mr. Frazar considers this woodpecker ‘rather common and
generally distributed in the cape region, except on the mountains,
where it was not met with.’ He found it most numerous about La Paz, but
did not see it anywhere to the northward of that place during his trip
along the Gulf coast.”
This is a smaller bird than _Dryobates scalaris eremicus_ from the
northern half of Baja California; both upper and lower surfaces are
lighter in color, with the white bars on the back broader and with the
sides of the breast spotted. Mr. Brewster (1902) writes:
All the characters which have been proposed for this
Woodpecker are shown by the large series before me to be
subject to much variation, but this, as in the case of
_Melanerpes angustifrons_, is confined within limits which
do not overlap, if, indeed, they quite reach those of the
bird’s nearest allies. The restriction of the black on the
outer tail feathers is perhaps its best distinguishing
feature, although this is not at all uniform, for many of
my specimens have three complete dark bars crossing both
webs of the outer tail feathers, while in one a fourth bar
is only broken by a small space near the middle of the
feather. The width of the dark bars on the back is also
variable, although these bars are usually wider than in any
of the allied forms. The feet average larger than those
of _bairdi_, but they are by no means _always_ larger. A
difference which I do not find mentioned in descriptions,
but which is shown by my series to be quite as constant as
most of the characters that have been proposed, is that the
white spots on the top of the head are much larger and more
numerous than in _bairdi_, while the red is less vivid and
more nearly restricted to the crown and occiput.
Griffing Bancroft (1930) writes of this woodpecker, in central Lower
California, near the northern limit of its supposed range:
This little denizen of brush and thick undergrowth requires
a heavy stand of low cactuses in which to feed and rest.
It occurs from the shores of the Gulf to the mouth of José
María Cañon. Though the rarest of the resident Picidae
it is still fairly common. Its nesting instincts are
quite distinct from other _Dryobates scalaris_. They,
similarly situated, would utilize sahuaro, it is true, but
they would also be prone to add such substitutes as dry
mescal stalks, telephone poles, tree yucca and mesquite
and would, more often than not, chose one of these other
sites by preference. But _lucasanus_ confines itself to
the cardón, at least in the district we were studying,
selecting a single-stalked giant cactus and drilling its
hole very near the top of the plant. As a result the
nest-cavity is rather uniformly twenty feet above ground.
The entrance hole is at the top of a cavity typically five
inches in diameter by fifteen in depth. No foreign material
is brought in for a nest. The eggs lie on the chips that
fall in the process of excavating.
The number of eggs in a clutch is two, three, or rarely
four. The first two weeks in May find almost all the San
Lucas Woodpeckers at the peak of laying. After the middle
of the month nests with young may be expected. The parent
bird will ordinarily flush, especially if the cardón be
tapped, but it is not very nervous about its home. It is
too busy with family duties to waste much attention on
strangers.
The eggs are similar to those of the other subspecies. Bancroft (1930)
gives the average measurements of 23 eggs as 22.9 by 18.1 millimeters.
The measurements of 10 other eggs average 21.30 by 16.61 millimeters;
the eggs, in this series, showing the four extremes measure =24.40=
by 18.70, 23.70 by =18.80=, =19.50= by 16.80, and 21.43 by =15.42=
millimeters.
DRYOBATES SCALARIS CACTOPHILUS Oberholser
CACTUS WOODPECKER
HABITS
The ladder-backed woodpeckers are quite widely distributed in the
Southwestern United States and in nearly all Mexico and in British
Honduras, chiefly in the Lower Austral and Tropical Zones. When Dr.
Harry C. Oberholser (1911b) wrote his revision of this group, he split
the species _Dryobates scalaris_ into 15 subspecies, 9 of which he
described and named as new subspecies. Only two of these subspecies
are found within the limits of the United States, and only two in Baja
California, giving us four on our Check-List.
The name _Dryobates scalaris bairdi_, which was for a long time used
to designate the ladder-backed woodpeckers of the United States, was
restricted by Oberholser to a Mexican form. He gave as the characters
of _cactophilus_, “much like _Dryobates scalaris eremicus_, but
smaller, particularly the tail and bill; lower surface lighter,
laterally almost always _streaked_ with black; upper parts lighter--the
black bars on back and scapulars narrower; wing-quills with larger
spots and broader bars of white; outer long rectrices with exterior
webs barred throughout with black; black bars on posterior lower
surface narrower.”
Ridgway (1914) compares it with _symplectus_, the Texas bird, as
“slightly larger, and with black bars on back, etc., decidedly broader.”
The cactus woodpecker ranges, according to the 1931 A. O. U.
Check-List, from “central western Texas through New Mexico and Arizona
to extreme northeastern Lower California and southeastern California,
north to extreme southern Nevada and southwestern Utah, and south to
northern Durango.” It frequents the deserts, or the borders of the
deserts, and the lower slopes of the mountains in the Sonoran Zone, a
hot, dry region where there are no trees of any size and where this is
about the only species of woodpecker found. We never found it in the
giant-cactus, or saguaro, region, where it seemed to be replaced by
the noisy Gila woodpecker and Mearns’s gilded flicker. W. Leon Dawson
(1923) says:
Of course it must not be understood that the Cactus
Woodpecker tries to live in the central wastes of the
desert; for however much it may forage over the creosote
and cholla patches, on occasion, it requires something of
more ample girth for a nesting site. Hence its breeding
range is confined to the more fruitful upper edges of
the Lower Sonoran zone, and to the moister bottoms. In
the former situation the dried stalks of the agave and
the lesser yucca (_whipplei_), or of the Joshua tree
(_Yucca arborescens_), and the Mohave Yucca offer asylum.
In the valley of the Colorado, fearing no rivalry from
_D. pubescens turati_, the Cactus Woodpecker is able to
monopolize the willows which grow so rankly along the
lagoons.
Referring to Arizona, Harry S. Swarth (1904) says: “This woodpecker is
seldom seen above 5,500 feet, and rarely ventures into the canyons. On
the plains below, wherever there is brush or trees, and all along the
San Pedro River it is very common, as in fact, I have found it in all
similar places I have visited in southern Arizona.”
Swarth says elsewhere (1929):
In southeastern Arizona, east of the Santa Rita Mountains,
the vast areas of prairie land are for the most part
unsuitable to this species. Wherever even a scanty growth
of chaparral has found a foothold, though, the Cactus
Woodpecker is pretty sure to occur, for it does not require
large trees. Along the streams and washes in this same
area, as elsewhere, it does frequent the sycamores and
other larger growths, but these do not form the preferred
habitat. In the lowlands west of the Santa Rita Mountains
this woodpecker is in the surroundings that suit it best.
It does not frequent the giant cactus (I do not believe
that there is a known instance of its nesting in one), but
stays nearer the ground, in cholla cactus, creosote bush,
catclaw or other low-growing vegetation.
_Nesting._--Major Bendire (1895) writes:
In southern New Mexico and Arizona it nests sometimes in
the flowering stems of the agave plant and also in yucca
trees, and I have found it nesting on Rillito Creek,
Arizona, in a small dead willow sapling not over 3½ inches
in diameter. The cavity was about 12 feet from the ground
and 10 inches in depth, and the entrance hole a trifle over
1½ inches in diameter. This nest was found on June 8, 1872,
and contained only two eggs, in which incubation was about
one-half advanced; the eggs laid on fine chips. The nesting
sites are placed at various distances from the ground, from
3 to 30, usually from 6 to 14 feet. Dead branches of trees
or partly decayed ones seem to be preferred to live ones.
* * * It nests by preference in mesquite trees, one of our
hardest woods, and it must require a long time to chisel
out a nesting site in one of these trees. While it is true
that the heart is usually more or less decayed, the birds
have first to work through an inch or two of solid wood
which is almost impervious to a sharp ax.
Mrs. Florence M. Bailey (1928) says that in New Mexico the nests are
“from 2 to 30 feet from the ground in holes in mesquite, screw bean,
palo verde, hackberry, and China trees, willows, cottonwoods, walnuts,
oaks, and other trees, telegraph poles, fence posts, and stalks of
agave, yucca, and cactus.”
While collecting with Frank C. Willard, in southern Arizona, we found
the cactus woodpecker fairly common about Tombstone and near Fairbanks
on the San Pedro River. Near the former place, one nest was 6½ feet up
in a fence post; the cavity was about 10 inches deep and 3¼ inches in
diameter at the bottom; another nest was in a cavity 12 inches deep in
the dry stalk of a mescal about 5 feet from the ground. In the valley
of the San Pedro River, we found a nest about 12 feet from the ground
in a willow stub; and another nest was located in a stump of a willow
beside a fence; it was only 6 feet up in the solid part of the stub,
and so well concealed behind a bunch of sprouts that we had passed it
many times without seeing it.
Mr. Willard (1918) says:
“Along the San Pedro River the Cactus Woodpecker
(_Dryobates s. cactophilus_) is the only one nesting at all
commonly. In the lines of willows bordering the irrigation
ditches and in all the small groups found along the river
banks, I had quite a list of pairs whose nests I could
count upon finding within certain circumscribed areas.
They exhibited individual characteristics. One pair never
dug its nest lower than twenty feet from the ground and
usually selected a site that overhung the water. Another
liked short stubs not over five or six feet tall. Another
was partial to fence posts. While these selections were
not invariably followed they were so usual that I always
began my search by examining all the available sites of
that character before looking at others and was usually
successful in my first search.”
_Eggs._--The cactus woodpecker lays 2 to 6 eggs, usually 4 or 5.
These are usually oval or short oval, sometimes elliptical-oval or
elliptical-ovate. They are pure white and more or less glossy. The
measurements of 18 eggs average 21.48 by 16.18 millimeters; the eggs
showing the four extremes measure =23.02= by 16.67, 22.5 by =17.0=, and
=19.2= by =15.1= millimeters. Bendire (1895) says that incubation lasts
for about 13 days and is shared by both sexes.
_Plumages._--The young are probably hatched naked (I have not seen
any), as is the case with other woodpeckers, but the juvenal plumage is
acquired before the young bird leaves the nest. This first plumage is
much like that of the adult male, but the sexes are not quite alike.
In the young male, the forehead, sides of the occiput, and the nape
are uniform black; only the crown is scarlet, more or less dotted with
white. The young female is similar to the young male, except that there
is usually much less scarlet on the crown, often only a few scarlet
tips. In both sexes the back is barred with dull black and grayish
white, instead of the clear black and white of the adult; the under
parts are “vinaceous-buff,” faintly spotted on the sides and flanks;
the plumage is softer and the markings are not so clearly defined as
in the adult. Just how long this plumage is worn I have not been able
to determine, but July birds show signs of body molt and an increasing
amount of the clear black streaks of the adult plumage on the sides and
flanks. Probably a plumage that is practically adult is assumed by the
first fall at the latest. Adults apparently have a complete annual molt
in summer, mainly in August.
_Food._--The cactus woodpecker lives mainly on the larvae of
wood-boring beetles, which it gleans from the trunks and branches
of trees. It also eats the larvae of the coddling moth and other
Lepidoptera, ants, caterpillars, and cotton worms. It usually forages
at low elevations on small trees, shrubs, and various cacti and is
often seen feeding on the ground. Major Bendire (1895) says that this
woodpecker, “like several other species, is very fond of the ripe
figlike fruit of the giant cactus, and I have met it more than once in
Sahuarito Pass, Arizona, eating it on the ground.”
_Voice._--Ralph Hoffmann (1927) compares the notes of the cactus
woodpecker with those of the downy woodpecker and says that “the common
notes are a single high-pitched _tschik_ or a longer rattling call with
a slight fall toward the end. It often calls as it flies, and like
other woodpeckers drums in spring on dry limbs.” Dawson (1923) refers
to the notes as “his _plink, plink_, and his long rolling chirrup.”
_Field marks._--A small woodpecker with the upper parts distinctly and
extensively barred with black and white is either one of the races
of _Dryobates scalaris_, commonly called ladderbacks, or _Dryobates
nuttalli_. These two species are very much alike in superficial
appearance and might be easily confused; but fortunately their ranges
do not overlap, except to a slight extent in some of the mountain
passes of southeastern California. Mr. Dawson (1923) says that the
cactus woodpecker “is browner above, more strikingly, heavily, and
numerously barred, with less of black on sides of head, and red (of
adult male) pervading crown as well as nape.”
_Winter._--W. E. D. Scott (1886) says that these woodpeckers “are at
times gregarious. I particularly noticed this in December, 1885, when
I frequently met the species in flocks of from four to a dozen, on the
plains at an altitude of 3,000 feet.”
DRYOBATES SCALARIS EREMICUS Oberholser
SAN FERNANDO WOODPECKER
HABITS
This race of ladder-backed woodpeckers occupies the northern half of
Baja California, north of the range of _Dryobates scalaris lucasanus_,
with which it intergrades about midway the peninsular. It is described
by Dr. H. C. Oberholser (1911b) as “similar to _Dryobates scalaris
lucasanus_, but larger; lower surface darker; upper parts darker, the
white bars on back averaging narrower and less regular, the black bars
wider; black bars on posterior lower parts averaging somewhat wider.”
Very little seems to have appeared in print about this woodpecker,
but, as it lives in a similar habitat to that occupied by the San
Lucas woodpecker, it probably does not differ materially from it in
habits. It lives in the lowland, desert regions and nests in the giant
cactus. Both races are said to be rather shy. It is replaced in extreme
northwestern Baja California by Nuttall’s woodpecker and in the extreme
northeast by the cactus woodpecker.
Griffing Bancroft (1930) states that the measurements of nine eggs of
this subspecies average 21.7 by 16.7 millimeters.
DRYOBATES NUTTALLI (Gambel)
NUTTALL’S WOODPECKER
PLATES 11, 12
HABITS
Though closely resembling, superficially, the ladder-backed woodpeckers
of the _scalaris_ group, Nuttall’s woodpecker is a very distinct
species; the ranges of the two species come together at several points
but do not overlap; and the habitats of the two are in different
types of environment. The 1931 A. O. U. Check-List gives the range
of _nuttalli_ as “Upper Austral Zone west of the southern Cascade
Mountains and the Sierra Nevada from southern Oregon to northwestern
Lower California.”
W. Leon Dawson (1923) described the haunts of this woodpecker very
well, as follows:
Although one who is forming the acquaintance of the Nuttall
Woodpecker soon learns where to look for him, his range
is hard to characterize in terms of associations. Upper
Sonoran, foothill, oak, live oak, chaparral, deciduous
trees bordering narrow stream beds--all these apply to
_nuttalli_ well enough, but they are not exhaustive, save
for the first, which is all inclusive. Within Upper Sonoran
limits it is, perhaps, easier to tell where he will not be
found; thus, not (or only occasionally) in pine timber;
not in stands of pure willow (which are given over to _D.
pubescens turati_); not in orchards, nor about cultures of
any sort; not, most decidedly, “nesting in giant cactus.”
Least of all, is it “seldom found along streams,” as one
precocious authority avers. A narrow canyon whose floor
harbors sycamores and alders and bay trees, nourished by a
purling stream, and whose sides are lined with live oaks
which run up into ceanothus chaparral, is precisely the
best place to look for _D. nuttalli_.
_Nesting._--Major Bendire (1895) quotes the following contribution from
B. T. Gault:
I had been out on the bowlder plain [in the San Bernardino
Valley] several hours, on the morning of April 23, 1883,
collecting birds, and spying a clump of elder bushes in
the distance, not far from the brook, the thought occurred
to me that I might take a rest beneath their shade and
at the same time be ready for any bird that put in an
appearance. These bushes, or more properly trees, are a
great deal larger shrub than our eastern plant, their
trunks growing from 4 to 8 inches through; and if they
are not the same species, their umbellate blossoms are
strikingly similar, if not identical, to those of our
common eastern shrub (_Sambucus canadensis_). I had hardly
seated myself on an arm of the shrub when my attention was
attracted to a hole in the main trunk, directly above my
head. At almost the same instant a bird appeared at the
opening from within, and dodged back again as soon as she
saw me. The movement was executed so quickly that I was
unable to tell whether it was a wren or a woodpecker, but
concluded that it was the latter. Upon examination of the
aperture it seemed to have been lately made. Of course I
thought that there would be no trouble in dislodging her,
and commenced to rap on the trunk of the shrub with the
butt of my gun; but this seemed to have no effect. I then
walked back about 50 feet, and taking a stand, waited from
ten to fifteen minutes in the hope that she would come out,
affording me an opportunity to secure her and thus solve
the mystery, but in this maneuver I was also baffled. I
then went up to the bush and shouted with all my might,
but this did not shake her nervous system in the least,
when I finally resorted to my jackknife in order to enlarge
the orifice, but, from its being such a tedious job, gave
it up in disgust. The next morning I took a hatchet along
with me, for I desired very much to know what that hole
contained. It did not take me very long to cut a place
large enough for me to get my hand in, and I was thoroughly
surprised to learn that the bird was still on her nest. I
pulled her out, and she appeared to be stupefied--dead,
apparently--but soon revived. Upon further inspection I
found that the nest contained eggs. The bird proved to be a
female Nuttall’s woodpecker, and the eggs were pretty well
advanced in incubation and would have hatched in a few days.
The nest, which was about 5½ feet from the ground, was
nearly a foot deep and about 5 inches wide. The hole at the
entrance to the nest was but a little larger than a silver
half dollar. The eggs were six in number.
Mr. Dawson’s (1923) remarks on the nesting of this woodpecker are
rather cryptic, but I infer from them that it nests in willows, alders,
elders, cottonwoods, sycamores, live oaks, and other oaks and at
heights varying from 2½ to 60 feet above ground. The only nest of this
species that I have seen was shown to me by A. M. Ingersoll, while
collecting with him and James B. Dixon, in San Diego County, Calif.,
on April 9, 1929; the nest, which the birds had not quite finished
excavating, was about 30 feet from the ground in a leaning, dead
cottonwood tree (pl. 11). A set of four eggs in my collection was taken
by Henry W. Carriger, on April 23, 1897, in Sonoma County, Calif.; the
nest was in a dead limb of a large laurel along a creek; he had taken a
set of six eggs from the same tree the previous year.
_Eggs._--Nuttall’s woodpecker lays three to six eggs, most commonly
four and often five. These are ovate, or rarely short-ovate or
elliptical-ovate. The color is dull creamy white or pure white, and
sometimes rather glossy. The measurements of 47 eggs average 21.75 by
16.27 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =25.0= by
16.0, 23.3 by =17.0=, =19.30= by 15.75, and 19.7 by =14.6= millimeters.
_Young._--The period of incubation is said to be about 14 days, and to
be shared by both sexes. Mr. Dawson (1923) says:
The male Nuttall not only takes a lively interest in all
matters connected with the nesting, but it is believed
that he monopolizes the task of excavation. Certainly he
takes his turn at incubating, and he is invariably, in
my experience, the more valiant of the two in defense of
young. The female, however, is probably the closer sitter,
as there are several instances in which she has submitted
to the hand rather than forsake her trust. * * * When
the chicks are astir the father is fairly beside himself
with joy and apprehension. In fact, if you ever require
a symbol of doting solicitude, picture a male Nuttall
woodpecker thrusting his head into a dark hole to make
sure that nothing has spilled out of it since his last
inspection--which occurred exactly three seconds ago.
_Plumages._--The young are hatched naked, as with other woodpeckers,
but the juvenal plumage is acquired before the young leave the nest.
The young male, in juvenal plumage, has the forehead, occiput, and nape
uniform dull black, leaving only the crown scarlet, spotted or speckled
with white dots; the black bars on the back are dull black and the
white bars are grayish white, instead of clear black and pure white,
as in the adult; these bars are also less clearly defined than in the
adult; the under parts are yellowish white, spotted on the sides and
flanks less distinctly than in the adult, and with pale dusky, instead
of clear black; the wings and tail are as in the adult.
The young female is similar to the young male, except that the red of
the crown is more restricted and the forehead is streaked with white.
This plumage is, apparently, worn all through the first summer; I have
seen young birds in this plumage as late as August 30. Probably early
in fall a postjuvenal molt produces a plumage that is practically
adult. I have been unable to learn anything about the molts of adults.
Ridgway (1914) says that spring males have the “white streaks on
forehead and crown much reduced in size, sometimes obsolete, and
red nuchal area more restricted, through wearing off of red tips of
feathers.” The white streaks on the crown of the adult female also wear
away almost entirely during winter, leaving the crown clear black.
_Food._--The food of Nuttall’s woodpecker is very similar to that of
the downy and other small woodpeckers. Prof. F. E. L. Beal (1911)
summarizes it by saying: “In its animal food the Nuttall woodpecker
is beyond criticism. Practically all of the insects eaten are either
pests or of no positive benefit. While some fruit is eaten, it consists
largely, and perhaps entirely, of wild varieties. Probably the worst
that can be said of the bird is that it helps in the distribution of
poison-oak seeds.”
Among the insect food, the most prominent items seem to be the larvae
of the very harmful wood-boring beetles Cerambycidae and Elateridae;
other beetles are eaten largely, as well as ants and other Hymenoptera,
scales, plant lice and other bugs, weevils, caterpillars, spiders,
flies, and millipeds. Prof. Beal (1911) says: “Two stomachs contained
each between 30 and 40 box-elder bugs (_Leptocoris trivittatus_).
These insects have a way of becoming very abundant at times and making
a nuisance of themselves by invading buildings in search of winter
quarters.”
The vegetable food consists mainly of wild fruits, such as
blackberries, elderberries, and the seeds of poison-oaks; a few acorns
and some grain are occasionally eaten. Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale
(1930) write: “Trees that this woodpecker foraged over were sycamore,
cotton, valley oak, blue oak (most frequently), digger pine, yellow
pine (rarely), and orchard trees. On June 3, 1926, one was seen feeding
on cherries in an orchard near Manton.”
_Behavior._--Florence M. Bailey (1902) says of this little woodpecker:
It has a nuthatch-like way of flying up to light on the
underside of a limb, and when hanging upside down turns
itself around with as much ease as a fly on a ceiling. * * *
He is a sturdy little fellow, and in flight will sometimes
rise high in air and fly long and steadily, dipping only
slightly over the brush. He has the full strength of his
convictions and will drive a big flicker from a sycamore
and then stretch up on a branch and call out triumphantly.
Two Nuttalls trying to decide whether to fight are an
amusing sight. They shake their feathers and scold and
dance about as if they were aching to fly at each other,
but couldn’t quite make up their minds to so grave a matter.
_Voice._--The same writer says of the voice of Nuttall’s woodpecker:
“At times the small Nuttall waxes excited, and shakes his wings as
he gives his thin, rattling call. All his notes are thin, and his
_quee-quee-quee-quee’p_ has a sharp quality. His _chit’ tah_ is a
diminutive of the _ja’ cob_ of the California woodpecker.”
Ralph Hoffmann (1927) says: “One cannot remain long near a grove of
live oaks in the foothills of California without hearing from some
tree a hoarse ringing call _prrip_, often lengthened to a rattling
_prrrrrrt_. It has the exclamatory quality of the Hairy Woodpecker’s,
but is less clear and metallic, with more burr. * * * Like the other
woodpeckers the Nuttall, particularly in spring, drums on resonant
timber or telephone poles; it also gives at that season a rapid,
squealing _quee quee quee quee_.”
Mr. Dawson (1923) says that this woodpecker “always has a grouch on,
and you are sure to be challenged as you pass, by repetition of his
double notes of distrust, _ticket, ticket--ticket it_.”
_Field marks._--Nuttall’s woodpecker closely resembles the cactus
woodpecker, and where the ranges of the two species come together, in
southeastern California, there is a chance for confusion; but their
ranges barely touch each other, and fortunately the habitats of the
two species are quite different and mainly well separated. Nuttall’s
is somewhat lighter colored on the under parts, and the black bands
on the back are slightly wider than in the cactus woodpecker; but
the best distinguishing mark, if the observer is near enough to see
it, is the black forehead and front of the crown, which in the male
cactus woodpecker is spotted with white and red. It is only slightly
larger than the downy woodpeckers but can be readily distinguished
from that species by the conspicuous, transverse barring of black and
white on the back, instead of the broad, white, longitudinal band of
the downies; there are also more white spots in the wings than in the
western races of the downy.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Southwestern Oregon, California, and northern Baja
California; nonmigratory.
The range of Nuttall’s woodpecker extends =north= to southwestern
Oregon (probably Ashland); and northern California (Weed and Lassen
Peak). =East= to California (Lassen Peak, Oroville, probably Florence
Lake, Owens Lake, and Redlands); and Baja California (San Rafael and
San Domingo). =South= to northern Baja California (San Domingo and
Ensenada). =West= to northwestern Baja California (Ensenada); western
California (San Diego, San Onofre, Santa Barbara, Morro, Monterey, and
East Park); and southwestern Oregon (probably Ashland).
_Egg dates._--California: 82 records, March 25 to June 14; 41
records, April 21 to May 6, indicating the height of the season.
DRYOBATES ARIZONAE ARIZONAE (Hargitt)
ARIZONA WOODPECKER
HABITS
Strickland’s woodpecker (_Dryobates stricklandi_), a Mexican species,
was formerly recorded from southern Arizona by some of the early
writers; but Edward Hargitt (1886) discovered that the Arizona bird was
specifically distinct, described it, and named it as a new species,
_Picus arizonae_. He gave it the following diagnosis: “_P._ similis _P.
stricklandi_, sed dorso uniformi nec albofasciato distinguendus.” The
two species are quite similar in general appearance, but _stricklandi_
has the median portion of the back and the whole rump broadly barred or
transversely spotted with white, whereas in _arizonae_ these parts are
uniformly plain brown, and the markings on the under parts are in the
form of large rounded or subcordate spots, instead of streaks.
The range of the Arizona woodpecker includes southeastern Arizona,
southwestern New Mexico, Sonora, Chihuahua, and northwestern Durango;
it is another one of those Mexican species that barely crosses our
southwestern border.
Henry W. Henshaw (1875) was the first to report this woodpecker, under
the name of Strickland’s woodpecker, as entitled to a place in our
fauna; he writes: “This rare woodpecker is a common species on the
foothills of the Chiricahua Mountains, where it was one of the first
birds that met my eye when the section where it abounds was first
entered. Whether it extends upward, and finds its home during a portion
of the year among the pines that here begin at an altitude of about
1,000 [10,000?] feet, I do not know. So far as I could ascertain, at
this season at least [August], it is confined to the region of the
oaks, ranging from about 4,000 to 7,000 feet, thus inhabiting a region
about midway between the low valleys and the mountain districts proper.”
Harry S. Swarth (1904) writes: “Although the Arizona Woodpecker is
resident the year through in the Huachucas, it is singular how the
birds seem to disappear in the breeding season, that is from the middle
of April to the middle of June, when the young birds begin to leave the
nest. During this time their loud shrill call may be occasionally heard
from some wooded hillside, but the birds themselves are seldom seen. I
have taken specimens from the base of the mountains, about 4,500 feet
altitude, up to 8,000 feet, but they are not often seen above 7,000
feet.”
_Nesting._--We found the Arizona woodpecker well distributed in Ramsay
Canyon in the Huachuca Mountains from the base of the mountains up to
7,500 feet, but nowhere common. On April 15, 1922, while exploring the
lower part of the canyon, which is quite heavily wooded with giant
sycamores, various oaks, ash, maples, black walnut, and locusts, we
saw an Arizona woodpecker excavating a nest hole in a solid dead stub,
about 50 feet up near the top of one of the big sycamores. The hole
was on the under side of the stub and deep enough to take in all the
bird but the tail. A red-shafted flicker was “yuckering” in the top
of another big tree, and I think it had designs on this nest, for it
subsequently drove away the Arizona woodpecker; and later on the nest
was found to have been deserted. We found only one occupied nest; this
was at an altitude of about 7,500 feet in a branch of Ramsay Canyon; it
was about 20 feet from the ground in a dead branch of a small walnut
tree, which was growing up through an oak on the steep mountain side;
the entrance to the cavity, which was about 12 inches deep, was well
hidden; it contained three eggs well advanced in incubation on May 16,
1922. The birds were heard in the vicinity, and one was seen to relieve
the other on the nest. Frank C. Willard’s notes record the finding of
two nests of this woodpecker in the same region on May 24, 1899; these
were both in dead branches of oak trees; one was 15 and one 18 feet
from the ground, and the nesting cavities were both 12 inches deep;
“one bird was seen to leave the nest and the other one entered it;
after it got in, it stuck its head out and uttered one sharp note, like
a grosbeak’s, which was answered by its mate.”
Major Bendire (1895) mentions a nest, found by Dr. A. K. Fisher in
Garden Canyon in the Huachuca Mountains, on May 14, that was “in a
large maple which overhung a stream. The cavity was situated in a dry
branch, about 20 feet from the ground, and was about a foot in depth.
It contained four young, which were still naked.” There are two sets of
four eggs each in the Thayer collection; one was taken by O. W. Howard
in the Huachuca Mountains on April 24, 1902, from a nest in a mescal
stalk, 8 feet from the ground; the other was collected by Virgil W.
Owen in the Chiricahua Mountains, on April 22, 1906; the entrance to
the cavity was 9 feet up on the under side of a slightly leaning, dead
and decaying stub of an oak limb in a dead tree.
_Eggs._--The Arizona woodpecker apparently lays either three or four
eggs; we have no record of more or fewer. The few that I have seen
are practically ovate; they are pure white and some are quite glossy,
others less so. The measurements of 27 eggs average 22.82 by 17.33
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =24.0= by
=18.0=, =19.9= by 16.7, and 22.5 by =16.5= millimeters.
_Young._--The period of incubation does not seem to have been
definitely determined, but it is probably about 14 days, as with other
_Dryobates_. Both sexes assist in this task, and probably in the care
of the young.
H. S. Swarth (1904) writes:
About the third week in April they commence laying their
eggs, and after the middle of June the young birds begin
to leave the nest, and soon become quite abundant. I have
never had any difficulty in approaching these birds as
they are usually quite tame and unsuspicious; far more so
than the generality of woodpeckers, and the young birds
are noticeably so. I have several times stood within ten
feet of a young bird, easily distinguishable by his red
cap, as he was industriously pounding on a limb without
seeming in the least disturbed by my presence, or showing
any inclination to leave. On one occasion the confiding,
and in this case inquiring nature of the bird occasioned
rather a laughable scene. An acquaintance in the mountains,
passing the camp one day stopped to lead his horse down
to the well which supplied us with water. A young Arizona
Woodpecker was sitting in an oak tree close by, and soon
after the horse began drinking he flew down, and lighting
on the animal’s hind leg as on the side of a tree, hit it
a vigorous rap or two. The horse and its owner appeared
equally surprised, and both moving a little the bird
retreated to his tree. It wasn’t a minute before he was
back again, this time on a front leg, where he went to
work with such energy as to start the horse plunging and
kicking in an effort to get rid of its curious assailant.
The woodpecker left but did not seem to be particularly
frightened, as he sat on the wooden curb of the well until
he was left alone again.
_Plumages._--The young are hatched naked but acquire the juvenal
plumage before leaving the nest. In three young males in my collection,
taken on June 20, August 4, and August 30, the upper parts are much
like those of the adult male, but the crown is more or less invaded
with scarlet or vermilion-tipped feathers, sometimes with only a few
scattered feathers and sometimes covering the whole crown and nape;
they are more heavily spotted on the breast and more heavily barred on
the belly than are the fall adults, and these markings are dark sepia,
instead of black, and less well defined than in adults; the bills are
smaller and weaker. Mr. Swarth (1904) says: “In the young female,
besides occupying a less extensive surface, the red is less intense
than in the male, and not as solid, that is there is always more or
less brown showing through. The red cap of the juvenile bird seems
to be worn but a short time, as a young female taken September 4 has
hardly a trace of it remaining.”
Apparently the juvenal plumage is molted, including the wings and tail,
late in August or September, when the first winter plumage, which is
practically indistinguishable from that of the adult, is acquired. Mr.
Swarth (1904) says of the molt of the adult:
The Arizona woodpecker commences to moult about the middle
of July, and by the first week in September the new plumage
is almost completely acquired. The plumage of the breast,
abdomen, and lower parts generally, seems to be the first
to be renewed, while the remiges, rectrices and feathers of
the interscapular region are the last to get their growth.
An old female shot on September 3 had practically completed
its moult, with the exception of the tail feathers, none of
which were over half an inch long; while several specimens
of both sexes, taken during the last two weeks in August,
are in nearly perfect autumnal plumage, except for some
small patches of old feathers in the interscapular region.
Fall specimens are considerably darker on the back than
birds taken during the spring and summer, but the change is
undoubtedly due to fading of the plumage, as birds taken in
the late winter and early spring, show not the slightest
traces of moult, and a series of birds taken from February
to July, show plainly the gradual change of coloration.
Singularly enough the pileum and back of the neck does not
seem to fade as the dorsum does, and consequently, while
birds in fresh fall plumage are of practically uniform
coloration on the upper parts, specimens taken in the late
spring and summer have the head and neck abruptly darker
than the back and exposed portion of the wings. * * * Of
twenty-four specimens from this region [Arizona] four show
more or less traces of white bars across the rump; one of
these is a male in nuptial plumage, one a male in freshly
acquired autumnal plumage, one a female in nuptial plumage
(this specimen has some faint indications of white bars on
some of the scapulars as well), and one is a young male.
Another spring female has some white bars on the scapulars
but none on the rump. Presumably this is a tendency toward
the Mexican species _Dryobates stricklandi_.
_Food._--Very little seems to be recorded on the food of the Arizona
woodpecker, which probably does not differ greatly from that of other
members of the _Dryobates_ group. It apparently feeds mainly on insects
and their larvae, but to some extent on fruits and acorns. Mr. Henshaw
(1875) says of its feeding habits: “When in pursuit of food, they
almost always alighted near the base of the trees, gradually ascending,
and making their way along the smaller limbs, and even out among the
foliage, appearing to prefer to secure their food by a careful search
rather than by the hard labor of cutting into the wood in the way the
hairy woodpecker employs its strength.”
_Behavior._--The same observer says of their habits:
Here they appeared to be perfectly at home, climbing over
the trunks of the oaks with the same ease and rapidity of
movement that distinguish the motions of the downy or hairy
woodpecker; though their habits, in so far as they are at
all peculiar, are, perhaps, best comparable to those of
the red-cockaded woodpecker of the South (_P. borealis_),
especially their custom of moving about in small companies
of from five to fifteen, though they were occasionally
found singly or in pairs. * * *
I found them at all times rather shy, and gifted with very
little of that prying curiosity which is seen in some of
the better known species of this family; and if by chance
I surprised a band feeding among the low trees, a sharp
warning note, from some member more watchful than the rest,
communicated alarm to the whole assembly, when they took
flight immediately, showing great dexterity in dodging
behind trunks and limbs, and making good their retreat by
short flights from one tree to another till they were out
of sight.
In the Whetstone Mountains, Ariz., Austin Paul Smith (1908) observed a
female Arizona woodpecker--
working on an oak-trunk, not three feet above the base;
while the trees around harbored unnumbered Bridled
Tits (_Baeolophus wollweberi_), Lead-colored Bush-tits
(_Psaltriparus plumbeus_) and Rocky Mountain Nuthatches
(_Sitta carolinensis nelsoni_). Very often did I run across
a similar assemblage, but rarely were there more than one
or two Arizona Woodpeckers in it. There is no recollection
at hand, of noting above four adult woodpeckers of this
species in view at once; more likely to chance upon a
solitary individual than a pair at any time. The noisiest
occasion I can accredit to the species occurred one spring
day when two adult females were located, perched upon
a horizontal limb of a madrona, facing each other, and
emitting a continuous volume of characteristic woodpecker
notes, the effect being heightened by that peculiar
muscular movement which accompanies the vocal utterances of
some Pici. The continuity was possible by a relay system;
and so engrossed were the participants, that I approached
to directly under the limb and stood there at least two
minutes, without being detected.
F. H. Fowler (1903) writes:
The Arizona woodpecker (_Dryobates arizonae_) is, outside
of the alpine three-toed and pileated, the most interesting
member of the woodpecker family, that I have ever seen. So
far as I have noted, the species is never common, never
noisy, and never at rest. I have not found it except in
live-oak woods, and at Fort Huachuca; on a good field
day I used to see about six on an average. Not even the
chickadees are as active as this little woodpecker. He
will alight on the main trunk of the tree, or generally
one of the largest limbs, and the moment his claws are
fastened in the bark he begins an untiring search for
insects and grubs. He ascends rapidly in spirals picking
and prying away small pieces of bark in search of food;
when a promising limb is reached out he goes on it, often
on the lower side. The search over in one tree, he wastes
no time in looking around, but launches out, with barely a
glance to determine the course, in his undulating flight
to the next, there to repeat the performance. When closely
approached, he works around the tree without paying any
especial attention to the intruder, and when thoroughly
frightened he will take flight with as little warning as he
does when simply in search of food. While going up the tree
he gives, from time to time, a characteristic call, much
like that of the hairy woodpecker.
_Field marks._--The Arizona woodpecker should be easily recognized, as
it is the only small woodpecker that has a uniformly brown, unmarked
back and crown, and lower parts thickly spotted with black; the adult
male has a red patch on the nape, and young birds of both sexes have
more or less red in the crown, less in the female than in the male.
_Winter._--This woodpecker is a permanent resident in southern Arizona,
moving down from the higher parts of the mountains to the lower levels
in winter. Mr. Swarth (1904) says that “in the winter they seem to more
particularly favor the large groves of live-oaks along the foot-hills
and at the mouths of the canyons; scattering over the mountains and
ascending to rather a higher elevation upon the advent of the breeding
season.” W. E. D. Scott (1886) writes: “Rarely have I met with more
than two in company, and a family, two parents and three young, were
the most I ever saw associated together. But I frequently met in the
fall a party composed of Arizona jays, California woodpeckers, various
Titmice and Warblers, and a pair of Strickland’s [Arizona] woodpeckers.
The birds I have met with them appear late in January or early in
February, and are apparently already mated.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Southwestern New Mexico, southeastern Arizona, and western
Mexico; nonmigratory.
The Arizona woodpecker is found =north= to southeastern Arizona (Canada
del Oro and the Whetstone Mountains); and southwestern New Mexico
(probably the Animas Mountains and the San Luis Mountains). =East= to
southwestern New Mexico (San Luis Mountains); Chihuahua (Cajon Bonito,
Colonia Garcia, Temosachic, and Apache); Durango (Metalotes and Arroyo
del Buey); and Zacatecas (Sierra de Valparaiso). =South= to Zacatecas
(Sierra de Valparaiso) and Jalisco (Nevada Volcanoe, Colima Volcanoe,
Tonila, and San Marcos.) =West= to Jalisco (San Marcos and Bolanos);
eastern Sinaloa (Sierra de Choix); central Sonora (La Chumata mine
and Saric); and southeastern Arizona (Huachuca Mountains, Santa Rita
Mountains; Rincon Mountains Pantano, and Canada del Oro).
The range as outlined is for the entire species, which has been
divided into two geographic races, the true Arizona woodpecker (_D.
a. arizonae_), occupying the northern part of the area south to
northwestern Durango, and the Colima woodpecker (_D. a. fraterculus_),
occupying the rest of the range in Mexico.
_Egg dates._--Arizona: 8 records, April 20 to May 16.
DRYOBATES ALBOLARVATUS ALBOLARVATUS (Cassin)
NORTHERN WHITE-HEADED WOODPECKER
PLATES 13, 14.
HABITS
The northern race of the white-headed woodpecker is found in the
Cascade Mountains and the Sierra Nevada, from Washington to Kern
County, Calif., and eastward into western Idaho and western Nevada.
It is a bird of the pine and fir forests in the mountains, ranging from
4,000 to 9,000 feet during the breeding season, but coming down to
lower levels in winter. W. L. Dawson (1923) says: “This woodpecker is
essentially a pine-loving species and is, therefore, nearly confined
to the slopes of the Sierras and the Transition zones of the southern
ranges. Only in winter does it appear at lower levels, and then rarely
beyond the pale of the yellow pine. So close is this devotion of bird
to tree that the woodpecker’s feathers are almost always smeared with
pine pitch; and I have found eggs dotted with pitch and soiled to
blackness by contact with the sitting bird.”
Clarence F. Smith writes to me that he found this woodpecker very
common around a camp where he was located from June 25 to July 10,
1935, in Tuolumne County, Calif., in the Transition Zone at an
elevation of about 4,000 feet. The camp was at one time a lumbering
mill, and there was much dead standing timber nearby. Most of the trees
were _Pinus ponderosa_ and _Pinus lambertiana_.
_Nesting._--The same observer says in his notes: “All the nests
observed, except one in a _Quercus kelloggii_, were in dead standing
stumps of the pines. The stumps were mostly some 12 to 15 feet in
height, and the nests averaged about 8 feet above ground, with an
approximate minimum of 6 feet. These nests may not represent a typical
situation, as they were undoubtedly the ones that were most obvious to
casual observation. Nests in higher locations would more easily escape
notice. We had at least 8 nests within a half-mile radius of camp
headquarters, and the birds were one of the commonest species in the
vicinity. None of the nests opened contained any lining but chips of
wood, and the cavities were about 14 inches in depth. None of the nest
trees were less than 2 feet in diameter at the point where the nest was
located. Many of the stumps had several holes in them, some of which
had been nests in previous years, and some of which had been merely
abortive attempts at drilling. The one nest in the oak, referred to
above, was in a live tree with a decayed heart.”
Major Bendire (1895) writes:
Nidification usually begins about the middle of May and
continues through June. The sexes relieve each other in the
preparation of the nesting site, which is usually located
in a dead stub of a pine or fir; one that is partly decayed
seems to be preferred as it rarely excavates one in solid,
hard wood. The nesting sites are seldom situated over 15
feet from the ground, and sometimes as low as 2 feet. The
entrance hole is about 1½ inches wide, perfectly circular,
and just large enough to admit the bird; the inner cavity
gradually widens towards the bottom, and is usually from 8
to 12 inches deep, the eggs lying on a slight layer of fine
chips, in which they become well embedded as incubation
advances. Occasionally a rather peculiar site is selected.
Mr. Charles A. Allen found a nest of this species in a post
in one of the snow sheds on the Central Pacific Railroad,
between Blue Canyon and Emigrant Gap, about 40 feet from
the entrance of the shed, and some thirty trains passed
daily within a few feet of the nest, which contained six
eggs when found.
Milton P. Skinner sends me the following notes on nest building by this
woodpecker: “On May 10, 1933, I found one at work on a hole in a stub
of a tree, about 3 feet above ground. Although this was in the Sequoia
National Park beside one of the most used paths, it was deepening
the hole for a nest. Chips were scattered on the ground below. After
pecking a while, the woodpecker would get into the hole and soon after
back out again with a billful of chips. It then opened its bill and
let them scatter to the ground; then back to work again. Although this
was as public a place as could be found, and though the birds must
frequently have been disturbed by the crowds of people and were within
reach of hundreds of children, they succeeded in raising their brood of
young. In spite of nesting so low, most of these birds are usually seen
from 20 to 50 feet, and sometimes as high as 100 feet, above ground,
working on the trees.”
Of ten nests found by Grinnell and Storer (1924) in the Yosemite
region--
the lowest was located only 58 inches (measured) above
ground and the highest, 15 feet (estimated). * * * No nest
holes of this woodpecker were found in living conifers.
Nor, on the other hand, do the birds seek what is commonly
known as rotten wood, that is, wood too soft for the nest
cavity to be maintained against the incessant wear involved
in the birds’ passage back and forth, incident to the
rearing of a brood. The tree chosen must have been dead a
sufficient length of time for the pitch to have hardened or
to have descended to the base of the tree, and the outer
shell of the tree must still be hard and firm, whereas the
interior must have been softened to a moderate degree by
decay. These conditions are not to be met with in every
standing dead stub; hence the choice of a nest site becomes
a matter of rather fine discrimination.
They found plenty of evidence of this discrimination in the many
unfinished nesting holes of varying depths that had been abandoned,
often several in the same stub. “Some stubs are literally riddled with
holes, these probably recording successive years of occupancy. One stub
had at least 5 fully excavated holes besides 11 or more prospects.
* * * We were led to conclude from all this that the White-headed
Woodpecker is either notional or else very particular, in the selection
of its home. Evidence points strongly to the birds excavating and
occupying a new cavity each year, although one set of eggs was found in
a hole which had been dug in earlier years.”
They made a number of careful measurements of four nests, at heights
varying from about 5 feet to about 10 feet above ground; the internal
dimensions varied somewhat, but the size of the entrance hole was
“surprisingly constant”; in one case this hole was a perfect circle,
43 by 43 millimeters, and in another 37 by 37 millimeters; in the
other two cases the entrance hole measured 47 millimeters in height
and 42 in width; translated into inches this shows a variation in the
two dimensions of from 1.45 to 1.85 inches, which does not seem to be
“surprisingly constant.” The total depth of the cavity varied from 275
to 400 millimeters, or from about 10 to 15 inches.
They say further: “Two of the nest cavities we found were in such
unusual sites as to call forth comment. One at Hazel Green was in a
slanting upright limb on a prostrate dead black oak trunk lying in a
grassy meadow, fully 150 feet from the margin of the forest. The hole
was excavated on the lower side of the stub. The other nest was at
Tamarack Flat, in the butt end of an old log, lifted above the ground
when the tree fell over a granite outcrop. This hole was about 7½ feet
above the ground, and as with the other there were piles of chips
immediately beneath it.”
Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) mention a nest they found in
the Lassen Peak region that was “four meters up in the trunk of a
dead-topped aspen.” Bendire (1895) mentions a nest found near Camp
Harney, Oreg., that was about 25 feet from the ground in a dead limb
of a pine; this nest seems to be at about the limit as to height above
ground. A set in my collection was taken from a nest 10 feet up in a
dead aspen.
_Eggs._--The white-headed woodpecker lays three to seven eggs, four
being the commonest number, and five rather often. These vary in shape
from ovate to short-ovate. They are pure white and moderately or quite
glossy. Grinnell and Storer (1924) say: “The eggs in one set had a
wrinkled appearance at the smaller end as though that end had been
compressed before the shells had hardened. Eggs which are advanced in
incubation are apt to be soiled by pitch; this is doubtless brought
in by the parent birds on their bills, feet, or plumage.” Sometimes
the eggs show tiny black dots, or are profusely smeared with black
from the same cause. The measurements of 50 eggs average 24.26 by
18.11 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =26.40=
by 18.29, 25.40 by =19.50=, =21.84= by 17.78, and 22.86 by =16.76=
millimeters.
_Young._--Incubation is said to last for 14 days and to be shared by
both sexes. Both parents also assist in the care and feeding of the
young. Clarence F. Smith tells me that “the female at one nest made
trips about twice as frequently as the male; her visits were about two
minutes apart, while the visits of the male were about five minutes.”
Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) write:
On July 1, the young woodpeckers, by this time half-grown,
were being fed by the parents, mostly by the female. Food
was brought at intervals averaging fifteen minutes each.
The birds foraged at distances up to a quarter of a mile
away from the nest. The female carried away the feces.
On July 11 the female seemed to be coaxing the young from
this nest. When the young woodpeckers stuck their heads out
of the cavity, the parent would move away from the entrance
and call, although it remained on the tree trunk. When
a person shook the stub two of the young birds flew out
and went thirty meters before coming to the ground. When
placed on a tree trunk the birds could move freely upward
or downward. Within a few minutes one of the young birds
could fly so well that it successfully evaded capture by
the observer.
_Plumages._--As with other woodpeckers, the young are hatched naked
and blind, but the juvenal plumage is acquired before the young bird
leaves the nest. The juvenal plumage is much like that of the adult
but duller, and the bill is shorter and weaker; the contour plumage is
softer and looser; the lower parts are brownish black instead of clear
black, and the back is only a little darker; the white in the primaries
is more restricted. In the young male, the posterior half of the crown
is largely “vermilion” or “salmon orange”; these reddish colors are
much reduced or entirely absent in the young female. Ridgway (1914)
says that the feathers of the hind neck and underparts are sometimes,
perhaps on younger birds than I have seen, “indistinctly and narrowly
margined at tip with grayish, and the hindneck sometimes indistinctly
spotted with whitish.” By the middle of September this juvenal plumage,
including the wings and tail, has been replaced by the first winter
plumage, which is like that of the adult, except for somewhat less
white in the primaries. Adults have a complete annual molt, which
begins in July and is generally completed before the end of September.
_Food._--The white-headed woodpecker forages for its food mainly, if
not entirely, on the trunks and branches of coniferous trees, living
or dead. Mr. Skinner writes to me that he has seen it feeding on the
trunks of sequoias, sugar pines, and Douglas firs, searching most
diligently and thoroughly in the crevices in the bark for insects and
their eggs; it generally begins low down on the tree and progresses
upward, working pretty well up to the top of the tree before flying
off; occasionally, one has worked horizontally around a tree trunk, but
not downward. Dr. J. C. Merrill (1888) describes its method of feeding
very well, as follows:
So far as I have observed, and during the winter I watched
it carefully, its principal supply of food is obtained
in the bark, most of the pines having a very rough bark,
scaly and deeply fissured. The bird uses its bill as
a crowbar rather than as a hammer or chisel, _prying_
off the successive scales and layers of bark in a very
characteristic way. This explains the fact of its being
such a quiet worker, and as would be expected it is most
often seen near the base of the tree where the bark is
thickest and roughest.
It must destroy immense numbers of Scolytidae, whose larvae
tunnel the bark so extensively, and of other insects that
crawl beneath the scales of bark for shelter during winter.
I have several times imitated the work of this bird by
prying off the successive layers of bark, and have been
astonished at the great numbers of insects, and especially
of spiders, so exposed.
Prof. F. E. L. Beal (1911) examined only 14 stomachs, but says that
“half of the animal food of the white-headed woodpecker (_Xenopicus
albolarvatus_) is ants, but the most pronounced characteristic of this
bird is its fondness for the seeds of pines, which constitute more than
half of the food.”
Grinnell and Storer (1924) say: “Stomachs of two adult birds, obtained
at Merced Grove Big Trees on June 10, 1915, and at East Fork of
Indian Cañon, June 24, 1915, both held ants, some of which were large
carpenter ants. The stomach of one of the young birds from the nest
mentioned above contained remains of 2 large spiders, a large ant, 2
boring beetles, and a whole fly larva.”
Major Bendire (1895) quotes Rollo H. Beck as saying: “I noticed one
of these birds on some fallen logs near the road, busily engaged in
catching spiders, searching for grubs, and frequently flying after
passing insects, catching them in mid-air in the manner of the
California Woodpecker.”
_Behavior._--Dr. Merrill (1888) writes: “Though not shy, and with care
generally approachable to within a short distance, it is watchful and
suspicious, and seems to know very well what is going on even if it
does not see fit to fly away, though it is more apt to do this than
to dodge around the trunk. The flight is direct, and rather slow
and heavy.” Dr. Merrill noted that the skull of the white-headed
woodpecker is “noticeably less hard and dense” than the skulls of
other woodpeckers; this is probably due to the fact that its method of
feeding requires less heavy drilling into hard wood.
Mrs. Florence M. Bailey (1902) says: “_Xenopicus_ works with apparent
indifference on trunks or branches. Like the Nuttall woodpecker he
often lights upside down. In hunting over the bark he easily backs
down the trunk, or if he takes the notion will fly, or perhaps drop
backwards, a foot or so. He will also light sidewise on a branch and
grasp the limb with his tail as if afraid of falling off. It is
interesting to see him explore cracks in the bark. Standing on the edge
he pokes his head into the dark cavern, turning it from one side to the
other inquiringly.”
Grinnell and Storer (1924) write:
At Tamarack Flat, on May 26, 1919, a female white-headed
woodpecker was seen to flush from her nest about ten feet
above ground in a dead pine stub. Tapping by one of us on
a nearby hole had caused her to leave, but she returned
to the vicinity almost immediately. Then, for fully 25
minutes, while the observer remained within watching
distance the bird foraged, preened, and flew about from one
to another of the circle of 8 or 10 trees within a 50-foot
radius of the nest, but always kept the nest tree in her
sight. About every 5 minutes she would fly to the nest. In
approaching it, she would swoop below its level and then
glide up to the site with decreasing speed so as to end
her flight with little or no momentum. Then, having gained
claw-hold, she would poke the fore part of her body into
the hole, withdraw it at once and repeat this performance
four or five times before flying away again. Finally, after
fully half an hour had elapsed, and her suspicions had been
allayed, she went in, to remain. During this entire time
the male kept out of sight and was heard only twice.
Van Rossem and Pierce (1915) noted its manner of drinking, thus:
“White-headed woodpeckers were often observed to drink at a small
stream near our camp at Bear Lake, where a pine sapling grew from the
edge of a small pool. On this sapling the birds would alight, usually
about three feet from the base, ‘hitch’ quickly backwards down the
trunk to the water, and, leaning sharply to one side, drink by quick,
nervous dips.”
Another method of drinking is described by Grinnell, Dixon, and
Linsdale (1930), as follows: “In mid-afternoon one flew down from a
yellow pine to some shallow, running water in an open roadside near
Mineral. It alighted in a horizontal position on the ground and dipped
its bill into the water six times. After each dip the bird raised its
bill skyward at an angle of fully eighty degrees from the horizontal.
After drinking, the bird flew to a prostrate log, and foraged
horizontally along its lower curvature.”
Some observers seem to think that the white-headed woodpecker rarely,
if ever, drums on tree trunks, but seeks its food more quietly; but
Alexander Sprunt, Jr., tells me that the birds he saw in Oregon
“drummed and beat upon the tree trunks and telephone poles at the
roadside, exactly as any other woodpecker.” Clarence F. Smith writes to
me that “one male bird was a regular overnight guest, hanging to the
ridgepole of our cabin, outside the wall, just beneath the eaves. He
never made any attempt to drill the wood there.”
_Voice._--Grinnell and Storer (1924) say that “the usual call note of
this woodpecker is a single _wiek_, but when excited, the female calls
_cheep-eep-eep-eep_, very fast, and repeats the call every few seconds.
The male, under similar circumstances calls _yip, yip, yip, yip_, in
a much shriller tone, but in slower time.” Mr. Dawson (1923) once
heard “a double or treble call-note, _chick-up_ or _chick-it-up_, which
reminded me somewhat of the Cabanis’s cry.” Major Bendire (1895) heard
it utter “a sharp, clear _witt-witt_” as it passed from one tree to
another; he considered it a rather silent bird.
_Field marks._--The white-headed woodpecker could hardly be mistaken
for any other bird. It is the only woodpecker with a wholly black
body and a wholly white head; while perched it shows a long white
stripe in the wing, and while flying a large white patch in the wing
is conspicuous; the narrow red band on the nape is not conspicuous
and can be seen only at short range and only in the adult male; young
birds show more or less red in the crown. One would think that such a
strikingly marked bird would be very conspicuous, but such is not the
case; its coloration is, in fact, somewhat concealing in its chosen
environment; its quiet behavior helps to make it less obvious. For
example, Dr. Merrill (1888) writes: “On most of the pines in this
vicinity there are many short stubs of small broken branches projecting
an inch or two from the main trunk. When the sun is shining these
projections are lighted up in such a manner as to appear quite white
at a little distance, and they often cast a shadow exactly resembling
the black body of the bird. In winter when a little snow has lodged on
these stubs the resemblance is even greater, and almost daily I was
misled by this deceptive appearance, either mistaking the stub for a
bird or the reverse.”
Furthermore, Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) state that “it was
further observed that in usual pose, either when foraging or when in
digging or inspecting a nest hole, the whole back of a bird (either
sex) appeared to a nearby observer solidly black, clear to the top
of the head. The white showed only as a very narrow rim or border
anteriorly around the black of the head. * * * At the same time the
concealing black of the bird’s dorsal surface must cover all of the
area of the bird exposed to the view of the potentially inimical
observer at more or less distance.”
And again, Mrs. Bailey (1902) says:
Impossible as it would seem at first sight, I have found
that the snow-white head often serves the bird as a
disguise. It is the disguise of color pattern, for the
black body seen against a tree trunk becomes one of the
black streaks or shadows of the bark, and the white head
is cut off as a detached white spot without bird-like
suggestions. On the other hand, when the bird is exploring
the light-barked young Shasta firs or gray, barkless tracts
of old trees, the white of the head tones in with the gray
and is lost, the headless back again becoming only a shadow
or scar. But the most surprising thing of all is to see the
sun streaming full on the white head and find that the bird
form is lost. The white in this case is so glaring that it
fills the eye and carries it over to the light streaks on
the bark, making the black sink away as insignificant.
The activities of this and other woodpeckers play an important role
in the welfare of the forests and the lives of the little furred
and feathered denizens of the woods. It is a well-known fact that
woodpeckers are most useful in guarding the living trees and destroying
the insect pests that injure them; but Grinnell and Storer (1924) have
called our attention to the fact that woodpeckers in general, and the
white-headed woodpecker in particular, contribute, by their excessive
drilling of nest holes, “rather directly toward bringing down the
standing dead timber.” They continue:
Drilling by woodpeckers results in an increase in the
number of entrances through which insects may get at
the heart wood of a tree and thus hasten its ultimate
disintegration. Water, also, is thus afforded an easier
entrance and this hastens decay. Eventually each and every
tree must yield its place in the forest to seedlings. The
woodpeckers hasten this process of replacement, once the
tree is dead.
Many of the wood-inhabiting animals depend upon this
woodpecker to furnish them convenient nest holes
or retreats. We have found mountain chickadees and
slender-billed nuthatches incubating their own eggs
in holes drilled in earlier years by the white-headed
woodpecker; a Sierra flying squirrel was found occupying an
old white-head’s hole. Probably, tree-dwelling chipmunks
and perhaps California pigmy owls also occupy holes of this
woodpecker.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Pacific coast of the United States; occurring rarely in
southern British Columbia; nonmigratory.
The range of the white-headed woodpecker extends =north= to Washington
(Methow River and probably Fort Colville); and northern Idaho (Fort
Sherman). =East= to western Idaho (Fort Sherman and Grangeville);
eastern Oregon (Hurricane Creek, Powder River Mountains, Anthony, and
Camp Harney); western Nevada (Carson); and eastern California (Bijou,
Yosemite Valley, Pyramid Peak, San Bernardino Mountains, and Cuyamaca
Mountains). =South= to southern California (Cuyamaca Mountains and
Mount Pinos). =West= to the western slopes of the Sierra Nevadas,
Calif. (Mount Pinos, Bear Valley, Fyffe, Butte Lake, and Mount Shasta);
western Oregon (Pinehurst, Foley Creek, and The Dalles); and western
Washington (Kalama, Cle Elum, and Methow River).
The species has been separated into two subspecies, the northern
white-headed woodpecker (_Dryobates a. albolarvatus_), occupying most
of the range south to the southern end of the Sierra Nevadas, and the
southern white-headed woodpecker (_D. a. gravirostris_), found in the
mountain ranges of southern California.
_Casual records._--A specimen collected near Point Bonita, Marin
County, Calif., on July 20, 1932, is the only coastal record in that
State. There is, however, an old record for Grays Harbor, Wash.
(previous to 1892), which cannot now be confirmed.
In the Provincial Museum at Victoria, British Columbia, there is an
unlabeled specimen said to have been collected in the Similkameen
Valley. Two have been collected at Okanagan, British Columbia, one on
December 20, 1911, and the other on January 24, 1914.
_Egg dates._--California: 53 records, April 24 to June 16; 27 records,
May 22 to June 7, indicating the height of the season.
DRYOBATES ALBOLARVATUS GRAVIROSTRIS (Grinnell)
SOUTHERN WHITE-HEADED WOODPECKER
HABITS
Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1902), in describing and naming the white-headed
woodpecker of the mountain ranges of southern California, gave as its
characters: “Similar to _Xenopicus albolarvatus_ but bill much heavier,
and size in general slightly greater.” He named it as a distinct
species, on the theory that “the material at hand does not justify
subspecific treatment of these two forms. Geographical continuity of
ranges possibly exists; but it seems quite as likely that there is a
broad hiatus in the vicinity of Tehachapi Pass, whence I can find no
record of the white-headed woodpecker.”
The range of this form includes the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, San
Jacinto, Santa Rosa, and Cuyamaca Mountains in southern California.
Dr. Grinnell (1908) found this woodpecker rather scarce in the San
Bernardino Mountains, and says: “They were seen only in the Transition
zone, none being observed above the fir belt, and but very few down
into pure yellow pine tracts. In the vicinity of Fish creek, 6,500
feet, a few pairs were breeding in June. On July 5, 1905, I found a
nesting hole seven feet up in a dead pine stub, which contained four
half-fledged young. We did not see the species anywhere higher than
8,000 feet, except on the south slope of Sugarloaf, where on July 11,
1906, one was seen among the silver firs at about 9,000 feet altitude.
About Bluff lake they were more common than anywhere else, and a few
were seen on the northern slopes of Sugarloaf at about 8,000 feet, in
August.”
W. L. Dawson (1923) writes: “In the San Jacinto Mountains, where these
white-heads outnumber all other woodpeckers combined, our attention was
drawn, on the 6th day of June, by a male who tittered anxiously as we
stumbled along the rough trail. We camped on the prospect immediately,
but it took a full hour to trace the ‘damage’ to a hole fifty feet up
in a yellow pine stub, which was three feet through at the base. * * *
“We found a clean-cut round hole, one and a half inches in diameter,
which gave admission to a cavity ten inches deep, and which had for its
outer wall only the thick bark of the tree.”
Frank Stephens wrote to Major Bendire (1895): “_Xenopicus albolarvatus_
is a resident of the pine regions of southern California, but is not
common excepting possibly in a few localities. I have never observed
it below the pines. I have taken incubating birds in June in the
Cuyamaca Mountains at altitudes of about 7,000 feet. The nesting sites
here were in very large dead pine trees and inaccessible.”
This woodpecker seems to show a tendency to nest, at least
occasionally, at greater heights above ground than its northern
relative, but otherwise its habits seem to be very similar.
The eggs are similar to those of the northern race. The measurements of
20 eggs average 24.67 by 18.60 millimeters; the eggs showing the four
extremes measure =26.70= by 19.50, 25.60 by =19.70=, and =22.62= by
=16.67= millimeters.
PICOÏDES ARCTICUS (Swainson)
ARCTIC THREE-TOED WOODPECKER
PLATES 15, 16
HABITS
Although not found in the strictly Arctic, treeless regions, this bird
is probably well named, for its range as a whole averages farther north
than that of any other woodpecker except _P. tridactylus_. It is a bird
of the boreal forests of spruces and firs, ranging as far north in
Alaska and northern Canada as these trees grow, and extending its range
southward throughout the Canadian Zone into the Northern United States
and farther southward in some of the higher mountain ranges.
In the eastern portion of its range this woodpecker seems to prefer the
dense virgin forests of spruces and balsam fir, but it nests mainly
in the more open windfalls or burned-over clearings where there are
plenty of dead, standing trees in which to excavate its nest. In New
York State, near the southern limit of its breeding range, a typical
locality is thus described by Laurence Achilles (1906): “At three
thousand feet or more above the sea, in the denser spruce and balsam
forests of the Adirondacks, the Arctic three-toed woodpecker is fairly
common. * * *
“The trees near the nest were chiefly spruces, with a few balsams and
birches scattered among them. The birds had selected a rather open
place for their nesting-site, as, within a radius of ten yards from
their nest, there were several windfalls and dead spruces. The ground
was carpeted with moss, while linnea, clintonia, wood-sorrel and
bunchberry were blossoming in profusion near the base of the tree.”
In the Midwestern States and Provinces, the Arctic three-toed shows a
decided preference for tamarack swamps, especially where these have
been burned over, leaving a few dead or dying trees still standing;
these trees not only furnish an abundant food supply but offer many
convenient nesting sites. Into such attractive habitats these birds
sometimes congregate to form small breeding colonies.
The Weydemeyers (1928) say that in northwestern Montana this woodpecker
“is found most frequently in Transition zone woods that have been
logged or burned over. In virgin forests it occurs sparingly in yellow
pine woods at low elevations; more commonly in mixed broad-leaf and
conifer, and Douglas fir, associations; and rarely in alpine fir and
lodgepole pine woods of the higher mountains, in the Canadian zone. Its
favorite feeding trees are Douglas fir and western larch.”
_Nesting._--Philipp and Bowdish (1919) found four or five nests of the
Arctic three-toed woodpecker in Northumberland County, New Brunswick,
in May and June 1917. Most of the nests were in living balsam firs with
dead hearts, but one was “in a dead maple stub, near the edge of a
large burnt barren, and a short distance from the edge of mixed woods.”
This was “at a height of about ten feet. The cavity measured 10½ inches
from the lower edge of entrance to bottom. The entrance measured 1⅝
inches in height and 1¾ inches in width.” They say that--
apparently nest sites are selected indiscriminately, in
dead stubs in open cleared ground or burnt barrens, and
in the woods, where nests are often in dead-hearted live
trees. The birds have a remarkably strong attachment for
their nests, as evidenced by re-laying in nest holes
from which eggs had been removed, and their disregard of
the immediate presence of intruders. The male evidently
performs his share of the work of incubation, as well as
care of young. New nest holes are apparently dug each year,
and these may not be in the immediate vicinity of nests of
the previous year. The site selected tends to be low, only
one nest having been noted at a height of over ten feet,
while one, as noted, was as low as two feet. Entrances to
nest holes are strongly beveled at the lower edge, forming
a sort of “door-step,” and more or less at sides and even
top. While this is true in some cases with the Northern
Hairy and some other woodpecker excavations which we have
examined, it has not proved so frequent or pronounced. With
experience, one can usually identify the nest hole of this
species with comparative certainty, by this one feature.
Dr. Harrison F. Lewis watched a pair of these woodpeckers excavating
their nesting hole on May 27, 1936, in some second-growth woods,
chiefly spruce and fir, in Saguenay County, Quebec; he says in his
notes: “The Arctic three-toed woodpeckers had a partly excavated nest
cavity at a height of about 14 feet on the northwest side of a dead
birch stub in a clearing. The stub was about 20 feet high and 1 foot
in diameter and stood about 10 feet from the border of the clearing.
The nest cavity was guarded almost continually by one bird of the
pair. The bird on guard clung to the lower edge of the opening of this
cavity. Nine other woodpecker-made openings, many of them only partly
completed, were to be seen in the same stub.
“I watched the three-toed woodpeckers, from partial concealment near
at hand, for an hour and 25 minutes. Each one of them would spend a
period of 15 to 20 minutes at their nest cavity, then be relieved by
the other. The periods spent at the cavity by the male were somewhat
longer than those spent there by the female. While the male was at
the cavity, he spent much of his time in excavating, with only his
tail and the region of his rump projecting from the opening, but at
intervals of a few seconds he would withdraw his body and head from the
cavity and look about him. When he was excavating, very little noise
could be heard. He spent some time in throwing out chips and some time
in resting. When the female was at the cavity, she did very little
excavating, so little that it seemed to be a mere gesture. On one
occasion, after she had been clinging to the edge of the opening for 10
minutes, she drummed repeatedly, but not loudly, on the outside of the
stub beside the opening. I wondered if she were signaling to the male
to come to relieve her in guarding the cavity. After 5 minutes of such
intermittent drumming, she was relieved at the opening by the male.”
Mr. Achilles (1906) describes the nest he found in the Adirondacks as
follows:
The hole, which was in a spruce tree, faced north by
northeast, and was twenty-seven feet one inch from the
ground. The spruce retained all its branches and some
twigs, although it had been dead for some time.
The following dimensions of the hole were taken after the
young had left their nest. The entrance to the hole was
two inches wide and one and five-eighths inches high. From
the outside of the hole, straight through over the top of
the nest to the back of the hole, the measurement was five
and three-fourths inches. The outside shell, including the
bark, was one and three-fourths inches thick. The diameter
of the nest opening was three and one-fourth inches, while
the diameter of the hole on the inside at the bottom of the
shaft, was four and five-eighths inches. The depth of the
hole was nine and one-eighth inches.
Dr. C. Hart Merriam sent Major Bendire (1895) some notes on two nests
that he found in the Adirondacks, as follows:
The water of Seventh Lake, Fulton Chain, had been raised by
a dam at the foot of Sixth Lake, flooding a considerable
area along the inlet, and the trees killed by the overflow
stood in about 6 feet of water. In 1883 the place was
first visited by me, May 27. Both species of Three-toed
Woodpeckers (_Picoides americanus_ and _arcticus_) were
tolerably common, and one new nest of each was found.
That of _P. arcticus_ contained one fresh egg. The nest
was 10 inches deep, and the opening within 5 feet of the
surface of the water. It was in a dead spruce, 10 inches
in diameter. * * * The place was next visited, June 2, but
the date proved still too early. Several unfinished nests
of _P. americanus_ were found, and one completed nest with
four fresh eggs of _P. arcticus_. Like the one found on my
first visit, it was in a dead spruce and about 5 feet above
the water. The nest was 11 inches deep and the orifice 1¾
inches in diameter.
J. H. Fleming (1901) says that the Arctic three-toed woodpecker is
“a common resident in Parry Sound, rarer in Muskoka. This Woodpecker
has a habit of sometimes nesting in colonies. I saw the nests of such
a colony near Sand Lake in 1896; there were six or seven nests, each
cut into the trunk of a living cedar, just below the first branch, and
usually eight or ten feet from the ground. The cedars were in a dense
forest, overlooking a small stream that empties into Sand Lake.”
Macoun (1909) reports, on the authority of Spreadborough, that “a pair
nested in a telegraph pole quite near Cache lake station of the Parry
Sound railway.” Major Bendire (1895) writes:
On May 10, 1883, while en route from Fort Klamath to
Linkville, Oregon, and only a few miles from the latter
place, just where the pine timber ended and the sagebrush
commenced, I found a male busily at work on a pine stump,
only about 2½ feet high and about 18 inches in diameter,
standing within a few feet of the road, and close to a
charcoal burner’s camp, in quite an open and exposed
situation, nearly all the timber in the vicinity having
been cut down. The stump was solid, full of pitch, and
showed no signs of decay; the entrance hole was about 1½
inches in diameter and 8 inches from the top. The cavity,
when first examined, was only about 2 inches deep, and
on my return, two days later, it had reached a depth of
4 inches: the female was then at work. To make sure of a
full set of eggs, I waited until the 25th. The cavity then
was found to be 18 inches deep, and was gradually enlarged
toward the bottom. The four eggs it contained had been
incubated about four days. The female was on the nest, and
uttered a hissing sound as she left it, and might easily
have been caught, as she remained in the hole until the
stump was struck with a hatchet. The sides of the cavity
were quite smooth, and the eggs were partly embedded in a
slight layer of pine chips. The locality where this nest
was found was near the top of a low divide, not over 4,100
feet in altitude.
Dr. Thomas S. Roberts (1932) calls attention to an interesting feature
in the nesting habits of this woodpecker, as observed in two nestings
that he saw in Minnesota; he says of the two nests:
The nesting-hole was in a live jack-pine on the edge of a
tamarack and spruce swamp, only twenty feet from a traveled
road and close by a log house used as a store. The entrance
faced south and was twelve feet from the ground, at which
point the tree was seven inches in diameter. The outer bark
of the tree had been chipped off for a distance of twelve
to fifteen inches above and below the hole and half-way
around the tree, thus leaving a large, irregular, whitish
area. * * *
Another nest, found the same season, was also in a live
evergreen tree and the outer bark had been similarly
stripped from around the entrance, making a conspicuous,
white patch with the dark nesting-hole in the center. Can
this be a direction mark for the returning bird among the
dark tree trunks around?
As to the height from the ground, P. B. Philipp writes to me that of 26
nesting holes examined by him in New Brunswick two were 15 feet, two 12
feet, three 10 feet, one 8 feet, two 6 feet, two 5 feet, four 4 feet,
six 3 feet, and four only 2 feet above ground.
Although the Arctic three-toed woodpecker usually nests at no great
height above ground, there are a few exceptions to this rule, mainly
in the western portion of its range. Grinnell and Storer (1924) record
a nest seen in the Yosemite region that was 50 feet above ground in a
dead lodgepole pine. Harry S. Swarth (1924) found, in the Skeena River
region, the highest nest of which I can find any record; he says: “A
nest of the Arctic three-toed woodpecker was found in Kispiox Valley.
It was placed in a dead and charred Engelmann spruce, in a strip of
spruce woods bordering a muskeg otherwise surrounded by poplar forest.
The nest hole was eighty feet from the ground. It was two and one-half
inches in diameter and one foot deep, drilled through an outer sheath
of sound, hard wood, and downward through soft, rotten ‘punk.’”
_Eggs._--The number of eggs laid by the Arctic three-toed woodpecker
varies from two to six, four being the commonest number. These vary
from ovate to elliptical-ovate, the former shape prevailing. The shell
is dull or only slightly glossy and is pure white. The measurements of
39 eggs average 21.32 by 18.94 millimeters; the eggs showing the four
extremes measure =25.9= by 18.7, 25.1 by =20.2=, and =22.35= by =17.53=
millimeters.
_Young._--The period of incubation is about 14 days; both sexes assist
in this and in the care of the young. Only one brood is raised in a
season, but if the eggs are taken, a second set will be laid, often in
the same nest.
Mr. Achilles (1906) watched a nest containing young for 24 consecutive
hours, he and a companion taking turns at the vigil and sleeping
alternately within ten yards of the tree; he writes:
The parents, when feeding their young, usually alighted
within a space of three feet below the hole, and never
directly at its entrance. They would pause here for a
moment as though fearing they were observed by someone.
Then they would hop up to the hole and look in, anywhere
from two up to six times, as if accustoming their eyes to
the darkness. Once in a while grubs could be seen in their
bills, but, from the actions of the birds when feeding
their young, they appeared to be regurgitating. During
twenty-four hours the female fed the young thirty times,
and the male twenty-nine times.
As it grew dusk, the young gradually grew quieter, and
their little “peep-peep-peep” greatly resembled those of
chicks when crawling beneath their mother’s wings. From two
o’clock in the afternoon till seven o’clock that evening,
two minutes was the longest period during which the young
did not utter a single “peep.” From seven P. M. until
two minutes after four the next morning, the young birds
ceased this continuous chattering. The mother was the last
to feed them at night, the time being seventeen minutes
after seven; but the male was up first in the morning.
At four-fifteen in the morning, the young uttered a few
sleepy “peeps,” and the male alighted three feet below the
hole at four-sixteen. The young birds heard him alight and
immediately commenced to chatter. The male hopped up to the
hole, looked in twice, and then fed them. The young birds’
bills were seen, indicating that they were very hungry,
and were hanging on to the inner wall of the nest near the
entrance. Soon after this their hunger was appeased, their
bills were seen no more, and the parents had to go almost
into the hole to feed them.
_Plumages._--The nestlings are naked and blind at first, but the
juvenal plumage is acquired before the young leave the nest. In the
juvenal plumage, the young male is similar to the adult male, but the
yellow crown patch is smaller and not so sharply defined; the upper
parts are duller, browner black, lacking the glossy, bluish edgings;
the breast is tinged with dull buffy white; and the flanks are more
heavily and less distinctly barred or spotted with dull black. The
young female is similar to the young male, but there is no distinct
yellow patch on the crown, only scattering yellow feathers in varying
amounts, often few or none at all. This plumage is worn through the
summer and early fall; the first winter plumage, which is practically
indistinguishable from that of the adult, is apparently not fully
acquired until November or December. Adults have one complete annual
molt, beginning in August.
_Food._--More than three-quarters of the food of both species of
three-toed woodpeckers consists of the larvae of wood-boring beetles,
mainly Cerambycidae and Buprestidae. Referring to the former, Prof. F.
E. L. Beal (1911) says:
Stomachs containing 15 to 20 of these grubs are very
common, and one held 34. Probably the stomach is filled
several times each day, and it does not seem unreasonable
to assume that a bird will eat 50 of these insects every 24
hours for 6 months and at least 25 daily for the other half
of the year. At this rate one bird will annually destroy
13,675 of these destructive grubs. * * *
Probably there are not many other agencies more destructive
to timber than this family of beetles. Nor is timber safe
even after it has been cut. Logs lying in the mill yard or
forest may be ruined in a single season if these creatures
are not prevented from depositing their eggs. * * * A very
efficient check upon the undue increase of these insects
is found in the woodpeckers, especially the two species of
Picoides.
Weevils and other beetles and some ants are eaten, as well as a few
other insects and spiders. Vegetable food, wild fruits, mast, and
cambium amount to less than 12 percent of the food.
While with us, in southern New England, in winter, this woodpecker
shows a decided preference for dead white pine trees (_Pinus strobus_),
especially those that have been killed by fire or have been dead long
enough for the bark to have partially peeled off. An isolated tree or
a group of trees of this type may be visited day after day by one of
these woodpeckers, during its stay, with such regularity that many
an observer, who has never seen an Arctic three-toed woodpecker, may
feel reasonably sure of finding one in such a place, if it has been
previously seen there. Its persistent work on such a tree is well
described by E. H. Forbush (1927) as follows:
This species very often begins to work on the trunk near
the foot of a tree; it sounds the bark with direct blows,
and then, turning its head from side to side, strikes its
beak slantingly into and under the bark, and flakes it off.
It often works long on the same tree and barks the whole
trunk in time, only occasionally working on the branches.
Thus it exposes channels of bark-beetles and the holes made
by borers. When the bird remains motionless, it is well
concealed against the blackened bark of the burnt trees.
It seems deliberate in its movements and appears to do its
work thoroughly, as it often remains five to ten minutes
on the same spot and then shifts only a little distance.
In early autumn, while the grubs are still at work on the
tree, it lays its head against the tree, at times, turning
it first to one side and then to the other as if listening.
Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) write of the feeding habits of
this woodpecker in the Lassen Peak region:
One of these woodpeckers was watched as it moved slowly
up a tree trunk. It stopped to knock off a piece of bark
with a sidewise (glancing) blow of the heavy bill. This
was repeated several times. Then the bird began to drill
in earnest and the tapping could be heard by a person
more than thirty meters distant. The blows were delivered
rapidly, about two per second. Between three and five
minutes were required to bore through the bark, in this
instance twenty millimeters thick. Then after a few moments
of probing the bill was withdrawn and was seen to hold a
white larva which was quickly eaten. * * *
On one tree thirty-five centimeters in diameter an area of
bark thirty by sixty centimeters was punctured completely
through by twenty-two holes each leading to the tunnel
of a wood-borer. * * * The holes were twelve by twelve
millimeters across by twenty deep. It appeared to the
observer * * * that many of the still living trees in that
locality had been saved from complete destruction by the
insects, by the activity of this woodpecker.
Manly Hardy wrote to Major Bendire (1895) that, in Maine, “it seems
to feed entirely on such wood worms as attack spruce, pine, and other
soft-wood timber that has been fire-killed. Specimens are so abundant
in such places that I once shot the heads off of six in a few minutes
when short of material for a stew.”
Some dead pine trees that had been regularly frequented by these
woodpeckers, on the Kennard estate, were cut down; and the birds,
seeing their favorite trees gone, continued to search for food on the
wood piles made from these trees.
_Behavior._--Most observers agree that the Arctic three-toed woodpecker
is very tame and unsuspicious, working very quietly on a tree trunk for
long periods, without moving about much, and allowing a close approach;
perhaps, as it lives most of its life in remote northern forests, where
men are scarce, it has not learned to fear human beings. Manly Hardy
considered it the tamest and stupidest of the woodpeckers found in
Maine. Major Bendire (1895) says:
“Like the hairy woodpecker, they are persistent drummers, rattling away
for minutes at a time on some dead limb, and are especially active
during the mating season, in April. I have located more than one
specimen by traveling in the direction of the sound when it was fully
half a mile away. * * * Its flight is swift, greatly undulating, and is
often protracted for considerable distances.”
Dr. Lewis says in his notes: “When one bird relieved the other in
guarding the cavity, the bird taking over guard duty flew low toward
the stub and swerved sharply upward, with widespread tail, to alight
near the opening.”
_Voice._--Dr. Lewis (MS.) records the common cry of this woodpecker as
“_tchuk_, often shortened and sharpened to _kip_.” He also says: “A
male mounted a stub, about 25 feet from me, and there, in plain view,
scolded me vigorously with a sharp note like _kuk_, repeated about
once a second for some minutes. Each time the note was uttered there
was a flash of whitish at the bird’s eye, as though it winked with
each utterance. It was also heard to utter a rattling note, apparently
another kind of scolding cry.”
Francis H. Allen tells me that the “call-note resembles the
_cluck_ used in New England to start a horse; it has a ‘woodeny’
quality.” Ralph Hoffmann (1927) says that “in the breeding season
the Arctic Three-toed Woodpecker makes a very loud rolling sound by
drumming on dry limbs and when concerned about the nest a shrill
_kick-er-uck-a-kick_. The ordinary call is _tschick_ or _tschuck_.” A
note of greeting, possibly part of a love-making performance, is thus
described by Mr. Achilles (1906): “Several times when the female was
getting grubs in the dead spruce near the hole, the male would fly from
some distant tree and alight near her. She would see him coming and,
just about as he was about to alight, would spread her wings and utter
a ‘whe-e-e-e-ee.’ This call, which was its loudest at its middle point,
rose and then fell to the same pitch at which it was begun.”
Rev. C. W. G. Eifrig (1906) heard a queer sound that “was as if
produced by pulling out the end of a clock spring and suddenly
releasing it, producing a wiry, humming sound. The author of it proved
to be a male of this woodpecker. In the course of the half hour that I
watched him he showed himself master of quite a repertoire of notes and
would-be songs. When flying he would say: _chut chut_ and then rattle
like a Kingfisher. When hammering on a tree and preening himself, he
would intersperse those actions by chuckling: _duck, duck, duck_.”
_Field marks._--All the three-toed woodpeckers can be easily recognized
by the yellow patch on the crown of the adult male and by more or less
yellow in the crowns or young birds of both sexes. The crown patch
of the adult male _arcticus_ is larger and extends farther forward
than that of _tridactylus_. But the best field mark for the Arctic
three-toed woodpecker is the solid-black back, without any white
markings, and in the female the solid-black crown as well; the dorsal
aspect, when the bird is clinging to a tree trunk, often appears wholly
black. The white stripe on the side of the head, below the eye, is much
wider in _arcticus_ than in _tridactylus_, and the latter has the back
transversely banded with white.
_Enemies._--Mr. Achilles (1906) relates the following:
In the course of the morning, two red-breasted nuthatches
tormented the woodpeckers for fifteen minutes. * * * They
hovered around the hole with drooping wings, holding their
tails up like wrens. One of them finally ventured into the
hole so far that just his tail was protruding. They would
fly away when the parents approached the hole, but would
return as soon as the nest was unprotected. After some time
the male woodpecker went into the hole, evidently intending
to peck them in case they should look into it. During the
three minutes he remained in the hole, he managed to keep
from looking out for one straight minute. Nevertheless,
he was greatly agitated, and would look out every few
seconds to see if the nuthatches were approaching,--his
crown-patch showing brightly. At last the male nuthatch
came to the edge of the hole, whereat the woodpecker made
an unsuccessful attempt to peck his opponent, afterward
flying out with a rush, and chasing the nuthatch for some
distance on the wing.
Soon after that four Canada jays approached, and one of them ventured
near the nest hole, but the woodpecker and a hermit thrush succeeded in
driving him and his companions away, and they did not return.
Joseph Dixon (1927) tells of an attempt by a black bear to rob a nest
of young Arctic three-toed woodpeckers:
This nest was located only four feet above the ground in a
large live lodgepole pine. My attention was first attracted
to the locality by the unusually vigorous scolding of the
parent woodpeckers. A closer approach revealed the cause of
the excitement.
A bear had located the nest, probably through the noise of
the young woodpeckers, which were old enough to come to
the nest entrance to receive food, and which squealed with
anticipation of a meal any time any bird, animal or person
came close to the nest tree. In an endeavor to get at the
young in the nest, the bear had bitten out slabs of green
wood twelve inches long, two inches wide, and one-quarter
of an inch thick. The muddy stains around the inside of
the nest entrance showed that the bear had thrust his nose
into the hole repeatedly. But after gnawing over an area
10 by 10 inches on the tree trunk to a depth of more than
an inch, the bear gave it up as a bad job. Had the nest
been in an old stump, the outcome would probably have been
different. This offers a reasonable explanation of the
tendency of certain woodpeckers to nest in living trees.
Mr. Kennard tells in his notes of a female hummingbird that attacked
one of these woodpeckers: “Several times she swooped down at the
woodpecker, who, quick as a flash, would dodge around the trunk and out
of her way.”
_Winter._--The Arctic three-toed woodpecker is normally mainly resident
in winter throughout most of its breeding range; it is a hardy bird
and its food supply is available at all seasons, the grubs on which it
feeds remaining in the wood for more than one season. Probably a few
wander southward nearly every winter, and there have been several heavy
flights of these birds into the Northeastern States, which it is not
easy to explain. Dr. Josselyn Van Tyne (1926) has given a full account
of one of these invasions, to which the reader is referred. Mr. Forbush
(1927) writes:
It is difficult to determine exactly what causes these
unusual migrations, They are not forced by inclement
weather, for one at least has occurred in a mild winter.
* * * It seems probable that the unusual invasions of the
species into New England follow summers when its food has
been unusually abundant. An excessive food supply tends to
fecundity, and overbreeding naturally compels expansion
and induces migration, whether among the lower animals or
humankind. Since the above was written, Mr. Josselyn Van
Tyne has published a paper regarding the unusual flight
of this species in 1923 in which he advances a similar
explanation. He says that between 1909 and 1914 there was
an irruption of the spruce budworm in eastern Canada and
Maine which resulted in the death of many trees and a
consequent increase of bark-beetles and borers, followed
by an increase in the number of these woodpeckers. On the
other hand a scarcity of the usual food supply may cause
migration. A wet season with few fires in the woods or a
scarcity of insects (such as the spruce bud-moth) that kill
trees might, later, cause a migration.
Illustrating the length of the sojourn of these woodpeckers during the
winter of 1923-24, Dr. Van Tyne (1926) says:
The greatest concentration of these woodpeckers recorded at
any one point was on the estate of Mr. F. H. Kennard where
scores of dead and dying white pine afforded an abundance
of their special food. The first one seen was a male
collected on October 17. Another individual appeared by
October 20 and during the winter at least three males and
two females were accounted for, while all indications point
toward the actual presence of perhaps twice as many. The
most remarkable fact about this group of birds, however,
was the length of their stay, for both males and females
were seen as late as the middle of May and at least one
male stayed through the early part of June and was last
seen on June 12.
Other invasions are recorded by Mr. Forbush (1927) as follows: “A
great irruption of these birds occurred in the autumn of 1860. During
the following winter Mr. George O. Welch often saw as many as six or
eight at once in a piece of fire-killed timber in Lynn. * * * In the
autumn of 1925, there was a lesser movement, and many returned through
New England in the spring of 1926. In the autumn of 1926 another
considerable southward migration occurred.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--North America south to the Central United States;
nonmigratory.
The range of the Arctic three-toed woodpecker extends =north= to
central Alaska (probably Tocatna Forks and Fairbanks); southern
Mackenzie (Fort Wrigley, Fort Providence, and Smith Portage); northern
Manitoba (Cochrane River and probably York Factory); Quebec (Richmond
Gulf, Godbout, and Madeline River); and Newfoundland (Nicholsville).
=East= to Newfoundland (Nicholsville); probably rarely Prince Edward
Island (Baddeck); eastern New Brunswick (Tabusintac); probably
rarely Nova Scotia (Advocate); Maine (Machias); and probably rarely
Massachusetts (Winchendon and Concord). =South= to probably rarely
Massachusetts (Concord); central Vermont (Pico Peak); southern Ontario
(Ottawa, Algonquin Park, and Sand Lake); northern Michigan (Au Sable
Valley, Blaney, and Huron Mountain); probably northern Wisconsin
(Kelley Brook and Star Lake); northern Minnesota (North Pacific
Junction, Itasca Park, and White Earth); probably southwestern South
Dakota (Elk Mountains); northwestern Wyoming (Yellowstone Park);
northwestern Montana (Glacier National Park and Fortine); northern
Idaho (Fort Sherman); and central California (Mona Lake and Bear
Valley). =West= to California. (Bear Valley, Lassen Peak, and Mount
Shasta); Oregon (Pinehurst and Fort Klamath); Washington (Bumping Lake
and probably Tiger); British Columbia (Arrow Lakes, Fort St. James,
Kispiox Valley, and Atlin); south-central Yukon (Six-mile River); and
Alaska (Chitina Moraine and probably Tocatna Forks).
During the winter season this species has been recorded =north= to
Alaska (Copper River); Mackenzie (Fort Simpson, Fort Rae, and Fort
Reliance); Manitoba (Grand Rapids); Ontario (Arnprior and Ottawa); New
Brunswick (Scotch Lake); and Nova Scotia (Pictou). While no regular
movements have been detected, individuals have been recorded at this
season =south= to Long Island, N. Y. (East Hampton and Southampton);
northern New Jersey (Upper Montclair and Englewood); southern New York
(Ithaca); Ohio (Painesville and Akron); Illinois (Rantoul and Peoria);
Iowa (Big Cedar River); and Nebraska (Omaha and Dakota).
_Egg dates._--Labrador: 3 records, May 27 to June 2.
Maine: 3 records, May 19 to June 12.
New Brunswick: 12 records, May 19 to June 30; 6 records, May 30 to
June 15, indicating the height of the season.
New York: 5 records, May 18 to June 10.
PICOÏDES TRIDACTYLUS BACATUS Bangs
AMERICAN THREE-TOED WOODPECKER
PLATE 17
HABITS
This North American race of the three-toed woodpecker occupies an
extensive range in the Hudsonian and Canadian Zones of approximately
the eastern half of Canada, which extends into some of the Northern
States from Minnesota eastward. Two other races occupy similar zones
in western Canada, Alaska, and the Rocky Mountains. The species is not
particularly common anywhere, but the eastern race seems to be the best
known. For a full discussion of the various races of the North American
three-toed woodpeckers, the reader is referred to an extensive paper
on the subject by Outram Bangs (1900). This woodpecker is not evenly
distributed throughout its range but seems to be confined to certain
rather limited and favorable localities. William Brewster (1898) found
it breeding in the eastern part of Coos County, N. H., on the eastern
side of a small pond; “where an elevated ridge approaches the pond the
banks are above the reach of the highest floods and the land in the
rear slopes gently upward. At this point a dense, vigorous forest of
spruces, balsams and arbor vitaes, intermingled with a few deciduous
trees, comes quite to the water’s edge and here, on June 2d, 1897, I
found my first nest of the Banded Three-toed Woodpecker.”
In the same county, Charles L. Whittle (1920) found what he called a
colony of three-toed woodpeckers in “a single small area of virgin
forest containing abundant white spruces and balsams, the former
splendid, healthy trees of large size, and the latter also large but
having many trees diseased or decayed at the heart. * * * In the
area of diseased balsams, a pleasant surprise awaited me, for here
Three-toed Woodpeckers of both species, sexes, and all recognizable
ages, were distinctly common--a colony, so to speak, temporarily
concentrated owing to two factors: (1) The nearly complete destruction
in this region of the former virgin forest of large conifers on which
and in which they fed and nested; and (2) the presence of abundant food
at this locality in the diseased balsam trees.”
Elon H. Eaton (1914) says:
In New York it is evidently confined to the Adirondack
forests. I have heard of no specimen taken farther from the
spruce belt than Waterville, Oneida county. It therefore
shares with the Spruce grouse, the Canada jay and the
Hudsonian chickadee the distinction of being one of our
perfectly nonmigratory species. Within the spruce and
balsam forests it is quite uniformly distributed, but is
less common than the Black-backed woodpecker, evidently
about one-half as common as that species. It inhabits both
the spruce swamps and the mountain sides. While making
the bird survey of the Mount Marcy district we found this
species breeding on the slopes of Marcy just above Skylight
camp, an altitude of 4,000 feet, and in the swamp at the
Upper Ausable lake at an altitude of 2,000 feet.
_Nesting._--Mr. Brewster (1898) describes, in considerable detail, the
nest he found in a spruce tree in Coos County, N. H., as follows:
On measuring the spruce I found it to be thirty-nine inches
in circumference one foot above the ground, and twenty-nine
inches at the nest. The hole was on the west side at a
height above the ground of exactly ten feet and eleven
inches. The entrance hole was somewhat irregular outwardly
measuring about one and three quarters inches in breadth by
two inches in height--the greater diameter vertically being
due to the fact that the lower edges had been chiselled
away rather freely to afford a foothold for the bird; half
an inch in, the hole was perfectly round, and measured one
and one-half inches in diameter.
The interior or nest cavity was irregularly gourd-shaped
and ten and one-eighth inches in depth, its greatest
diameter, about four and one-half inches, being midway
between the bottom and top. The walls were rough and seamy
but this was not, perhaps, the fault of the birds, for the
wood, although soft and easily worked, had evidently peeled
off in long, stringy fibers.
The eggs lay on a deep mat of these shreds some of which
were more than one inch in length.
Dr. C. Hart Merriam informed Major Bendire (1895) that “numerous nests
were found in the Adirondacks in June, 1883. Most of them were in the
flooded timber bordering the inlet of Seventh Lake, Fulton Chain.
They varied from 5 to 12 feet in height above the water, and were in
spruce, tamarack, pine, balsam, and cedar trees.” The nests of this
woodpecker are not always so low down as those mentioned above; Col.
John E. Thayer took a set, near Upton, Maine, on June 9, 1898, that was
20 feet from the ground in an old dead spruce stub; and the nests that
Mr. Eaton (1914) found in the Adirondacks “were situated in tamaracks
and spruces from 25 to 40 feet from the ground.”
_Eggs._--Four seems to be the usual number of eggs laid by this
woodpecker; I can find no record of either more or fewer in complete
sets. The eggs are ovate, pure white, and only moderately glossy. The
measurements of 43 eggs average 23.32 by 18.01 millimeters; the eggs
showing the four extremes measure =25.5= by 18.2, 23.8 by =19.6=, and
=20.1= by =15.0= millimeters.
_Young._--The period of incubation is said to be about 14 days, and it
is shared by both sexes. Both parents feed and care for the young, even
after the young leave the nest, as family parties are seen traveling
about together in summer.
_Plumages._--The nestlings are probably hatched naked and blind, as
with other woodpeckers, but the juvenal plumage is acquired before the
young leave the nest. In the juvenal plumage, the young male is similar
to the adult male, but the yellow crown patch is smaller and less
sharply defined; the upper parts are duller, brownish black instead of
sooty black; the flanks are more heavily and more extensively banded,
or spotted, with sepia instead of clear black; the white of the throat
and breast is tinged with pale buffy. The juvenal female is similar
to the young male, but the yellow crown patch is smaller, and the
amount of yellow in it is very variable, sometimes only a few scattered
feathers and sometimes a well-defined, clear patch. This plumage is
worn at least through August and probably well into fall. The only
molting adults I have seen were taken in August.
_Food._--The feeding habits of the American three-toed woodpecker are
almost identical with that of the Arctic three-toed. Prof. F. E. L.
Beal (1911) says:
The largest item with both species is wood-boring
coleopterous larvae. These amount to 64.25 percent with
_arcticus_ and 60.66 with _americanus_. Caterpillars, which
in this case are mostly wood-boring species, amount to
12.88 and 14.45 percent for the two birds respectively. The
total of wood-boring larvae, including both caterpillars
and beetles, is, 77.13 percent for _arcticus_ and 75.11
percent for _americanus_, or more than three-fourths of the
food of both species. * * *
Fruit skins were found in only one stomach of _americanus_
and mast in but one stomach of _arcticus_. Cambium was
found in 10 stomachs of _arcticus_ and 8 of _americanus_.
This indicates that these birds do some pecking at the bark
of living trees for other purposes than getting insects,
but no complaints have yet been made, from which we infer
that little or no damage is done; in fact the amount
contained in the stomachs is not large a little less than
10 percent.
E. H. Forbush (1927) says that “Miss Caroline E. Hamilton of
Greenfield, Massachusetts, observed in late September an individual
that remained in a yard from daylight till dark, making the rounds of
the trees and remaining longest on the fruit trees at the tiny holes
attributed to Sapsuckers. She said that the bird seemed to find good
food in these pits, and it may have been eating some of the cambium.”
He writes further:
Mr. E. O. Grant, a faithful correspondent of Patten, Maine,
travels over considerable region and north into Quebec,
spending much time in the woods. On March 6, 1922, he wrote
that the spruce budworm had killed about thirty percent
of the spruce in that region and nearly all the fir, and
that among the dead trees he saw hundreds of both the
three-toed species, together with nearly equal numbers
of Downy Woodpeckers and Hairy Woodpeckers. Food for the
birds was very plentiful, as dark-beetles and spruce-borers
were numerous. When an invasion of caterpillars strips
coniferous trees and thus exposes their trunks and
branches to the hot summer sun, dark-beetles attack and
virtually girdle them with numerous tunnels beneath the
bark; borers get in and sometimes most of the trees die.
The woodpeckers, concentrating on these dead trees from
all the forest around about, help to keep down the undue
increase of bark-beetles and borers which, if they became
too numerous, might attack some live trees.
_Behavior._--Lucien M. Turner says in his unpublished notes: “The
manner of flight of this species is less vigorous than in _Picoides
arcticus_, yet differing in a manner that is difficult to describe;
the unfolding of the wings when preparing to make the upward swoop is
quicker, the stroke of the wing not so strong, and the plunge not so
deep.”
Both species of three-toed woodpeckers are fearless birds, tame, and
unsuspicious, probably because of their unfamiliarity with man and his
hostile intentions; both are less active than most other woodpeckers,
this species being particularly quiet in its movements and sedentary in
its habits. Mr. Brewster (1898) writes:
My previous impression that _Picoides americanus_ is a very
much less active and restless bird than _P. arcticus_,
was fully confirmed by the behavior of this male who was
almost if not quite as slow and lethargic of movement as
a sapsucker. He would spend minutes at a time clinging to
one spot and when he moved up the tree trunks it was in a
singularly slow, deliberate manner. Only when at or near
the nest did he show real animation. * * *
I have rarely seen a nesting bird so alert and keen of
hearing as was this _Picoides_. The sound of our voices or
the slightest noise made by an oar or paddle would bring
him at once to the entrance of the hole, even when we were
forty or fifty yards away, and every few minutes when we
were sitting perfectly still he would look out turning
his head in every direction. He would not leave the hole,
however, until we were within a few yards of the foot of
the tree and after he had drummed awhile he would return
to the stub while we were sitting near its base with the
camera directed towards it. * * *
On returning to the stub the bird would usually strike
against it about two feet below the hole and reaching it
by two or three quick, upward hops would cling to its
lower edge, alternately looking in and down at us. * * *
He did not once enter the nest while we were near the
tree, nor did he again attempt to mislead us by pecking at
the bark, evidently realizing that this ruse had failed.
When he flew back into the woods he always took one of two
courses and along each he invariably alighted not only on
the same trees but on the same spot on each tree. He had
one particular place on the trunk of a large spruce where
he would spend ten or fifteen minutes at a time pluming
himself and watching us, before returning to the nest.
Major Bendire (1895) quotes the following from Dr. C. Hart Merriam:
We had just crossed the boundary line between Lewis and
Herkimer counties, when Mr. Bagg called my attention to a
“fresh hole,” about 8 feet from the ground, in a spruce
tree near by. On approaching the tree a yellow crown
appeared in the hole, showing that the male bird was “at
home.” To prevent his escape I jumped toward the tree and
introduced three fingers, which were immediately punctured
in a manner so distasteful to their proprietor as to
necessitate an immediate withdrawal and exchange for the
muzzle of my friend’s gun. A handkerchief was next crowded
into the hole, but was instantly riddled and driven out
by a few blows from his terrible bill. It was then held
loosely over the hole, and as the bird emerged I secured
and killed him.
Wendell Taber had a good chance to observe one of these woodpeckers
at short range in Grafton County, N. H., on May 31, 1937, about which
he writes to me: “The bird was intent upon obtaining its food and
ignored our presence. Most of the time the bird would fly to a tree
and alight at a height of 20 to 25 feet, then work downward, hopping
backward. Particularly it seemed to enjoy prodding around on the base
of a tree at or within an inch or two of where tree and earth met.
Drilling was barely audible, even when the bird was close-to. Both live
and dead trees were attacked impartially. There was no strip act--the
bark was not peeled off. There was a row of dead trees at the edge of
the forest, which might well have been concentrated on, but which,
actually, was attacked only in a haphazard manner along with trees
alive in the forest. If anything, more attention was given to live
trees.”
_Voice._--The three-toed woodpecker is normally a rather silent
bird. Its weak notes have been likened to the squealing notes of the
yellow-bellied sapsucker, or the squeak of a small mammal; it also
utters a variety of short notes like _queep_ or _quip_. Horace W.
Wright (1911) says: “The calls of the _americanus_ male bird were not
excited or loud. The single calls were somewhat like the robin’s call
at dusk, and the rattling calls resembled a Hairy Woodpecker’s rattle,
but were less loud and sharp.”
Mr. Brewster (1898) writes:
I had abundant opportunities for studying the drumming call
today. It varied in duration from one to two seconds (never
running over or under these limits) but was usually one and
a half to one and three quarters seconds. The intervals
between the calls were too irregular to be worth recording.
The first three or four taps were slightly slower and
more disconnected than the remaining ones but the general
effect was that of a uniform roll similar to that made
by the Downy and the Hairy Woodpecker, but less loud and
penetrating. Still it carried well and under favorable
conditions could be heard fully one quarter of a mile away.
* * *
After drumming a dozen times or more he gave a long vocal
call closely similar to the Kingfisher-like rattle of the
Hairy Woodpecker.
_Field marks._--The American three-toed woodpecker is the only
woodpecker likely to be seen in the northern woods that has a black
back transversely barred with white, white under parts banded with
black on the flanks, and a black crown, with or without a yellow crown
patch; the yellow patch is very prominent in the adult male and less so
in the young birds of both sexes, but lacking in the adult female. In
flight the “ladderback” is more conspicuous than when the bird is at
rest, and the tail flashes white.
_Winter._--Both species of three-toed woodpeckers are mainly resident
throughout the year within their breeding ranges, as their normal food
supply is as easily available in winter as in summer. Consequently few
species of birds are less inclined to migrate than these woodpeckers.
However, on rare occasions this woodpecker has been known to appear in
winter somewhat south of its summer range. Probably these southward
movements have been due to some shortage of food in its summer home,
or an unusual supply of it further south, or, possibly, an unusually
successful breeding season may have overcrowded the home range and
caused an exodus.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Northern Europe, Asia, and North America, south through high
mountainous regions to about latitude 35° N.; nonmigratory.
In North America the range of the three-toed woodpecker extends
=north= to northern Alaska (Kowak River, Tanana, Beaver Creek, Fort
Yukon, Circle, and Charlie Creek); northern Yukon (Forty Mile and
probably Coal Creek); Mackenzie (Fort McPherson, Fort Goodhope,
Fort Anderson, Fort Rae, and Fort Smith); northern Manitoba (Fort
Du Brochet and Churchill); northern Ontario (Fort Albany); northern
Quebec (Fort Chimo); and Labrador (Okak). =East= to Labrador (Okak
and Nain); Newfoundland (South Exploit River); northeastern Maine
(Presque Isle); and New Hampshire (Lake Umbagog and Mount Jefferson).
=South= to northern New Hampshire (Mount Jefferson); northern New
York (Long Lake and Moose River); probably northern Michigan (Isle
Royal); northern Minnesota (Lake Itasca); northern New Mexico (Pecos
Baldy and Chuska Mountains); Arizona (White Mountains, San Francisco
Mountain, and Kaibab Plateau); east-central Nevada (Snake Mountains);
and southwestern Oregon (Four-mile Lake). =West= to western Oregon
(Four-mile Lake); Washington (Blue Mountains, probably Mount Rainier,
and Mount Baker); British Columbia (Chilliwack, Clinton, Willow River,
and Hazelton); and Alaska (Chichagof Island, Glacier, Copper River, Lake
Clark, Mount McKinley, Nulato, and Kowak River).
Several races of this species have been recognized, three of which
are included in the range above outlined. The American three-toed
woodpecker (_P. t. bacatus_) ranges from Maine, Newfoundland, and
Labrador west to northern Manitoba and southern Mackenzie; the Alpine
three-toed woodpecker (_P. t. dorsalis_) is the Rocky Mountain form
and is found in that region from Montana and Idaho south to the higher
mountains of New Mexico and Arizona; the Alaska three-toed woodpecker
(_P. t. fasciatus_) is found from Alaska, Yukon, and western Mackenzie
south to Oregon, Idaho, and Montana.
While the three-toed woodpecker is not regularly migratory, it
appears likely that during severe winters it withdraws somewhat from
the northern parts of its range. At this season it is occasionally
collected or observed short distances south of its normal range
(Massachusetts, southern Wisconsin, southern Minnesota, and southern
New Mexico).
_Egg dates._--Alberta: 8 records, May 23 to June 16.
Arctic America: 5 records, May 15 to June 9.
Labrador: 3 records, May 26 and 27.
New York: 3 records, May 14 to June 8.
PICOÏDES TRIDACTYLUS FASCIATUS Baird
ALASKA THREE-TOED WOODPECKER
HABITS
The range of this race of the three-toed woodpecker extends throughout
the Hudsonian and Canadian Zones of western Canada and Alaska, and a
short distance southward into some of the Western States, where it
intergrades with the next form in the boreal forests of the Rocky
Mountains.
Ridgway (1914) describes it as similar to the eastern race, “but
with much more white on back, the white bars much larger and more or
less coalesced along median line, forming a more or less continuous
longitudinal patch; whitish spots on forehead much larger, sometimes
coalesced into a nearly uniform dull white frontal area; upper
tail-coverts and lower rump barred or spotted with white; sometimes
even the wing-coverts and middle rectrices are spotted with white;
black malar stripe narrower and usually less distinct, and black bars
on sides and flanks narrower; averaging slightly larger.”
Dr. E. W. Nelson (1887) says that this woodpecker occurs “on the
headwaters of the Mackenzie River, extending thence north along the
course of this stream and the Anderson River, and westward, covering
all the wooded portions of Northern Alaska to the northern tree-limit,
* * * outnumbering by far the combined numbers of all the other
woodpeckers of that region. * * * On the Yukon these birds are said to
prefer the groves of poplar and willow to the spruces.”
Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1900) says: “This, the only species of woodpecker
detected by me in the Kowak region, was resident throughout the year.
It could scarcely be called common, though its borings were noticed in
nearly every tract of spruces visited.” J. A. Munro (1919), referring
to the Okanagan Valley, British Columbia, says: “This species is
resident and fairly common in Murray pine, Western larch, and spruce
forests. I have never found them in yellow pine or Douglas fir country.
They prefer the burnt areas of timber, and specimens collected are
generally stained with charcoal on the underparts.”
_Nesting._--The nesting habits of this woodpecker do not differ
materially from those of its eastern relative. Bendire (1895) mentions
two sets of eggs, collected by MacFarlane in the Anderson River region,
of which he says: “A single egg, originally from a set of three taken
on May 30, 1863, accompanied by the female bird, was taken from a
cavity in a pine tree, 4 feet from the ground, and another set of four,
of which there are three eggs remaining, and likewise accompanied by
the male bird, was taken on June 5, 1864, from a hole in a dry spruce,
situated about 6 feet from the ground. The eggs from the last set were
said to have been lying on the decayed dust of the tree, and were
perfectly fresh when found.”
Laing and Taverner (1929) found an abandoned nest in the Chitina River
region, Alaska, of which they say: “Tree, about 15 inches in diameter
at butt, had a dead top and nest in this dead portion, about 40 feet
aloft. Dimensions as follows: diameter of door barely 2 inches; depth
of nest 9½ inches; greatest diameter 3 inches. Barrel of nest quite
cylindrical.”
There is a set of four eggs in my collection, taken by Richard C.
Harlow near Belvedere, Alberta, on May 29, 1926. The nest was about 20
feet above ground in a dead tamarack stub, among a scattered growth of
tamaracks, in a muskeg, near a lake; the eggs lay on a bed of chips 10
inches below the entrance.
Mr. Munro (1919) writes: “On May 28, 1917, I found a nest that had just
been finished, thirty feet from the ground in a dead Murray pine. The
entrance was smaller than would be expected, slightly over one and a
half inches, and the hole about fourteen inches deep.”
_Eggs._--The eggs of the Alaska three-toed woodpecker are
indistinguishable from those of the eastern race. The measurements of
12 eggs average 22.08 by 17.09 millimeters; the eggs showing the four
extremes measure =23.6= by =18.1=, =20.8= by 16.8, and 21.5 by =16.5=
millimeters.
_Behavior._--The plumages, feeding habits, and general behavior of this
race do not differ materially from those of the species elsewhere,
but Maj. Allan Brooks (Dawson and Bowles, 1909) has given a good
description of a habit that seems to be shared by both species of
_Picoïdes_ and that has been referred to by others; he writes:
When shot, even if instantly killed, three-toed woodpeckers
of both species have a marvelous faculty of remaining
clinging to the tree in death. Where the trunks are draped
with _Usnea_ moss, it is impossible to bring one down,
except when winged--then they attempt to fly, and fall
to earth; but when killed outright they remain securely
fastened by their strong curved claws. * * * The only
chance is to leave the bird and to visit the foot of the
tree when the relaxing muscles have at length permitted the
body to drop--usually within two days. Once I was fortunate
enough to observe the exact position that enabled the bird
to maintain its grip. I had shot and killed an Arctic
Three-toed Woodpecker on a low stump. On going up I found
the bird’s feet to be three inches apart by measurement;
the tail was firmly braced, and the further the body was
tilted back the more firmly the claws held in the bark.
Dr. Grinnell (1900) says: “In the fall and mid-winter these birds are
silent and seldom seen. But after the first of March their drumming
on some resonant dead tree was heard nearly every morning. This sound
could be heard a long distance through the quiet woods, giving notice
of the whereabouts of the woodpeckers.”
PICOÏDES TRIDACTYLUS DORSALIS Baird
ALPINE THREE-TOED WOODPECKER
HABITS
This race of the three-toed woodpeckers enjoys the most southern
distribution of any of the birds of this genus, ranging from northern
Montana to northern Arizona and New Mexico, in the boreal forests of
the Rocky Mountains. Ridgway (1914) characterizes it as “similar to
white-backed examples of _P. a. fasciatus_, but larger; white markings
on back usually all longitudinal (very rarely with any transverse bars
of black), white supra-auricular streak usually broader, forehead
usually with more black and less whitish spotting, white spots or bars
on inner web of innermost secondaries larger, and sides and flanks
usually less barred with black.”
The Weydemeyers (1928) say that in northwestern Montana, “unlike
_arcticus_, this species prefers dense, virgin forests to cut-over
woods and open woodland pastures. * * * In the higher elevations,
this woodpecker may be found in white pine, lodgepole pine, alpine
fir, and Engelmann spruce forests. In the Transition zone, it shows
a preference for spruce woods, with larch and yellow pine forests as
second choice. In the Canadian zone, this species is somewhat commoner
than _arcticus_; in the Transition zone, it occurs only about one-third
as frequently as does the larger bird.”
M. P. Skinner says, in his Yellowstone National Park notes: “This
woodpecker is rather uncommon, but I have seen it in coniferous forests
between 6,500 and 8,000 feet, in firs, lodgepole pine, and Engelmann
spruce. I have also seen it on dead trees and on telephone poles. I
have seen this woodpecker in this Park only between May and October.”
_Nesting._--At an altitude of about 9,000 feet in the mountains of
Colorado, in or near Estes Park, John H. Flanagan (1911) collected a
set of four eggs of the alpine three-toed woodpecker. “The hole was in
an aspen stub, nine feet from the ground and about a foot or eighteen
inches from the top, and just before the guide reached the hole the
bird flew out. * * *
“The entrance to the nesting cavity was about one and one-half inches
in diameter; the cavity itself about nine or ten inches in depth and
quite large at the bottom. The eggs were laid on a few chips.”
In north-central Colorado, Edwin R. Warren (1912) found a nest of this
woodpecker “in a dead Engelmann spruce, which was twenty-five inches
in diameter at the base, and twenty at the nest hole, the latter being
seven feet above ground. The nest was eight inches deep, the entrance
one and three-quarters inches in diameter; the thickness of the wood on
the front side of the hole was two and three-quarters inches, and the
cavity was five inches from front to back, and three wide. There were
a few chips in the bottom, as well as a few of the birds’ droppings.
There were two young, about ready to fly, though I had no difficulty in
posing them on the tree for pictures; they showed little or no fear.”
Randolph Jenks (1934) discovered two nests of the alpine three-toed
woodpecker on the Kaibab Plateau, near the east rim of the Grand
Canyon, in northern Arizona. One was in “a hole in an aspen tree, two
and one-half inches in diameter, opening to the southeast, twelve feet
from the ground. The cavity was eight inches deep and the nest was
lined with a thick layer of maggot-infested sawdust. In spite of the
crawling competitors, the nestlings, a male and a female, seemed quite
contented.” This was on June 30, 1931. Several days later another nest
was found, also on the Plateau, at an elevation of 8,100 feet; this
nest was “in a hole about sixty feet above the ground in a western
yellow pine.”
Dr. Edgar A. Mearns (1890b) writes:
The Alpine Three-toed Woodpecker breeds commonly throughout
the pine belt, seldom ascending far into the spruce woods
of the highest peaks [in the mountains of Arizona]. On the
northwestern slope of San Francisco Mountain I discovered a
nest of this species on June 8, 1887. The female was seen
alone pecking at a large yellow pine, which, although dead,
still retained its bark and was quite solid. While feeding
she uttered a peculiar, harsh, nasal cry. I shot her, and
then noticed a small, neatly bored hole in the south side
of the pine trunk, about 30 feet from the ground and away
from branches. With the aid of a rope, and taking a start
from the saddle, I was scarcely able to climb to the nest,
which the male did not quit until I was well up; then he
came out and uttered a sudden, sharp “whip-whip-whip” in
a menacing tone, remaining hard by while I worked with
saw and chisel. It took me nearly half an hour to make an
opening sufficiently large to admit the hand, as the burrow
was situated so extraordinarily deep. Two young, male and
female, with feathers just sprouting, were found on a bed
of small chips at the bottom of the burrow, not more than
8 inches lower than the entrance, but in the very heart of
the tree, the cavity being oblique and pear-shaped, and
having the strong odor characteristic of Woodpeckers’ nests
in general. Both parents and their progeny were preserved,
and are now in the American Museum collection. The irides
of the adults were dark cherry red; their feet, claws, and
basal half of mandible plumbeous, the rest of the bill
being plumbeous black.
_Eggs._--The alpine three-toed woodpecker is said to lay five eggs to a
set, but probably the set oftener consists of fewer eggs. I have seen
no eggs of this subspecies; and the only measurements I have been able
to get are those from a set of five eggs, collected by A. Treganza in
Salt Lake County, Utah, on June 3, 1916; these are in the P. B. Philipp
collection in the American Museum of Natural History. The measurements
average 24.52 by 17.52 millimeters, rather large for the species; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =25.3= by =17.7= and =24.1= by
=17.4= millimeters.
_Food._--Mrs. Bailey (1928) says that the food of this woodpecker
consists of “over 75 percent, destructive wood-boring larvae of
caterpillars and beetles. The Three-toed Woodpeckers rank high as
conservators of the forest, eliminating annually, as Professor Beal
has estimated, some 13,675 of the grubs most destructive to forests.
The scarcity of these useful woodpeckers makes their protection and
encouragement especially important.”
SPHYRAPICUS VARIUS VARIUS (Linnaeus)
YELLOW-BELLIED SAPSUCKER
PLATES 18, 19
HABITS
CONTRIBUTED BY WINSOR MARRETT TYLER
_Spring._--It is spring in the Transition Zone when in April the
yellow-bellied sapsucker passes through on the way from its winter
quarters to its breeding ground in the Canadian Zone. If spring
is tardy most of the trees may be leafless, but many of them have
blossomed, and the sap is running.
At this season the sapsucker is light-hearted and jaunty compared to
the sober, quiet bird that visited us the autumn before. The breeding
season is near at hand, and if two birds meet they often engage in a
sort of game, a precursory courtship, wherein one bird flies at the
other in a playful attack; the other eludes the rush of the oncoming
bird by a sudden, last-minute retreat--winding around the branch on
which it rests, or sliding off into the air. In these pursuits in and
out among the branches we are impressed by the agility and grace of
the birds and by the easy way they direct their course through the
air. They do not appear to impel themselves by strength of wing alone,
but, especially in their slanting descents, they let the force of
gravity pull them swiftly along, and then, by the impetus of the speed
attained, glide upward to a perch. They seem to swing from branch to
branch with little effort, slowly opening and closing their wings to
guide them on their way. As we watch them we are reminded of trapeze
artists in the circus.
But the new sap is running, and the birds quickly tap the supply by
drilling into the bark of their favorite trees and drink of the sap as
it flows freely from the wounds.
Every spring the birds come to a sturdy yellow birch tree on the Boston
Public Garden, a species of tree with which they must be familiar on
their breeding grounds in the north. The sap flows plenteously in
mid-April from the many punctures that the birds make; it wets a large
portion of the trunk of the tree and often drips to the ground from the
branches. The birds stand clear of the tree as they feed at the sap
wells with only the feet and the tip of the tail touching the bark.
The tail is braced against the trunk at an angle of about 45°, and the
feet reach far forward to grasp the bark opposite the bend of the wing.
I have never seen a sapsucker crouch against this wet bark as a downy
woodpecker commonly does when digging out a grub--like a cat hunched up
lapping a saucer of milk. When a bird wishes to move to a point below
where it is perched, it jumps from the tree and floats in the air,
then turning, with its wings held out somewhat, dives head-downward,
drifting in an easy, leisurely manner as if moving under water; then,
just before alighting, it rights itself. If you come too near, the
sapsucker scrambles around to the rear of the limb, and if you step
close up to the tree, the bird starts away in free, sweeping curves,
like a skater over the ice, the white in the wing flashing out.
Eaton (1914) notes that “during the migration it is evident that the
male birds arrive first, for during 15 years of continuous records
which I have kept with this object in view I have found that male birds
are the first to be seen each year and no females are seen for several
days after the first males arrive.”
Audubon (1842) records the following unique observation:
While travelling I observed that they performed their
migration by day, in loose parties or families of six or
seven individuals, flying at a great height, and at the
intervals between their sailings and the flappings of their
wings, emitting their remarkable plaintive cries. When
alighting towards sunset, they descended with amazing speed
in a tortuous manner, and first settled on the tops of the
highest trees, where they remained perfectly silent for
awhile, after which they betook themselves to the central
parts of the thickest trees, and searched along the trunks
for abandoned holes of Squirrels or Woodpeckers, in which
they spent the night, several together in the same hole.
A. B. Klugh (1909) reports a remarkably large gathering of sapsuckers
on their northward migration. He says:
On the morning of April 17th, 1909, the city of Kingston,
Ontario, was alive with yellow-bellied sapsuckers.
From my study window I saw some twenty of them on the trees
at the lodge of the park and on going out to investigate
I found from one to four on nearly every tree. As a
conservative estimate I placed the number of birds in the
park at three hundred. * * *
The probable cause of this immense wave of yellow-bellied
sapsuckers striking Kingston lies in the strong gale from
the north which was blowing on the night of April 16th, the
birds apparently dropping as soon as they had crossed the
lake.
_Courtship._--Little has been recorded on the courtship of the
yellow-bellied sapsucker, but we may get a hint of its early stages at
least as the birds pass northward--the increased interest in each other
shown by their lively pursuits and their rapid whirlings among the
branches, as noted under “Spring.”
George Miksch Sutton (1928b) speaks thus of the birds on their nesting
ground in Pennsylvania: “In late May and June the mewing cry was
familiar and they occasionally indulged in strange courtship antics,
flashing through the tops of the trees, calling excitedly in tones
resembling those of a flicker, and dancing about with wings and tail
spread in a manner utterly foreign to the usually stolid bearing of
migrant individuals.”
Of the spring drumming, perhaps a part of courtship, Dr. Harry C.
Oberholser (1896b) says:
In spring the drumming of the yellow-bellied sapsucker
may usually be easily recognized by the following
peculiarities. Four or five taps given in quick succession
are followed by a short pause, this being soon succeeded
by two short quick taps; then another pause, and two more
taps in somewhat less rapid succession than the first;
followed by yet another pause, and two additional taps
still a little slower. This is sometimes slightly varied
with regard to the number of taps; and occasionally also
the latter part consists only of single quick taps with an
increasing interval toward the last.
The difference between the tapping of the sapsucker and of the hairy
and the downy woodpecker is described in the life history of the latter
bird. Wendell Taber told Mr. Bent that he succeeded in calling up three
of these birds by imitating their drumming with a fountain pen on a
dead tree; one of them alighted on the tree on which he was drumming.
_Nesting._--William Brewster (1876a), writing of the nesting of the
sapsucker at Umbagog Lake, Maine, says:
They arrive from the South, where they spend the winter,
from the middle to the last of April, and, pairing being
soon effected, commence at once the excavation of their
nests. The trees usually selected are large dead birches,
and a decided preference is manifested for the vicinity
of water, though some nests occur on high ground in the
interior of the woods, but never so abundantly there as
along the margin of rivers and lakes. Both sexes work
alternately, relieving each other at frequent intervals,
the bird not employed usually clinging near the hole and
encouraging its toiling mate, by an occasional low cry.
With the deepening of the hole arises the necessity for
increased labor, as the rapidly accumulating debris must
be removed, and the bird now appears at frequent intervals
at the entrance, and, dropping its mouthful of chips,
returns to its work. A week or more is occupied in the
completion of the nest, the time varying considerably with
the relative hardness of the wood. A small quantity of the
finer chips are left at the bottom to serve as a bed for
the eggs. * * * The labor of incubation, like all other
duties, is shared equally by the two sexes. * * *
All nests examined upon this occasion [an occasion when
he found half a dozen nests] were of uniform gourd-like
shape, with the sides very smoothly and evenly chiselled.
They averaged about fourteen inches in depth by five in
diameter at the widest point, while the diameter of the
exterior hole varied from 1.25 to 1.60 inches. So small,
indeed, was this entrance in proportion to the size of the
bird, that in many cases they were obliged to struggle
violently for several seconds in either going out or in.
The nests in most instances were very easily discovered, as
the bird was almost always in the immediate vicinity, and
if the tree was approached would fly to the hole and utter
a few low calls, which would bring out its sitting mate,
when both would pass to and from the spot, emitting notes
of anxiety and alarm. The bird not employed in incubation
has also a peculiar habit of clinging to the trunk just
below the hole, in a perfectly motionless and strikingly
pensive attitude, apparently looking in, though from the
conformation of the interior it would be impossible for it
to see its mate or eggs. In this position it will remain
without moving for many minutes at a time.
Henry Mousley (1916) states that the bird “often nests year after year
in the same tree (but not necessarily in the same hole) the favourite
ones here [Hatley, Quebec] being elm, poplar, and butternut. * * *
Of two nests examined the average dimensions are as follows, viz.:
entrance hole 1⅜ inches in diameter, extreme depth 10¾ inches, and
width 2⅞ inches.”
Philipp and Bowdish (1917) say of the nesting site in New Brunswick:
“The favorite situation was the dead heart of a live poplar, most
often on the bank of a stream, and facing same, but some nests were in
totally dead trees, of different kinds. They ranged from eight to forty
feet from ground.”
Bendire (1895) says that the birds “are devoted parents, and when
incubation is somewhat advanced, or the young have been recently
hatched, the bird on the nest is loath to leave it, and will sometimes
allow itself to be captured rather than to desert its treasures.”
_Eggs._--[AUTHOR’S NOTE: The yellow-bellied sapsucker lays four
to seven eggs to a set, though five or six eggs are more commonly
found. They vary from ovate to elliptical-ovate and sometimes to
elliptical-oval. The shell is smooth and either dull or moderately
glossy. They are pure white, like all woodpeckers’ eggs. The
measurements of 52 eggs average 22.44 by 16.92 millimeters; the eggs
showing the four extremes measure =24.9= by 17.0, 23.8 by =18.0=,
=20.57= by 16.26, and 22.1 by =15.5= millimeters.]
_Young._--As in the case of most nestling birds reared in a hole in a
tree, little is known of the young sapsuckers while they are in the
nest.
Frank Bolles (1892) speaks of “a nest filled with noisy fledglings
whose squealing sounded afar in the otherwise silent woods. * * * The
parent birds came frequently to the tree, and their arrival was always
greeted by more vigorous crying from the young.”
William Brewster (1876a), in his study of the bird at Umbagog Lake,
Maine, says: “The young leave the nest in July, and for a long time
the brood remains together, being still fed by the parents. They are
very playful, sporting about the tree-trunks and chasing one another
continually.”
Frank Bolles (1892) has given a very interesting, detailed account of
rearing three nestlings, about to be fledged, over a period of three
and a half months. The three birds were dissimilar enough in coloring
to be distinguished from one another; they proved to be two males and
one female; and they soon developed marked differences in conduct and
personality. Mr. Bolles at first kept them in a large cage in which
they had ample space to climb about and later allowed them to fly
around a room. They became very tame, letting him handle them freely.
They subsisted almost entirely on maple syrup and water in equal parts,
fed by hand at first, but in a few days they drank readily from a
basin. They caught a few flies and ate some other insects that entered
the cage, attracted by the syrup. Mr. Bolles says, however, that “the
number of insects caught by them in this way was small, and I do not
think amounted at any time to ten percent of their food.”
The birds were lively and apparently in perfect health from the time
they were captured, July 7, until October 11, when one of them, the
female, began to droop. Two days later she had a convulsion in the
morning and died in the afternoon. Autopsy showed that her body was
well nourished and that the organs were apparently normal except the
liver, which was “very large, deeply bile-stained, and very soft.”
A week later the other two birds died after exhibiting the same
symptoms as the first bird. The Department of Agriculture examined
the body of one of these birds and reported enlargement and fatty
degeneration of the liver.
Mr. Bolles remarks that “the most probable cause of this enlargement
of the liver, which seems to have been the reason for the death of the
three sapsuckers, was an undue proportion of sugar in their diet. In
a wild state they would have eaten insects every day and kept their
stomachs well filled with the chitinous parts of acid insects. Under
restraint they secured fewer and fewer insects, until during the last
few weeks of their lives, they had practically no solid food of any
kind.”
Summarizing his observations, he says:
From these experiments I draw the following conclusions:
(1), that the yellow-bellied woodpecker may be successfully
kept in captivity for a period corresponding to that
during which as a resident bird he taps trees for their
sap, sustained during this time upon a diet of which from
90 to 100 per cent is diluted maple syrup; (2), that this
fact affords evidence of an extremely strong character,
in confirmation and support of the theory that when the
yellow-bellied woodpecker taps trees for their sap he uses
the sap as his principal article of food, and not primarily
as a bait to attract insects.
Winton Weydemeyer (1926) in Montana “observed a pair of red-naped
sapsuckers * * * gathering sap to feed their young in the nest. A
regular tree-route, followed alternately by the male and female,
included a quaking aspen, a larger alder, and a large willow, in which
borings had been made. The birds flew directly from the nest to the
aspen, and gathered the sap that had accumulated since the last visit;
then flew to the alder and to the willow, repeating the process;
and finally flew back to the nest, without hunting for insects.
Occasionally the male would vary the process by catching a few flies
from the air, eating some and carrying some to the nest.”
Forbush (1927) gives the incubation period of the yellow-bellied
sapsucker as “probably about 14 days.”
A. Dawes DuBois furnishes the following note: “Yellow-bellied
sapsuckers were observed feeding young in a nest, in Hennepin County,
Minn., on July 5, 1937. The nest was about 25 feet above ground in
a partially dead tree at edge of willow-and-alder thicket adjoining
woods. Both parents were bringing food. The squeaky note of the young
was repeated with such regularity (about four times a second) as to
indicate that only one nestling was uttering it. When the nestling was
being fed at the entrance, by the poking method, these notes went up to
a higher pitch, and were sometimes choked off almost to inaudibility.
“Two days later, the parents were still feeding very frequently. The
male, who on the first day had been seen to bring a bright red berry
about the size of a pea, again brought a bit of small red fruit. On one
occasion, when the parents were away, the nestling put its head out
of the hole; but it did not do so when being fed. In general, alarm
calls of the parents had little if any effect upon the squeaking of the
nestling, though at one time, July 7, the squeaking seemed to cease for
a short interval when the parent gave the alarm notes. For the most
part the series of squeaky notes is continuous. It was by hearing these
sounds that this nest was discovered.”
_Plumages._--[AUTHOR’S NOTE: The young sapsucker is hatched naked, as
is the case with other woodpeckers, but the juvenal plumage is acquired
before the young bird leaves the nest. The sexes are alike in the
juvenal plumage. A young bird, not fully grown and probably not long
out of the nest, taken June 25, has the black crown largely concealed
by the long brownish tips of the feathers, “ochraceous-tawny” to
“buckthorn brown”; each of the black feathers of the back has a large
terminal spot of grayish white, or yellowish white, producing a boldly
spotted pattern; the nape and sides of the neck have smaller spots of
the same color; the wings and tail are as in the adult-fall plumage;
the chin and upper throat are dull white or pale buffy brownish; the
lower throat and chest are pale brownish, broken by crescentic bars of
dusky; and the center of the breast and the abdomen are pale yellow
or yellowish white. Changes soon begin to take place, at irregular
intervals, during which the sexes begin to differentiate. Young males
may begin to show traces of red in the throat patch as early as July;
and in August some may have the crown largely crimson; the black patch
on the chest does not usually appear until much of the red has been
assumed, but some birds show considerable of both red and black before
the end of August. Other young males may not acquire much red before
the end of September. Progress toward maturity continues all through
fall, winter, and early spring by protracted partial molts; probably
most individuals acquire the fully adult plumage by early spring, but
I have seen birds that had not fully completed this prenuptial molt by
the end of April.
Young females follow the same sequence of molts but are somewhat later
in developing the red crown, which apparently is not acquired until
October or later. The adult body plumage of both sexes is acquired
during winter and early spring. Adults have a partial prenuptial molt
about the head and throat early in spring and a complete molt late in
summer and fall. In fresh fall plumage, the lighter markings are more
or less suffused with yellowish or buffy tints, and the belly is deeper
yellow.]
_Food._--W. L. McAtee (1911) learned by stomach examinations that the
yellow-bellied sapsucker consumed cambium and bast averaging 16.71
percent of its diet. He continues:
It must be noted also that cambium is a very delicate,
perishable material, at certain times no more than a
jelly, and thus never receives a percentage valuation in
examinations of long-preserved stomachs corresponding to
its bulk when first swallowed. Neither do we get any
record of the sap consumed by these birds [the three
species of sapsucker] and they are inordinate tipplers.
Hence the value of the percentages cited lies not so much
in their accuracy as to the quantity of cambium eaten as in
the fact that they indicate a steady consumption of this
important substance. There is no doubt that cambium, bast,
and sap are depended upon by sapsuckers as stable diet.
We may get some idea of the amount of sap consumed by the bird from
Frank Bolles’ (1892) record of his three young captive sapsuckers.
He says: “Ordinarily they disposed of eight teaspoonfuls [of diluted
syrup] each during the twenty-four hours. Part of this evaporated,
and part was probably secured by black ants which visited the cage by
night.”
Bolles (1891), describing the method of feeding of birds in the wild,
says: “The dipping was done regularly and rather quickly, often two
or three times in each hole. The sap glistened on the bill as it was
withdrawn. I could sometimes see the tongue move. The bill was directed
towards the lower, inner part of the drill, which, as I found by
examination, was cut so as to hold the sap.”
This is the common method of feeding, but sometimes, when two or more
holes have coalesced into a vertical groove, the bird will run its bill
upward along the edge of the wound, sipping the sap much as we might,
with our finger, wipe off a drop running down from a pitcher’s lip.
McAtee (1911) states that “about four-fifths of the insect food of the
three species of sapsuckers consists of ants, the eating of which may
be reckoned slightly in the birds’ favor. The remainder of the food
is made up of beetles, wasps, and a great variety of other insects,
including, however, practically no wood-boring larvae or other special
enemies of trees. The birds’ vegetable food can not be cited in their
behalf, as it consists almost entirely of wild fruits, which are of no
importance, and of cambium, the securing of which results in serious
damage.”
F. E. L. Beal (1895) mentions, as articles in the sapsucker’s diet,
the berries of dogwood, black alder, Virginia creeper, and wild black
cherries. Winfrid A. Stearns (1883) says: “Nuts, berries, and other
fruits vary its fare; and to procure these it may often be seen
creeping and hanging in the strangest attitudes among the terminal
twigs of trees, so slender that they bend with the weight of the bird.”
Audubon (1842), in his plate of the sapsucker, gives an animated
picture of the bird thus engaged.
Brewster (1876a) shows the bird as an expert flycatcher. “From
an humble delver after worms and larvae, it rises to the proud
independence of a Flycatcher, taking its prey on wing as unerringly as
the best marksman of them all. From its perch on the spire of some tall
stub it makes a succession of rapid sorties after its abundant victims
and then flies off to its nest with bill and mouth crammed full of
insects, principally large _Diptera_.”
_Behavior._--The sapsucker, a bird of wide distribution and in some
parts of its range the commonest woodpecker, has come to be regarded
with disfavor by man, who accuses it of harming the trees it drills to
obtain its food. Man accuses the bird of weakening trees by drawing
away their life-blood and of killing many by girdling them with
multiple punctures, and he blames the bird for marring the beauty of
trunk and limb by pitting and scarring them.
A study of the habits of the sapsucker shows that its work on the
trees varies with the season and, on the Atlantic coast, is spread
over a territory 3,000 miles long or more. During the migrations,
northward and southward, when the birds are scattered and on the
move, comparatively little harm is done. Here and there a limb may be
killed--either girdled or opened so that infection enters--and rarely a
tree may die, but the chief effect is an esthetic one, the scarring of
the bark with pits, notably in orchards where it is a matter of common
observation that most of the pitted trees are in perfect health. On
their breeding ground and in their winter quarters, however, where the
birds are concentrated and remain in one locality for a considerable
time, the effect is more serious. In the Southern States especially,
the lumber industry suffers material financial loss due to the fact
that deep in the wood cut from trees on which sapsuckers have worked
extensively, when the trees were small, the grain is distorted and
made unsightly by the scars of the wounds inflicted by the birds years
before.
From an exhaustive study of the economic status of the woodpeckers
by W. L. McAtee (1911), the salient points in reference to the
yellow-bellied sapsucker are quoted below:
The results of sapsucker attacks on trees are so uniform
and characteristic as to be distinguished easily from the
work of other woodpeckers. Sapsucker holes are drilled
clear through the bark and cambium and often into the wood.
They vary in outline from circular to squarish elliptical,
in the latter case usually having the longer diameter
across the limb or trunk. Generally they are arranged in
rings or partial rings around the trunk, but they often
fall into vertical series. Deeply-cut holes arranged with
such regularity are made only by sapsuckers.
After the original pattern of holes is completed, the
sapsuckers often continue their work, taking out the bark
between holes until sometimes large areas are cleanly
removed. This often occurs on small limbs or trunks,
where long strips of bark up and down the tree are
removed, leaving narrow strings between. This effect is
also produced by continually enlarging single punctures
by excavating at the upper end, * * * which is done to
secure fresh inner bark and a constant supply of sap.
Occasionally, after a tree has been checkered or grooved
after the above-described systematic methods, it may be
barked indiscriminately, leaving only ragged patches of
bark. * * * Even in such cases, however, traces of the
regularly arranged punctures are likely to remain, and
there is no difficulty in recognizing the work as that of
sapsuckers, for no other woodpecker makes anything like it
on sound, living trees.
All holes, grooves, or irregular openings made by
sapsuckers penetrate at least to the outermost layer of
sapwood or nongrowing part of the tree. This results in the
removal of the exterior rough bark, the delicate inner bark
or bast, and the cambium. Since the elaborated sap (upon
which the growth of trees depends) is conveyed and stored
in these layers, it is evident that sapsuckers attack the
trees in a vital part. Each ring of punctures severs at
its particular level part of the sap-carrying vessels,
another ring made above destroys others, and so the process
continues until in extreme cases circulation of elaborated
sap stops and the tree dies. When the injury to the vital
tissues is not carried so far, only a limb here and there
may die, or the tree may only have its vitality lowered
for a few years. If the attacks cease, it may completely
recover. * * *
Recovery, however, does not mean that the tree has escaped
permanent injury. Patches of cambium of varying size may
be killed. Growth ceases at these points and the dead and
discolored areas are finally covered by wood and bark.
Until this process is completed, the tree is disfigured by
pits with dead bark and wood at the bottom, and even when
completely healed, the spot remains a source of weakness.
In fact, all sapsucker pecking is followed by more or less
rotting and consequent weakening of the wood, and renders
trees more liable to be broken by the wind or other causes.
Sapsucker injuries usually stimulate growth of the wood
layers at the points attacked, so that they become much
thicker than usual. This results in a slight swelling of
the bark, and when the birds reopen the old wounds year
after year, as they habitually do, succeeding wood layers
make excess growth and in time shelflike girdles develop.
McAtee (1911) gives a long list of trees attacked by the bird.
Summarizing, he says: “Condensing the information contained in the
foregoing lists, we find that the yellow-bellied sapsucker attacks no
fewer than 246 species of native trees and 6 vines, besides 31 kinds of
introduced trees. Twenty-nine of these trees and 1 vine are known to be
sometimes killed and 28 others are much disfigured or seriously reduced
in vitality.”
Of “the effects of sapsucker work on lumber and finished wood products”
he says:
Those relations of sapsuckers to trees which are
detrimental to man’s interest are by no means confined to
the external disfiguration, the weakening, or killing of
trees. Indeed in the aggregate sapsuckers inflict much
greater financial loss by rendering defective the wood
of the far larger number of trees which they work upon
moderately but do not kill. Blemishes, reducing the value,
appear in the lumber from such trees and in the various
articles into which it is manufactured.
These defects consist of distortion of the grain, formation
of knotty growths and cavities in the wood, extensive
staining, fat streaks, resin deposits, and other blemishes.
All of them result from injuries to the cambium, their
variety being due to the differences in the healing.
Besides blemishes, ornamental effects are sometimes
produced during the healing of sapsucker wounds, such as
small sound stains, curly grain, and a form of bird’s-eye.
McAtee (1911) estimates that “the annual loss for the whole United
States [from the impairment of lumber] is more than a million and
a quarter dollars.” He continues: “Sapsuckers do not prey upon any
especially destructive insects and do comparatively little to offset
the damage they inflict. Hence the yellow-bellied sapsucker * * * must
be included in the class of injurious species.”
The situation is quite different on the breeding ground. Here the
birds resort to a group of trees, and confine their feeding activities
almost exclusively to them. Frank Bolles (1891), in his study of the
bird in the region about Mount Chocorua, N. H., terms these stations
“orchards.” He describes one of them as consisting “of about a dozen
canoe birches and red maples, most of which were dead, some decayed
and fallen. The tree most recently tapped was a red maple about forty
feet high and two feet through at the butt.” Of another “orchard,” half
a mile away, he says: “The tree in use last year was nearly dead. Two
neighboring birches showing scars of earlier years were quite dead.
All stood on the crest of a kame. About three rods along the ridge to
the eastward a red oak and two or three canoe birches were in use by
the birds.” This report shows that sapsuckers undoubtedly cause the
death of many trees as they return to their “orchards” year after year,
but most of these trees are of small value, especially in the heavily
forested regions where the birds commonly breed.
Bolles (1891) also notes the association of the sapsuckers with the
ruby-throated hummingbirds, which were attracted to the pits by the
running sap. In the main, hosts and guests got along well enough
together, although attacks occurred on both sides from time to time.
He says: “My notes refer again and again to the spiteful treatment of
the Hummers at Orchard No. 1. On the other hand at Orchard No. 2 they
say ‘Male and young one dipping. Hummer comes in and dips several times
_between them_ and they offer no objection.’”
Major Bendire (1895), half in jest, we may presume, brings an
accusation of inebriety against the sapsucker in these words:
That it should be fond of the sweet sap of trees does not
surprise me, as this contains considerable nourishment,
and likewise attracts a good many insects, which the birds
eat; but it is not so easy to account for its especial
predilection for the sap of the mountain ash, which
has a decidedly bitter taste, and I believe possesses
intoxicating properties, unless it be taken for the latter
purpose; and the fact that after drinking freely of the sap
of this tree it may often be seen clinging to the trunk for
hours at a time, as if stupefied, seems to confirm this
view. It is well known that some of our birds indulge in
such disreputable practices, and possibly this species must
be included in the number, as there are sots among birds as
well as among the genus _Homo_.
_Voice._--Just as the sapsucker in its behavior is conspicuous, almost
boisterous, at one season of the year and retiring and unobtrusive at
another, in the same way it is very noisy in spring and the early part
of the nesting period and comparatively silent afterward.
Dr. C. Hart Merriam (1879) speaks of the bird thus: “In few species can
the date of arrival, in spring, be ascertained with such precision as
in the bird now under consideration; for, no sooner are they here, and
recovered from the fatigue of their northward journey, than the country
fairly resounds with their cries and drumming. * * * Noisy, rollicking
fellows, they are always chasing one another among the trees, screaming
meanwhile at the top of their voices, and when three or four vociferous
males alight on the same tree, as often happens, their boisterous cries
are truly astonishing.”
William Brewster (1876a) mentions a “peculiar snarling cry” used as an
alarm note, and of a pair at the nest he says:
Watching once a nest for an hour or two, I remarked that
the birds relieved each other in the labors of incubation
at intervals averaging about half an hour each. The one
that had been absent would alight just below the hole, and,
uttering a low _yew-ick, yew-ick_, its mate would appear
from within, when, after the interchange of a few notes of
endearment, the sitting bird would fly off and the other
instantly enter the hole. * * *
Both young and old utter most frequently a low snarling cry
that bears no very distant resemblance to the _mew_ of the
Catbird. The adults have also two other notes--one, already
spoken of, when the opposite sexes meet; the other a clear,
ringing _cleur_, repeated five or six times in succession,
and heard, I think, only in the spring.
Of the voice of the sapsucker, Bendire (1895) says: “Its ordinary call
note is a whining ‘whäee,’ and it utters a number of other sounds,
some of these resembling the calls of the Blue Jay, and others those
of the Red-shouldered Hawk. During the mating season, when the sexes
are chasing each other, a series of notes like ‘hoih-hoih,’ a number of
times repeated, are frequently heard. Although generally disposed to be
more or less noisy, while clinging to their food trees they are always
silent as far as my observations go.”
The note mentioned above does resemble the cry of the blue jay somewhat
in form, but the notes of the two birds need never be confused. The
sapsucker’s may be as long as the blue jay’s, or the _caw_ of a crow;
again it may be given as a very short syllable. The note commonly
is not nearly so loud as the blue jay’s and the tone of voice is
different; it is a complaining whine rather than a boisterous shout.
Another note, a minor note heard only when one is near the bird, is
very like the explosive _hit_ of the red-breasted nuthatch--the little
conversational note that the nuthatches use as they scramble over the
bark, not the nasal _toot_.
The most remarkable of the sapsucker’s utterances, in that it does not
resemble a bird note at all, is a single syllable sounded regularly
over and over again--a low-toned _tuck_, like slow, sharp strokes on
a nonresonant branch. This note might sometimes be mistaken for a
chipmunk’s pluck, except that it lacks completely any ringing quality
of tone.
_Field marks._--The colored plates in the illustrated books on
ornithology lead one to expect to find the yellow-bellied sapsucker
rather a brilliantly colored, conspicuous bird. However, when we meet
it in the field, the colors, so bright and sharply outlined in the
picture of the bird, are often dimmed by the shadows of limbs and
leaves, and as the chief color is of a neutral tint, not unlike the
bark of many trees, we may sometimes pass the bird by, unnoticed. Our
first impression of the bird, when we catch a glimpse of it, is of a
medium-sized woodpecker, dull old-gold in color, and almost without
markings. A glass, however, brings out a thin line of white along the
length of the closed wing, a red or reddish forehead and fore part of
the crown, a black mark across the upper breast, and, if we look very
carefully, a yellowish belly.
W. L. McAtee (1911) points out the black mark is characteristic of
nearly all sapsuckers, and he links it up pretty successfully with a
red forehead. For example, The red-breasted sapsucker lacks the black
mark, but has a red head; the flicker, not a sapsucker, has a “black
spot on breast, but top of head from bill is not red”; the pileated
woodpecker “not a sapsucker. Entire lower parts black.” He continues:
“All sapsuckers have yellow bellies, few other woodpeckers have; all
sapsuckers have a conspicuous white patch on the upper part of the
wing, as seen from the side when clinging to a tree; white wing patches
in other woodpeckers are on the middle or lower part of the wings.
The yellow-bellied sapsucker of transcontinental range is the only
woodpecker having the front of the head (i. e., from bill to crown) red
in combination with a black patch on the breast.”
_Fall._--Generally when we see the yellow-bellied sapsucker in autumn,
during its slow journey toward the Southern States, it is alone. A
single bird may settle for two or three days in our dooryard, if there
be a tree there to its liking, perching well up in it and rarely moving
away. Here it is inconspicuous: its brownish color matches the bark
closely; it moves deliberately, as if to avoid notice; by hopping
behind a branch it keeps out of sight most of the time; and commonly it
is perfectly silent. On occasion it makes use of its whining cry, and
if two birds meet they may utter the red-breasted-nuthatch note, but as
a rule this woodpecker is one of the quietest of migrants.
If we watch a bird for a time, we see that it is picking at the bark,
dislodging bits of it in searching for concealed food. It hops forward,
backward, and around the limbs, moving easily, taking rather long,
rapid hops, seeming careless of a fall. When investigating crevices
and peering under flakes of bark it cranes its neck, turning its head
from side to side. The neck then appears constricted, like a pileated
woodpecker in miniature.
At other times it may drill holes--even the young birds of the year,
which can have had little experience in this kind of work. They drill
with a sideways stroke, to one side, then the other, then, perhaps,
a stroke straight at the branch. In this manner, before very long, a
small area is denuded of bark, the sideways strokes giving it an oval
shape with the long axis parallel to the ground. However, at this
season, mid-October, in the latitude of Boston, little sap rewards
their efforts.
_Winter._--Sapsuckers spend the winter mainly in the Southern States,
Central America, and on the islands south of North America, but there
are a few records indicating that a bird rarely may remain nearly or
quite as far north as the southern limit of the breeding range. For
example, Fred. H. Kennard (1895) reports finding one in Brookline,
Mass., on February 6, 1895. Collected, “he proved to be in fine, fat
condition”; and Harriet A. Nye (1918) watched, in Fairfield Center,
Maine, a bird throughout the winter of 1911, in which the temperature
fell to 32° below zero. Apples formed a considerable part of this
bird’s diet, although he often hunted over the branches and trunks of
trees. He was last seen April 5 “as sprightly as ever.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--North and Central America and the West Indies, casual in
Bermuda and Greenland.
_Breeding range._--This species breeds =north= to southeastern Alaska
(probably Skagway); southern Mackenzie (Nahanni Mountain, Fort
Providence, and Fort Resolution); northern Manitoba (Cochrane River
and probably Fort Churchill); Ontario (Lac Seul and probably Moose
Factory); Quebec (Montreal, Quebec City, Godbout, Ellis Bay, and
probably Eskimo Point); and Newfoundland (Fox Island and Nicholsville).
=East= to Newfoundland (Nicholsville, Deer Lake, and Harrys River);
Nova Scotia (Sydney and Halifax); Maine (Bucksport and Livermore
Falls); southeastern New Hampshire (Ossipee and Monadnock Mountain);
western Massachusetts (Chesterfield); New Jersey (Midvale); and western
Virginia (Sounding Knob, Cold Mountain, and White Top Mountain).
=South= to southwestern Virginia (White Top Mountain); northwestern
Indiana (Kouts); central Illinois (Peoria); eastern Missouri (St.
Louis); Iowa (Keokuk, Grinnell, and Ogden); southeastern South Dakota
(Sioux Falls and probably Vermillion); New Mexico (Pot Creek and
Diamond Peak); Arizona (Buffalo Creek and Kaibab Plateau); and southern
California (San Bernardino Mountains, San Jacinto Mountains, and
Mount Pinos). =West= to California (Mount Pinos, Big Creek, Cisco,
Carlotta, and Mount Shasta); western Oregon (Prospect, Elkton, Salem,
and Tillamook); Washington (Tacoma and Seattle); British Columbia
(Beaver Creek, Alta Lake, and Masset); and southeastern Alaska (Craig,
Wrangell, and probably Skagway).
_Winter range._--The winter range extends =north= to southwestern
British Columbia (Comox); northeastern Oregon (Haines); central Arizona
(Oak Creek); southern New Mexico (Silver City); Kansas (Wichita,
Topeka, and Bendena); Missouri (Lexington and Nelson); Illinois
(Bernadotte and Mount Carmel); southern Indiana (Vincennes and probably
Bloomington); southern Ohio (Hamilton and Hillsboro); northern Maryland
(Hagerstown); southeastern Pennsylvania (Edge Hill); and southern New
Jersey (Newfield). From this point the species is found in winter
=south= along the Atlantic coast to southern Florida (Miami, Royal Palm
Hammock, and Key West); the Bahama Islands (Nassau, Watling Island, and
Great Inagua); and the northern Lesser Antilles (St. Croix). =South=
to the Lesser Antilles (St. Croix); rarely Haiti (Gonave Island);
and rarely Costa Rica (Coli Blanco and Punta Arenas). From this
southwestern point the winter range extends northward along the western
coast of Central America (including Baja California) to California;
Oregon; rarely Washington; and southwestern British Columbia (probably
Barkley Sound and Comox). In the eastern part of the country the
species is found irregularly =north= to southern Wisconsin (Madison);
southern Michigan (Ann Arbor and Detroit); southern Ontario (London and
Lindsay); southern Vermont (Bennington); and central Maine (Fairfield
and Dover).
The range as above outlined covers the entire species, which has been
separated into four subspecies or geographic races. The typical form,
known as the yellow-bellied sapsucker (_S. v. varius_), is found during
the breeding season over all the northern parts of the range east of
Alaska and south to Missouri and the mountains of western Virginia. In
winter it is found south to Central America and the West Indies. The
red-naped sapsucker (_S. v. nuchalis_) is found chiefly in the Rocky
Mountain region from central British Columbia south (in winter) to Baja
California and central Mexico. The northern red-breasted sapsucker (_S.
v. ruber_) breeds from southeastern Alaska south through the mountains
to western Oregon and in winter to central California. The southern
red-breasted sapsucker (_S. v. daggetti_) is confined to the mountains
of California and northern Baja California.
_Spring migration._--Early dates of spring arrival are: Quebec--
Montreal, March 25; Westmount, March 30. New Brunswick--Scotch
Lake, April 12; St. John, April 22. Nova Scotia--Wolfville, April
30. Northern Michigan--Blaney, April 2; Sault Ste. Marie, April 10;
Houghton, April 24. Minnesota--Elk River, March 26; Minneapolis, March
29. Nebraska--Omaha, April 14. South Dakota--Faulkton, April 15. North
Dakota--Fargo, April 15. Manitoba--Aweme, March 31; Margaret, April
17. Saskatchewan--Indian Head, April 4. Colorado--Estes Park, April
27. Wyoming--Yellowstone Park, May 12. Montana--Columbia Falls, April
13. Alberta--Stony Plain, April 1; Edmonton, May 2. Mackenzie--Fort
Simpson, May 11. Alaska--Chilkat River, April 12; Admiralty Island,
April 17; Forrester Island, May 6.
_Fall migration._--Late dates of fall departure are: Alberta--Glenevis,
September 24. Montana--Fortine, September 20; Kalispell, October 1.
Wyoming--Yellowstone Park, October 2. Colorado--De Beque, October 1;
Denver, October 8; Walden, October 16. Saskatchewan--Indian Head,
September 25. Manitoba--Shoal Lake, September 30; Treesbank, October
14; Margaret, October 24. North Dakota--Rice Lake, October 1; Fargo,
October 2. South Dakota--Yankton, October 5; Faulkton, October 20.
Nebraska--Monroe Canyon, Sioux County, October 4. Minnesota--Elk
River, October 15; Lanesboro, October 19. Northern Michigan--Blaney,
October 1; Houghton, October 2; Sault Ste. Marie, October 22. Nova
Scotia--Sable Island, October 9. New Brunswick--Scotch Lake, November
4. Quebec--Montreal, October 1; Quebec City, October 2.
_Casual records._--According to Reid (1884) several specimens of this
species were taken in Bermuda during the period 1847-1850 when it bred
in that area. He also noted it in 1875. A specimen was found dead at
Julianshaab, Greenland, in July 1845; another was obtained in that
general region about 1858; and an adult female was collected at Loup
Bay, Labrador, on May 5, 1899.
_Egg dates._--Alberta: 19 records, May 20 to June 18; 10 records,
May 30 to June 11, indicating the height of the season.
California: 13 records, May 12 to June 21; 7 records, May 30 to
June 9.
Colorado: 19 records, May 27 to June 15; 10 records, June 4 to 12.
Illinois: 5 records, April 20 to June 3.
Nova Scotia: 14 records, May 28 to June 15; 7 records, June 5 to 10.
Oregon: 24 records, May 12 to June 12; 12 records, May 25 to June 2.
SPHYRAPICUS VARIUS NUCHALIS Baird
RED-NAPED SAPSUCKER
HABITS
The western race of the eastern yellow-bellied sapsucker occupies an
extensive range in the general region of the Rocky Mountains, chiefly
east of the Sierra Nevada and Cascade Ranges, from central British
Columbia and Alberta to western Texas and Arizona.
Ridgway (1914) gives a full description of this form, which is worth
quoting in view of his remarks as to its status; he describes it as--
Similar to _S. v. varius_, but with much less white on
back, this forming two definite but broken stripes,
converging posteriorly; nape always with more or less of
red, under parts less strongly tinged with yellow, and wing
and tail averaging decidedly longer; adult male with red
of throat more extended, both laterally and posteriorly,
covering malar region (except anterior portion), where
meeting white sub-auricular stripe; adult female with at
least lower half of throat red (sometimes whole throat red,
only the chin being white); young much darker above than
corresponding stage of _S. v. varius_, the pileum dark
sooty slate, white markings on back less brownish, and
under parts much less yellowish, the chest and foreneck
brownish gray or grayish brown (instead of buffy brown),
and usually less distinctly barred or lunulated with dusky.
On account of the conspicuous difference in coloration
of the young, definite difference in color pattern of
back, head, and neck in adults, and comparative rarity
of intermediate specimens (which are far less common,
relatively, than in the case of _Colaptes_), I believe that
it would be better to consider this form as specifically
distinct from _S. varius_. It is true that specimens do
occur that are intermediate between _S. nuchalis_ and _S.
varius_, as well as between the former and if _S. ruber_;
but they may be (and I believe they are) hybrids; certainly
there is no more reason for not considering them as such
than in the case of _Colaptes_; and if _S. nuchalis_ is to
be considered as merely a subspecies of _S. varius_ then,
most certainly, must _S. ruber_ also.
Mr. Ridgway (1877) says of its haunts:
Throughout the country between the Sierra Nevada and the
Rocky Mountains, the red-naped woodpecker is a common
species in suitable localities. Its favorite summer-haunts
are the groves of large aspens near the head of the upper
cañons, high up in the mountains, and for this reason we
found it more abundant in the Wahsatch and Uintah region
than elsewhere; indeed, but a single individual was
observed on the Sierra Nevada, and this one was obtained on
the eastern slope of the range, near Carson City. It was
very rare throughout western Nevada, but became abundant
as we approached the higher mountains in the eastern
portion of the State. Among the aspen groves in Parley’s
Park, as well as in similar places throughout that portion
of the country, it was by far the most abundant of the
Woodpeckers; and it seemed to be as strictly confined to
the aspens as _S. thyroideus_ was to the pines.
The Weydemeyers (1928) say that, in northwestern Montana, “it occurs
most abundantly and typically in mixed broad-leaf and conifer
associations along streams, where it nests regularly. It ranges less
commonly into virgin forests of fir, larch, yellow pine, and hemlock
(_Tsuga heterophylla_) in the valleys; and into arborvitae, lodgepole
pine, and spruce woods of the foothills. Occasional birds are seen
in alpine fir and spruce woods upward to the lower borders of the
Hudsonian zone.”
_Courtship._--M. P. Skinner says in his notes: “On May 13, 1915, I
saw a red-naped sapsucker drumming on a hollow, dead lodgepole pine;
soon he flew to the top of another pine, where his mate was, and
the two began bobbing and curtsying in true cake-walk fashion much
like flickers, except that these sapsuckers were on a vertical stub.
There was no movement of the feet, but the body was bent from side to
side, and there was a constant ‘juggling’ motion. The head was tilted
back and the bill pointed up at an angle of sixty degrees, with neck
outstretched. The neck, head, and bill were in constant motion. That of
the bill reminded me of a musical director’s baton.”
_Nesting._--The Weydemeyers (1928) say of its nesting habits: “As
elsewhere in the state, this bird in Lincoln County nests most commonly
in live aspens. Our records for this area include four nests in live
aspens, one in a live larch, and one in a dead Engelmann spruce. These
nests were all in the Transition zone, near streams, Three of the
nests in aspens were in a single tree, in successive years. Nest-hole
preparation usually commences immediately upon the arrival of the birds
in the spring, about April 20.”
Major Bendire (1895) gives an attractive account of finding a nest of
this woodpecker in a live aspen, in a small grove of these trees, near
Camp Harney, Oregon, on June 12, 1877: “Their nesting site was directly
over my head, about 20 feet from the ground. * * * The entrance to the
excavation was exceedingly small, not over 1¼ inches in diameter, about
8 inches deep, and about 4 inches wide at the bottom. It contained
three nearly fresh eggs, lying partly embedded in a layer of fine
chips.”
He quotes the following observations of Denis Gale:
My observations have been that this subspecies invariably
selects for its nesting site a living aspen tree. I have
never met with it in any other. This tree favors the
mountain gulches and low, sheltered hillsides, at an
altitude of from 7,000 to 10,000 feet. Above this point
they do not attain sufficient size, and are mostly dwarfed
and scrubby. Here in Colorado _Sphyrapicus varius nuchalis_
is seldom found above 9,000 feet or much below 8,000 feet.
The aspen tree is short lived, and ere much of a growth is
attained, a cross section, in the majority of instances,
will show a discolored center of incipient decay, involving
half or two-thirds of its entire diameter, with a sound,
white sap zone on the outer circumference, next to the
bark. This sound, healthy zone nourishes the tree until the
decayed core discovers itself in some withered limbs, and
frequently the top of the tree manifests the canker.
Such trees the Red-naped Sapsucker selects for its nesting
site, and with great perseverance chisels through this
tough, sound zone, from 1 to 1½ inches in thickness,
commencing with a very small hole and gradually extending
its circumference with each stage of the deepening
process, working from the lowest center out, till the
exact circumference of the intended aperture of entrance
is attained. In thus radiating in circles from the central
point the minute chips are chiseled out with considerable
ease. This mode of working is observed until the tough zone
is worked through; what remains then is comparatively easy
work; the soft, soggy, lifeless inside is worked into and
downward with greater facility, and a roomy, gourd-shaped
excavation quickly follows, the female doing the excavating
from beginning to end, and, according to exigencies,
completes it in from six to ten days. * * *
_Sphyrapicus varius nuchalis_ usually insists upon a new
excavation each year. The height of the nesting sites from
the ground varies from 5 to 30 feet; the full set of eggs
is four or five in number; sometimes a smaller number of
eggs mark a full set, presumably the nest of one of last
year’s birds. Fresh eggs may be looked for in Colorado from
June 1 to 15, and should the first set be taken, a second
one may generally be found from ten to fifteen days later;
and, as a rule, the second nesting site will not be greatly
distant from the first one. Several nests of this species
may be found within a short distance of each other in the
same aspen grove.
_Eggs._--Major Bendire (1895) says of the eggs: “The number of eggs
to a set varies from three to six, usually four or five; these are
mostly ovate in shape, a few are more elliptical ovate; they are pure
white in color; the shell is fine grained and moderately glossy.” The
measurements of 40 eggs average 22.89 by 17.28 millimeters; the eggs
showing the four extremes measure =24.38= by 16.76, 23.60 by =18.50=,
=20.83= by 16.76, and 21.34 by =16.26= millimeters.
_Young._--Major Bendire (1895) says: “I believe that both sexes assist
in the labor of excavating the nesting site, the female appearing to
do the greater part of the work, however, which is frequently very
laborious, and that the male also shares the duties of incubation,
which lasts about fourteen days.”
_Food._--Again, he writes: “Its general habits are similar to those
of the preceding species [yellow-bellied sapsucker], and in the
fruit-growing sections within its range, in southern Utah, for
instance, it is said to do considerable damage to the orchards in the
early spring and again in the fall, tapping the peach and apple trees
for sap in the same manner as _Sphyrapicus varius_ does in the East.
Its principal food consists of small beetles, spiders, grasshoppers,
ants, and such larvæ as are to be found under the loose bark of trees,
as well as wild berries of different kinds.”
W. L. McAtee (1911) gives a long list of trees that are attacked by
this species of sapsucker, among which this western race is charged
with doing considerable damage to many western trees, such as various
pines, spruces, hemlocks, firs, redwood, cedars, cypresses, junipers,
cottonwoods, aspens, willows, bayberry, walnuts, hophornbeam, white
alder, oaks, laurels, sycamores, mahoganies, pears, apples, cherries,
mesquite, ironwood, maples, _Ceanothus_, _Fremontia_, western dogwood,
madrona, buckthorn, ashes, and probably others.
Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1914) says, referring to the Colorado Valley,
where this sapsucker was evidently wintering among the willow thickets:
“Willows were the trees attacked by this woodpecker; but in one case a
single large mesquite, and the only one of many in the vicinity, had
been selected for bleeding, and its main trunk and larger branches were
plentifully bored. I visited this tree many times during the space of
three days, March 2 to 4, opposite The Needles, and invariably found a
sapsucker working about the borings. I shot two of the birds at this
mesquite, and there was still one there the last time I visited the
tree, although I had never seen but one at a time there.”
W. L. Dawson (1923) remarks: “In lieu of maple sap the western bird
makes heavy requisition on the fresh-flowing pitch of pine and fir
trees. As for cambium, that of the aspen (_Populus tremuloides_) has
marked preference, and the summer range of the bird, so far as it goes,
is practically controlled by the occurrence of the tree. Inasmuch
as this tree is short-lived and of slight economic importance, the
depredations of the bark-eaters are not seriously felt.”
Mr. Skinner says, in his Yellowstone Park notes: “I have seen the
red-naped sapsucker pick and hammer on dead aspens and on the trunks of
lodgepole pine for insects. On June 28, 1917, I saw one make frequent
flycatcher-like sallies from an aspen out into the open.”
_Behavior._--John H. Flanagan (1911) witnessed a rather remarkable
performance by a red-naped sapsucker, such as I had not seen recorded
elsewhere. He had chopped out a nest containing two fresh eggs and
was intending to leave them for a possible addition to the set, as he
had done successfully before, when one of the birds, “both of which
remained in sight, flew to the tree, perched a moment upon the edge of
the cut hole, then went in, and shortly reappeared with one of the eggs
in its beak. It flew to a nearby stub, not more than forty feet from
where” he “was sitting, calmly devoured the egg and dropped the empty
shell.”
_Winter._--Apparently the fall migration of this woodpecker consists
largely of a withdrawal from the high altitudes, in which it breeds, to
winter resorts in the lowlands. Major Bendire (1895) says: “During the
winter months, I have occasionally observed a red-naped sapsucker in
the Harney Valley, in Oregon, busily engaged in hunting for food among
the willow thickets found growing along the banks of the small streams
in that sagebrush-covered region, often long distances away from timber
of any size.”
Dr. Grinnell (1914) noted it, as a winter visitant, among the willows
and mesquites in the lower Colorado Valley. And M. French Gilman
(1915), referring to the Arizona lowlands, says: “The red-naped
sapsucker (_Sphyrapicus varius nuchalis_) is a winter visitant along
the Gila River, and while not to be called abundant, is frequently
noticed. I have seen individuals from October 6 to as late as April 17,
and in all the months between these two dates. Once I saw three in one
mesquite tree. Signs of their work are frequently present on cottonwood
and willow trees and occasionally on an Arizona ash. If there are any
almond trees in the country they are sure to be attacked, as they are
favorites with these birds. Only once or twice have I seen mesquite
trees attacked.”
SPHYRAPICUS VARIUS DAGGETTI Grinnell
SOUTHERN RED-BREASTED SAPSUCKER
HABITS
The above name was applied to this sapsucker by Dr. Joseph Grinnell
(1901) and was characterized by him as smaller and paler than the
northern race and with a maximum extent of white markings. It is
evidently a well-marked race. But whether the red-breasted sapsucker
should be considered a subspecies of the yellow-bellied sapsucker
seems to me to be a decidedly open question, on which authorities seem
to have differed, or to have changed their minds. In support of his
views, Dr. Grinnell (1901) says: “I have examined a number of skins of
the _nuchalis_ type, and others approaching _ruber_ in almost every
degree, and I am certain that there is a continuous intergradation
geographically between the eastern _S. varius_ and _ruber_ of the
Pacific Coast. The intermediates do not appear to be the result of
‘hybridization’ and the case does not seem to be at all parallel to
that of _Colaptes auratus_ and _C. cafer_. Therefore I see no reason
why the Red-breasted Sapsucker is of more than subspecific rank.”
It is interesting to note that Ridgway used the name _Sphyrapicus
varius ruber_ in 1872 and again in 1874 (Ridgway, 1914, in synonymy),
but 40 years later (1914) he gave the red-breasted sapsucker full
specific rank, apparently having changed his mind. And, in the same
work, in a footnote under the red-naped sapsucker, referring to the
intergrades mentioned by Dr. Grinnell, he says: “But they may be (and
I believe are) hybrids; certainly there is no more reason for not
considering them as such than in the case of _Colaptes_.”
Certainly the red-breasted sapsucker and the yellow-bellied sapsucker
are as much unlike in appearance as the two flickers; and the hybrid
flickers certainly show “every degree” of intergradation. In the large
series of sapsuckers that I have examined, containing 87 typical
_ruber_ and 86 typical _nuchalis_, I was able to find only 8 specimens
that could, by any stretch of the imagination, be considered as
intermediates; I believe that these intergrading sapsuckers will prove
to be relatively less common than are the hybrids between the two
flickers.
It is interesting, too, to note that the first three editions of the
A. O. U. Check-List, 1886, 1895, and 1910, all gave the red-breasted
sapsucker full specific rank, in spite of the fact that Ridgway had
called it a subspecies of the yellow-bellied in 1872, and Grinnell
had done the same in 1901. But the fourth edition, 1931, adopts the
subspecies theory, in spite of Ridgway’s latest decision.
The southern race of the red-breasted sapsucker breeds in the Canadian
and Transition Zones in the mountains of California, from the Trinity
and Warner Mountains southward to the San Jacinto Mountains. Grinnell
and Storer (1924) say that it “is found in the main forest belt during
the spring, summer, and fall, but regularly performs an altitudinal
migration which carries it down into the tree growths of the western
foothills and valleys for the winter months.”
_Nesting._--Very little seems to have been published on the nesting
habits of this sapsucker, which probably do not differ materially from
those of its northern relative, about which more seems to be known.
Wright M. Pierce (1916) located one of its nests in the San Bernardino
Mountains, on June 26, of which he says: “The cavity was in the dead
top of a large live silver fir about forty-five feet up. The cavity
had a small opening and was only 5 or 6 inches deep; diameter, inside,
1½ or 2 inches. The nest held two large young and one smaller dead
one. It was hard to see how more than one bird could survive in such a
small space, so it was not surprising that the probably weaker bird had
apparently been suffocated.”
_Eggs._--The red-breasted sapsucker lays usually four or five eggs,
sometimes as many as six. Like all woodpeckers’ eggs, they are pure
white, usually with very little or no gloss, and they vary from ovate
to rounded-ovate. The measurements of 13 eggs average 23.79 by 17.25
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =24.6= by 17.0,
23.81 by =17.86=, =22.5= by 17.5, and 24.5 by =16.6= millimeters.
_Young._--Incubation is said to last about 14 days; this duty and the
care of the young is shared by both parents. Mrs. Irene G. Wheelock
(1904) says of a nest that she watched: “Incubation began May 30, and
lasted fifteen days. The young were fed by regurgitation for the first
two weeks. * * *
“The young sapsuckers left the nest on the seventh of July, and clung
to the nest tree for three days. Here they were initiated by both
parents into the mysteries of sap-sucking. A hole having been bored
in front of each, with grotesque earnestness the mother watched the
attempt to drink the sweet syrup. During this time both insects and
berries were brought to them by the adults, in one hour one youngster
devouring twelve insects that looked like dragonflies.”
Mrs. Florence M. Bailey (1902) writes:
The last week in July at Donner Lake we found a family
of dull colored young going about with their mother, a
handsome old bird with dark red head and breast. They flew
around in a poplar grove for a while, and then gathered in
a clump of willows, where four young clung to the branches
and devoted themselves to eating sap. The old bird flew
about among them and seemingly cut and scraped off the bark
for them, at the same time apparently trying to teach them
to eat the sap for themselves; for though she would feed
them at other times she refused to feed them there, and
apparently watched carefully to see if they knew enough to
drink the sap. When the meal was finally over and the birds
had flown, we examined the branch and found that lengthwise
strips of bark had been cut off, leaving narrow strips like
fiddle-strings between. At the freshly cut places the sap
exuded as sweet as sugar, ready for the birds to suck.
_Plumages._--Like other young sapsuckers, the young of this species
are hatched naked, but the juvenal plumage is acquired before they
leave the nest. In the juvenal plumage, in which the sexes are alike,
the wings and tail are essentially as in the adult; the head and neck,
except for the white stripe below the eye, are dark grayish sooty,
though the forehead and crown are usually more or less tinged with dull
red; the sides and flanks are more or less barred with dull gray and
white; and the abdomen is dull yellowish white.
By the last of July, or first of August, the molt into the first winter
plumage begins, with an increasing amount of red coming in on the
crown, throat, and breast; at the same time the yellow of the abdomen
becomes brighter. This molt continues through fall and is often not
complete until November or later. The young bird is now much like the
adult. In fall birds, both adult and young, the red of the head and
breast, is much duller than in spring, “Brazil red” to “dragon’s blood
red” in the fall, and “scarlet red” or bright “scarlet” in the late
winter and spring; this is due, of course, to the wearing away of the
tips of the feathers; in early summer, just before molting, the red is
decidedly brilliant.
Adults have a complete annual molt, beginning sometimes in July and
lasting through August or later.
_Food._--The food of the red-breasted sapsucker is much like that of
its close relatives in the _varius_ group. M. P. Skinner writes to
me: “I have found red-breasted sapsuckers drilling on cottonwoods,
willows, yellow pines, and lodgepole pines; but all the actual feeding
I have seen was on willows. Mr. Michael tells me that these birds work
largely on the apple trees that have been planted in various parts of
the Yosemite Valley. When a sapsucker is at its wells, it takes a sip
now and then, but considerable time is used in watchful guarding, or in
driving away intruders or would-be robbers. In the case of such wells
as I found on willow stems, I could see no established regularity in
arrangement. They looked as if the bark had been irregularly scaled
off. In fact, such work may be necessary to secure the inner bark; yet
the birds actually took sap at such wells. One had a dozen willow stems
on which it drilled and sipped in succession; each one was only a few
inches from the next; and the bark of each, both above and below the
wells, was worn smooth. This bird went from well to well in regular
order, then back to the first well to begin again. Although sap formed
the bulk of their food in August, I have seen them also searching the
bark for insects during that same month.”
McAtee (1911) lists the following trees that are attacked by the
red-breasted sapsucker: Cottonwoods, willows, walnuts, birches, oaks,
barberry, sycamore, mountain-ash, pears, apples, peaches, plums,
apricot, orange, pepper, and blue gum (_Eucalyptus_). Emanuel Fritz
(1937) has, on several occasions, found this sapsucker attacking
redwood trees. “In each instance the individual tree was ‘peppered’
with holes in horizontal rows, from the base to the top. In virgin
timber, it is only an occasional tree that is attacked, and one
searches in vain for another victim in the general vicinity. * * *
“During the present year, the writer came upon his first example of
sapsucker work on so-called second-growth redwood. * * * The sapsuckers
attacked every tree in two groups, or families, of sprouts.”
W. L. Dawson (1923) writes:
The red-breasted sapsucker does puncture trees and drink
sap both in summer and winter. In summer it attacks in this
fashion not only pine, fir, aspen, alder, cottonwood and
willow trees, but such orchard trees as apple, pear, prune
and the like, as may lie within Transition areas. In winter
at lower levels it gives attention to evergreen trees,
white birch, mountain ash, peach, plum, apricot, English
walnut, elder, and pepper trees. * * * Instead of gleaning
at random, as we might expect, the Sapsucker makes careful
selection, like a prudent forester, of a single tree, and
confines his attentions henceforth, even though it be
through succeeding seasons, to that one tree. Starting well
toward the top of an evergreen, or well up on the major
branches of an orchard tree, the bird works successively
downward in perpendicular rows, whose borings are sometimes
confluent. In this way the bird secures an ever-fresh flow
of sap, from below. If carried on too extensively, or
persisted in for successive seasons, these operations will
sometimes cause a tree to bleed fatally, or at least to
fall easy victim to insect pests. I have myself seen limbs
of mountain ash trees, pear trees, and English walnut, done
to death in this fashion. Yet it is only fair to say that
but one or two trees in an orchard may be attacked, and
there is scarcely more danger of the trouble spreading than
there would be from successive strokes of lightning. * * *
For the rest, _Sphyrapicus ruber_ is a large consumer of
ants, and does some good in the destruction of leaf-eating
beetles. Berries of the pepper trees (_Schinus molle_) are
eaten to some extent, in winter, as are also, regrettably,
seeds of the poison oak.
W. Otto Emerson (1893) says: “One I watched every morning from my
tent fly to the top of a tall burnt tree and rap its roll-call as a
kind of warning may be to the flying insects. It would then sail out
like a flycatcher, catch an insect, and return to the burnt tree-top.
Its movements were very graceful and regular. As it dipped or circled
around for this or that insect the sunlight catching on the red breast
lit it up like a patch of flame.” He says elsewhere (1899): “One I
found in a willow tree trying to get the best of a yellow jacket’s
nest, dodging back and forth either to get a mouthful of their stored
sweets or the jackets themselves.”
Junius Henderson (1927) gives, in his table, the percentages of animal
and vegetable food, exclusive of sap, taken by this sapsucker. Based on
a study of 34 stomachs the total animal food made up 69 percent and the
total vegetable food 31 percent of the whole; 42 percent consisted of
ants and 12 percent of fruits, mostly wild; insects accounted for 11
percent and seeds for 5 percent.
_Behavior._--Grinnell and Storer (1924) write:
The Sierra red-breasted sapsucker is in our experience
well-nigh voiceless and its work is done in such a quiet
manner that it does not ordinarily attract attention, as do
the woodpeckers that are wont to pound noisily. The most
vigorous drilling of the sapsucker will scarcely be heard
more than a hundred feet away. The bird moves its head
through a short arc, an inch or two at the most, giving
but slight momentum to the blows. The chips cut away are
correspondingly small, mere sawdust as compared with the
splinters or slabs chiseled off by other woodpeckers. The
strokes are delivered in intermittent series, four or five
within a second, then a pause of equal duration, then
another short series, and so on. From time to time a longer
pause ensues, when the sapsucker withdraws its bill and
gazes monocularly at the work.
Mr. Skinner says, in his notes: “Although methodical, these birds
seem quite nervous, moving from stem to stem. Generally they perch
lengthwise of a limb when working or feeding but are apt to perch
crosswise when hopping from limb to limb. After a sapsucker has its
wells established, it finds it necessary to stay near to guard them
from other birds attracted by the sap, or by the insects drawn there.
Preening is often done while guarding the wells. The hairy woodpeckers
chase these sapsuckers from tree to tree. The Audubon and lutescent
warblers literally swarm to the sap-wells in the willows whenever
the sapsuckers cease to guard them, but I do not know that there is
active antagonism between the species. On one occasion, I saw a young
sapsucker chase off a chipmunk that came too near.”
_Voice._--Ralph Hoffmann (1927) says that “the ordinary cry is a nasal
squeal, _chée-arr_, somewhat suggesting the note of a red-bellied
hawk.” But it is apparently not a noisy bird, as Grinnell and Storer
(1924) say that it is “well-nigh voiceless”.
_Field marks._--The red head and breast of the adult are unmistakable
and very conspicuous. The young bird might be mistaken for the young of
the red-naped sapsucker, as they are much alike, but the head of the
red-breasted sapsucker is darker and often shows dull red. The broad,
white band in the wing is conspicuous while the bird is perched or when
flying; this is common to both adults and young, but the red-naped
sapsucker has a very similar white band.
_Winter._--Mr. Dawson (1923) writes: “Sapsuckers are more extensively
migratory than any other woodpeckers, save _Colaptes_, but _ruber’s_
migrations are chiefly altitudinal. Retirement from the untenable
heights is quite irregular, and dependent upon weather conditions. The
winter distribution, also, appears somewhat irregular and haphazard.
The bird is very quiet and rather stolid in winter, as becomes a bird
of high feather. It is, however, quite as likely to be seen in a city
park or on a shaded avenue as in a foothill forest.”
SPHYRAPICUS VARIUS RUBER (Gmelin)
NORTHERN RED-BREASTED SAPSUCKER
HABITS
The northern race of the red-breasted sapsucker breeds from Alaska
southward to western Oregon, chiefly in the Canadian Zone. Ridgway
(1914) says that it is “similar to” the southern race, “but slightly
larger and with coloration darker and brighter; the red of the head,
neck, and chest averaging brighter, and whitish spots on back usually
smaller (sometimes obsolete).”
Bendire (1895) says of its haunts:
Throughout its range I think this species breeds frequently
at lower altitudes than _Sphyrapicus varius nuchalis_.
Fort Klamath, however, although but 4,200 feet above sea
level, has a very cool summer climate, frosts occurring in
almost every month in the year. The surrounding country
is very beautiful at that time. Heavy, open forests of
stately pines and firs, among these the graceful and
beautiful sugar pine, are found on the mountain sides and
reaching well down into the green, park-like valleys.
Interspersed here and there are aspen groves of various
extent, their silvery trunks and light-green foliage
blending artistically with the somber green of the pines.
These aspen groves are the summer home of the Red-breasted
Sapsucker.
_Spring._--In the vicinity of Fort Klamath, Oreg., Bendire (1895) found
this sapsucker to be “an abundant summer resident” and says:
They are among the earliest birds to arrive in the spring.
The first bird of this species shot by me, in the spring
of 1883, was obtained on March 13, and I have seen a few
as late as November. On one of my collecting trips, the
morning of April 4, 1883, while riding through a patch of
pine timber, near Wood River, the principal stream running
through the center of Klamath Valley, I noticed a flock
of these birds, at least twenty in number. They were very
noisy, apparently glad to get back to their summer homes,
and seemed to have an excellent time generally, flying from
tree to tree and calling to each other.
As I wanted a couple of specimens, I was compelled to
disturb their jollification; those procured were both
males, and presumably the entire flock belonged to this
sex. By April 20 they had become very common, and some
pairs at least were mated and had already selected their
future domiciles, in every case a good-sized live aspen
tree. The males might at that time be heard in almost all
directions drumming on some dry limb, generally the dead
top of one of these trees. They scarcely seemed to do
anything else.
Nesting.--He says of the nesting habits in the Klamath Valley:
As far as my own observations go, healthy, smooth-barked
aspens are always selected as suitable nesting sites by
these birds. The trees used vary from 12 to 18 inches in
diameter near the ground, and taper very gradually. The
cavity is usually excavated below the first limb of the
tree, say from 15 to 25 feet from the ground. The entrance
hole seems to be ridiculously small for the size of the
bird--perfectly circular, from 1¼ to 1½ inches in
diameter only--so small, indeed, that it seems as if it
took considerable effort for the bird to squeeze himself in
and wriggle out of the hole.
The gourd-shaped excavation varies in depth from 6 to 10
inches, and it is from 3 inches near the top to 4 or 5
inches wide at the bottom. The finer chips are allowed to
remain in the bottom, forming the nest proper, on which
the eggs are deposited. Frequently they are more than
half covered by these chips. The interior of the entire
excavation is most carefully smoothed off, which must
consume considerable time, considering the tough, stringy,
and elastic nature of the wood when filled with sap, making
it even more difficult to work when partly decayed, which
seems to be the case with nearly all the aspens of any
size. Probably eight or ten days are consumed in excavating
a satisfactory nesting site. All the larger and coarser
chips are dropped out of the hole and scattered about the
base of the tree.
Johnson A. Neff (1928) says: “The nests of these birds are placed in
whatever trees are abundant in their vicinity. In Klamath County, in
the foothills and in the lower valleys, alders, cottonwoods and aspens
were utilized; in the higher altitudes, firs were the common site,
with the alder and willow along the small streams. In the Willamette
Valley the firs, cottonwoods, willows, alders, and others, are used
indiscriminately.”
Near Blaine, Wash., Mr. Dawson (Dawson and Bowles, 1909) found an
almost inaccessible nest of this sapsucker 50 feet from the ground in a
big fir stub, “sixteen feet around at the base, above the root bulge,
and perfectly desolate of limbs.” He managed to reach the nest with the
help of a rope and cleats nailed on the barkless trunk. He says:
“By the time I had a hole large enough to thrust in the hand, the
eggs were quite buried in chips and rotten wood. But when they were
uncovered, they were seen to lie, seven of them, in two regular lines,
four in the front rank with sides touching evenly, and three in the
rear with points dove-tailed between.”
Harry S. Swarth (1924) also found some lofty nests in the Skeena River
region of northern British Columbia; he writes: “During May and June
a number of nests were found, mostly through seeing the old birds
carrying food to the young. One was drilled in a live poplar, the tree
a straight column with no branching limb save at the very top, the nest
some seventy feet from the ground. Another was in a dead birch, sixty
feet up. Many others were noted, all in birch or poplar, mostly dead
trees, and no nest was less than fifty feet above the ground. One male
bird collected had the abdomen bare of feathers. It obviously had been
incubating eggs.”
_Eggs._--The red-breasted sapsucker lays four to seven eggs, usually
five or six. Bendire (1895) describes them, as follows: “The eggs,
when fresh and before blowing, like those of all Woodpeckers, show the
yolk through the translucent shell, giving them a beautiful pinkish
appearance, as well as a series of straight lines or streaks, of a
more pronounced white than the rest of the shell, running toward and
converging at the smaller axis of the egg. After blowing, the pink
tint will be found to have disappeared and the egg changed to a pure,
delicate white, the shell showing a moderate amount of luster. There is
considerable variation in their shape, running as they do through all
the different ovates to an elongated ovate.”
The measurements of 54 eggs average 23.61 by 17.51 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =25.40= by 17.78, 24.13 by
=18.54=, =21.84= by 17.27, and 23.11 by =16.26= millimeters.
_Food._--Mr. Neff (1928) lists 67 species of fruit, forest, and
ornamental trees and shrubs that are known to have been tapped by
the red-breasted sapsucker, showing that this species is not at all
particular as to what kind of sap it drinks. A total of 64 stomachs
were examined, representing every month in the year. “The stomach
analyses revealed 40.7 percent of vegetable food, and 52.53 percent
insect food.” Ants formed the bulk of the insect food, running as
high as 80 percent in July; other items were boring beetles and their
larvae, other beetles, weevils, caddiceflies, aphids, various flies,
mites, and spiders. Fruit averaged less than 4 percent of the food and
included elderberries, wild cherries, haw and dogwood berries. “No
cultivated fruits were taken and seeds were almost a minus quantity.
True cambium or soft inner bark averaged 31.35 percent; most of
this was taken between October and April. Other bark, fibre, and
miscellaneous vegetable matter averaged 5.14 percent.”
Bendire (1895) says: “Their food consists principally of grubs, larvæ
of insects, ants, various species of lepidoptera, which they catch
on the wing, like Flycatchers, and berries. * * * They seem to be
especially fond of wild strawberries.”
_Behavior._--Charles A. Allen, of Nicasio, Calif., wrote to Major
Bendire (1895): “These Woodpeckers are very fond of hanging to
telegraph poles, and may be found drumming along the line of the
Central Pacific Railroad through the Sierra Nevadas, where you can hear
them beating a tattoo for hours at a time. If you try to approach one,
as soon as a certain distance is reached the bird will sidle to the
opposite side of the pole, and then keep peeping around the corner at
whatever has excited his suspicions, and as soon as it thinks it has a
good opportunity to escape it will fly away with a shrill cry, and keep
the pole in line between it and yourself for protection. Here they are
very shy, and remain very quiet if discovered.”
According to Bendire’s own experience--
“These birds are not at all shy during the breeding season,
allowing you to approach them closely; but they have an
extraordinarily keen sense of hearing. I frequently tried
to sneak up to a tree close to my house which I knew had
been selected by a pair of these birds, to watch them at
work, but I was invariably detected by the bird, no matter
how carefully I tried to creep up, before I was able to get
within 30 yards, even when she was at work on the inside of
the cavity and could not possibly see me. The bird would
cease working at once, her head would pop out of the hole
for an instant, and the surroundings would be surveyed
carefully. If I kept out of sight and perfectly still, she
would probably begin working again a few minutes afterward,
but if I moved ever so little, without even making the
least noise, in my own estimation, she would notice it and
stop working again at once. If the tree were approached
too closely, she would fly off, uttering at the same time
a note resembling the word ‘jay,’ or ‘chäe,’ several times
repeated, which would invariably bring the male around
also, who had in the meantime kept himself busy in some
other tree, either drumming or hunting for food. While the
female was at work on the inside of the excavation the male
would fly to the entrance, from time to time, and look in;
* * * and at other times he would hang, for five or ten
minutes even, just below the entrance to the burrow, in a
dreamy sort of study, perfectly motionless and seemingly
dazed.”
Mr. Neff (1928) writes:
They have not been found to be particularly quiet excepting
during the hotter summer months. At other times they have
been neither noticeably noisy nor silent. The outstanding
features of their behavior have proven to be pugnacity and
noise during the mating season and while incubating and
feeding the young, and an extreme curiosity at other times.
In many instances the writer has located them by utilizing
this curiosity; sitting motionless on a log or rock after
failing to find them, any sapsucker in the community
would soon make its presence known by a characteristic
interrogative call, at first from a distance, gradually
drawing nearer.
In winter they seem to be quite belligerent, for on several
occasions one has been located by the angry noise as if
of a pitched battle; on closer investigation it would be
found that the sapsucker was attempting to drive some other
woodpecker, generally the Gairdner, from some favorite tree.
_Voice._--Bendire (1895) says: “While the nest was being rifled of its
contents both parents flew about the upper limbs of the tree, uttering
a number of different sounding, plaintive sounds, like ‘peeye,’
‘pinck,’ and ‘peurr,’ some of these resembling somewhat the purring of
a cat when pleased and rubbing against your leg. I used to note the
different sounds in a small notebook at the very time, but scarcely
ever put them down alike; each time they appeared a trifle different to
the ear, and it is a hard matter to express them exactly on paper.”
Mr. Dawson (Dawson and Bowles, 1909) says that while he was chopping
out the nest the birds “made frequent approaches from a neighboring
tree, crying _kee-a, kee-aa_, in helpless bewilderment. * * * When all
was over, they raised a high, strong _qué-oo,--qeé-oo_, never before
heard, and reminding one generically of the Red-headed Woodpecker of
boyhood days.”
SPHYRAPICUS THYROIDEUS THYROIDEUS (Cassin)
WILLIAMSON’S SAPSUCKER
HABITS
Williamson’s sapsucker is not only one of our most unique woodpeckers
in its striking coloration, but it has an interesting history. Owing
to the radical difference in appearance between the two sexes, they
were for some time regarded as two distinct species. The female was
the first to be described by John Cassin (1852, p. 349), based on a
specimen collected by John G. Bell in Eldorado County, Calif. Under
the name black-breasted woodpecker (_Melanerpes thyroideus_), Cassin
describes and figures (1854) the adult female as the male of the
species and says of the female: “Similar to the male, but with the
colors more obscure, and the black of the breast of less extent and not
so deep in shade,” which is a very fair description of the immature
female. The male was discovered and described and figured by Dr.
Newberry (1857, p. 89, pl. 34) under the name _Picus williamsonii_,
based on a specimen collected by him on August 23, 1855, on the shores
of Klamath Lake, Oreg. Baird, Cassin, and Lawrence (1860) give a very
good description of an adult male, as the male of the species, but say
“female with the chin white instead of red,” which, of course, is the
immature male. Thus we have the adult of each sex regarded as the male
of a species, and the young bird of each sex regarded as the female
of a species. With careless, or improper, sexing of specimens, such
an error might easily occur, but it is remarkable that it remained so
long undiscovered. Baird, Cassin, and Lawrence (1860) describe the male
as _Sphyrapicus williamsonii_ Baird, Williamson’s woodpecker, and the
female as _Sphyrapicus thyroideus_ Baird, brown-headed woodpecker. J.
G. Cooper (1870), in the Geological Survey of California, edited by
Baird, follows the same error but calls the female the round-headed
woodpecker. Even Baird, Brewer, and Ridgway, in their history of
North American Birds, had not discovered the error, for they use
substantially the same nomenclature.
It remained for Henry W. Henshaw (1875) to discover the true
relationship of the two supposed species and clear up the previous
misunderstanding. He writes: “While near Fort Garland, I obtained
abundant proof of the specific identity of the two birds in question;
_williamsonii_ being the male of _thyroideus_. Though led to suspect
this, from finding the two birds in suspicious proximity, it was some
time before I could procure a pair actually mated. A nest was at length
discovered, excavated in the trunk of a live aspen, and both the parent
birds were secured as they flew from the hole, having just entered with
food for the newly hatched young.”
Mr. Ridgway (1877) comments on the discovery as follows:
A suspicion that the two might eventually prove to be
different plumages of one species several times arose in
our mind during the course of our field-work, the chief
occasion for which was the very suggestive circumstance
that both were invariably found in the same woods, and
had identical manners and notes, while they also agreed
strictly in all the details of form and proportions, as
well as in the bright gamboge-yellow color of the belly.
Our theory that _thyroideus_ was perhaps the _young_, and
_williamsoni_ the _adult_, proved erroneous, however; and
it never occurred to us that the differences might be
sexual, an oversight caused chiefly by the circumstance
of our having seen in collections many specimens of
_thyroideus_ with a red streak on the throat and marked
as males, while the type specimen of _williamsoni_ had a
white streak on the throat and was said to be a female. We
were thus entirely misled by the erroneous identification
of the sex in these specimens. We gave the matter up,
however, only after shooting a very young specimen of what
was undoubtedly _williamsoni_, and another of _thyroideus_,
both of which very closely resembled the adults of the
same forms, a circumstance which at once convinced us that
the differences could not depend on age; so we finally
concluded that the two must be distinct.
All observers seem to agree that this woodpecker is confined to the
higher elevations in the mountains among the pines, in sharp contrast
to the haunts of the red-breasted sapsucker at lower levels among the
deciduous trees.
Joseph Grinnell (1908), referring to the San Bernardino Mountains,
in southern California, says: “This Williamson sapsucker appeared to
be restricted to the Canadian zone and upper edge of Transition. We
found it only among the tamarack pines on the slopes and ridges of San
Gorgonio peak, and among the silver firs, tamarack and yellow pines
around Bluff lake. In the former locality the species was common for
a woodpecker, especially around Dry Lake, 9,000 feet altitude, where
several nests were found.”
_Courtship._--Charles W. Michael (1935) noted the mating behavior of a
male Williamson’s sapsucker, which had just left a fresh nest-hole, as
follows:
He sounded his harsh call several times. Seemingly in
answer to his call the female appeared. This was the
first we had seen of the female. The female examined the
nest hole, flew up on a branch and uttered a series of
low notes. The male joined her, alighting a foot away and
uttering a series of low chuckling notes. While giving
these notes he strutted along the limb with wing-tips
and tail jerking rapidly. As he approached his mate
she crouched low on the limb and the mating act was
accomplished. The act lasted several seconds before the
birds separated to perch side by side on a limb. After a
minute or so the female flew off through the woods and the
male went into the nest hole. In about five minutes the
female came to the nest hole and again uttered her soft
coaxing notes. The male came out of the hole and both birds
flew to a limb where again the mating act was consummated.
The male returned to the nest. In our two-hour watch the
female only went to the nest hole to call the mate out.
_Nesting._--Dr. Grinnell (1908) says of its nesting in the San
Bernardino Mountains:
Tamarack pines were selected as nest trees, usually old
ones with the core dead and rotten but with a live shell
on the outside. In one found June 22, 1905, there were
four holes drilled one above the other about eighteen
inches apart, and one of these holes contained three small
young and two infertile eggs. * * * Later on in the same
day another nest was found similarly located containing
four half-fledged young. A nest with half-grown young was
found in the same locality, June 14, 1906; and on June
26 of the same year a nest twenty feet up in a half-dead
tamarack held five two-thirds-grown young and one rotten
egg. So that a full set of eggs probably varies from four
to six in number. On June 18, 1907, a nest with small
young was located ten feet up in an exceptionally large
nearly dead tamarack pine. This was one of the lowest of a
series of forty-seven well-formed holes of similar external
appearance, which penetrated this one tree trunk on all
sides up to an estimated height of thirty-five feet.
W. L. Dawson (1923) writes: “One soon comes to recognize the rigid
requirements of the Williamson Sapsucker in the matter of nesting
sites. Given a pine which is beginning to die at the top, usually in
a fairly sheltered situation, and a pair of birds will adopt it for
a permanent home. They will occupy it from year to year, or perhaps
the year around, nesting twice in a season; and a long occupation is
evinced by a trunk riddled with holes at all levels. One such ‘family
tree,’ closely examined, had 38 holes, apparently complete and fit for
habitation or incubation. At the time of our visit, on June 19th, the
male was industriously drilling a new excavation at a height of 45
feet.”
Major Bendire (1895) says:
I obtained my first set of eggs of this species on June 3,
1883, about 9 miles north of Fort Klamath, in the open pine
forest on the road to Crater Lake. It consisted of five
eggs, slightly incubated. The nesting site was excavated
in a partly decayed pine whose entire top for some 20 feet
was dead; the height of the excavation from the ground was
about 50 feet. The man climbing the tree reported it to be
about 8 inches deep and about 5 inches wide at the bottom,
and freshly made. A second set, of six fresh eggs, was
taken June 12 of the same year, about 12 miles north of
the Post, at a still higher altitude than the first one.
It came also out of a pine about 40 feet from the ground.
A third nest, found a week later, near the same place,
contained five young, just hatched. This nest was in a
dead aspen, about 20 feet from the ground. Only one brood
is raised, and, like the other two species, it is only a
summer resident in the vicinity of Fort Klamath.
Other observers have found nests in lodgepole pines, red firs, and
larches at various heights from 5 to 60 feet above ground but always in
conifer associations.
_Eggs._--Bendire (1895) says: “The number of eggs laid to a set varies
from three to seven, sets of five or six being most often found. These,
like all woodpecker’s eggs, are pure china-white in color; the shell
is close grained, rather thin, and only slightly glossy. In shape
they vary from ovate to elongate ovate, and a few approach an ovate
pyriform, a shape apparently not found in the eggs of other species
of this genus.” The measurements of 30 eggs average 23.54 by 17.23
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =25.91= by
17.27, 24.1 by =18.3=, and =20.1= by =15.4= millimeters.
_Young._--Both parents assist in the duties of incubation, but
the length of time required for this function does not seem to be
definitely known; both sexes also help in feeding the young. Dr. J.
C. Merrill (1888) says, of two nests that he watched for some time:
“The males brought food about twice as often as did the females, and
frequently removed the excrement of the young on leaving the nest,
alighting on the nearest tree for a moment to drop it and to clean
their bills; I did not see either of the females remove any excreta.
About four feet above one of the holes was another occupied by a pair
of pigmy nuthatches, but neither species paid any attention to the
other when they happened to arrive with food at the same time.”
Dr. Grinnell (1908) writes: “We usually located the nests by watching
the movements of the parent birds, which flew from their foraging
places, often far distant, direct to the nest tree. The young uttered
a whinnying chorus of cries when fed, and the adults, though generally
very quiet, had a not loud explosive cry, more like the distant squall
of a red-tailed hawk. The bill and throat of an adult male, shot as it
was approaching a nest, was crammed with large wood ants, not the kind,
however, that are common at lower altitudes and smell so foully.”
Charles W. Michael (1935) watched a nest containing young, in the
Yosemite region, of which he says:
When we arrived, about ten o’clock, both parent birds were
bringing food. We watched the birds for an hour and a half
and in this period of time the male made nine trips to the
nest hole and the female made seven trips. The young were
small, as the parent birds went completely into the nest
hole. The birds, male and female, always came onto the tree
trunk above the nest hole and hitched jerkily downward
until on a level with the hole. They landed anywhere
between five and fifteen feet above the hole; the female
was likely to land nearest to the hole. * * * About every
other trip excrement was carried from the nest. When the
male cleaned nest he carried the feces away and dropped
them some distance from the nest. When the female cleaned
nest she came to the entrance from within, looked about and
then dropped the refuse before leaving the nest hole.
_Plumages._--The most remarkable characteristic of this woodpecker is
the striking difference in the plumages of the two sexes at all ages,
from the first plumage of the young bird to its maturity; in most
birds the sexes are much alike in the juvenal plumage; but the young
male Williamson’s sapsucker is much like the adult male, and the young
female is much like the adult female; the principal character common to
both sexes at all ages is the white rump.
These young sapsuckers are fully fledged before they leave the nest.
The young male, in juvenal plumage in summer, differs from the adult
male in having a smaller and weaker bill and softer, more blended
plumage; the black areas, except the wings and tail, which are like
those of the adult, are dull brownish black, instead of clear glossy
black; there are usually numerous elongated white spots or streaks,
more or less concealed, on the scapulars and upper back, and often a
few small whitish spots on the crown; the chin and upper throat are
white, instead of scarlet; the center of the breast and abdomen is dull
yellowish white, instead of bright “lemon-chrome”; the sides and flanks
are barred, instead of striped or spotted, with dusky.
The young female differs from the adult female in having a smaller and
weaker bill and softer plumage; the black breast patch is entirely
lacking; the breast, sides, and flanks are barred with dusky, but less
distinctly than in the adult; and the yellow of the central breast and
abdomen is much paler.
These two juvenal plumages are worn for only a short time in summer. I
have seen young males molting into their first winter plumage, which
is practically adult, as early as August 9; and young females begin
to show the increasing black breast patch as early as August 6; but
this molt is slow, or variable, and is sometimes not completed until
November or December.
Adults apparently have their complete annual molt mainly in August and
September.
_Food._--Mrs. Florence M. Bailey (1928) says: “In 17 stomachs examined,
87 percent was animal matter and 13 percent vegetable. Of the animal
contents, 86 percent was ants, and cambium made up 12.55 percent of the
total food.”
Grinnell and Storer (1924) write:
In the Yosemite region the Williamson Sapsucker is closely
associated with the lodgepole pine. While this tree
seems to furnish the bird’s preferred source of forage,
practically all other species of trees within its local
range are also utilized. We saw workings attributable to
this sapsucker on the alpine hemlock, red and white firs,
Jeffrey pine, and quaking aspen.
The amount of work which this sapsucker will do upon
a single tree was impressed upon us while we were at
Porcupine Flat in early July, 1915. In that locality there
was a lodgepole pine (_Pinus murrayana_) about 60 feet
high, which showed no marks of sapsucker work previous to
the current year. The tree was in full leafy vigor and
measured 8 feet 3¼ inches in girth at 3 feet above the
ground. There were numerous live branches down to within 6
feet of the ground. Twenty-six irregularly horizontal rows
of fresh punctures were counted on one side of the trunk,
the lowest being only 18½ inches above the ground, and the
highest about 40 feet. * * *
During the winter months when sap is practically at a
standstill in the coniferous trees at high altitudes, the
Williamson Sapsucker must needs seek other fare. A few of
our own observations added to those of other naturalists
suggest that during the winter season the birds may forage
in a large part on dormant insects or on insect larvae
hidden in crevices in the bark. If such is the case,
whatever the damage done by these birds to the forest as a
whole during the summer months, it is partially offset by
their wintertime activity. In any event, the attacks of the
Williamson Sapsucker on the lodgepole pines of the central
Sierra Nevada cannot be considered as of great economic
importance, for these trees are there used little if at all
for lumber or for any other commercial purpose.
_Behavior._--Dr. J. C. Merrill (1888), at Fort Klamath, Oreg., found
this sapsucker “shy and very suspicious. A noticeable habit here is
the frequency with which it works down as well as up a trunk, and when
one dodges around a tree, in which, by the way, it is unpleasantly
expert, it is as apt to reappear twenty feet below where it was last
seen, as above. In searching for food it will often work up and down a
favorite tree repeatedly. In all its movements it is quick and active,
and gives one the impression of being thoroughly wide awake, which
impression the would-be collector is speedily convinced is correct.”
_Voice._--Mr. Michael (1935) says: “When the sapsuckers met at the
nest site they exchanged greetings in a ‘rubber doll’ tone of voice.
The nasal quaver of notes was remindful of a call often sounded by the
red-breasted sapsucker. Another call that was occasionally shouted from
the tree-tops was shrill and like that of a red-tailed hawk.”
Dr. Elliott Coues (1874) says: “It has an abrupt, explosive outcry,
much like that of other species of Woodpeckers, and also an entirely
different call note. This sounds to me like a number of rolling _r’s_,
beginning with a gutteral _k--k’-r-r-r_--each set of _r’s_ making a
long syllable. This note is leisurely given, and indefinitely repeated,
in a very low key.”
Grinnell and Storer (1924) describe the voice as “a weak wheezy _whang_
or _whether_.”
_Field marks._--Such a conspicuously and uniquely colored woodpecker
as the male Williamson’s sapsucker should be easily recognized; its
general appearance is largely black, with a large white patch in the
fore part of the wing, and another on the rump and upper tail coverts;
the yellow on the under parts is not so easily seen; neither is the red
throat. The female appears mainly pale brown, with a white rump, brown
head, and barred back and wings.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Mountainous regions of the Western United States and
southwestern Canada south to west-central Mexico.
_Breeding range._--Williamson’s sapsucker breeds =north= to central
Washington (Bumping Lake and probably Dayton); and southwestern
Montana (Missoula, Pipestone Creek, Bridger Creek, and Red Lodge).
=East= to Montana (Red Lodge); Wyoming (Yellowstone National Park and
Laramie Peak); Colorado (Estes Park, Idaho Springs, Breckenridge, El
Paso County, and Fort Garland); and New Mexico (Carson Forest, Santa
Fe Canyon, Las Vegas, and Hermosa). =South= to southern New Mexico
(Hermosa); Arizona (Tucson, Mogollon Mountains, and Fort Whipple); and
southern California (San Jacinto). =West= to eastern California (San
Jacinto, San Bernardino Mountains, Pyramid Peak, Tuolumne County, Echo
Lake, Lake Tahoe, Lassen Peak, and Eagle Peak); western Oregon (Rogue
River Valley and Foley Springs); and west-central Washington (Bumping
Lake).
_Winter range._--In winter the species is regularly found =north= to
central California (Yosemite Valley); central Arizona (Pine Springs,
Oak Creek, and Mogollon Mountains); southwestern New Mexico (Black
Range); and central Texas (San Angelo). =East= to Texas (San Angelo and
probably Kerrville); eastern Chihuahua (Apache); and Jalisco (Bolanos
and Guadalajara). =South= to southern Jalisco (Guadalajara). =West=
to Jalisco (Guadalajara); northwestern Durango; western Chihuahua
(Refugio, Casa Colorado, Bavispee River, and Colonia Garcia); northern
Baja California (San Pedro Martir, Ville de la Trinidad, and Hanson
Lagoon); and California (Pasadena and Yosemite Valley).
As outlined, the range applies to the entire species, which has been
separated into two subspecies. True Williamson’s sapsucker (_S. t.
thyroideus_) is found in the Pacific coast region from British Columbia
south to Baja California, while Natalie’s sapsucker (_S. t. nataliae_)
inhabits the Rocky Mountain region from Montana south to Jalisco.
_Spring migration._--Although the species appears to be resident
throughout considerable portions of its range, and but little is known
of its migratory movements, the following early dates of arrival have
been noted: Colorado--Boulder County, April 5; Colorado Springs, April
5; Evergreen, April 8; Denver, April 15. Wyoming--Yellowstone Park,
April 29. Montana--Charcoal Gulch, April 23. Nevada--Carson City, March
10. Washington--Pullman, April 26. A late date of departure from the
southern part of the winter range is Chihuahua, Palomas Lakes, April 7.
_Fall migration._--Available late dates of fall departure are:
Washington--Copper River, September 3. Oregon--Rustler Peak,
November 6. Nevada--Lee Canyon, October 7; Carson City, November 27.
Montana--Fort Custer, September 9. Wyoming--Yellowstone Park, September
22; Wheatland, October 4. Colorado--Del Norte, September 5; Rio Blanco,
September 9; Boulder County, November 6. It has been noted to reach
Hanson Lagoon, Baja California, on October 11.
_Casual records._--There are a few records in extreme southern British
Columbia, where it may breed occasionally. A pair were collected on
April 22, 1913, on Schoonover Mountain, near Okanagan Falls; one was
taken at Similkameen in June 1882, while Swarth (1917) records three
from Midway.
_Egg dates._--California: 14 records, May 27 to June 26.
Colorado: 29 records, May 24 to June 24; 15 records, June 1 to 8,
indicating the height of the season.
SPHYRAPICUS THYROIDEUS NATALIAE (Malherbe)
NATALIE’S SAPSUCKER
PLATE 29
HABITS
Harry S. Swarth (1917) is responsible for the recognition of this race,
which seems to differ from the Williamson’s sapsucker of the Pacific
coast in the same way that the northern white-headed woodpecker differs
from the southern race of that species; he says:
The differences are as worthy of recognition in one case
as in the other. It is my suggestion here that the Rocky
Mountain race of the Williamson Sapsucker be separately
recognized on the basis of its lesser bill measurements as
compared with those of _Sphyrapicus thyroideus thyroideus_
of the Pacific Coast.
As regards a name for this form, there is already one that
seems to be clearly available for use. A specimen from
Mexico was designated by Malherbe (Journ. für Orn., 1854,
p. 171) as _Picus nataliae_, and an example from any part
of Mexico (save possibly from the mountains of northern
Lower California) would assuredly be of the Rocky Mountain
subspecies. Also in the measurements given by Malherbe,
length of bill (“du bec, du front 20 millimeters”) places
his bird unequivocally with this race.
It is reasonably certain that in the Rocky Mountain
region the species does not breed south of the Mogollon
Divide, though it does occur as a common winter visitant
in southern Arizona and over a large part of the Mexican
plateau. These winter visitants, as shown by numerous
specimens at hand, are migrants from the Rocky Mountain
region to the northward, and not from the Pacific Coast
region. So the name _nataliae_, as given by Malherbe to a
Mexican specimen, can safely be used for the Rocky Mountain
subspecies, which may therefore stand as _Sphyrapicus
thyroideus nataliae_ (Malherbe).
Mrs. Florence M. Bailey (1928), referring to the striking difference in
plumage between the male and the female in this species, remarks:
The cause of this strongly contrasted sexual coloration
unique among the woodpeckers of the United States is one
of the unsolved problems of ornithology that stimulates
speculation and so adds zest to the study. Is it, as Mr.
Swarth suggests, that the female is still in a primitive
stage of development? Correlating the brown coloration of
the pasture-frequenting flickers with the ant-eating habits
so marked in the Rocky Mountain sapsucker, it would seem
that the color of the female might have been ancestrally
adapted to a more open habitat than that in which the pair
are found today; or has the ant-eating habit been diverted
from ants that live on the ground in the open to those that
live on tree trunks? The feeding habits of the anomalous
pair should be carefully studied in the field.
Dr. Edgar A. Mearns (1890b) says that in Arizona it “breeds very
commonly at the highest altitudes, frequenting the spruce and fir
woods. It seldom descends far into the pine belt during the breeding
season, although it is found in the pines in winter, occasionally
descending even to the cedars in severe weather; and after the nesting
season it frequently roves down to the pine woods with its young. When
shot, it usually fastened its claws into the balsam bark and remained
hanging there after life was extinct.”
Milton P. Skinner says in his Yellowstone Park notes: “In this Park,
the Williamson sapsucker lives below 7,000 feet and prefers mixed
forests of aspen and fir, but it is not particular whether in dense
forest or in the borderland between forest and open.”
_Spring._--Mr. Swarth (1904) witnessed a well-marked spring migration
in the Huachuca Mountains, Ariz., of which he says:
On April 6, 1902, I saw about a dozen Williamson Sapsuckers
near the summit of the mountains at an altitude of about
9,000 feet. Though not at all in a compact flock they
seemed to keep rather close together, and when one flew
any distance away, the others soon followed. The bulk of
them were females, and but one or two males were seen, one
of which was, with great difficulty secured, for they were
very wild. On April 9 several more were seen and a female
secured at this same place; and a male was taken a mile
or two from this place, at an altitude of nearly 10,000
feet. These were the last I saw in the spring, though they
do occur later as I have a female that was taken in the
Huachucas by H. Kimball on April 20, 1895.
_Nesting._--The nesting habits of this woodpecker do not seem to differ
materially from those of the species elsewhere. Bendire (1895) quotes
W. G. Smith, as follows: “Williamson’s Sapsucker is a common summer
resident in Estes Park, Colorado, where it nests mostly in dead pines,
often within a few feet of the ground, and again as high as 70 feet
up. Full sets of fresh eggs are usually found here during the first
week in June. The male appears to me to do most of the incubating, and
hereabouts it is most often found at altitudes between 7,000 and 8,000
feet, but I have also taken it at much higher ones, where it nests
somewhat later.”
Mr. Skinner says in his notes: “On June 14, 1914, I discovered the nest
of a pair of Williamson sapsuckers in the gulch beside the trail to
Snow Pass at the beginning of the last ascent. The nest was in an aspen
trunk about 6 inches in diameter. The opening to the nest was 1½ inches
in diameter and located 5 feet above ground. On June 30, 1915, the nest
was in the same tree, but 2 feet above the 1914 nest and in a fresh
opening.”
_Eggs._--The eggs of Natalie’s sapsucker do not differ materially from
those of the other race of the species. The measurements of 51 eggs
average 23.60 by 17.41 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes
measure =26.2= by 17.9, 24.2 by =19.4=, =21.5= by 17.0, and 22.0 by
=16.0= millimeters.
_Young._--Mr. Skinner says in his notes that the young “seem to arrive
irregularly between June 10 and July 1. I have seen young Williamson’s
sapsuckers hunting by themselves before August 10. In the nest recorded
above there were five young on June 14, 1914, and both parents were
kept constantly busy bringing food, and frequently came so fast that
one parent had to wait for the other to leave the nest. In feeding the
young the adults disappeared completely into the nest cavity and came
out head first. In 1915 there were five more young on June 30 and they
were still there on July 10. When I visited them on June 30, the male
was in the nest, and it required about five raps on the tree trunk to
dislodge him, although he came to the opening and looked out at each
rap.”
_Food._--The feeding habits of Natalie’s sapsucker are apparently
similar to those of the species elsewhere, but Mr. Skinner tells me
he has “seen it drumming on firs for insects, picking insects from a
crotch of a lodgepole pine and catching spruce-budworm moths from fir
foliage.”
_Behavior._--The feeding and other habits of Natalie’s sapsucker seems
to be similar to those of the other subspecies, but Bendire (1895)
quotes the following notes from Denis Gale, about its behavior around
the nest, which are worth repeating here:
A marked peculiarity I have noted with _Sphyrapicus
thyroideus_ is that the male takes a lookout station upon
some suitable tree, where, at the approach of any possible
danger, he gives the alarm by striking a short dry limb
with his bill, by which a peculiar vibrating sound is given
out, which the female, not very distant, fully understands,
and is at once on the alert. If either excavating,
guarding, or covering her eggs, she will immediately look
out of her burrow, and, should the intruder’s path lie in
the direction of her nest, she will silently slip away
and alight in a tree some distance off, but in view of
both her nest and the intruder. The first or second blow
of a hatchet upon the tree trunk in which the nest is
excavated will mark her movement again by a short flight,
so managed as not to increase the distance--in fact oftener
coming nearer. When satisfied that her treasures have been
discovered, she utters a peculiar, low, grating sound,
not unlike the purring of a cat. The male then comes to
the fore and braving the danger, is very courageous, and,
should the eggs be far advanced in incubation, he will even
enter the nest when you are almost within reach of it. When
the latter are rifled, he is always the first to go in and
discover the fact, often passing in and out several times
in a surprised sort of manner.
CEOPHLOEUS PILEATUS PILEATUS (Linnaeus)
SOUTHERN PILEATED WOODPECKER
HABITS
The above name is now restricted to the pileated woodpeckers of the
Lower Austral forests of the Southern United States, except southern
Florida, east of the Rocky Mountains. When Outram Bangs (1898) applied
the name _abieticola_, to the northern race, he said: “Linnaeus based
his _Picus pileatus_ on Catesby and Kalm. Taking Catesby as the best
authority, southern South Carolina must be considered the type locality
of the species, and birds from this region are as extreme of the
southern race as those from Florida.”
The southern pileated woodpecker is decidedly smaller than the northern
bird and somewhat darker in coloration. Ridgway (1914) says of this
race, in a footnote: “Some of the more northern examples are quite
as slaty as the extreme northern form (_P. p. abieticola_) but they
are distinctly smaller. In other words, I have restricted the name
_pileatus_ to an intermediate form, characterized by the small size of
_P. p. floridanus_ combined with an appreciably lighter (more slaty or
sooty) coloration, often approaching closely the lightness of hue of
_P. p. abieticola_.”
Arthur T. Wayne (1910) says that in South Carolina “this fine species
is abundant wherever the forest is of a primeval nature, but where
the heavy growth has been cut away it is seldom met with.” Wright
and Harper (1913), writing of its haunts in southern Georgia, say:
“With the exception of the red-bellied woodpecker, this is the most
abundant member of its family in the Okefinokee. In fact, we saw as
many as four Pileated Woodpeckers in a single tree. In every part of
the swamp--especially the cypress bays, but also the hammocks and the
piny woods on the islands, and even the ‘heads’ on the prairies--these
magnificent birds are at home.”
George Finlay Simmons (1925) says that in the Austin region of Texas
this woodpecker lives in the “wilder country only; cypress swamps, and
the most heavily timbered bottomlands, generally in very thinly settled
sections; post oak woods on gravelly river terraces; edges of woodland
meadows; along margins of both large and small streams; Austroriparian
forests; in or near edges of timber, venturing out onto fields to feed.”
Charles R. Stockard (1904) says of his experience with this species in
Mississippi:
During three seasons seventeen nests were watched in Adams
County. In the vicinity where observations were made every
small woods had its pair of these large woodpeckers. The
individuals of this species seemed to occupy very small
feeding areas. Of the seven nests that were found in 1902
five pairs of the birds were located in their respective
woods during the previous December and January. Whenever
a pair was once seen feeding in a wood during the winter
the same pair could always be found very close to that
place. At the beginning of the nesting season they would
invariably make their burrow in some dead but sound tree
near the edge of the brake. From continued observation it
appeared certain that whenever a pair were found in a small
wood during the winter they were sure to nest there the
following spring. * * *
In four instances, all of which had lost their eggs the
year before, the birds built their new burrows in their
several woods within a distance of about one quarter of a
mile from the previous nest site. These four are the only
cases which were watched with special care.
_Nesting._--The only nests of this race that I have seen were shown to
me by A. T. Wayne, on May 19, 1915, near Mount Pleasant, S. C. They
were in tall, dead pine trees (_Pinus taeda_) in a heavily forested
region of open, mixed woods. One was 43 feet from the ground; he had
taken three fresh eggs from this nest on April 24, 1915. The other
I estimated as over 60 feet up, but he said it was 80 feet from the
ground; it probably held young at that time, as both birds were much
in evidence and very noisy. Mr. Wayne told me that these two pairs of
birds had nested in this tract of timber for many years. He writes
(1910) regarding their nesting habits:
If the season is a forward one the birds mate early in
February and towards the latter part of the month begin
to excavate their hole, which requires exactly a month
for completion. During the month of March, 1904, I made
observations on a pair which excavated their hole in a
dead pine. On March 21, the opening was commenced by the
female, who drilled a small hole, and by degrees enlarged
it to the size of a silver dollar. The male assisted in the
excavation, but the female did by far the larger part of
the work. The size of the aperture was not increased until
necessary to admit the shoulders of the bird. I visited
these birds every day in order to note the progress of
their work, and, being so accustomed to seeing me, they
were utterly fearless and I could, at any time, approach
within twenty feet without hindering the work, although the
hole was only about thirty feet from the ground. This hole
was completed on April 21, and the first egg was laid the
following morning. * * * In this case the excavation was
made under a dead limb, and was about eighteen inches deep,
being hollowed out more on one side than the other. This
woodpecker is so attached to the tree in which it has first
made its nest that it continues to cling to it as long as
it can find a suitable spot at which to excavate a new
hole. It never uses the same hole a second time. I know of
a pair of these birds which resorted to the same tree for
four consecutive years, and each year they excavated a new
hole. * * *
If this bird is deprived of its first set of eggs, it at
once excavates a new hole, and the length of time consumed
in its construction is about twenty-five days. A curious
habit is that even when it is incubating or brooding
its young, this bird frequently taps in its hole as if
excavating.
Vernon Sharpe, Jr. (1932), says that in Tennessee “for a nesting site
a dead tree is invariably selected and preferably one of large size,
from which the branches have fallen. The cavity is situated from 20 to
85 feet above the ground, with a depth ranging from 20 to 26 inches.
Generally the four-inch opening is broader at the base and angular at
the top, forming somewhat of a triangular shape. While incubating, this
species will continue to enlarge the nest cavity, as was proved by
personal experience.”
M. G. Vaiden writes to me that the pileated woodpecker is fairly
common in certain localities near Rosedale, Miss. He has located seven
nests in cypress, sycamore, hackberry, or sweetgum trees, at estimated
heights ranging from 60 to 75 feet. His nesting dates range from April
14 to April 29.
Of the nest location, in Texas, Mr. Simmons (1925) says: “Cavity in
upper part, usually 30 to 60 feet from ground, in solid trunk of live,
sound tree, less commonly in dead or partly dead limbs or trunks,
generally tall cottonwood, cypress, elm, or oak, on the edge of woods
or in marginal timber skirting stream, and usually easily located by
the half-bushel of big fresh chips scattered about on the ground below;
tree 10 or more inches in diameter at cavity.”
Mr. Stockard (1904) says, of the 17 pairs that he watched in
Mississippi, that the birds do not lay a second set after the nest has
been robbed, but they remain in the same woods during the remainder of
the season. He says of the nests:
The burrow is very large and requires in most cases about
one month for construction, being commenced in this
locality about the latter part of February. But it was very
difficult to note the exact length of time consumed in
burrowing, as the birds try so many parts of the same tree
before striking one to suit their taste. The nest tree and
other dead trees close at hand were often scarred from top
to bottom. In two cases they began a nest, then seemed to
start one in another place, and then returned to the former
and completed it. * * *
The first nest, a burrow twenty-five feet from the ground
in an old sycamore stump, contained one egg on March 22;
March 26 it contained three, and on April 1, when the set
was removed, it consisted of four slightly incubated eggs.
* * *
Only one pair was observed that had their nest in a dead
tree which stood in an open field at least sixty or seventy
yards from the wood. The female in this case flew about
the nest tree and lit once on the upper part and again
just over the nest hole while a person was in the act of
climbing the tree. This was by far the most daring bird
seen and, as mentioned above, because of the isolation of
the tree, her burrow was unusually exposed for this species.
_Eggs._--The pileated woodpecker lays ordinarily from three to five
eggs; Audubon (1842) claims to have found six. The eggs vary from
ovate, the commonest shape, to elliptical-ovate; some are even quite
pointed. They are a brilliant china-white and usually decidedly glossy.
The measurements of 52 eggs average 32.90 by 24.72 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =35.70= by =27.00=, =30.22= by
22.35, and 29.30 by =22.00= millimeters.
_Young._--Bendire (1895) says that “an egg is deposited daily, and
incubation begins occasionally before the set is completed, and lasts
about eighteen days, both sexes assisting in this duty, as well as
in caring for the young. Like all Woodpeckers, the Pileated are very
devoted parents, and the young follow them for some weeks after leaving
the nest, until fully capable of caring for themselves. Only one brood
is raised in a season.”
_Plumages._--I have seen no small nestlings of this species, but they
are probably hatched naked and blind, like all other woodpeckers; the
juvenal plumage is evidently acquired before the young bird leaves the
nest.
The young male, in juvenal plumage, is much like the adult male in
general appearance, but the body plumage is softer, less firm, and
rather lighter and more sooty in color; the tips of the primaries have
dull-white narrow margins, which soon wear away; the red of the head
is duller, paler, and more restricted; on the fore half of the crown
and the malar region, the feathers are basally grayish brown, the red
showing only on the tips of most of the feathers, producing a mixed
color effect. The young female is similar to the young male but with
even less red in the head; the forehead and most of the crown are
grayish brown, which invades the red posterior portion of the crown;
and there is no red in the malar region. Audubon (1842) says that the
bill of the young bird is considerably longer than that of the adult.
The juvenal plumage is apparently worn for only a short time, during
the summer and early fall; I have not been able to detect it beyond
August; this is followed by a prolonged molt into a first winter
plumage, which is scarcely distinguishable from that of the adult.
Adults have a complete molt between June and September.
_Food._--The food of the southern pileated woodpecker is not
essentially different from that of the other races of the species, with
due allowance for the difference in environment. Prof. F. E. L. Beal
(1895) says: “Six stomachs, collected by Dr. B. H. Warren on the St.
Johns River in Florida, contained numerous palmetto ants (_Camponotus
escuriens_), and remains of other ants, several larvae of a Prionid
beetle (_Orthosoma brunnea_), numerous builder ants (_Crematogaster
lineolata_), one larva of _Xylotrechus_, and one pupa of the white ant
(_Termes_).”
George Finlay Simmons (1925) says that in Texas it “feeds on ants,
particularly about decayed stumps; the eggs, larvae, and adults of
wood-boring insects, particularly beetles; and on berries, acorns,
nuts, and wild grapes. When digging for insects beneath the bark or in
the wood of dead limbs or trunks of trees, it pounds steadily away,
head swinging back in an impossible arc and driving straight down
with the force of a blacksmith’s sledge, chips flying every stroke or
two; by employing a wrenching stroke with its chisel-bill, it knocks
three-inch, four-inch, or even six-inch chips from the tree and causes
them to fly for some distance.”
Arthur H. Howell (1924) says that in Alabama its food “consists mainly
of ants, beetles, and wild fruits and berries, including sour gum,
tupelo gum, dogwood, persimmon, frost grape, holly, poison ivy, sumac,
and hackberry.”
_Behavior._--The pileated woodpecker is ordinarily a wild, shy bird of
the wilderness forests, though in some places it is said to be quite
unsuspicious, where perhaps it has not yet learned to fear man, or
where familiarity has taught it to trust him. Its flight is rather
slow, but vigorous and usually direct, after the manner of a crow; at
times, however, in short swings, it adopts the bounding flight, so
common to many woodpeckers. It is an adept at keeping out of sight
behind a tree trunk and will lead a hunter a long chase by flying from
tree to tree well in advance of him. When shot dead, it may cling for
some time to the branch or trunk, until its muscles relax and allow it
to fall. If wounded, it keeps up a constant chatter while falling and
will not become quiet while life remains; a wounded bird should be
handled carefully, for it can inflict a painful wound with its powerful
beak.
Audubon (1842) relates the following story, as told to him by the Rev.
John Bachman: “A pair of pileated woodpeckers had a nest in an old elm
tree, in a swamp, which they occupied that year; the next spring early,
two blue-birds took possession of it, and there had young. Before these
were half grown, the woodpeckers returned to the place, and, despite of
the cries and reiterated attacks of the blue-birds, the others took the
young, not very gently, as you may imagine, and carried them away to
some distance. Next the nest itself was disposed of, the hole cleaned
and enlarged, and there they raised a brood. The nest, it is true, was
originally their own.”
Robert P. Allen has sent me the following note: “When in one of the
Carolina river swamps with Herbert L. Stoddard, early in December
1936, we were interested in the actions of pileated woodpeckers that
we called to us by tapping on the side of our cypress dug-out in
imitation of the birds. We paddled our canoe close against the buttress
of a large cypress tree, so that we were partially concealed by the
trunk itself and by a dense growth of intertwining branches overhead.
As many as four pileateds at one time responded to our efforts, and
all these appeared to be males. As they swooped low, to get a look at
this stranger in their midst, each bird made what we took to be an
_intimidating_ noise with its wings.
“From the immediate and pugnacious interest that these male (?)
pileateds showed in our presence, it would seem as if they had
previously cataloged the pileated population of that area and had,
therefore, rushed over to investigate the presence of a bird that could
not be accounted for, except as a stranger and a trespasser. Their
efforts at intimidation were evidently designed to drive us out of the
region.”
_Voice._--The most familiar note of the pileated woodpecker is the
loud, ringing call, suggesting the “yucker” call of the flicker, but
louder and stronger, less rapid, more prolonged, and on a lower key.
Mr. Simmons (1925) has summed up the notes of this woodpecker very
well, as follows: “A loud _cac, cac, cac_ as it flies. A sonorous
_cow-cow-cow_, repeated many times; a clear _wichew_, when two birds
are together. A loud cackle, like loud, ringing, derisive laughter,
_chuck-chuck_; _chuck, chuck-ah, chuck, chuck-ah, chuck, chuck, chuck,
chuck_; or _chuck, chuck, chuck, chuck, chuck, chuck, chuck_.”
_Field marks._--The pileated woodpecker has the appearance of a large,
black bird, nearly as large as a crow and somewhat like it in flight,
but the large, white patches in the wings are distinctive, as well as
the flaming red crest. As it bounds through the woods in long swinging
flights from tree to tree, it is unmistakable. While hammering on a
tree trunk, its long neck and heavy head and beak are conspicuous and
distinctive.
_Winter._--Throughout most of its range the southern pileated
woodpecker is a permanent resident; in fact, there is very little
southward movement for the species, even in the more northern portions
of its range, except for winter wanderings in search of a suitable food
supply.
Vernon Sharpe, Jr. (1932), writing from Tennessee, says: “The winter
roosting place of this bird is rather interesting. A live hollow tree
is selected, and there two or more holes are dug, presumably with
the thought of using one for escape should any attack by some night
marauder take place. These roosting places are used year after year;
in fact, there is one site in the Overton Hills, south of Nashville,
that has been used for so many seasons it has become essential for the
woodpecker to cut away a portion of the tree that is trying to heal
over the cavity.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--North America; chiefly timbered regions east of the Great
Plains and from southern Mackenzie to western Montana and California.
The range of the pileated woodpecker extends =north= to northern
British Columbia (Buckley Lake and Thutade Lake); southern Mackenzie
(Fort Liard and Fort Smith); northern Saskatchewan (Poplar Point);
northeastern Ontario (Moose Factory); and southeastern Quebec (Godbout
and Mont Louis Lake). =East= through the wooded areas along the
Atlantic coast to southeastern Florida (Everglades, Royal Palm Hammock,
and Key West). =South= along the Gulf coasts of Florida, Mississippi,
and Louisiana, to southeastern Texas (San Point). The species is not
known through the southern Rocky Mountain and Great Basin regions,
appearing next in central California (Yosemite Valley and Napa County).
From the latter point it occurs north along the Pacific coast through
Oregon and Washington, to northwestern British Columbia (Hazelton and
Buckley Lake).
The range above outlined is for the entire species, which has, however,
been separated into four subspecies. The southern pileated woodpecker
(_C. p. pileatus_) is found in the Eastern United States from central
Texas and northern Florida north to Oklahoma, southern Illinois,
southern Indiana, southern Pennsylvania, and Maryland; the northern
pileated woodpecker (_C. p. abieticola_), occupies the balance of the
range in Eastern North America, except for the peninsula of Florida
to which the Florida pileated woodpecker (_C. p. floridanus_) is
restricted. The western pileated woodpecker (_C. p. picinus_) is found
chiefly in the humid areas of the Northwest coast district but also
south to central California and east to western Montana and Idaho.
_Casual records._--Two specimens have been taken in North Dakota,
one at Grafton on May 30, 1905, and the other at Fargo on October
16, 1915. It may occur rarely in Wyoming, although no specimen is at
present known. The Colorado and New Mexico records are not considered
satisfactory.
_Egg dates._--Alberta: 18 records, May 10 to June 22; 9 records,
May 15 to 30, indicating the height of the season.
Arkansas: 18 records, April 5 to May 15; 9 records, April 15 to 30.
Florida: 32 records, March 22 to May 25; 16 records, April 10 to 23.
New Hampshire: 6 records, May 6 to 25.
Pennsylvania: 7 records, April 23 to May 21.
Texas: 8 records, March 4 to May 16.
CEOPHLOEUS PILEATUS ABIETICOLA Bangs
NORTHERN PILEATED WOODPECKER
PLATES 20-24
HABITS
CONTRIBUTED BY BAYARD HENDERSON CHRISTY
This, the largest race of _Ceophloeus pileatus_, inhabits the forests
of the Transition and Canadian Zones, from the Atlantic coast to the
Rocky Mountains. In the South it is replaced by _C. p. pileatus_ and
in the West by _C. p. picinus_. The southern limit of its range lies
across southern Pennsylvania, West Virginia, central Ohio, southern
Indiana, southern Illinois, and Missouri. The most northerly record
of its occurrence is that of John Reid, noted by Bendire (1895). He
took a specimen on Big Island, in Great Slave Lake (lat. 61° N.).
Bangs (1898), who described the northern form and named it _C. p.
abieticola_, believed that in the mountains of Virginia and West
Virginia lay the line of transition from the southern to the northern
form; but later investigators have determined that the line lies, as
first noted above, somewhat northward of Bangs’ location.
The characteristics that distinguish the northern from the southern
form are greater size, longer bill, slatiness rather than sootiness of
the black of the plumage, and greater extent of the white areas.
Catesby (1731) depicted the bird (in its southern form) and called it
“the large red-crested woodpecker”; and Linnaeus (1758), citing Catesby
as his source, named it, for his purposes, _pileatus_ (= crested).
Following Linnaeus, the English naturalist Latham (1783) began in 1781
to publish his General Synopsis; and he, lacking knowledge of the bird
in its haunts, and finding Catesby’s circumlocution unwieldy, took from
Linnaeus’s Latin, as a name for common usage, “pileated woodpecker.”
The indications are that Latham coined the name; certainly he gave it
currency.
The bird already possessed a common name; and it is a pity that Latham
did not know it. In its native land it was, and still is, commonly
called, the log-cock. That is a good name--apt, picturesque, and widely
used. Wilson (1811) knew it well enough, and so did Audubon (1842); and
they would have done well, had they given it place as the established
vernacular name. But Wilson, under Bartram’s tutelage, followed Latham,
and Audubon followed Wilson. They, in their prestige, have settled the
matter. Nuttall (1832) tried to make a stand for log-cock, and others
since have tried, but in vain. And now upon this splendid creature a
dull piece of pedantry remains hopelessly fixed.
Another homespun name in extensive use is _Cock-of-the-woods_; yet
another is _Wood-cock_. This last is suitable enough, but it leads
obviously to confusion. Accordingly, within the range of the true
woodcock (_Philohela minor_), the woodpecker is commonly distinguished
as the “black woodcock.” Other appellatives that have been picked
up here and there and gathered in the books are “black woodpecker,”
“English woodpecker,” “black log,” “king-of-the-woods,” “stump
breaker”; and, because of its cackling cry, “wood-hen,” “Indian-hen,”
“laughing woodpecker,” “johnny-cock,” “wood-chuck,” and “cluck-cock.”
(The last, given by Scoville, 1920, as current in Juniata County, Pa.,
is, perhaps, an assimilation from the Pennsylvania Dutch.)
The subspecific name _abieticola_ (= dweller amid fir trees) is in
some degree misleading, for, in the Northeastern States at least, the
bird is commonly found in forests of mingled conifers and hardwoods;
it shows no partiality to firs, nor even to conifers generally; and
it cuts its nesting cavities, in the large majority of cases, in the
dead and standing trunks of deciduous trees. In the Rocky Mountains,
however, according to the Weydemeyers (1928), it prefers growths of
larch, yellow pine, and Douglas fir.
It is a denizen of extensive forests. It will adapt itself to second
growth--particularly where the young trees have sprung up about some
remnant of the old; but in any case it requires wide areas. As forests
dwindle to woodlots, along with the wild turkey, the barred owl, and
the raven, it disappears. From regions once forested but now devoted
to agriculture it is gone; in the mountains, however, in the marginal
areas, where wooded ridges extend out to the plains, and in forested
swamp lands, it continues. In such territories, indeed, its numbers
during the past 50 years have increased, and it has reappeared in
localities once deserted. Reports of such recrudescence are many, and
they come from widely scattered places, particularly in the States to
eastward of the Mississippi River.
Roger T. Peterson (MS.) says: “The pileated woodpecker has greatly
increased in the Northeast during the past few years. At one time it
was nearly gone from many parts of New York State and southern New
England, where it had occurred in fair numbers. The bird disappeared
from northern New Jersey about 1880, and from southern New Jersey in
1908. About 1920 W. DeWitt Miller found it again at two or three points
in northern New Jersey; and now it is fairly common in many places in
the northern part of the State, and as far east as in Bergen County,
within 15 miles of New York City. Within the past 5 years it has
reappeared in the lower Hudson Valley. It is especially common in some
portions of southwestern New York State. In one recent year I found
four nests near the city of Jamestown, N. Y. Similar increases have
been noted by bird students in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Ohio, and
Missouri”--and, he might have added, in Pennsylvania.
Ludlow Griscom (1929) wrote: “I incline to the view that the increase
in this Woodpecker is not so much due to conservation, as to its
adaptation to less primeval conditions. The generation that regarded
this species as a game-bird died off in this Region [the Northeastern
States] before it returned.”
Granted that the species shows itself to be adaptable, it still is
pertinent to note other ameliorations of circumstance. When lumbering
operations have been carried through to completion, when the camps are
gone from the woods, and when new growth has begun to spring up, it is
generally true that animal life in its larger forms tends to reappear
and to increase. Again, the development of more fertile lands in the
West has had effect in the abandonment of poorer lands in the East.
Extensive areas, in New England particularly, that a hundred years ago
were farmed, have now long since returned to wilderness. The forests of
second growth, as they approach maturity, may be supposed increasingly
to afford the food resources proper to this denizen of the great
forests. And, finally, protective laws have been more intelligently
framed, more widely adopted, and more generally respected.
The birds range over plain and mountain side. They prefer “the edges
of the balsam and cedar swamps, when surrounded with forests of
hardwood and hemlocks” (Blackwelder, 1909, Iron County, Mich.). Their
nesting places are ordinarily in lowlands, and near water. In the
region where I have known them best--the Huron Mountains, in Marquette
County, Mich.--I have found the birds to occur in pairs or families at
intervals of two or three miles along the course of a river that flows
through primeval forest land. This I take to be a fair indication of
the saturation point in pileated woodpecker population.
_Migration._--Generally speaking, the species is resident wherever
found. Some of the earlier naturalists supposed that it retired in
winter from the more northerly portions of its range; but none affords
any evidence. George Miksch Sutton (1930), when ornithologist for the
Game Commission of Pennsylvania, having reviewed the reports of the
wardens, said that they tended to indicate a gradual movement of the
birds in winter around the eastern end of Lake Erie and southward into
Pennsylvania. Such may be the case. On the other hand, it is true that,
after the nesting season has passed, and throughout fall and winter,
the birds wander and appear in areas where at other seasons they are
unknown; and it may be that Dr. Sutton’s wardens were basing their
reports upon such seasonal reappearances. More precise observations
must be made before it can be asserted with confidence that there is
migration in any sense other than that here recognized.
_Courtship._--It is usual to find the birds associated in pairs, even
after the nesting season has passed; and from this the inference has
been drawn (Morrell, 1901; Knight, 1908) that they continue, year
after year, constantly mated. Lewis O. Shelley, writing from East
Westmoreland, N. H., says (MS.): “It is my belief that the pileated
mates for life, for, seen almost daily, one pair is known to have
shown no active spring display for the past few years, nor was a third
bird (male) seen near.” This inference may be sound; nevertheless, an
element of conjecture here should not be overlooked, and further data
should be sought.
In some cases, certainly, the birds engage in mating antics, and Edmund
W. Arthur (1934) relates an example:
On April 14, 1933, while driving with a companion * * *
from Slippery Rock [Pennsylvania] * * * to Grove City, I
observed a Pileated Woodpecker * * * flying across the
highway a short distance south of Barmore Run. Stopping our
car, we got out and followed the bird with our eyes, until
it alighted on a tall tree a thousand feet away in the
swampy woodland. Presently another, and then a third, were
seen. They were quite restless, though apparently fearless,
as evidenced by their flying about, alighting in plain view
of us upon trees not fifty yards distant. After several
minutes one of them--a female we thought--alighted upon a
grassy knoll in a pasture to the left of the road, where
it walked about for a brief interval, until a second came
to the knoll and approached within three or four feet of
the first. Then began a curious movement, much resembling
the dance of Flickers, wherein with bowing and scraping one
bird, stepping sideways, made a circle about the other, who
slowly turned, facing the performer. When the dance ceased
there was a sudden jerky movement on the part of each,
and thereupon they flew away. There are two houses at the
intersection, and the people living in one of them told us
that a pair of these birds had nested the year before in a
maple just in the rear of their house.
Francis H. Allen has written a description of a formal dance at a
season remote from mating time; and, since the description has not
been published, and since it is pertinent to the question of permanence
of mating, it is here given at length:
“On the side of Mount Monadnock, N. H., October 13, 1908, I watched two
birds executing a sort of dance. When first seen they were clinging
to the hole of a spruce, near the ground. They hopped up and down the
trunk, frequently pecking at each other’s bills simultaneously, now on
one side of the tree, now on the other. When I got too near they flew a
short distance to another tree, and I followed them about from tree to
tree for about half an hour, often within 50 or 60 feet of them. They
always lit at the base of the tree and worked up a few feet, seldom
going more than 5 feet up, I think. They hopped backward and downward a
great deal, and often they lifted and partly spread their wings. Their
motions were limber and undulating, marked by a certain awkward grace,
without the stiffness of the smaller woodpeckers. The crests were
elevated occasionally. I noticed no difference in the markings, but I
was then unacquainted with the sexual differences of the species, and I
cannot say whether or not they were male and female. They occasionally
uttered a faint _wahh, wahk, wahk_, in a soft, conversational tone; but
it was for the most part a silent performance.”
The bird drums a roll, as do other woodpeckers. The only other drumming
of comparable intensity is that of the yellow-bellied sapsucker, but
commonly the pileated woodpecker’s performance is so heavy as to be
unmistakable. Often the drumming consists not of a roll but of slow
heavy beats. Dr. Sutton (1930) writes: “On May 19, 1925, * * * I
heard a male drumming for over an hour * * * During the whole period
there was a noticeable similarity of the performances * * * At least
fifty or sixty times there was an introductory, rapidly given _roll_;
then a pause, followed by three distinct blows, * * * giving much the
impression of a queer rhythm beat upon an aboriginal drum.” With this
the description of the drumming of the sapsucker given by Dr. Harry C.
Oberholser (1896b) may be compared.
Ernest Waters Vickers (1915) gives the following description of “the
masterly roll of the great log-cock”:
“This roll is composed of twelve strokes or blows, forming
an ascending and descending climax; increasing in rapidity
and volume to the middle and dying in force and rapidity
just as it began. While the bird may not give the complete
roll, may break off anywhere, it is always, so far as I
have heard, a part of the above * * * A mellow yet powerful
cellular jar to which the whole wooded heart of the forest
makes echoing response--a solemn and ancient sound. * * *
“Thus * * * I heard one drumming far away on a sounding
board of peculiar musical resonance and power to carry * * *
I had often heard this roll a full mile and a half away;
once or twice I had even heard it in the house with doors
and windows closed! * * * This old sounding-board was the
hollow limb or arm of a big tulip tree or “white wood”
flung out at right angle from the trunk 60 or 70 feet from
the ground, a mere shell as appeared * * * sound and hard
and barkless. The spot where he hammered was white where
the weathered gray fibers had been beaten off by constant
use.
“That April day * * * he sat upright upon the limb grasping
it firmly, * * * poising himself, making a motion or two
as a neat penman about to begin writing starts with a
preliminary flourish, struck the limb somewhat lightly
at first and deliberately, accelerating both speed and
power, diminishing to stop as he started. He then paused
to listen to the effect, attend to the echoes, or wait for
the response of his mate perhaps, which occasionally rolled
back from somewhere away east in the woods. He would hop
about a trifle, cock his head examining his neighborhood a
little, dress his feathers or search for parasites;--but
not for long did he forget what he was there for; then
gather himself up for another reverberation. With such
energy did he hammer that his whole body shook and his
wings quivered. He fairly hurled himself wildly at it.
The great loose hair-like scarlet crest flowed in the sun
and his scarlet moustache added to his noble and savage
appearance.”
_Nesting._--The birds are very tenacious of their nesting places,
returning year after year to the same location and even to the same
tree trunk. It is usual to find several nesting holes (and, perhaps,
winter quarters too) within an area, say, 100 yards square. In such
preference, held to even when the forest has been partially cut down,
the reason probably lies why nests sometimes are found in open places.
Commonly, however, the nesting stub stands in heavy forest and within
the shadow of the leafy canopy. There are a few records of nests on
mountain sides and ridges, but, typically, the nesting tree stands in
valley or bottomland and near the margin of lake or stream or in a
swamp. The boles of trees riddled and furrowed in the pursuit of food
are in no case used for nesting. An ant-infested trunk may be supposed
to be definitely not suitable for such use.
Data are at hand upon 33 nests, from points widely scattered throughout
the range. Of these, one cavity was sunk in a large dead hemlock, one
in a dead pitch pine, one in a telegraph pole (an oddity--Roberts,
1932), and 30 in the boles of deciduous trees. Three are reported as
dug in living trees; four are more particularly reported as in the
dead tops of living trees; the remaining 20-odd were, certainly most
of them, and (for all that appears) all of them, in dead stubs. Of the
30, eight were in beech trees; six in poplar, and a seventh in tulip
poplar. Three were in birches, three in oaks, three in hickories. Two
were in sugar maples and one in a red maple. One was in an ash, one
in an elm, and one in a basswood. One was as low as 15 feet from the
ground; three as high as 70 feet. The average height was about 45 feet.
The trunk at the point where the hole is drilled will ordinarily be
from 15 to 20 inches in diameter. The hole commonly, though not
invariably, faces the east or the south. Such is the preferred
position, but, as may be supposed, the slope of the surface of the tree
trunk and the quality of the wood are factors in the choice; and holes
sometimes are found drilled in west and north faces of the trunks.
The hole may be drilled through bark; more frequently it is through
the bleached and bonelike surface of a stub from which the bark has
long been stripped away. Though sometimes quite circular, the hole
tends to be of triangular outline, peaked above and leveled below. The
lower margin of the hole is outwardly and downwardly beveled and very
nicely finished. The orifice varies from 3¼ to 4½ inches in diameter,
and typically may be 3¼ inches in width and 3½ in vertical extent. The
only other notable item in external appearance is that, if the tree
be bare of bark and smooth surfaced (as is usual), an area of surface
a few inches below the hole will be seen to have become polished by
the rubbing of the tail feathers of the parent birds. And this spot,
perhaps in consequence of difference in the absorption of moisture and
fungus growth, may persist and be still plainly discernible in later
years.
A nesting tree that may be regarded as typical stood in a dense forest,
entirely of hardwood--maples, elms, and yellow birches--on the plain of
a high and ancient beach of Lake Superior, cut through by a mountain
stream, and about a hundred yards from the water. It was the smooth
and barkless stub of a dead elm, about 45 feet high and having a
girth, breast-high, of 76 inches. The hole was smooth and white, and
the wood was still firm. The stub stood well shaded beneath the living
trees. A few flecks of morning sunlight fell upon its eastern face;
but throughout the greater part of the day it remained in shadow. It
had been the woodpeckers’ nesting place certainly for four years. The
highest hole seemed to be the oldest--in the south face and near the
top. The uppermost 6 feet of the stub had since become weathered and
checked and manifestly unsuitable. Next, on the north face, there was
an old and black-looking hole about 36 feet up. The third and lowest
hole was in the east face and about 25 feet up; and, lastly, there was
the hole of the year, 34 feet up and also in the east face.
The chamber within is capacious and is ordinarily of conical form,
tapering slightly from a low domed roof downward to a bowllike bottom.
There may be a slight bulging of the walls below a narrowed median
portion. The depth may vary from 10 to 24 inches (extreme figures
of 6 and 26 have been recorded). The average of 15 measurements is
19 inches. The entrance hole leads to the upper widest portion, and
there the chamber is 7 or 8 inches across. The distance from the outer
surface of the hole of the tree to the remote wall of the chamber is
about 11 inches. The entrance passageway about 2 inches inward is
ridged across, and from this median ridge the floor of the passageway
slopes downward, both inwardly and outwardly, and this outward slope
forms the bevel already mentioned. The bowl at the bottom is 6 or 6½
inches across. In a specimen before me as I write, the wall of the
chamber below the entrance hole is 4 inches thick. The ridge across the
floor of the entrance passageway is rounded. Its crest is 2¼ inches
inward from the outer surface of the tree trunk, and the vertical
depth of the outward bevel is 2 inches. All the surfaces of the cavity
are neatly and uniformly chiseled. Along the sides of the entrance
passageway extend in parallel curves the tool marks of the bird’s beak.
No nesting materials are brought in. A feather or two will be the only
trace of occupancy remaining after the young are flown. In some though
not in all cases it is possible for a man to thrust in his arm and
reach the bottom of the chamber.
As a general rule, certainly, a new cavity is drilled for every
brood. Such exceptions as have been recorded have explanation in
human interference. Samuel Scoville, Jr. (1920), quotes Richard C.
Harlow to the effect that but once in his experience had a second
use of a nesting cavity occurred. Afterward Mr. Harlow said to me in
conversation that even in that instance the cavity had been deepened
before it was used for a second time. The only other instance that
has come to my attention is one recorded by Morrell (1901) in which a
single cavity was used three times--in 1895, in 1897, and in 1898. In
preparation for the third nesting the cavity had been deepened by three
inches. This nesting was in “a small patch of good sized trees * * *
separated [from] the main growth by cutting,” and it may be supposed
that the woodpeckers had been unduly limited in the choice of nesting
sites. In both cases the birds were subject to the disturbance of
persistent egg-collecting. It stands to reason that, in avoidance of
parasites, the practice should have evolved of drilling a fresh cavity
for each brood.
Mr. Harlow (1914) found that in one instance the drilling of the
nesting cavity was in progress in March and was continued “all during
March and April.” The female worked alone, and the male continued near
by. This nest, an unusually early one, contained, on April 30, three
eggs. In the Northern States the eggs commonly are laid early in May.
Incubation continues, according to Burns (1915), for 18 days. The young
leave the nest about the middle of June.
The range of date in nesting is illustrated by two records that come
from Centre County, Pa. (Scoville, 1920; Burleigh, 1931). One is
of a set of eggs that hatched on May 11. These eggs must have been
laid before April 23. The other record is of a set collected May 11
and found to be practically fresh. The interval at which these two
cases stand apart is about 25 days. Scoville (1920) quotes Harlow, a
collector whose experience was chiefly in Centre County, to the effect
that “May 10 is the standard date for a full clutch of eggs.”
Records of nests are at hand from Maine, New Hampshire, New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin. The total body of data, however, is
small; and it is not possible to discover what the difference may be in
mean nesting date from south to north within the region covered. There
is a record from Maine, for instance (Morrell, 1901), of a set of eggs
found to be heavily incubated as early as May 13.
_Eggs._--The eggs are white, with a gleaming smoothness and
translucence of shell. They rest at the bottom of the cavity, on the
bare bed of finely splintered wood. Three eggs often complete the set,
but more commonly four. Of 17 recorded sets, 4 are sets of three,
and 13 are sets of four. Some of the earlier writers (Wilson, for
instance, 1811) said the number of eggs might be five or even six; but
no specific record of so large a number has been found. The eggs are of
ovate outline.
The measurements of 51 eggs average 33.16 by 25.21 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =38.2= by =27.1=, =30.2= by
25.2, and 33.05 by =23.75= millimeters.
There are cases on record in which a pair of these birds, robbed
of their eggs, have laid again (and in the same cavity); with this
qualification, there is but a single brood in a season.
_Young._--In a particular instance; which I take to be typical, of a
nesting (in northern Fulton County, Pa.) I found the male to be no less
attentive than the female to the duties of incubation and nurture. In
one respect, indeed, the male seemed to be the more attentive, for
on both of the two occasions when I had opportunity to observe--once
shortly before, the other shortly after the hatching of the eggs--it
was the male bird who at sunset retired within the hole and who at
sunrise the following morning appeared from within. And I mention this
the more confidently since I find chance confirmation in the narrative
of another observer, Morrell (1901), and since like observations have
been made upon other species of woodpeckers--upon the flicker, for
instance, and upon the ivory-billed woodpecker (Allen, 1937).
When incubation was in progress I found the parent birds to be
relieving one another at intervals of about two hours; and a week
later, when the young were still small, they were coming in with food
and replacing one another at intervals of approximately one hour. It
may have been accidental, and yet it seemed to me noteworthy, that the
routine of hourly visits was broken when the female returned after an
absence of 10 minutes to afford the male freedom for 40 minutes before
he returned to retire within the cavity for the night.
At the time when hatching was near, and afterward when the young were
newly hatched, one or the other of the parent birds was constantly
present in the nesting chamber and, the weather being warm, was much
of the time perched immediately within the hole. And I then realized
the value of the larger dimensions of the upper portion of the chamber.
The waiting bird was constantly moving about, thrusting its head out
and withdrawing it again, turning about within the chamber so that it
had free view outward, preening, reaching upward with its foot and
scratching its head. And all this movement was free because the space
was wide.
Each of the parents seemed to have its own path of approach to the
nest. One of them came almost invariably to a particular position on
the trunk, about 6 feet below and to the right, and hopped up thence to
the entrance, but the other bird followed a different course.
I was impressed, too, with the comparative silence of the birds
at their nesting tree. Such small converse as took place there (a
flicker-like _wuck-a-wuck_--and it occurred irregularly) was so soft as
to be scarcely audible to human ears at a distance of fifty yards.
The feeding of the young is by regurgitation; and, while the young are
still small and remain at the bottom of the nesting cavity, the parents
may be seen to follow an interesting routine. The incoming bird hops
to the hole, perches on the ridge of the entrance passageway, and then
swings inward and downward, at the same time elevating the posterior
part of its body until the tail presses upon the outer upper rim of the
hole. In this position, evidently, the parent’s bill meets those of the
nestlings. This attitude is maintained often for as much as a minute,
and while it is maintained the body of the bird may be seen to shake
convulsively--plainly indicating that regurgitation is in progress.
When the young are small, the parent, after feeding, does not
immediately leave the nest but awaits the incoming of its mate. It
then glides away on wide-spread wings; and, while I suspected that the
excrement of the young is carried in the bill and dropped, I was unable
to detect this. Quite possibly, in this early stage at least, the
excrement is swallowed by the parent.
Charles W. Townsend (1925) gave account of a family observed in
Worcester County, Mass., when the young were well developed and nearly
ready to leave the nest:
On June 11, 1924, I spent five hours within twenty-five
feet of the base of the stub, unconcealed, and on June 14,
six hours, but after the first hour I took up a position
about fifty yards away, partially concealed by bushes.
My observations may be summarized as follows: the young
were fed eleven times at the first visit, four times at the
second when the adults acted in a very shy manner. As a
rule the female fed the young, but on three occasions the
male was identified at the hole. * * *
As a rule the adult appeared suddenly at the hole, flying
noiselessly through the forest. Occasionally it alighted
below the hole and rapidly ascended by hops, or it alighted
on some neighboring tree, and often calling like a Flicker,
glided on motionless outstretched wings in a graceful curve
to its young. The flight away from the hole was always
direct after a preliminary downward glide and lacked the
usual woodpecker undulations. * * *
The three young crowded to the hole as soon as a parent
appeared anywhere in the neighborhood and eagerly stretched
forth their heads and necks. * * * They were always hungry
and screamed with rasping voices for food, once or twice
they uttered low whinnies. The adult inserted its bill
to its full length into the throats of the young and
vigorously regurgitated and pumped in the nourishment. * * *
After feeding the young, the female on several occasions,
the male on one, entered the nest, to emerge after a minute
or two and glide away. Once I detected a white piece in the
bill, once, something dark, but the other times nothing at
all.
Herbert L. Stoddard (1917) has noted the “hissing” noise of the young
within the nesting cavity when the trunk is jarred, “similar to young
flickers, but a great deal louder.”
When the young have flown from the nest, the cavity is not utterly
abandoned. I once saw one of the parent birds reenter at midday a
cavity from which the young had recently flown and remain within for
40 minutes. Why, I know not. The mate accompanied this returning bird
and waited near by. Maurice Brooks writes (MS.): “Nest cavities are
sometimes used as roosting places after the nesting season. On the
evening of August 2, 1937, at Jacksons Mill [Lewis County, W. Va.], I
saw six birds (two adults and four young) enter a cavity that had held
a nest earlier in the season. This was probably the brood of the year,
with the parents.”
_Food._--The pileated woodpecker lives upon insects that infest
standing and fallen timber and supplements this diet with wild berries
and acorns.
Ants are the chief item of food. It is in pursuit of ants that the
woodpecker cuts its great furrows in the boles of standing trees,
living and dead. On examination the heart wood exposed by the
woodpecker’s operations will be found to have been penetrated by the
labyrinthine passageways of the great carpenter ants, _Camponotus
herculeanus_ (Linnaeus).
All the observations of others that have come to my attention
upon the woodpecker when actually engaged in cutting these great
trunk-penetrating chasms have been made in winter and early in spring,
and with them my own are in agreement. It is a natural surmise that
only in winter is such heavy work done, since in summer proper food is
more easily available. Another surmise along the same lines is that
the disappearance of the bird from particular areas, followed after
an interval of years by reappearance, may perhaps have occurred in
correspondence with precisely such a fluctuation in its essential,
wintertime food supply: it must find, when the ground is snow-covered,
ant-infested trunks of large trees.
In September I once made leisurely observation upon a bird at work upon
a dead but standing hemlock tree. With swinging, obliquely directed
blows it was splitting off the outer leaves of the scalelike bark and
pausing intermittently with head turned to the trunk, licking up, as
I supposed, the insect life thus exposed. Again, in September, I came
upon a pair feeding together upon the ground. They had been tearing up
a carpet of moss that spread over damp surfaces both of wood and of
rock, and I thought that their prey must be insect life that they were
finding in the moss itself.
And yet again, on September 21, I watched for many minutes an adult
female feeding on a charred and decayed stump that remained in a young
forest of jack pines. She was perched about a foot from the ground. Her
method was by deliberate and swinging blows to break away platelike
fragments of still firm wood, and then to intrude her bill and search
with her tongue (as was evident) the opened cavity. This licking was
always, or nearly always, upward, and often the head was turned, crown
inward, throat outward. A jay might call or some other forest sound
be heard, and the bird would pause, listen for an instant, and then
resume her work. A day or two later I visited the stump and with my
knife made an incision in it, and I found it to be the home of a colony
of ants--not of the large _Camponotus_ but of a smaller, wine-black
species about a quarter of an inch long. The body of the stump was
honeycombed with their galleries.
Of the major wintertime operations Vickers (1910) has written:
Like the flicker, the [pileated woodpecker] is a great
lover of ants, which accordingly occupy a large place in
his bill-of-fare. So, to dine on the big black timber ants,
which are his special delight, he drives holes to the very
heart of growing forest trees, tapping the central chamber
of the colony, where, in winter, he finds the dormant
swarm unable to move and feasts upon them at leisure....
And the Log-cock makes no mistakes, though man might find
no outward sign of an ant-tree. Doubtless that strong
formic smell, coupled with his experience in sounding tree
trunks,--as a man tells a ripe watermelon by the _plunk_ of
it,--enables him not only to find the tree, but, what is
more remarkable, to drive his hole with such precision that
he taps the heart of the community.
O. M. Bryens (1926) wrote from St. Joseph County, Mich.:
On February 16, 1925, I was able to approach within twelve
feet of one of these Woodpeckers busily engaged in digging
in a maple stub, two feet in diameter and about twelve feet
high. He was after insects whose borings I found later upon
examining the wood. I watched him for about an hour.
He seldom gave more than three or four pecks at a time, and
would then swing his head round to one side or the other,
sometimes raising his scarlet crest. He seldom threw back
his head without tossing a chip back of him, and when I
examined his work after he had left, later in the day, I
found some chips near the stub, which were three inches
long and one inch wide. Others half this size had been
thrown out on the snow a distance of four feet. The hole
was on the west side and measured six inches across and ten
inches long, and extended to a depth of six inches toward
the heart of the stub. There was another hole six inches
square on the south side. The bird seemed to chisel out a
section three inches wide across the hole and then move
down and cut out another section. The two holes were dug in
about two hours.
Of summertime feeding Ora W. Knight (1908) says: “Except the Flicker
this is the only species of Woodpecker I have observed feeding on the
ground, but this species likes to tear open the ant hills found in open
places in the woods and feed on the ants and their larvæ.” He also says
that in the fall these birds eat “dogwood berries, choke and black
cherries and other wild fruits and berries, also beechnuts and acorns
for which it has a decided fondness.”
Dr. Sutton (1930) says:
The food of this species in Pennsylvania, according to
official examination of four stomachs, is largely of
ants. The stomach and crop of a male specimen weighing
nine ounces, collected at Northumberland, Northumberland
County, on November 10, 1928, contained 469 carpenter
ants (_Camponotus herculaneus_), most of them so recently
swallowed as to permit of counting them easily. The stomach
of a female taken at Aitch, Huntingdon County, on November
30, 1928, contained the remains of at least 153 carpenter
ants, one small carabid beetle, the legs of a small bug
(apparently a squash-bug), and 17 wild grapes, swallowed
whole.
F. E. L. Beal (1911) gave the results of examination of the contents of
80 stomachs collected far and wide throughout the range of the species.
Animal food amounted to 72.88 percent; vegetable, 27.12 percent.
Beetles made up 22.01 percent of the total, and ants 39.91 percent.
As many as 2,600 ants were counted in a single stomach. The ants were
“mostly of the larger species that live in decaying timber.” Ants and
beetles together made up the bulk of the animal food (61.92 percent).
The Biological Survey (A. L. Nelson) has kindly made reply to my
inquiry concerning stomach examinations of the subspecies _abieticola_
alone. Data were available from 23 specimens, three collected in
January, two in June, two in July, six in October, eight in November,
and two in December. They were collected, two in Canada, two in New
Brunswick, four in New York, four in Pennsylvania, six in Michigan, two
in Illinois, two in Minnesota, and one in Iowa.
Animal food amounted to 83 percent of the whole; vegetable, 17 percent,
with but a trace of gravel (one stomach only). The chief item was ants,
principally large black ants, such as _Camponotus_ and _Crematogaster_;
this item alone constituted 60 percent of the whole. The animal
food otherwise consisted of a variety of beetles and of a very few
(2 percent) caterpillars. The vegetable food was made up of wild
berries (_Ilex_, _Cassine_, _Vitis cordifolia_, _Nyssa sylvatica_, and
_Viburnum nudum_--in all, 11 percent of the whole), mast (2 percent),
and rotten wood (4 percent).
Catesby’s (1731) assertion, repeated time and again by the earlier
writers, that the pileated woodpecker sometimes pierces the husks of
maize standing in the field, was almost certainly based on faulty
observation. No modern confirmation is to be found of this or of any
other predatory practice. To the contrary, the finding after careful
investigation (Beal, 1911) is: “The food of the pileated woodpecker
does not interest the farmer or horticulturist, for it is obtained
entirely from the forest or the wild copses on its edge. This bird does
not visit either the orchard or the grain field, and all its work in
the forest helps to conserve the timber * * *. Its killing should be
strictly prohibited at all times.”
_Behavior._--The bird is but little known--surprisingly little,
considering how large a bird it is. It is a forest dweller; it lives
almost wholly within the canopy of the treetops; it is alert, furtive
(almost) as a bear, rather silent in midsummer (the season when city
dwellers ordinarily visit the northern forests); and it easily eludes
observation. It is not strange then that, its gigantic operations
remaining in evidence, the bird itself should in common thought have
become a somewhat fabulous creature. Thoreau (1906) never saw it; and
this is what he wrote of it in the Moosehead Lake journal under date
of July 25, 1857: “Our path up the bank here led by a large dead white
pine, in whose trunk near the ground were great square-cornered holes
made by the woodpeckers. * * * They were seven or eight inches long
by four wide and reached to the heart of the tree through an inch or
more of sound wood, and looked like great mortise-holes whose corners
had been somewhat worn and rounded by a loose tenon. The tree for some
distance was quite honeycombed by them. It suggested woodpeckers on a
larger scale than ours, as were the trees and the forest.”
To one who visits its haunts the presence of the pileated woodpecker
is immediately made manifest by operations such in magnitude as to
have astonished Thoreau. Dead Norway pines may be found, gaunt and
bare, their bark split away in plates and lying heaped at the base,
and living white pines--young trees, particularly--pierced to the core
with deep pyramidal incisions. The freshly cut wood gleams clean, and
turpentine in pellucid globules rims the cut and drips downward. Great
boles of maples and basswoods stand, furrowed from broken top to base,
the ground below littered with splinters, often half a hand’s breadth
in extent. The cuts are roughly rectangular in outline. They may be
4, 5, or even 6 or 8 inches wide and are sunk deep into the heart of
the tree. They may extend vertically for a few inches or for a foot or
more. They may be aligned in vertical rows, and may run together in
furrows of several feet in length. Crumbling stumps and moss-covered
logs lying on the forest floor will often be found ripped and torn by
the woodpecker’s beak.
It is, as has been said, a wary creature, and is not easily stalked.
On one occasion, when I had successfully approached a male that was
idling in the top of a gaunt chestnut near the nesting tree, I paused,
before shifting from an uncomfortable position, until the bird should
sidle around the limb. Even so, he was quicker than I; for, before I
had completed my movement, he was peering from the opposite side, and,
detecting me, was off. Again I came upon a bird--a male--suddenly, in
open forest. He did not immediately take wing, but, hitching downward
upon the tree trunk, he reached the ground, hopped off, and then
flitted away through the undergrowth, so that I scarcely saw him go.
And when I came upon him again he repeated the maneuver.
With all their alertness, the birds have a large store of curiosity.
Dr. Sutton (1930) has remarked that some individuals will “fly up
hastily and boldly upon hearing a commotion in the woods.” They may
sometimes be called up by imitating their cry, by clapping together
the cupped palms of one’s hands, or by pounding with a billet of wood
upon a tree trunk. I was following one morning a forest trail, where I
knew a pair of the woodpeckers to be in residence, and had a glimpse,
as I walked, of a large bird flying away. There stood against the sky,
in the direction of the retreat, the stub of a great treetop. Pausing
in my tracks, I waited until, after a few minutes, the suspected
woodpecker came leaping up the stub--to have a look at me, as I
supposed. In such case, the square shoulders of the bird, the slender
white-striped neck, and the hammer head with its pointed scarlet crest
are very conspicuous.
Maurice Brooks (1934) has remarked upon the playfulness of the birds
when at ease.
For all their alertness, it remains still to be said that on occasion,
when the birds are feeding, or when tending a nestful of young, it
is possible to approach quietly and to remain watching, while they,
unheeding, continue their activities.
It is common to find hairy and downy woodpeckers associated with the
pileated, both on nesting grounds and when feeding. There is here, I
believe, some measure of commensalism. I have in mind an observation
upon a downy on the same dead hemlock tree with a pileated woodpecker.
The larger bird was scaling off the bark and feeding; the smaller
seemed to be gleaning over areas the pileated had left.
Tucked in the niche formed by a great furrowlike incision in the bole
of a basswood tree, and about 10 feet from the ground, I once found a
nest of the olive-backed thrush.
When I cut down the stub of which I have spoken, and which contained
four old nesting cavities of the pileated woodpecker, I found the
lowest, 25 feet from the ground, to be occupied by a family of
white-footed mice (_Peromyscus maniculatus_), and I have no doubt
that these cavities, after their abandonment by the woodpeckers, are
commonly used by flying squirrels, by owls, and by tree-nesting ducks.
Prof. Brooks (1934) has most engagingly described the enticement of
pileated woodpeckers to come to feeding trays, and, incidentally, has
adduced evidence of their traits of caution and of curiosity. To this
he adds (MS.): “I have indicated, in an article in Bird-Lore, that
we have found Pileated Woodpeckers something of clowns. The gourd
experience described in the above-mentioned article seemed to be in a
spirit of play. The evident curiosity displayed by many birds observed
is noteworthy; under its urge they apparently lose much of their fear.
Around our blinds they have used a slow and cautious approach, but
once at the feeding shelves, they have not been particularly nervous
or excitable. At times I have found them surprisingly tame in the open
woods.”
The pileated woodpecker lives, as has been said, almost entirely within
the forest cover. Its flight is commonly a matter of gliding and of
slow-measured flapping through the trees. Its appearance then is
unmistakable--large and black, with a flashing pattern of white beneath
the wings, and a gleaming scarlet crest.
At times it rises above the treetops and moves over greater distances,
and then its manner of flight bears greater likeness to the typical
bounding or galloping flight of the generality of woodpeckers. Its
outline against the sky is not unlike a kingfisher’s. Dr. Sutton (1930)
describes an encounter in the Pennsylvania mountains with a bird that
“cackled for about fifteen minutes, pounding intermittently on a tree
trunk. It then rose in air, mounted to a plane above the tree-tops,
and flew in direct course down the valley, uttering a single, loud,
even-toned _puck_ about every two seconds, as far as we could hear it.
The bird was still flying high when it faded from view.”
Cornelius Weygandt (1912) described from Monroe County, Pa., the
appearance of “the Logcock that in late July and early August made the
sunset hour more memorable by its passing”:
It was on the evening of July 26 that we first saw him
* * * we noticed a large bird flying heron-like toward
us. He passed us and made his way onward toward a tall
broken-topped gum tree that stood out black against the
sunset. He “landed” on its side near the top, woodpecker
fashion, and bobbed downtrunk backwards for several yards.
The sky was mauve and gold and crimson, and the great
bird loomed blacker and bigger than he really was, limned
sharply against it. He had not dropped along like the
smaller woodpeckers, but had kept on more steadily, very
like a heron, with only slight risings and fallings. After
a rest on the gum tree of some three minutes he flung
himself into the air and dove down into the Buck Hill Gorge.
Vickers (1915) characterizes the bird’s flight as “powerful and
straight-forward, his head and neck carrying his powerful beak like
a spear * * * [the bird] large as a crow and with a certain short,
sturdy, kingfisherlike aspect.”
In general conclusion it may be said that the pileated woodpecker has
the habit and manner of a giant, forest-loving flicker.
_Voice._--Throughout the greater part of the year the pileated
woodpecker is a relatively silent bird, but during the nesting season
drumming and calling are frequent. The usual call is a cackle,
resembling that of the flicker, though louder and of more sonorous
quality. The “song” of the white-breasted nuthatch so far resembles it
in pitch and tempo that a nuthatch near at hand may, for an instant,
suggest the woodpecker far away. The _ka, ka, ka_ of the woodpecker’s
cackle is variable in quality, in speed of iteration, and in
continuity, and seems to be expressive, sometimes of alarm, sometimes
of companionship, sometimes of contentment. Aretas A. Saunders (1935)
has noted that often there is rise in pitch at the beginning of a
rendition and a slight fall at the end; and Samuel Scoville, Jr.
(1920), distinguishing this from the flicker’s similar call, has
remarked on “a queer little quirk at the end.” When a pair of birds
cackle in alternation, as commonly they do, a difference in pitch will
be noted; but whether that be a constant sexual difference, or a matter
of individuality merely, I cannot say.
In the nesting season the mated birds have another flickerlike
_wuck-a-wuck_ call that seems to be peculiarly associated with their
conjugal relationship. They use it in courtship and when they relieve
one another in attendance at the nest.
Dr. Sutton (1930) mentions yet another call and describes it as
“whining notes, suggesting the _mew_ of the yellow-bellied sapsucker.”
But it is more than that. It is a loud cry, that resembles the scream
of a hawk. It is commonly reiterated slowly in five or six repetitions.
Unless one were to follow the sound and discover its source, he would
hardly impute it to this bird. It too, I believe, is a call peculiar to
the nesting season.
When the bird is in flight a slowly uttered _puck, puck_ may sometimes
be heard, and sometimes what for lack of a better term may be called a
creaking of the moving wings.
Besides these there is a high-pitched scream--“a bugle call,” says
Florence Merriam Bailey (1902), with which the bird greets the rising
sun. Horace W. Wright (1912) has noted that in June the bird is first
heard within a few minutes after sunrise and has described the
awakening thus: “There are eight records, when a bird has been heard
loudly rapping in the distance with slow and measured blows or has
called lustily and long, sometimes answered by another.”
_Enemies._--The number of eggs laid suggests that there must be
some wastage: that somewhere in the round of life the bird must be
peculiarly exposed to destruction; and to this point Dr. Sutton (1930)
speaks:
The Duck Hawk (_Rhynchodon peregrinus anatum_) appears to
be the chief, indeed perhaps the only, natural enemy of
this woodpecker in this State [Pennsylvania]. At Spruce
Creek, Huntingdon County, where these falcons have nested
for years, I found, on March 21, 1921, the head and plumage
of a male woodpecker which had not been dead long. Near
Palmerton, Carbon County, I saw a Duck Hawk pursue and with
ease strike down a pileated woodpecker that had started
to fly across the river. The hawk flew so fast that the
woodpecker seemed to have been unaware of the pursuit. A
cloud of feathers burst from the body of the victim as
it collapsed. The duck hawk apparently winters regularly
along some of our streams, and takes whatever comes along,
with a preference, perhaps, for the somewhat larger birds;
and to it the comparatively clumsy log cock falls easy
prey. So far as I know, neither the great horned owl nor
the Cooper’s hawk ever captures the bird, and our stomach
examinations of several hundred Goshawks revealed none
of its bones or plumage, though this savage predator no
doubt occasionally captures such birds as are to be found
throughout the winter.
R. B. Simpson (1910) wrote: “I once shot a Sharp-shinned Hawk that was
making a desperate attempt to catch a pileated * * *. A year or two ago
in summer along a trout stream in virgin forest back in the mountains
[of northern Pennsylvania], I came to a mossy spot where a pileated had
been wrecked and a close inspection showed the tracks of a huge wildcat
who had no doubt caught the big woodpecker on the ground or on a log.”
See also Bendire (1895).
In addition to man’s disturbance of habitat with which this paper has
had largely to do, the following matters are noteworthy:
Pennant (1785) wrote that the Indians made a practice of decking their
calumets with the crests of these birds. And see Bendire (1895).
Audubon (1842) said of the pileated woodpecker: “Its flesh is tough, of
a bluish tint, and smells so strongly of the worms and insects on which
it generally feeds, as to be extremely unpalatable.” Sutton (1930),
however, was able to show, both by the testimony of living witnesses
and by written record as well, that these birds, along with other
smaller birds, were once commonly exposed for sale as food in city
markets.
Major Bendire (1895) wrote:
I have occasionally seen bunches of these birds, numbering
from four to twelve, exposed for sale in the markets of
Washington, D. C. * * * I tried to eat one, when short of
meat, while traveling through the Blue Mountains of Oregon,
but I certainly can not recommend it. It feeds to a great
extent on the large black wood ants, which impart to it a
very peculiar, and to me an extremely unpleasant flavor,
a kind of sweet-sour taste, which any amount of seasoning
and cooking does not disguise, and I consider it as a very
unpalatable substitute for game of any kind.
_Winter._--As is true of other members of the family, the pileated
woodpecker may in fall be found digging for himself a cavity for winter
occupancy. Few birds other than the woodpeckers make what may be
called habitations, except as part of or incident to the activities of
reproduction. And in the case of the woodpeckers, while I know that in
particular instances these winter retreats are not so used, I am unable
to say that they never are subsequently used as nesting cavities.
Hoyes Lloyd (1932) wrote:
One of the most delightful bird adventures we have had at
Rockcliffe Park [near the City of Ottawa] was the visit
to us of a pileated woodpecker. It first came at 4:30 p. m.,
on October 12, 1928, and excavated a hole in a hollow
basswood for sleeping quarters * * *. The chips, from live
wood, were up to three inches by two inches in area, and
an eighth of an inch thick. Each chip had two or three
gouge-like beak marks across its surface. At 4:50 p. m.
on the next day the pileated came home, and although we
were all outdoors, it went directly to its own tree and
after a brief survey of affairs in the vicinity, retired.
The approach was silent except, possibly for a single
Flicker-like note in the distance. About 9 a. m., on
the 14th, our bird woke me up with a loud _kuk-kuk-kuk_
call and it looked very large as it climbed up the home
basswood. Promptly at quarter to five it came home,
undoubtedly after a day among the big hardwoods of the
neighborhood. We were all impressed by its great length of
neck, as it swung its head with a curious bobbing motion,
that was used, without doubt, to give a view on each side
of the home tree, before going into the hole for the night.
A pileated, thought to be the same bird, came back on March
22, 1929, possibly, or certainly on the 23rd, and slept in
its winter home.
Prof. Brooks writes (MS.): “At French Creek [Upshur County, W. Va.],
two birds used a nesting cavity as a roosting place during the
following winter.”
CEOPHLOEUS PILEATUS FLORIDANUS (Ridgway)
FLORIDA PILEATED WOODPECKER
HABITS
This is the race that is supposed to inhabit central and southern
Florida, as far north as Orange County, but there seems to be some
doubt as to the desirability of naming it. Ridgway (1914) describes it
as “similar to _P. p. pileatus_, but decidedly blacker (that is, the
general black color less slaty or sooty), and average size less, with
bill usually relatively shorter and broader.” But he admits his doubt,
in a footnote, saying:
I have found it very difficult to decide as to the
propriety of separating a form of this species from central
and southern Florida, but after having several times laid
out and carefully compared the entire series of specimens
from more southern localities, have come to the conclusion
that to do so will, apparently, best express the facts of
the case. Going by size alone, there is little difference
between specimens from southern and central Florida
and those from localities as far northward as Maryland
(lowlands), southern Illinois, and Missouri; in fact some
of these more northern specimens are quite as small as
Florida ones. But the series from central and southern
Florida are uniformly decidedly blacker than the rest. * * *
I have restricted the name _pileatus_ to an intermediate
form, characterized by the small size of _P. p. floridanus_
combined with an appreciably lighter (more slaty or sooty)
coloration, often approaching closely the lightness of hue
of _P. p. abieticola_.
Bangs (1898), in separating the northern race from the southern, says
that “southern South Carolina must be considered the type locality
of the species, and birds from this region are as extreme of the
southern race as those from Florida.” Furthermore, Arthur H. Howell
(1932) observes that “careful study of a large series from Florida
in comparison with a series of typical _pileatus_ from the Middle
States shows no constant difference in color, as claimed by Ridgway
for the subspecies ‘_floridanus_’; evidently specimens kept for some
years become more brownish (less sooty), which fact probably explains
Ridgway’s mistake, he having compared fresh Florida skins with older
skins from the Middle States.” Probably, also, if specimens from the
two regions in similar seasonal plumage were compared, there would
not be so much difference in coloration as Ridgway claims. Even if
Ridgway is correct in his diagnosis, it would seem unwise, in the
author’s opinion, to recognize the Florida race and thus establish an
intermediate race, where the gradation in both size and color warrants
the naming of only the two extremes.
Mr. Howell (1932) says of its haunts: “The pileated woodpecker in
Florida inhabits several different types of country--pine woods,
cypress swamps, hardwood swamps, and hammocks of cabbage palmetto and
other trees. The birds are perhaps most numerous in hammocks or swamps,
where there is an abundance of decaying trees.”
_Nesting._--Mr. Howell (1932) writes: “We found a number of pairs
breeding in cypress trees along the borders of Lake Istokpoga. The
nests are excavated either in living trees or in rotten stubs, from
12 to 75 feet from the ground. The trees commonly used for nesting
sites are cypress, pine, black gum, oak, and cabbage palmetto.” While
collecting in the Florida Keys in 1908, I found a pair of pileated
woodpeckers nesting on Murrays Key on April 3 and surprised one of the
birds working in its nesting hole; the excavation was about 12 feet
from the ground in the main trunk of a live black mangrove, which stood
in the inner fringe of mangroves around the borders of the island. I
climbed up to it and reached into the cavity but could not touch the
bottom of it; we were unable to visit the island again.
Major Bendire (1895) writes:
In southern Florida the mating season commences early in
March, and farther north correspondingly later. A suitable
tree having been selected, generally a dead one in large
and extensive woods, both birds work alternately on the
nesting site. This is usually excavated in the main trunk,
from 12 to 75 feet from the ground, and it takes from seven
to twelve days to complete it. The entrance measures from
3 to 3½ inches in diameter, and it often goes 5 inches
straight into the trunk before it is worked downward.
The cavity varies from 7 to 30 inches in depth, and is
gradually enlarged toward the bottom, where it is about 6
inches wide. A layer of chips is left at the bottom, on
which the eggs are deposited. Occasionally the entrance
hole, instead of being circular, is oval in shape, like
that of the Ivory-billed Woodpecker. The inside of the
cavity is quite smooth, the edges of the entrance are
nicely beveled, and, taken as a whole, it is quite an
artistic piece of work.
Dr. William L. Ralph told Bendire of a clever trick practiced by this
woodpecker; he found a nest “in the second week in April, about the
time nidification is at its height there. On rapping on the trunk
of the tree the bird, which was at home, stuck his head out of the
hole and dropped some chips, naturally causing the Doctor to believe
that the nesting site was still unfinished. The same performance was
repeated on several subsequent visits, and finally he concluded to
examine the nest anyhow, when he found nearly full-grown young. This
pair of birds must have had eggs at the time he first discovered the
nest, and the chips were simply thrown out as a ruse to deceive him.”
_Eggs._--This woodpecker lays, ordinarily, three or four eggs, rarely
five. These are indistinguishable from those of the species from other
southern States. The measurements of 22 eggs average 33.61 by 24.75
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =36.2= by 24.5,
35.70 by =26.19=, =31.5= by 24.0, and 34.2 by =22.8= millimeters.
_Food._--Mr. Howell (1932) states that “this large woodpecker
is a decidedly useful species. It never injures farm crops, but
feeds entirely in the forests, rendering good service there in the
destruction of wood-boring beetles. It eats, also, ants and wild fruits
and berries, including the fruit of the sour gum, tupelo gum, dogwood,
persimmon, frost grape, holly, poison ivy, sumac, and hackberry.” C.
J. Maynard (1896) says that they “are partial to the berries of the
palmetto, feeding, in Florida, upon little else when these are in
season.”
CEOPHLOEUS PILEATUS PICINUS (Bangs)
WESTERN PILEATED WOODPECKER
HABITS
In describing and naming this large, dark-colored race from the
Northwest coast region, Outram Bangs (1910) says that it is “as large
as, or even larger than, _P. pileatus abieticola_ (Bangs), but color
sooty black as in _P. pileatus pileatus_ (Linn.), the throat usually
much marked with sooty, and the sides and flanks but slightly marked
with grayish.”
Major Bendire (1895) writes of its haunts: “In the mountains of Oregon,
and presumably in other localities, the pileated woodpecker is most
frequently met with in the extensive burnt tracts, the so-called
‘deadenings,’ where forest fires have swept through miles of fine
timber and killed everything in its path. Such localities afford this
species an abundant food supply in the slowly decaying trees, and are
sure to atract them.”
Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale (1930) say that in the Lassen Peak region
in California “individuals of this woodpecker were found in or among
white firs, red firs, incense cedars, and yellow pines. Foraging birds
were often working on rotting stumps or logs close to the ground.
Almost invariably, even when in the tops of tall trees, the birds were
on dead or softened wood.”
_Nesting._--J. A. Munro (1923) says: “In southern British Columbia
nesting begins early in May. The nest is a chiselled hole in a
tree, fourteen to eighteen inches deep, cut occasionally in a green
cottonwood or poplar, more often in a dead pine or fir, and rarely in
any but the tallest trees and at a considerable distance above the
ground. On a cushion of fine chips three or four rose-white eggs are
laid.”
Carriger and Wells (1919) give an interesting account of the nesting
of the western pileated woodpecker in Placer County, Calif. The first
nest, containing young birds, was found early in June 1915. “The tree
stood about fifteen feet from the shore of the lake and in about five
feet of water. At its base the diameter was about eighteen inches, at
the nest entrance about ten. The tree was a live aspen. * * *
“The nest cavity was eighteen inches deep and six inches in diameter,
while the entrance was three inches in width. The entire excavation had
been made in live wood although there were plenty of large dead trees
near by.”
On May 16, 1916, they returned to this locality and found the birds
nesting in the same tree in a new hole “located three feet higher
up and on the opposite side of the tree.” The nest contained three
newly hatched young and one unhatched egg. Another visit was made the
following year, on May 5, but the woodpeckers “had abandoned the lake
and were making their home in a tree located in the channel of a small
stream which flowed into the lake and about three hundred yards from
their former site. The nest was found to be about half completed.
Visits were made to it on several occasions until May 26, but the birds
were not seen again.”
In 1918 they were more successful. There was practically no water in
the lake; and, on May 2, a search was “made through the aspen grove
which in former years had stood in its entirety in from two to seven
or eight feet of water, with the result that Mr. Flickinger discovered
a fresh hole forty feet up in a live aspen growing close to the lake
shore.” The nest had been completed, but no eggs had been laid.
Returning on May 12, they collected a set of four fresh eggs. They say:
The nest cavity was eighteen inches deep by about six in
diameter, while the entrance was nearly four inches across.
The nest was visited again on June 1 by both of us, and
to our surprise we found that the birds had used the same
cavity for a second set of eggs, four in number, which
were three-quarters incubated. The short time intervening
between the two sets shows that the birds did not lose any
time after their first set was lost to them. The locality
was again visited on June 30 and we found that the birds
had finished another cavity about two hundred feet from
the first tree and apparently the female was brooding a
third set. We did not disturb the bird and hope that she
successfully raised her brood.
Inasmuch as the lake contained no water at this point we
made a careful search of the upper end of the basin with
the result that twenty cavities in all were located in
various trees in what is usually the lake or very close to
its shores. Most of these cavities were in live aspens.
Apparently this pair of birds has nested here for a great
many years, for although we have carefully worked the
surrounding country for miles in every direction we have
never discovered other birds or their cavities.
_Eggs._--The western pileated woodpecker apparently lays either three
or four eggs; I have no record of five. The eggs are indistinguishable
from those of the northern pileated woodpecker. The measurements of two
eggs in the P. B. Philipp collection are 30.9 by 23 and 29.6 by 22.9
millimeters. W. L. Dawson (1923) gives the average measurement as 32.5
by 24.1 millimeters.
_Young._--Mrs. Irene G. Wheelock (1904) gives the following interesting
account of the young:
The parents are very devoted to their treasures whether
they be eggs or infant woodpeckers, and the male rarely
fails to stand on guard on a high perch ready to warn and
defend should possible danger threaten. The method of
feeding is like that of the flickers, by regurgitation for
the first two weeks or longer. The adult comes with gular
pouch full of food and alights at one side of the nest hole
to rest a moment. Though he may have come noiselessly and
from the other side of the tree, yet his approach is always
heralded by a mowing-machine chorus from the young, plainly
heard some yards away. If old enough, the queer-looking
little heads are thrust out of the doorway, and the parent,
inserting his long bill into the open mouth of a youngling,
shakes it vigorously, thereby emptying the food from his
throat into that of his offspring. Each in turn is fed in
this odd fashion. * * *
For a week or two after the young have left the nest,
they follow their parents begging for food with ludicrous
eagerness; at this time the provender brought them consists
of nuts, berries, ants, and the larvae of beetles. These,
especially the nuts, are often placed in a crevice of the
bark, and the youngster is compelled to pick them out.
After a few trials he learns to hammer right merrily and is
ready to forage for himself.
_Food._--The western pileated woodpecker lives on much the same kind
of food as its eastern relative, but naturally on different species of
insects and berries. Dr. Harold C. Bryant (1916) examined the stomach
of one, taken in Lake County, Calif., on November 5, 1915, and says:
“The stomach contained more than fifty carpenter ants (_Camponotus
herculaneus_ subsp.) and 131 seeds of poison oak (_Rhus diversiloba_).
As the seeds of poison oak are hard and without a noticeable covering
of softer material it is difficult to understand what there is about
them that is attractive to birds. Certain it is that the seeds are
incapable of complete digestion by woodpeckers.” And he adds: “The
stomachs of two pileated woodpeckers taken in or near Yosemite National
Park * * * were filled with carpenter ants (_Camponotus herculaneus
modoc_ Wheeler), many of them winged. Each stomach contained more than
a hundred of these ants. In addition one stomach contained a whole
fruit of manzanita (_Arctostaphylos nevadensis_ Gray) and the other,
four large beetle larvae (_Cerambycidae_), unidentifiable as to genus
or species, which had evidently been dug out of some dead tree, as the
stomach contained slivers of dead wood.”
J. A. Munro (1930) writes: “On December 2, 1926, a pileated woodpecker
was seen scrambling among the thick entwined branches of Virginia
creeper that partly covered the walls of a house situated on the shore
of Okanagan Lake. Here it remained for twenty minutes, busily picking
off the fruit. Subsequently, during the month of December, it often
was observed eating these berries at the same place and likewise at a
vine-covered house half a mile distant. Sometimes it appeared at both
houses on the same day, but more often only one house was visited.”
Charles W. Michael (1928) gives the following interesting account:
Beside the road, with branches overhanging it, stands a
group of mountain dogwoods (_Cornus nuttalli_). These
trees bore this year a heavy crop of fruit. At the end of
each flower stalk was a bunched cluster of ripe berries.
The Pileated Woodpecker was here today [September 19] to
collect his toll of fruit. The fruit being at the ends
of slender branches we thought the heavy-bodied bird
would be out of luck. How could the big fellow reach the
fruit? He was apparently not just sure himself. At first
he tried walking out the heavier branches; but always as
he approached the tip-ends they bent under his weight and
threw the berries beyond reach. By working out on a cedar
branch that intermingled with the dogwood branches he did
manage to get a taste of fruit, just enough to tease his
appetite. He was not to be cheated, however; for his next
move was to flutter clumsily up to a branch containing
berries, clutch the branch firmly with his strong feet, and
then drop to swing like a great pendulum. He now had the
system. Swinging head down he would pick the berries one by
one, loosen his hold, swing into flight and then repeat the
performance on another branch.
MELANERPES ERYTHROCEPHALUS (Linnaeus)
RED-HEADED WOODPECKER
PLATES 25-27
HABITS
This handsome and conspicuously colored woodpecker enjoys a wide
distribution over much of North America, from southern Canada to the
Gulf coast, east of the Rocky Mountains, and west of New England and
eastern Canada. It is recorded from British Columbia, and is rare in
New England. The only one I have seen in southeastern Massachusetts, in
50 years of field work, was chased across the line from Rhode Island
before I shot it. Throughout the northern portion of its range, it is a
summer resident only, though in mild winters, when food is abundant, it
may remain all through winter.
The red-headed woodpecker is essentially a bird of the open country
and not in any sense a forest dweller. I first met this woodpecker in
northern New York while on a fishing trip on the St. Lawrence River;
here it was fairly common in open groves of large trees or in groups of
scattered trees in open fields, where its brilliant color pattern made
it very conspicuous; it was frequently seen sitting on telegraph poles,
fence posts, the dead tops of tall trees, or on dead stubs. Dr. Elon H.
Eaton (1914) says of its haunts in that State: “The preferred home of
this woodpecker is in open groves and ‘slashings’ and ‘old burns’ and
tracts of half-dead forest where the live trees are scattered and dead
stubs are in abundance.”
Spencer Trotter (1903) writes: “I first saw the bird on a certain
hill-side in Maryland that was grown up with tall white-oaks,
not thickly, but open enough for a sheep-pasture, with vistas of
close-cropped grass among the gray tree-trunks. In this setting a
Woodpecker winged before me from tree to tree with its strongly
contrasted blotches of black, white, and crimson flashing in the
sunlight.”
In Florida I have found it most commonly in the large burned-over
areas in the pine woods, where numerous dead trees and stubs are left
standing; these offer attractive nesting sites and some food supply.
But Arthur H. Howell (1932) says: “The red-head is the most domestic of
our woodpeckers, living frequently in the heart of populous towns and
nesting in telephone poles on village streets. The birds are especially
attracted to newly cleared lands, where many dead or girdled trees are
left standing. They are common, also, in open pine forests in certain
sections, but in other seemingly suitable localities are not to be
found.”
_Nesting._--As my experience with the nesting habits of the red-headed
woodpecker is almost nothing, I shall have to draw on the observations
of others. Major Bendire (1895) makes the following general statement:
Some of its nesting sites are exceedingly neat pieces
of work; the edges of the entrance hole are beautifully
beveled off, and the inside is as smooth as if finished
with a fine rasp. The entrance is about 1¾ inches in
diameter and the inner cavity varies from 8 to 24 inches
in depth; the eggs are deposited on a layer of fine chips.
It usually nests in the dead tops or limbs of deciduous
trees, or in old stumps of oak, ash, butternut, maple,
elm, sycamore, cottonwood, willow, and other species,
more rarely in coniferous and fruit trees, at heights
varying from 8 to 80 feet from the ground, and also not
infrequently in natural cavities. On the treeless prairies
it has to resort mainly to telegraph poles and fence posts,
and here it also nests under the roofs of houses or in any
dark corner it can find.
John Helton, Jr., tells me that in Alabama the favorite nesting site is
in a rotten stump from which the bark has peeled off; he very seldom
finds a nest in a tree with bark on it. M. G. Vaiden sends me a note
on a nest that was only 5 feet from the ground in a limb of a-dead oak
near Rosedale, Miss. The nests are often placed near houses or in trees
on town or village streets. Two broods are often raised in a season
and sometimes in the same cavity; A. D. DuBois tells, in his notes, of
such a Minnesota nest; the earlier brood had been raised in a newly
excavated cavity that was 14 inches deep; the second set of eggs was
laid at a depth of only 9 inches, the bed for the eggs having been
raised 5 inches by chiseling fresh chips from the inner walls of the
cavity. Dr. H. C. Oberholser (1896b) gives the average measurements of
four Ohio nests as follows: Total depth 10.75; diameter of entrance
2.06 by 1.66; diameter at entrance 3.81 by 2.69; diameter at middle
4.50 by 3.88; and diameter at bottom 4.41 by 3.35 inches.
In the prairie regions and in other places, where trees are scarce and
these woodpeckers are common, some unusual and odd nesting sites have
been noted. Kumlien and Hollister (1903) write: “Among some of the odd
nesting sites we have noted are the following: Between two flat rails
on an old style rail fence; the hub of a broken wagon wheel, leaning
against a fence; the box of a grain drill left standing in a field; a
hole excavated in the hollow cylinder of an ordinary pump; common fence
posts and telegraph poles. These were usually in prairie regions where
there were few, if any, suitable trees.”
G. S. Agersborg (1881) mentions a nest that “was in the angle formed
by the shares of an upturned plow” in South Dakota. And E. A. Stoner
(1915) flushed a red-headed woodpecker from a blue jay’s nest in
Iowa. “The nest was eight feet up in an oak sapling and was a typical
Blue Jay’s but was found to contain three pure white and unmistakably
Woodpecker eggs.”
_Eggs._--Major Bendire (1895) writes: “The number of eggs to a set
varies from four to seven, sets of five being most frequently found,
while occasionally as many as eight eggs have been taken from a nest.
Mr. R. C. McGregor records taking a set of ten eggs of the red-head,
varying in size from ordinary down to that of the song sparrow.
Incubation varied from fresh in the smallest egg to advanced in the
larger (Oologist, vol. 5, p. 44, 1888).”
If the first set of eggs is taken, another set will be completed within
the next 10 or 12 days, usually in the same hole. Like the flicker,
this woodpecker is very persistent in its attempt to raise a brood and
will keep on laying, if repeatedly robbed. C. C. Bacon (1891), of Bell,
Ky., reports taking six sets of eggs, 28 eggs in all, from the same
nest in a single season, after which the birds drilled a new hole in
the same tree and raised a brood of four young; this persevering pair
drilled two holes and laid 32 eggs before they succeeded in raising a
brood.
The eggs vary in shape from short ovate to rounded ovate, are pure
white in color, and somewhat glossy when incubated. The measurements of
54 eggs average 25.14 by 19.17 millimeters; the eggs showing the four
extremes measure =27.18= by 19.30, 26.16 by =20.57=, =23= by 18.20, and
23.11 by =17.78= millimeters.
_Young._--Incubation is said to last for about 14 days. Both sexes
assist in this duty, as well as in the care of the young. As an egg
is laid each day, and, as incubation often begins before the set is
complete, the young may hatch on different days.
Mr. DuBois writes to me that one nest that he watched held newly
hatched young on June 11; they were in the nest on July 7 but had left
before 2 p. m. on the 9th, making the period in the nest approximately
27 days. He says: “The newly hatched, naked young have extremely long
necks, longer in fact than their bodies. The four young all faced
inward, each toward a point to the right of the center of the nest; and
when in repose, each neck crossed the necks of the two others at right
angles to its own--like woof and warp in a loom. A little noise on my
part made all four of them stretch their necks straight upward; but
when they collapsed, their necks became again interwoven. Each lowered
its head to its own right side of the one opposite it. There were egg
shells still in the nest.”
Julian K. Potter (1912) says of a nest that he watched at Camden, N. J.:
The old birds fed the young at varying intervals, sometimes
going to the nest once in every three or four minutes for a
half hour, then not appearing again for fifteen or twenty
minutes. * * *
The young birds left the nest about June 25. On that day
I saw them out in the open, quite able to take care of
themselves, although the parents fed them occasionally.
[This pair raised a second brood that season, and had
young on July 30.] Meanwhile the young of the first brood
were being very much misused by their parents, and were
driven away whenever they came in sight; in fact they
were persecuted to such an extent that they must have been
driven from the locality, for I was unable to find them
after July 30.
Some writers have said that only one brood is raised in a season, and
others that two broods are raised only in the southern part of the
breeding range. But Mr. DuBois reports two broods in Minnesota; and Mr.
Potter one brood one season and two broods the next season for his pair
in New Jersey.
_Plumages._--The young are hatched naked and blind, but they acquire
the juvenal plumage before they leave the nest. The sexes are alike
in all plumages, and the juvenal plumage is quite unlike that of the
adult. In the juvenal plumage, the head, neck, and upper chest are
brownish gray, spotted above and streaked below with dusky; the back
is black but not glossy as in the adult; the wings are as in the
adult, except that the secondaries and tertials are white but more
or less patterned or barred with black, chiefly near the tips, and
the primaries are edged with buffy white on the outer webs; the under
parts below the chest are dull white, clouded with brownish gray and
more or less streaked with dusky, chiefly on the sides and flanks.
This plumage is usually worn in its purity through July and August and
sometimes into October, though sometimes a few red feathers are seen in
the head; I have seen two or three red feathers in the head as early
as June 29 and a bird not much farther advanced on December 1. But
usually the complete molt into the adult plumage begins in September
and lasts through winter; the change begins on the head and back in
fall, but the wings are not usually molted until April, and even then
some of the juvenal secondaries may be retained. Most young birds are
in practically adult plumage before May.
Adults have a complete postnuptial molt in August and September; they
may have a partial molt in spring, but I have not seen it. Some highly
plumaged birds, probably old birds and mostly from western localities,
have the abdomen tinged with red.
_Food._--Much has been written on the food habits of the red-headed
woodpecker, a most resourceful feeder on a greatly varied diet. Prof.
F. E. L. Beal (1895) makes the following report on the contents of 101
stomachs, collected throughout the year in various parts of the country:
Animal matter, 50 percent; vegetable matter, 47 percent;
mineral matter, 3 percent. * * * The insects consist of
ants, wasps, beetles, bugs, grasshoppers, crickets, moths,
and caterpillars. Spiders and myriapods also were found.
Ants amounted to about 11 percent of the whole food. * * *
Beetle remains formed nearly one-third of all food.
* * * The families represented were those of the common
May beetle (_Lachnosterna_), which was found in several
stomachs, the predaceous ground beetles, tiger beetles,
weevils, and a few others. * * * Weevils were found in 15
stomachs, and in several cases as many as 10 were present.
Remains of Carabid beetles were found in 44 stomachs to
an average amount of 24 percent of the contents of those
that contained them, or 10 percent of all. The fact that
43 percent of all the birds taken had eaten these beetles,
some of them to the extent of 16 individuals, shows a
decided fondness for these insects, and taken with the fact
that 5 stomachs contained Cicindelids or tiger beetles
forms a rather strong indictment against the bird.
The vegetable food includes corn, dogwood berries, huckleberries,
strawberries, blackberries, raspberries, mulberries, elderberries,
wild black cherries, choke cherries, cultivated cherries, wild grapes,
apples, pears, various seeds, acorns, and beechnuts. Prof. Beal (1895)
reports that--
corn was found in 17 stomachs, collected from May to
September, inclusive, and amounted to more than 7
percent of all the food. While it seems to be eaten in
any condition, that taken in the late summer was in the
milk, and evidently picked from standing ears. This * * *
corroborates some of the testimony received, and indicates
that the Redhead, if sufficiently abundant, might do
considerable damage to the growing crop, particularly if
other food was not at hand. While the fruit list is not so
long as in the case of the Flicker, it includes more kinds
that are, or may be, cultivated; and the quantity found
in the stomachs, a little more than 33 percent of all the
food, is greater than in any of the others. Strawberries
were found in 1 stomach, blackberries or raspberries in
15, cultivated cherries in 2, apples in 4, and pears in
6. Fruit pulp was found in 33 stomachs, and it is almost
certain that a large part of this was obtained from some of
the larger cultivated varieties. Seeds were found in but
few stomachs, and only a small number in each.
Audubon (1842) gives this woodpecker a rather bad name, saying:
I would not recommend to anyone to trust their fruit to
the red-heads; for they not only feed on all kinds as
they ripen, but destroy an immense quantity besides. No
sooner are the cherries seen to redden, than these birds
attack them. * * * Trees of this kind are stripped clean
by them. * * * I may safely assert that a hundred have
been shot upon a single cherry-tree in one day. * * * They
have another bad habit, which is that of sucking the eggs
of small birds. For this purpose, they frequently try to
enter the boxes of the Martins or Bluebirds, as well as
the pigeon-houses, and are often successful. The corn, as
it ripens, is laid bare by their bill, when they feed on
the top parts of the ear, and leave the rest either to the
Grakles or the Squirrels, or still worse, to decay, after a
shower has fallen upon it.
Bendire (1895) adds to the evidence against this gay villain. He
personally saw a red-headed woodpecker rifle a nest of a red-shafted
flicker and carry off an egg. He quotes from one observer who had
seen one of these woodpeckers clean out a nest of young of the
tufted titmouse, and from another who had seen one carrying off a
freshly killed young robin. W. G. Smith wrote to him from Colorado:
“The red-headed woodpecker is a common summer resident in the lower
foothills along the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains in this
State, and I consider it a veritable butcher among our nuthatches and
chickadees, driving every one away from its nesting sites, and woe to
the bird that this villain can reach. It destroys both eggs and young,
dragging the latter out of their nests and frequently leaving them dead
at the entrance of their holes.”
He also relates the following personal experience:
We noticed a red-headed woodpecker take something,
apparently a bunch of moss, from a crotch of a maple and
carry it to a fence post of an adjacent field. After
worrying some time in trying to swallow something rather
too large for his gullet, he finally succeeded, after an
effort, and then worked some little time, evidently trying
to secrete the remainder. Both of us had our field glasses
and were watching the bird’s actions closely. After some
little time he flew back to the tree he had started from,
while we proceeded to the fence post to investigate, and,
much to our disgust and surprise, we found the freshly
killed and partly eaten body of a young bird, almost
denuded of feathers, securely tucked away behind the loose
bark of the post. His victim was too much mutilated to
identify positively, but looked like a half-grown bluebird,
whose head had been crushed in, the brain abstracted, and
the entire rump and entrails torn out; the only parts left
intact were the breast, upper part of the back, and the
lower portion of the head. The missing parts had evidently
just been eaten by the rascal while clinging to the top of
the post, and the remnant was then hidden for future use.
Howard Jones (1883), of Circleville, Ohio, reports the following
incident:
Under the eaves of a large barn near Mt. Sterling, O., a
colony of Cliff Swallows have built for some years. Last
year they were nearly exterminated by several woodpeckers.
The redheads would alight at the doors of the mud huts and
extract the eggs from the nests with their bills. In some
nests the necks or entrance-ways were so long that the
woodpeckers could not reach the eggs by this means, but not
willing to be cheated of such choice food they would climb
around to the side, and with a few well directed blows of
their bills make openings large enough to enable them to
procure the eggs. Of the dozens of nests built not a single
brood was reared in any. One woodpecker bolder than the
rest began eating hen’s eggs wherever they could be found.
Mr. DuBois says in his notes: “A redhead, seeing a young lark sparrow
flutter in the grass, attacked it and might have killed it, had I
not intervened. He had struck the young bird at one of his lores and
had brought blood. I have also seen this woodpecker attack a young
bluebird, on the ground, just after it had left the nest.”
But not all red-headed woodpeckers are cannibals or murderers; perhaps
many individuals never indulge in such practices; and all of them have
some harmless and useful feeding habits. Their insect-eating habits
are impressive. They are very fond of grasshoppers and destroy them in
large numbers. H. B. Bailey (1878) quotes the following from a letter
from G. S. Agersborg, of Vermillion, S. Dak.:
Last spring in opening a good many birds of this species
with the object of ascertaining their principal food, I
found in their stomachs nothing but young grasshoppers.
One of them, which had its headquarters near my house, was
observed making frequent visits to an old oak post, and on
examining it I found a large crack where the Woodpecker had
inserted about one hundred grasshoppers of all sizes (for
future use, as later observations proved), which were put
in without killing them, but they were so firmly wedged in
the crack that they in vain tried to get free. I told this
to a couple of farmers, and found that they had also seen
the same thing, and showed me the posts which were used for
the same purpose. Later in the season the Woodpecker, whose
station was near my house, commenced to use his stores, and
today (February 10) there are only a few shrivelled-up
grasshoppers left.
Milton P. Skinner (1928), referring to the feeding habits of this
woodpecker in North Carolina, writes:
Flying insects are an important source of food supply all
through the winter, but with the increase of the number
of insects in March this activity greatly increases. The
observation post for fly-catching is usually the one in
which the nest hole is situated. But I noted at least one
bird that used four tall trees in succession for this
purpose. On February 1, 1927, a red-headed woodpecker was
seen clinging to the side of a telephone pole. Twice it
left the pole, flew out twenty feet, caught an insect each
time, and returned to the pole to eat it. Two weeks later
another bird was seen to make six trips similarly out
and back during six minutes, sometimes going more than a
hundred feet from its perch. As the bird went direct to the
insect, caught it and returned immediately to its perch,
it seemed likely that the insect was seen each time before
the bird started, indicating wonderful eyesight. While not
engaged in thus hawking, this bird hunted the limbs for
prey. Ten days later I found this bird watching for insects
and making ten fly-catching sallies in minute and a half.
Its flights were from ten to one hundred and fifty feet in
length, and all the insects were from forty to sixty feet
above the ground. One of the redheads seen fly-catching in
December, returned to its dead stub where it drilled for
grubs and borers in the usual woodpecker fashion, except
that its strokes were heavy and deliberate. On another
occasion, I saw one of these birds fly down into the road
to catch and eat an earthworm.
E. D. Nauman (1930), in Iowa, watched a red-headed woodpecker feeding
a young bird in the top of a tall tree. “The adult bird was at work,
darting off every few moments into the air in pursuit of insects and
returning after each flight to the young bird on the tree with its
prey. I watched and timed it carefully for an hour. It made from five
to seven trips per minute, always at an elevation of 50 to 100 feet,
and caught at each trip from one to three or more insects. * * *
“A computation based upon careful observation showed that a single
individual Redhead had destroyed over 600 insects in one hour. When I
left, the bird was still at work, and I am, of course, unable to state
how long it had been at work at this place before I came there.”
A. V. Goodpasture (1909), of Nashville, Tenn., made some interesting
observations on the feeding habits of this woodpecker. He watched one
preparing insect food for its young on a stump, some 4 feet high, near
its nest, and says:
When one of the woodpeckers came in, it did not go directly
to the nest, but always alighted first on this stump, where
it hammered away for a time, then proceeded to the nest
with a shapeless mass in its beak. My glass having failed
to disclose their object in thus lighting and hammering
on the stump before feeding their young, I went down to
reconnoiter. The place looked like a field hospital after a
severe engagement. There were wings, and wing-covers, heads
and legs strewn around the stump in great profusion. Then
I understood it all. The stump was their meat-block, and
they were preparing the food for their young by removing
the hard and indigestible parts. They dispatched this work
with much dexterity, without using their feet to confine
the insect; they laid it on the stump, and, with the bill
alone, succeeded in removing the undesirable parts.
The kinds of insects whose remains were found there was a
study. They were almost as gaudy as the woodpecker himself.
* * * Woodpeckers can undoubtedly distinguish between
colors; they find the ruddiest apple and the rosiest
peach in the orchard. In like manner, they seem to be
attracted by bright-colored insects. They prefer beautiful
butterflies, silky moths, and brilliant beetles. The
favorite food of this pair was the June-bug; not the plain
brown beetle of the northern states, but the beautiful
green and gold June-bug of the South--associated in the
mind with sultry summer days, and ripe blackberries, on
which he feeds. * * *
I found not only the dismembered wing-covers of the
June-bug around the Woodpecker’s meat-block, but, in a
pit on the splintered top of the stump, I found a live
June-bug. And what a prison he was in! It was a thousand
times worse than the Black Hole of Calcutta. They had
turned him on his back and pounded him into a cavity that
so exactly fitted him that he could move nothing but his
legs, which were plying like weaver’s shuttles in the empty
air. I always found the June-bugs deposited on their backs,
and always alive.
The red-headed woodpecker also shares with the California woodpecker
the provident habit of storing acorns and nuts. Fannie Hardy Eckstorm
(1901) says:
Lately it has been discovered that they not only eat
beechnuts all the fall, but store them up for winter use.
This time the observation was made in Indiana. There, when
the nuts were abundant, the red-heads were seen busily
carrying them off. Their accumulations were found in all
sorts of places; cavities in old tree-trunks contained nuts
by the handful; knot-holes, cracks, crevices, seams in the
barns were filled full of nuts. Nuts were tucked into the
cracks in fence-posts; they were driven into railroad ties;
they were pounded in between the shingles on the roofs; if
a board was sprung out, the space behind it was filled with
nuts, and bark or wood was often brought to cover over the
gathered store.
Unlike the California woodpecker, it does not make holes for the
reception of the nuts but uses what cavities it can find. Dr. Thomas
S. Roberts (1932) says that, on the outskirts of St. Paul, “a redhead
spent most of October putting acorns into cracks and climbing-iron
holes in a telephone pole and under the shingles of a near-by house.
One crack was closely plugged for a distance of twenty feet. When the
nuts were too large for the cracks they were split and driven in in
pieces.”
George A. Dorsey (1926) tells of an amusing attempt of a young redhead
to fill a hole in a telephone pole:
Finally he found a hole to his liking, and, chattering as
he worked, he drove the acorn in. Imagine my surprise when
I saw a couple of acorns fall out on the other side of the
pole! The hole was bored straight through the pole, and
the Woodpecker was wasting his time by pushing the acorns
through. He seemed to know that something was wrong, but
couldn’t quite reason it out. He would chatter agitatedly
and hitch around the pole to examine the other side of the
pole, but would finally give it up and go off for another
acorn. I watched him poke acorns in the hole several times,
only to have some of the ones he had previously placed
there fall out on the other side. On the ground under the
pole was about a double handful of acorns that had fallen
out.
E. D. Nauman (1932) saw a house mouse running across a paved street,
but it had not gone very far when a red-headed woodpecker “darted down
out of the grove and made an attack upon it. The woodpecker struck
the mouse several hard and vicious blows with its stout bill, rolling
and tossing it over and over. It appeared that a moment more of such
treatment must have finished the mouse, had not a vehicle approached
just at that instant, threatening to crush both the red-head and its
prey. The bird darted away just in time to save itself, and the mouse,
not having been struck by the wheels, hurriedly limped to the edge
of the pavement, got over the curb with difficulty, and hid in the
grass. The red-head flew back immediately to see what had become of its
prospect for dinner, but the mouse was so well hidden that the bird had
to give up the chase.”
Mr. DuBois writes to me that “a red-headed woodpecker was observed
hanging upside down from the small twigs at the end of a branch of a
large oak, evidently gleaning insect life of some sort from the twigs.
It flew to another tree and repeated this method of feeding.”
Lewis O. Shelley tells me that he observed one “feeding on ants in a
dry, harvested oat piece, obtaining the ants by thrusting the bill
into an ant tunnel entrance and working the bill to form a cone-shaped
opening, up through which the ants emerged at the disturbance, and were
licked up without the bill being withdrawn from this foodhopper.”
_Behavior._--Audubon (1842) writes attractively of the behavior of this
woodpecker:
With the exception of the mocking-bird, I know of no
species so gay and frolicksome. Indeed, their whole life
is one of pleasure. They find a superabundance of food
everywhere, as well as the best facilities for raising
their broods. * * * They do not seem to be much afraid of
man, although they have scarcely a more dangerous enemy.
When alighted on a fence-stake by the road, or in a field,
and one approaches them, they gradually move sidewise out
of sight, peeping now and then to discover your intention;
and when you are quite close and opposite, lie still until
you are past, when they hop to the top of the stake, and
rattle upon it with their bill, as if to congratulate
themselves on the success of their cunning. Should you
approach within arm’s length, which may frequently be done,
the woodpecker flies to the next stake or the second from
you, bends his head to peep, and rattles again, as if to
provoke you to a continuance of what seems to him excellent
sport. * * *
They chase each other on wing in a very amicable manner,
in long, beautifully curved sweeps, during which the
remarkable variety of their plumage becomes conspicuous,
and is highly pleasing to the eye. When passing from one
tree to another, their flight resembles the motion of a
great swing, and is performed by a single opening of the
wings, descending at first, and rising towards the spot
on which they are going to alight with ease, and in the
most graceful manner. They move upwards, sidewise, or
backwards, without apparent effort, but seldom with the
head downwards. * * *
On the ground, this species is by no means awkward, as it
hops there with ease, and secures beetles which it had
espied whilst on the fence or a tree.
Red-headed woodpeckers are quite quarrelsome at times with other
species; besides attacking various small birds, driving them away from
their nests, or robbing them of their eggs or young, they contend
with other hole-nesting birds, such as starlings and the smaller
woodpeckers, for the possession of nesting holes. They are jealous of
their food supply and will drive other birds away from their favorite
feeding places or from any choice morsel of food. They are generally
the winners in such encounters, even against such aggressive rivals as
blue jays and starlings. But toward birds of their own species they
are often solicitous, friendly, and helpful to birds in trouble. Mr.
DuBois writes to me: “A wounded female, after several attempts to fly,
fluttered to the ground; and while she was fluttering in the air, her
mate flew to her and apparently tried to help her to a place of safety.
After reaching the ground, the female lay still in the grass, although
only winged; but her mate clung to a nearby tree, from which he flew
down to her repeatedly, showing great distress.”
H. M. Holland (1931) tells the following story:
A red-head was caught by one wing, and possibly a foot,
in a crack formed at the tip of a tall, dead tree where
the trunk had been broken off and left a splintered stub.
Perhaps a dozen red-heads were present, all flying here
and there, evidently much excited, and make a great ado, a
veritable woodpecker hubbub.
First one and then another would alight just below and
apparently peck at, or more often while in flight would
strike or brush against the hapless victim, whose struggles
were renewed at each encounter. The clamor became actually
distressing. At times two or three were simultaneously
fluttering close to the captive. These activities continued
for several minutes when suddenly the bird was freed, to
accomplish which it would seem that a concerted effort
had been made. Quiet was restored almost at once and the
participants dispersed.
Julian K. Potter (1912) noticed that sparrows bothered his woodpeckers
considerably about their roosting holes and saw one of them fighting
two starlings for the possession of a cavity, but all were eventually
driven away and learned the lesson of “no trespass.” He says: “On one
occasion, when I watched the woodpeckers until dark, I found that one
went to roost in the nesting-hole about dusk, and the other, probably
the male, shortly after went into an old hole in the same dead tree
higher up.”
Mrs. John Franklin Kyler (1927) gives an interesting account of a
red-headed woodpecker that she raised by hand from the nest, beginning
before the young bird had opened its eyes; it developed into a very
satisfactory pet, with marked affection for its foster mother; anyone
who wants to try raising young birds could learn much by reading her
story.
_Voice._--Bendire (1895) writes: “Its ordinary call note is a loud
‘tchur-tchur’; when chasing each other a shrill note like ‘chärr-chärr’
is frequently uttered, and alarm is expressed by a harsh, rattling
note, as well as by one which, according to Mr. Otto Widmann, is
indistinguishable from the note of the Tree-frog (_Hyla arborea_). He
tells me that both bird and frog sometimes answer each other.”
Describing their spring notes, W. L. Dawson (1903) says:
Then the woods and groves soon resound with their loud
calls, _Quee-o--quee-o--queer_. These _queer_ cries are not
unpleasant, but the birds are a noisy lot at best. When one
of them flies into a tree where others are gathered, all
set up an outcry of _yarrow, yarrow, yarrow_, which does
not subside until the newcomer has had time to shake hands
all around at least twice. Besides these more familiar
sounds the red-heads boast an unfathomed repertory of
chirping, cackling, and raucous noises. The youngsters,
especially,--awkward, saucy fellows that most of them
are--sometimes get together and raise a fearful racket
until some of the older ones, out-stentored, interpose.
_Field marks._--The red-headed woodpecker is so conspicuously marked
that it hardly could be mistaken for anything else. The large white
areas in the wings and on the rump are much in evidence, in any
plumage, especially in flight. The bright red of the entire head and
neck and the plain white breast of the adult are also very conspicuous.
_Enemies._--The red-headed woodpecker has some bad habits, which have
at times caused considerable damage to property, arousing the enmity
of those who have suffered from its depredations and resulting in the
destruction of large numbers of these birds. Raids on cultivated fruits
have given these woodpeckers a bad name and many have been killed by
fruit growers. Audubon (1842) asserts that as many as “a hundred have
been shot upon a single cherry tree in one day. Pears, peaches, apples,
figs, mulberries, and even peas, are thus attacked.”
They do considerable damage to pole lines by excavating their nests in
them. An editorial in The Osprey (vol. 1, p. 147) quotes, as follows,
from an article in the Kansas City Star:
The little red-headed woodpecker has become such a nuisance
on the electric lines of the metropolitan street railway
system, that it has become necessary to appoint an official
woodpecker exterminator. The title has been conferred on
Coffee Rice, an Independence young man, and yesterday
he killed nineteen of the destructive birds on the
Independence line. The woodpeckers attack the large poles
which hold up the feed cables and dig holes into the center
and downward to a depth of more than a foot. * * * The
result is that in a season the water gets into the heart of
the pole and it rots off and breaks, requiring a new pole
to be set up; whereas, ordinarily, the life of the big pole
is several years. A large number of the electric line poles
have been ruined this way, and there was a threatened loss
of many thousand dollars unless the pest was checked.
Red-headed woodpeckers seem to be oftener killed on highways by
speeding automobiles than any other species, as attested by several
observers. Dr. Dayton Stoner (1932) made some observations on this
point on an automobile trip, on July 15, 1924, for a distance of 211
miles on well-graveled roads in Iowa. He says:
En route, 105 dead animals representing fifteen species
were counted; of these, thirty-nine were red-headed
woodpeckers. The mortality in this species was higher than
for any other species of vertebrate animal noted and I
believe that several contributory factors are responsible
for it. First, these birds have a propensity for feeding
upon insects and waste grain in and along the roads;
second, they delay taking wing before the approaching car,
in all probability being poor judges of its speed; and
third, they have a slow “get-away,” that is, they can not
quickly gain sufficient speed to escape the oncoming car.
However, I feel certain that a speed as high as thirty-five
to forty miles an hour is necessary in order to overtake
these birds.
Alexander Wilson (1832) writes:
Notwithstanding the care which this bird, in common with
the rest of its genus, takes to place its young beyond the
reach of enemies, within the hollows of trees, yet there
is one deadly foe, against whose depredations neither
the height of the tree nor the depth of the cavity, is
the least security. This is the black snake (_Coluber
constrictor_), who frequently glides up the trunk of the
tree, and, like a skulking savage, enters the woodpecker’s
peaceful apartment, devours the eggs or helpless young, in
spite of the cries and fluttering of the parents; and, if
the place be large enough, coils himself up in the spot
they occupied, where he will sometimes remain for several
days.
_Fall._--The fall migration is often well marked. A. H. Helme (1882),
writing from Millers Place, Long Island, N. Y., where the bird occurs
mainly as a migrant, says:
The first one observed this season was on the 10th of
September. On the 12th I saw three, and on the 20th I saw
one. Early on the morning of the 24th of September they
began to pass over in large numbers, and continued to pass
until about 10 o’clock, after which very few were seen,
except straggling groups of three or four, and occasionally
a single one was seen to pass over during the day. The
flight must have consisted of several hundred, principally
young birds. They came from the east and were flying west.
Many of them in their flight would alight for a few minutes
in the orchards and corn fields to feed on the half-ripened
corn, or search among the apple trees for the larva or eggs
of insects but would soon continue on their journey, and
their places would be supplied by others. I noticed one
or two to dart out and seize an insect in the manner of a
flycatcher. The following day but two or three were seen. A
few stragglers, however, were occasionally met with up to
the 10th of October, and one was seen as late as the 23rd
of November.
John B. Semple (1930) writes:
On September 16, 1929, a flight of red-headed woodpeckers
(_Melanerpes erythrocephalus_) was observed passing over
the marshes at the head of Sandusky Bay, Ohio. The birds
were flying in little groups of two to five against a
stiff southwest wind heading nearly south and at an
elevation of sixty to eighty yards. Rather more than half
of them were immature birds but the old and young were not
segregated. I was hunting ducks at the time and counted
forty-eight woodpeckers passing in a little more than two
hours. They apparently came from Ontario and probably
crossed Lake Erie by way of Point Pelee and Bass Island
which would make the flight over water only about nine
miles. It was interesting to note that each successive
group of birds followed exactly the same route over the
marshes although those that had gone before were well out
of sight.
_Winter._--The red-headed woodpecker is generally considered to be
a migratory species throughout the northern portion of its breeding
range, but its movements seem to depend almost entirely on the
abundance or scarcity of its winter food supply, mainly acorns and
beechnuts; when these nuts are available in considerable quantities,
this woodpecker is to be found in reasonable numbers within its summer
range in the northern States. When Dr. C. Hart Merriam (1878) referred
to it as remaining occasionally in northern New York, Lewis County, in
winter, some of his ornithological friends were skeptical. He says:
I therefore wrote to my friend, Mr. C. L. Bagg, asking
him to send me a lot of red-headed woodpeckers as soon as
possible, and in a week’s time received a box containing
over twenty specimens,--all killed in Lewis County and when
the snow was three feet deep! This was proof positive.
Notes kept by Mr. Bagg and myself during the past six
years show that they were abundant here during the winters
1871-72, 1873-74, 1875-76, and 1877-78; while they were
rare or did not occur at all during the winters of 1872-73
and 1876-77. Their absence was in no way governed by the
severity of the winters, but entirely dependent upon the
absence of the usual supply of beechnuts. While the greater
portion of nuts fall to the ground and are buried beneath
the snow far beyond the reach of the woodpeckers, yet
enough remain on the trees all winter to furnish abundant
subsistence for those species which feed on them. * * *
During the autumn the scattered pairs for several miles
around usually congregate in some suitable wood, containing
a plenty of beech-trees, and here spend the long cold
winter in company, chattering and chasing one another about
among the trees to keep warm, and to help while away the
time. “Coe’s woods,” in this immediate vicinity, has long
been famous as the great winter resort for the red-headed
woodpeckers of the neighborhood, and it is certainly the
most suitable place for their purposes to be found for many
miles around. This piece of woods, not over an eighth of
a mile in extent, contains, besides hundreds of beeches
(_Fagus ferruginea_), a large number of elms (_Ulmus
americana_), and white ash-trees (_Fraxinus americana_) of
great size, most of the tops of which are now dead. What
more favorable location than this woods could a woodpecker
desire? Here they have beechnuts in abundance and a
bountiful supply of dead limbs and tree-tops far above the
reach of the small charges commonly used by bird-collectors.
James B. Purdy (1900) says that “the presence of the Red-headed
Woodpecker (_Melanerpes erythrocephalus_) during the winter months in
Michigan does not depend upon the temperature, but entirely upon the
food supply, viz.: the crop of acorns and beechnuts which precedes the
winter. If these nuts are plenty, the red-headed woodpeckers will
always be found during the winter months, but in no great abundance. If
there are no acorns or beechnuts, this bird will be entirely absent in
our Michigan forests.”
Robert Ridgway (1881) writes:
Ordinarily this species (_Melanerpes erythrocephalus_)
is decidedly the most numerous of the Woodpeckers in
Southeastern Illinois, while during the winter season it is
often so excessively common in the sheltered bottom-lands
as to outnumber all other species together, and, in fact,
is voted a decided nuisance by the hunter, sportsman,
or collector, on account of its well known habit of
following any one carrying a gun, and annoying him by its
continued chatter; at intervals sweeping before him and
thus diverting attention. Being at this season always
semi-gregarious, while they are of all woodpeckers the most
restless and sportive, the annoyance which they thus cause
is really no trifling matter.
Evidently, they do not always spend the winter even here, for he says:
“In the early part of October, 1879, I paid my usual yearly visit to my
old home, and scarcely had arrived at the house ere my father informed
me, as a bit of news which he was well aware would both interest and
surprise me, that the red-headed woodpeckers had all migrated; that for
a number of nights preceding he had heard overhead their well-known
notes as they winged their way to some more or less distant region; in
short, that the woods that had been their home ‘knew them now no more.’”
Even as far south as South Carolina, according to Arthur T. Wayne
(1910): “The controlling influence upon the migration of this species
in winter is the presence or absence of acorns of the live and water
oaks. If the crop of acorns is large, this woodpecker is abundant
during the winter months, but if there are no acorns, the bird is
entirely absent, no matter whether the season is mild or severe.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Southern Canada and the United States east of the Rocky
Mountains; irregularly migratory in the northern parts of its range.
_Breeding range._--The breeding range of the red-headed woodpecker
extends =north= to northern Montana (Strabane, Lewistown, Fairview,
and Terry); northern North Dakota (Arnegard and Willow City); southern
Manitoba (Lake St. Martin and Winnipeg); southern Ontario (Kenora,
Cobden, and Ottawa); southern Quebec (Three Rivers and Hatley); and
southern New Brunswick (St. John). The =eastern= limits of the range
extend from New Brunswick (St. John) south along the Atlantic coast
to Florida (Orlando and Fort Myers). =South= through the Gulf coastal
regions of Florida, Mississippi, and Louisiana; central Texas (Waco);
and central New Mexico (Fort Sumner and Albuquerque). =West= to New
Mexico (Albuquerque and Santa Fe); central Colorado (Hotchkiss,
Golden, Estes Park, and Fort Collins); eastern Wyoming (Laramie and
Carey burst); and Montana (Kirby, Billings, Lewistown, and Strabane).
During the summer season the species also has been taken or observed
north to southeastern Alberta (Medicine Hat, Big Stick, and Eastend);
southern Saskatchewan (Oak Lake, Aweme, and Pilot mound); Quebec
(Quebec City); and New Brunswick (Beaver Dam).
_Winter range._--The normal winter range of the red-headed woodpecker
appears to extend =north= to Oklahoma (Oklahoma City and Okmulgee);
northeastern Iowa (National); Illinois (Ohio and Mount Carmel);
Tennessee (Nashville and Knoxville); West Virginia (Charlestown and
Clarksburg); and southeastern Pennsylvania (Philadelphia). At this
season it is never common on the Atlantic coast north of South Carolina
(Charleston), but is found from there =south= to southern Florida
(Miami). From this point it winters westward along the Gulf coast to
Louisiana and probably Texas. The =western= limits of the winter range
appear to be central Texas (probably Somerset) and Oklahoma (Caddo and
Oklahoma City).
In addition to the winter range above given, it also has been noted
casually at this season in eastern Kansas and Nebraska, southeastern
South Dakota (Yankton, January 2, 1929, and the winter of 1936-37);
North Dakota (Grafton, specimen collected January 24, 1905); Minnesota
(frequent in the southern part); Wisconsin (occasional north to
Meriden and New London); southern Michigan (Grand Rapids, Lansing,
and Detroit); southern Ontario (Coldstream, Toronto, and Kingston);
southern Vermont (Bennington); and Massachusetts (Boston).
_Migration._--The migrations of the red-headed woodpecker are
imperfectly understood, and, as will be noted from the numerous casual
winter records, individuals of this species sometimes winter north
almost to the limits of the breeding range. This makes difficult the
designation of early and late dates of migration. Nevertheless, the
following dates may be considered representative of most seasons in
that portion of the range where the species is normally migratory:
_Spring migration._--Early dates of arrival are: New Jersey--Elizabeth,
February 27; New Providence, March 13; Cape May, March 27. Northwestern
Pennsylvania--Beaver, April 15. New York--Penn Yan, April 3; West
Brighton, April 12; Syracuse, April 14. Connecticut--Fairfield, March
2; Meriden, March 28. Massachusetts--Bernardstown, April 4; Russell,
April 21. Vermont--St. Johnsbury, April 19. Maine--Lewiston, May 8;
Portland, May 15. Quebec--Montreal, May 7. Ohio--Wauseon, March 7.
Michigan--Saginaw, March 9; Sault Ste. Marie, May 22. Ontario--London,
March 13; Hamilton, April 15; Toronto, April 26. Wisconsin--Ladysmith,
April 23. Minnesota.--Redwing, March 30; St. Cloud, April 1;
Hutchinson, April 14. Kansas--Fort Hays, April 11; Bendena, April 13;
Harper, April 25. Nebraska--Omaha, April 29; Neligh, May 3; Scribner,
May 7. South Dakota--Yankton, April 13; Vermillion, April 29; Sioux
Falls, May 4. North Dakota--Jamestown, April 21; Argusville, May 8;
Fargo, May 9. Manitoba--East Kildonan, May 6; Aweme, May 19. New
Mexico--Glenrio, April 26. Colorado (occasionally winters)--Burlington,
May 7; Lamar, May 11; Denver, May 15. Wyoming--Laramie Peak, May 2;
Careyhurst, May 15; Torrington, May 17. Montana--Albion, May 19; Fort
Custer, May 20.
_Fall migration._--Late dates of fall departure are: Montana--Sun
River, September 5. Wyoming--Laramie, September 4; Wheatland,
September 6; Panco, October 2. Colorado--Greeley, October 1; Denver;,
October 21; Boulder County, October 23. New Mexico--Koehler Junction,
October 24. Manitoba--Margaret, September 20; Aweme, October 8.
North Dakota--Medora, September 18; Wahpeton, September 29. South
Dakota--Sioux Falls, September 20; Harrison, September 28; Yankton,
October 7. Nebraska--Red Cloud, October 3; Blue Springs, October
4. Kansas--Harper, October 15; Lawrence, October 18; Fort Hays,
October 29. Minnesota--Hutchinson, October 20; Minneapolis, October
26. Wisconsin--Prescott, October 10; Reedsburg, October 16; and La
Crosse, October 29. Northern Michigan--Sault Ste. Marie, November 15.
Ontario--Toronto, September 15; Ottawa, September 18; Point Pelee,
October 14. Maine--Skowhegan, October 26. Vermont--Wells River,
September 24; Rutland, October 14. Massachusetts--Springfield, October
9; Boston, October 15. Connecticut--Fairfield, October 8; Hartford,
October 13. Northern New York--Watertown, October 16; Geneva, October
24; Rochester, November 11. Northwestern Pennsylvania--McKeesport,
October 19; Berwyn, November 8; Erie, November 17. New Jersey--Passaic,
October 21; Cape May, October 21; Morristown, November 2.
An examination of the banding files in the Biological Survey adds
but little information to knowledge of the migrations of this bird.
Although it has been banded in fair numbers (more than 1,700 previous
to July 1, 1937) the farthest recovery record is only about 80 miles
south of the point of banding. There are, however, several cases of
return in subsequent seasons to the banding stations.
_Casual records._--Records of this species outside its normal range are
not numerous. A single specimen was taken in the Chiricahua Mountains,
Ariz., in the spring of 1894; one was observed in Salt Lake City, Utah,
in June 1874; and one was noted near Fortine, in northwestern Montana,
on June 18, 1931.
_Egg dates._--Alabama: 12 records, April 20 to July 15; 6 records,
May 26 to June 17, indicating the height of the season.
Illinois: 19 records, May 9 to July 10; 10 records, May 19 to June 15.
Michigan: 16 records, May 9 to August 20; 8 records, May 15 to June 3.
New York: 15 records, May 21 to June 19; 8 records, May 26 to June 5.
South Carolina: 12 records, May 6 to July 2.
BALANOSPHYRA FORMICIVORA FORMICIVORA (Swainson)
ANT-EATING WOODPECKER
HABITS
The type race of the species is now restricted in its distribution
to the region from south-central Texas (Kerr County and the Chisos
Mountains) to eastern and southern Mexico. It differs from the other
races in the width of the white frontal band, the amount of streaking
on the breast and sides, and the amount of yellow in the throat patch,
as well as in size. It differs from _bairdi_ and _aculeata_ in having
the chest mostly streaked, at least on the median portion, instead
of mostly uniform black. The white frontal patch is broader than in
_angustifrons_, and the black band across the female crown is much
wider. It is slightly larger than _aculeata_, and somewhat smaller than
_bairdi_ but decidedly larger than _angustifrons_. Its throat patch is
paler yellow than in _bairdi_ and _angustifrons_.
I cannot find anything of consequence in print relating to the habits
of the race, which probably do not differ materially from the habits
of the species elsewhere. There are two sets of eggs in the Thayer
collection, one of six and one of five eggs, taken in Tamaulipas,
Mexico, on April 18 and 22, 1908; in each case the nest is said to
have been 20 feet from the ground in a pine. The measurements of these
11 eggs average 26.47 by 19.00 millimeters; the eggs showing the four
extremes measure =28.1= by 19.0, 26.7 by =19.3=, =25.9= by =18.9=
millimeters.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Western United States, Central America, and northwestern
South America; nonmigratory.
On the Pacific coast the ant-eating woodpecker ranges through the
Coast and Sierra Nevada ranges =north= to southwestern Oregon (Cow
Creek and Ashland). In the interior it is found =north= to northern
Arizona (Hualapai Mountain, Williams, and Grand Canyon); northern New
Mexico (Largo Canyon and the headwaters of the Gallina River); and
southwestern Texas (Fort Davis and Kerrville). From these regions
the species is found =south= through both eastern and western Mexico
(including Baja California) and other Central American countries, at
least to central Colombia.
Several subspecies of this woodpecker are found only in Central and
South America, but three varieties occur regularly in the United
States, while two others are confined to Baja California. The true
ant-eating woodpecker (_B. f. formicivora_), which ranges through
eastern and southern Mexico, is found also in south-central Texas
(Chisos Mountains and Kerrville). Mearns’s woodpecker (_B. f.
aculeata_) occupies the range in Arizona, New Mexico, and western Texas
(Fort Davis) south through the Mexican States of Sonora, Chihuahua, and
Durango. The California woodpecker (_B. f. bairdi_) is found in the
Pacific coast region from Oregon south to northern Baja California. In
this Mexican State the narrow-fronted woodpecker (_B. f. angustifrons_)
is confined to the region of Cape San Lucas, while the San Pedro
woodpecker (_B. f. martirensis_) is found in the northwestern part of
the area nearly to the United States border.
_Egg dates._--Arizona: 9 records, May 10 to June 10.
California: 66 records, April 2 to June 15; 33 records, April 20 to
May 15, indicating the height of the season. Second and third
broods have been found in September and October.
Baja California: 4 records, May 10 to June 3.
BALANOSPHYRA FORMICIVORA BAIRDI (Ridgway)
CALIFORNIA WOODPECKER
PLATE 28
HABITS
The above common name is well chosen, as this is one of the commonest
and most conspicuous birds throughout its range in California. Anyone
who spends much time afield in the valleys, foothills, and canyons of
southern and western California is sure to see this strikingly colored
and active woodpecker making itself conspicuous among the oaks and
pines; and, where one is seen, there are almost sure to be others, for
it is a sociable species.
Referring to the Lassen Peak region, Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale
(1930) say:
Two environmental factors of seeming importance for the
presence of this bird were an available supply of acorns
and wood or bark of sorts into which the birds could bore
storage holes. As to species of oak, out of the six or
more present, our impression remains that no outstanding
choice by the woodpeckers was shown. About as many of the
birds were seen among the black oaks in the vicinity of
Payne Creek P. O., as among the valley oaks around Cone’s.
However, tracks of black oaks recurred east of the main
mountain mass in the section, as along the upper Susan
River and near Eagle Lake, where no California woodpeckers
were ever seen by us. To repeat, none of this species of
woodpecker was seen by us east of about the western edge of
the yellow pine belt (Transition life-zone). * * *
Situations where individuals of this woodpecker were
observed are as follows: top of sycamore; dead sycamore
stub; in cottonwood; about clumps of fruiting mistletoe; at
tips of twigs of large valley oak; in black oak; in blue
oak; on dead upper limb of living blue oak; in orchard
tree; on isolated digger pine; in large yellow pine; at
top of dead incense cedar; on ground at roadside; on fence
post; on barn end; on telephone pole.
_Courtship._--I first became acquainted with this handsome woodpecker
in the Arroyo Seco, on the outskirts of Pasadena, during the winter and
spring of 1929, where I often saw these birds busy with their courtship
activities in the tops of the tall sycamores. They were flying about
among the treetops, making a lot of noise, two males sometimes chasing
a female and showing off their brilliant colors, the white spaces in
their wings and the white rumps being especially conspicuous; doubtless
the red crown and yellow throat, set off by black and white, played an
important part in the display. They reminded me of flickers, as they
danced on, or dodged around, the branches in playful, showy antics.
_Nesting._--_Bendire_ (1895) writes:
In the more southern portions of its range nidification
commences sometimes as early as April, and somewhat later
farther north. The nesting sites are mostly excavated in
white-oak trees, both living and dead, but preferably
one of the former is selected in which the core of the
tree is decayed. It also nests occasionally in sycamores,
cottonwoods, and large willow trees, and more rarely in
telegraph poles. Both sexes assist in the excavation of
the nesting site, as well as in incubation. The entrance
hole is about 1⅗ inches in diameter, perfectly circular,
and is sometimes chiseled through 2 or 3 inches of solid
wood before the softer and decayed core is reached. The
inner cavity is gradually enlarged as it descends, and
varies from 8 to 24 inches in depth, usually being from 4
to 5 inches in diameter at the bottom, where a quantity of
fine chips are allowed to remain, on which the eggs are
deposited.
Milton P. Skinner writes to me: “On May 12, 1933, I found a nest in the
main trunk of an almost dead black oak. The opening, 25 feet above the
ground, seemed very small and was placed on the southeast side of the
tree.
“In the Yosemite Valley, these birds nest in the trunks and large limbs
of the Kellogg oaks, and their abandoned holes may be used by pygmy
owls another year. As a rule, the California woodpeckers and the pygmy
owls show little antagonism toward each other. In spite of this usual
custom of nesting in the oaks, most of the birds I saw in the Yosemite
were actually in the cottonwoods along the river. After some searching,
I found at least one nest there in a short, dead stub of a cottonwood,
on July 24, 1933. I saw one bird fly down and feed another that was
inside, and then fly away. The hole was about 12 feet above the ground
and on the north side of the stub, facing the river and away from the
meadow behind it. All the trees in the vicinity were cottonwoods, but
there was one oak 150 feet east of the nesting site. There were six
other holes in the stub, all on the north side and from 6 to 18 feet
above the ground.”
Grinnell and Storer (1924) write:
The more intensive occupancy of the Yosemite Valley
during recent years and the operations of the government
employees in promptly removing dead but standing trees
to be cut up for wood has operated to the detriment of
the woodpeckers which seek such trees for nesting holes.
So it was no surprise, in May, 1919, to find a number of
telephone or electric power poles near Redwood Lane which
had been prospected for nesting sites by woodpeckers--the
California, to judge from the size of hole and general
location. Dearth of suitable natural sites had forced the
birds to at least investigate these newly established
dead-tree substitutes. With no substitutes at all
available, the only result to be logically looked for,
as a result of man’s interference with the natural order
of affairs, would be the disappearance of woodpeckers.
The question arises here as to the justification of the
administratiton in so altering natural conditions in
National Parks as to threaten the persistence there of any
of its native denizens.
_Eggs._--The California woodpecker lays ordinarily four or five
eggs; six eggs are not very rare; and as many as ten have been found
in a nest, probably the product of two females. The eggs vary from
short-ovate to elliptical-ovate. They are pure white, with very little
or no gloss. The measurements of 52 eggs average 25.98 by 19.78
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =29.9= by 19.0,
27.9 by =22.6=, =22.0= by 18.6, and 24.38 by =18.29= millimeters.
_Young._--The period of incubation is said to be about 14 days, in
which both parents assist. Both also help to feed the young. Harriet
Williams Myers (1915) made some interesting observations on a late
brood of young California woodpeckers, which she found in a hole in a
telephone pole, on September 11, between Los Angeles and Pasadena. She
says:
In an hour’s watching the birds fed 28 times, the shortest
interval being one-half minute, the longest eight. In nine
minutes they fed eight times.
On the 15th of the month, when I believe the young must
have been about ten days old, they were fed 24 times in 58
minutes. The food given them now was mostly acorns which
the adults took from the nearby poles, sometimes digging
them out in pieces, and sometimes taking them to the top of
a flat pole where they pounded away for some minutes before
coming to the nest with their bills stuffed full of the
white bits. From this time until the young left the nest
they were fed mostly on these acorns.
One of her most interesting observations was that an apparently young
bird, presumably a fully grown member of an earlier brood, joined the
two parents that were feeding the young in the nest. At one time, this
immature bird entered the nest, while the parents were away, apparently
for the purpose of being fed by them, and remained there for some time.
Meanwhile--
when the adults came to feed they did not go inside but
reached over, fed, and flew away. Three times one of them
did this, but the fourth time, when the male came, he
stood on one side of the hole and I heard him give low,
guttural notes. * * * Presently, the truant young, for such
he proved to be, appeared in the doorway and, with open
mouth, begged for just one bite. * * * But the old bird was
unrelenting and stayed in his position by the hole until
the bird inside, which was undoubtedly a former nestling,
came out and flew onto the wire above, when the adult male
went within.
Just to prove that he was not all baby, the former nestling
turned in and helped feed. Several times he went into
the hole and came directly out, and I might have thought
that he was in there in hopes of getting fed had I not
distinctly seen a big fly in his bill as he entered. Each
time as he bobbed into the hole several white bars showed
plainly on the underside of the outer tail feathers. It was
this marking of a young bird which convinced me that he was
a former nestling. In every other respect he resembled a
male California Woodpecker. Once more, during my watching,
he slipped into the nest, staying eight minutes before they
got him out. The first time it had been twenty minutes.
From the above, and from the observations of Frank A. Leach (1925), to
be referred to later, it seems that the California woodpecker often, if
not regularly, raises two or even three broods in a season.
_Plumages._--The young are hatched naked and blind, but the juvenal
plumage is acquired before the young bird leaves the nest. In this
plumage the young male closely resembles the adult male and the young
female is much like the adult female in general color pattern, but the
red of the crown and nape is duller and more or less mixed with dusky
or black; sometimes the crown is nearly all black mixed with some
scarlet feathers; the colors everywhere are duller, lacking in gloss,
and the plumage is softer, less firm; the yellow of the throat is less
pronounced; the streaks on the breast are less sharply defined; the
tertials and scapulars are tipped with white, and there are narrow
white tips on the two outer tail feathers on each side, but these
tips wear away during winter, or sooner; there are at least two white
spots on each web of the outer tail feather, which are in evidence all
through the first year; as the juvenal wings and tail are retained
until the next summer molt, birds of the year may be thus recognized;
the bill is smaller and weaker than that of the adult. The molt of the
juvenal contour plumage begins in August or September.
Adults have a complete annual molt between July and September, mainly
in August.
_Food._--Some prominent California ornithologists have named this bird
the “California acorn-storing woodpecker,” a rather long but very
appropriate name, for it designates one of its most characteristic
habits and names the largest item in its food supply. W. L. Dawson
(1923) has this to say on the subject:
From time immemorial this bird has riddled the bark of
certain forest trees and stuffed the holes with acorns.
Speculation is still rife as to the cause or occasion or
necessity or purpose of this strange practice, but the fact
is indisputable and the evidence of it widely diffused. * * *
What he accomplishes the photographs show well enough,--the
close, methodical studding of bark or wood of any kind with
acorns, chiefly those of live-oaks, over immense areas.
The cultures, once started, are wrought upon continuously
year by year, as material avails or the colony flourishes.
Live-oaks themselves are the commonest hosts, together
with the white, or post, oak, and the black oak of the
southern counties. After these come sycamore and yellow
pine or, more rarely, eucalyptus. Telegraph and telephone
poles, gables, cornices, and, in fact, any wooden structure
where they are permitted to work, if near the source of
acorn supply, may come in for ornamentation. On a small
square-sawed telephone pole near Marysville I found sixty
acorns (and pecans purloined from a neighboring orchard)
imbedded in a space five inches wide and two feet long.
At that rate the pole carried some 1500 of these tiny
storehouses.
In Tecolote Canyon, west of Santa Barbara, there is a giant
sycamore which I count one of the handsomest examples of
Carpintero’s workmanship--an unbroken shaft, at least
forty feet high and three feet across the inlaid face,
covered with a “solid” mass of acorns totalling, say, some
20,000. Strawberry Valley in the San Jacinto Mountains
appears to be a paradise for the California Woodpecker.
Here majestic oaks (_Quercus californica_) alternate
with still more majestic pines (_Pinus ponderosa_), the
former for sustenance and the latter for storage, and the
doughty “California” is probably the most abundant bird
in the valley. The boles of the most enormous pines are
methodically riddled with their acorn-carrying niches, and
in some of the trees the work is carried through from base
to crown. In one such tree I estimated that there were
imbedded no less than 50,000 acorns.
Dr. William E. Ritter has made an intensive study of this interesting
habit of the California woodpecker and has published the results of
his observations and theories in three extensive papers (1921, 1922,
1938). There is much food for thought in these scholarly papers, to
which the reader is referred, but space here will permit only brief
quotations from or references to them. As to whether the hole drilling
is injurious to the trees, he says (1921): “Although I have examined
many storage pines in widely separated localities, I have never seen
anything even suggestive of harm to the trees from the holes. Never,
so far as I have noticed, do the holes pierce through into the deeper
living layers of the bark.” He noticed that “almost without exception
the nuts were inserted tip in and base out, most of them fitting the
hole snugly,” having been driven in good and hard, and flush with
the surface of the bark, or even countersunken below it; and that
“to a certain extent the store holes are made to fit the size of the
acorns they are to receive”; this latter point was discovered when
he noted that, in a region where the black oak (_Quercus kelloggii_)
predominated, the holes were considerably larger than they were in
the live-oak region, the acorns of the black oak being sharply larger
than those of the live oak. In some cases the acorns were not driven
in flush with the bark, the base being left protruding somewhat and
thus leaving them vulnerable to pilfering by rodents and perhaps
some birds; in this connection, he says: “Conclusive evidence that
nut-eating rodents (squirrels, rats) prey upon the acorns stored by the
woodpeckers was first obtained on the present visit. Two trees were
found on which the bark immediately around acorn holes had been gnawed
by rodents, as unmistakably proved by the tooth marks. The acorns were
gone from some of these holes, but not from all, thus showing that the
marauders had failed in some of their efforts.”
Summarizing his first paper, he makes the following statements:
As to hole drilling: While the holes are made expressly
for the reception of acorns, many holes are probably made
which are never used, holes are made at seasons of the year
when there are no acorns to store, and large numbers of
perfectly serviceable holes seem to be abandoned even in
localities where both birds and acorns are abundant, and
new holes are being made.
As to the storing business itself: While this is
of distinct service to the food necessities of the
woodpeckers, the instinct sometimes goes wrong to the
extent of storing pebbles instead of acorns, thus defeating
entirely the purpose of the instinct. Again, large numbers
of acorns are sometimes stored, the use of which is so long
delayed that the acorns become wholly or largely unfit
for food, and this in places where the bird population
seems normal. Finally, acorns are sometimes stored in such
fashion as to make them easy prey for marauding rodents,
when with some definite foresight and a little more work
such exposure could easily be largely avoided.
In his second paper (1922), after further observations, he states[1]:
My previous surmise that the birds are more interested in
the grubs contained in the acorns than in the acorn meats
has not been substantiated. What I could make out while
in camp among them, by watching them gather and eat their
breakfasts, was to the effect that good uninhabited acorns
were chiefly used. Again and again birds were seen to pick
nuts from the top-most branches of the black oak, fly
with them in their beaks to some approximately horizontal
surface of a large limb on a pine or another oak, make
the surface aid them somehow (I never could see exactly
how, as the “breakfast tables” were, of course, all on the
upper surfaces of the limbs, and too high for my vision)
in breaking and tearing open the nuts. Apparently cracks
and chinks in the table top serve as holders for the acorns
while they are being opened and eaten. This is indicated
by the fact that dead and partly decayed trees or parts of
trees were mostly used. I saw no indication of the feet
being used in handling the nuts. The litter on the ground
under the dining trees, consisting of shell fragments
and lost bits of meat, indicated grubless nuts almost
entirely. This result as to the use of mast is in agreement
with Beal’s examination of the stomach contents of our
woodpecker.
Charles W. Michael (1926), in the Yosemite Valley, made the interesting
discovery that the California woodpecker has been known to learn by
experience and to show some intelligence in its acorn storing. For a
number of years when acorns were abundant no extensive storing was
done, yet the woodpeckers lived in the valley all winter. Then came a
lean year, with no acorn crop, when no storing _could_ be done; and
that winter the woodpeckers were forced to leave the valley for lack
of food. The following year there was a bountiful crop of acorns, and
the woodpeckers, having learned by experience, were busy filling up
their storehouses. “From the above observations,” he says, “one might
conclude that an abundance of acorns is not directly responsible for
prodigious storing. In a land of plenty the necessity of laying aside
stores for future consumption is obviated. It is the barren years that
teach the value of thrift. Intelligence plus experience may well have
been the cause of the excessive storing of this year. A few of the more
intelligent woodpeckers that were forced last winter to abandon the
valley for lack of food are now preparing against the next lean year.”
Claude Gignoux (1921) reports finding almonds stored in the bark of an
oak tree on a ranch near Marysville, Calif., as well as in the side of
a barn.
Dawson (1923) says: “A regrettable taste for fruit is occasionally
cultivated, but this has not reached economic proportions, save in the
case of almonds. Almond orchards thrive best at a very considerable
distance from oak groves.”
Although acorns, almonds, walnuts, and pecans constitute nearly 53
percent of its food, and much more than that in fall and winter, the
California woodpecker eats quite a variety of other food at different
seasons. Prof. F. E. L. Beal (1910) examined the contents of 75
stomachs, which contained “22.43 percent of animal matter to 77.57
percent of vegetable.” Bendire (1895) says: “During the spring and
summer its food consists, to a great extent, of insects, including
grasshoppers, ants, beetles, and different species of flies, varied
occasionally with fruit, such as cherries, which are carried off whole,
apples, figs, and also berries and green corn.”
Mr. Skinner says in his notes: “At times this bird feeds very much
like an eastern red-headed woodpecker. On May 9, 1933, one was seen on
the trunk of an oak, only 4 feet above ground, making flycatcherlike
sallies up under the foliage of the oak. And many times thereafter I
saw the birds operating similarly within the foliage itself. In some
instances I have seen these woodpeckers dart out from high up in tall
yellow pines after passing insects, then gliding back on set wings.
Sometimes they do this from tall electric poles, at times going out as
much as 50 feet. Since there was every reason to suppose that the bird
saw the insect before it started, this speaks well for its keenness of
eyesight. At times, these woodpeckers glean insects from the bark of
trees. In July, in the Yosemite Valley, hunting the twigs and bark for
insects seemed the favorite method of getting food.”
Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1908) saw one of these woodpeckers, in the San
Bernardino Mountains, drive a sapsucker away from its borings in an
alder and then go “the rounds of the borings” drinking from each. Dr.
Harold C. Bryant (1921) saw a California woodpecker robbing a nest of
a pair of western wood pewees; he was “calmly perched on the pewee’s
nest and eating one of the eggs. I could see the white and the yolk of
the egg on the woodpecker’s bill, as he raised his head. After watching
for some time, I attempted to frighten the robber away, but experienced
considerable difficulty in doing so. When he finally left the nest the
pewees continued to dart at him, to drive him farther away. Soon one of
the pewees, apparently the female, returned to the nest, picked up an
eggshell and flew off with it. I was unable to see what she did with
it. In half a minute she returned and began incubating the remaining
eggs.”
_Behavior._--The California woodpecker flies in true woodpecker
fashion, an undulating flight, interspersed with long dips during which
the wings are partly closed and somewhat pressed against the sides of
the body; during the rises the wings are flapped, displaying the black
and white markings conspicuously; there is an upward sweep before
alighting. Grinnell and Storer (1924) say: “When alighting on a tree
trunk, these birds assume a vertical posture, head out, tail appressed
to the bark. They move up by a hitching process--head in, tail out; up;
tail in, head out. If a bird perches on a small horizontal branch, his
position is more likely to be diagonal than directly crosswise. If a
bird alights on the square top of a fence post, he seems ill at ease
and soon backs over the edge into a more woodpecker-like posture.”
Mr. Dawson (1923) writes: “A most characteristic flight-movement is an
exaggerated fluttering wherein progress is at a minimum and exercise at
a maximum. In this way, also, they ascend at acute angles, sometimes
almost vertically. With this movement alternates much sailing with
outspread wings, and certain tragic pauses wherein the wings are quite
folded.” A similar flight is thus described by Grinnell, Dixon, and
Linsdale (1930) as follows: “Individual woodpeckers were often seen
making a kind of flight the object of which we did not determine. A
bird would fly in a nearly vertical direction from its perch for three
meters or more and then commence an irregular swooping flight, finally
coming back to the original perch.”
M. P. Skinner says in his notes: “In many of their ways, motions, and
mannerisms these birds strongly resemble the red-headed woodpeckers of
Eastern United States. Often they are very quiet and remain motionless
in one position for many minutes at a time. They are as apt to perch
crosswise as lengthwise of a horizontal, or nearly horizontal, limb.
At times, they hop along a limb, or the cross-arm of an electric pole,
while their bodies are turned a little sideways. Although one exhibited
the usual woodpecker habit of nervously jumping down backward, and
swaying from side to side, so as to be seen first on one side of his
dead stub and then on the other, he was really noticeably quiet and
motionless most of the time. One was seen in the Yosemite Valley on the
under side of a cottonwood twig, clinging there with his back down.”
Bendire (1895), on the other hand, says: “It is one of the most
restless Woodpeckers I know of, and never appears to be at a loss for
amusement or work of some kind, and no other bird belonging to this
family could possibly be more industrious.” This was my impression of
it, as well as the opinion of others.
Henry W. Henshaw (1921) evidently considered this woodpecker playful,
for he writes: “In searching for the motives underlying the storing
habit of the California Woodpecker we should not lose sight of the fact
that the several acts in the process, the boring of the holes, the
search for the acorns, the carrying them to the holes and the fitting
them in, bear no semblance to work in the ordinary sense of the term,
but is play. I have seen the birds storing acorns many times, and
always when thus engaged they fill the air with their joyous cries and
constantly play tag with each other as they fly back and forth. When
thus engaged they might not inaptly be likened to a group of children
at play.”
California woodpeckers are well known to be sociable birds and to live
more or less in communities or loose colonies, where food conditions
are favorable. But a most remarkable story of apparently communal
nesting is told by Frank A. Leach (1925). On February 2, 1922, he
discovered these woodpeckers excavating a nest in a wooden trolley
pole at Diablo, Calif. He estimated that they must have started work
on this hole about the middle of January and thinks that it was some
time near the latter part of April before it was finished. On March 1,
he “saw two go in one after the other. Both appeared to be working on
the inside. Two other birds on the pole showed interest in the work by
remaining there and taking an occasional peep into the hole.” On April
3, there were “from four to six woodpeckers about the place all day. On
one occasion saw three go into the hole. Heard digging while they were
inside.” On April 17, he saw “three birds go into the cavity and soon
after heard two of them working. Four other birds were on the pole, one
looking into the hole.”
The above extracts from his notes, made at frequent intervals and
often for several days in succession, would seem to indicate that
at least two, and possibly three, pairs of woodpeckers assisted
in the excavation of that nest, but evidently their work was not
very efficient, as the time involved was unusually long. The same
cooperative behavior continued during incubation of the eggs and the
feeding of the young, several different birds working in relays; and
this continued during the rearing of three broods of young that season.
He says that “in the case of the second brood, on eight different
occasions I saw three different old birds feed the young ones in the
nest, and at one time I witnessed a fourth one delivering food to
them.”
Referring to the third brood, he says:
In the large oak tree standing so near the trolley pole
that some of its outer branches nearly reached the
pole, there were almost always from six to eight mature
woodpeckers, all of which seemed to be interested in the
welfare of the nestlings in the pole. I repeatedly saw
three of them feed the youngsters, and on two occasions
noted four different old birds perform this parental
service. I was satisfied from the actions of the birds that
a majority of the flock, if not all of them, participated
in the care of the young woodpeckers. * * *
For others than the parent birds to feed the young was a
custom that was not confined to this group or flock at the
trolley pole. At about the time the young were leaving
that nest, I discovered another nest in a large oak tree
situated about a quarter of a mile distant from the pole,
where I found from one to five old birds, and possibly
more, very busy feeding the nestlings.
Major Bendire (1895) remarks: “The California woodpecker is by far
the most social representative of this family found within the United
States, and it is no unusual occurrence to see half a dozen or more in
a single tree. It is also a well-disposed bird, and seldom quarrels
or fights with its own kind or with smaller species; but it most
emphatically resents the thieving propensities of the different jays,
magpies, and squirrels, when caught trespassing on its winter stores,
attacking these intruders with such vigor and persistency that they are
compelled to vacate the premises in a hurry.”
According to some other observers, its behavior toward other species
is not always as friendly as it might be. M. P. Skinner writes to me:
“Once I found a California woodpecker and a California jay peaceably
perched in the top of a dead cottonwood. But at other times I have
noted much fighting between these woodpeckers and the jays, with the
woodpeckers apparently able to hold their own. On May 1, 1933, at old
Fort Tejon, I saw a California woodpecker make a vicious dive at a
plain titmouse that was clinging to the bark on the trunk of an oak.
On May 31 I saw one make a dive at an Arkansas kingbird on a fence
and drive it away. In May 1933 I found a pair of house finches that
had attempted to nest in a cavity high up in a dead stub of a black
oak. When I appeared, I found a California woodpecker throwing out the
straws and other nest material. The two finches were only a foot or
two distant, but they made no attempt to save their home, although it
is probable that they were scolding. Old acorn stores in the same stub
indicated that some woodpecker had an earlier claim to that stub than
the finches had.”
Howard W. Wright (1908) says:
January 18, while collecting at Newhall, California, I
wounded a Lewis woodpecker. The bird was able to fly
to another tree, and I noticed that some California
woodpeckers in a nearby tree became very much excited. As
the Lewis woodpecker lit on the tree trunk four California
woodpeckers attacked him evidently with the intent of
driving him off. The Lewis started for another tree but a
California flew at him from in front, and they both fell
in the struggle that ensued. At this the other California
woodpeckers, which were joined by a few more, set up a
violent chattering and when I ran up, to my amazement I
found that the Lewis had hold of the California by the
skull, two of its claws entering the latter’s eyes and the
other two entering the skull in front and behind. The Lewis
woodpecker was dead and the California so nearly so that it
died while I was removing the former’s claws.
_Voice._--Mr. Skinner says in his notes: “In May, at least, these
woodpeckers are sometimes noisy while calling to their mates. One gave
a ringing _cleep-ep_, _cleep-ep_ call on May 25, 1933. It was somewhat
similar to a flicker’s call.” Ralph Hoffmann (1927) says: “When a
bird lights on a pole or limb already occupied, there is always mild
excitement, fluttering of the wings, bowing and scraping, and always
a lively interchange of harsh calls, like the syllables _chák-a_,
_chák-a_, _chák-a chak_, dying off at the end.” W. L. Dawson (1923)
gives the following interpretations of its notes: “A jeering, raucous
voice, * * * _Jacob_, _Jacob_, _Jacob_; * * * _Kerack Kerack_;” and
“_chaar chaar tchurrup_.”
_Field marks._--The California woodpecker is conspicuously marked and
need not be mistaken for anything else from any angle. When flying
away, it looks like a black bird with an extensive white rump and with
a white patch in each wing; when flying over or when perched facing
the observer, the white abdomen and the broad black band across the
chest are distinctive; if near enough, the color pattern of the head is
easily seen.
[1] Prof. Ritter’s extensive book (1938) on the California
woodpecker appeared while this bulletin was in
press.--EDITOR.
BALANOSPHYRA FORMICIVORA ANGUSTIFRONS (Baird)
NARROW-FRONTED WOODPECKER
HABITS
The Cape region of southern Baja California is the home of this
subspecies. It is a well-marked race, which Ridgway (1914) describes as
“similar to _B. f. formicivora_, but wing averaging much shorter, bill
relatively larger, white frontal band decidedly narrower, lower throat
usually much more strongly yellow, white area on proximal portion of
remiges smaller, and the adult female with black area on crown much
narrower.”
William Brewster (1902) says of its haunts:
This woodpecker, which seems to be confined to the Cape
Region proper, is exceedingly abundant throughout the pine
forests on the higher mountains south of La Paz and common
in many places in the oaks at the bases of the mountains
and among their foot-hills, ranging downward, according to
Mr. Belding, to an elevation of about 700 feet. Mr. Frazar
found it most numerous on the Sierra de la Laguna, during
the last week of April and the first week of May. After
that its numbers decreased perceptibly. It began breeding
on this mountain the first week in June, but the breeding
season was not at its height until the middle of that
month. * * *
Only one specimen was seen at Triunfo during the last two
weeks of June, but the bird was common and presumably
breeding at Pierce’s Ranch in July. At the latter place
it fairly swarmed in December, the resident colony being
probably augmented by large numbers of winter visitors
from La Laguna, where Mr. Frazar found only a few birds
lingering in late November and early December. Along the
road between San José del Cabo and Miraflores it was seen
in considerable numbers on November 15, and three were
observed in some evergreen oaks at Santiago on November 23.
_Nesting._--There is a set of four eggs in the Thayer collection,
apparently the same set referred to by Mr. Brewster, collected by M.
Abbott Frazar in the Sierra de la Laguna, on June 3, 1887; the nest is
described as 10 feet up in a dead pine stump; the entrance measured 1¾
inches in diameter, and the cavity was 18 inches deep. The measurements
of these 4 eggs are =24.13= by 19.05, 22.61 by =19.56=, =22.61= by
19.30, and 23.88 by =18.80= millimeters.
The food and general habits of this woodpecker do not seem to differ
materially from those of the species elsewhere. It has similar
acorn-storing habits, for Mr. Frazar found “many dead pines literally
stuffed full of acorns.”
BALANOSPHYRA FORMICIVORA ACULEATA (Mearns)
MEARNS’S WOODPECKER
PLATE 28
HABITS
Along our southwestern border, from Arizona, New Mexico, and western
Texas southward over northwestern Mexico to Durango, we find this race
of ant-eating woodpecker. It was separated, named, and described by
Dr. Edgar A. Mearns (1890a) as follows: “General size and coloring
intermediate between _M. formicivorus_ and M. _formicivorus bairdi_;
throat less yellow than in either of them; bill shorter, more slender,
and less arcuate than in either of the other forms of M. formicivorus;
white striping of chest more than in the Pacific coast form, less than
in _formicivorus_.”
He says of its haunts (1890b): “A very common resident through the
pine belt, breeding plentifully. I have found it as high as the spruce
forests, but never in them. It is essentially a bird of the pines, only
occasionally descending to the cottonwoods of the low valleys. The oaks
which are scattered through the lower pine zone supply a large share of
its food.”
Henry W. Henshaw (1875) writes: “This woodpecker was first observed
when we neared Camp Apache, and, so far as my own observations go, its
range in Arizona is coincident with that of the oaks, the acorns of
which appear to constitute a very important item in its bill of fare.
We noticed it to the southward in every locality where oaks were found
in sufficiently large groves to afford it at once a place of shelter
and an inexhaustible source whence to draw food.”
Harry S. Swarth (1904), writing of the Huachuca Mountains, Ariz., says:
“A most abundant summer resident in the lower parts of the mountains;
a few winter here but they are scarce during the cold weather. I saw
but two or three during February and the early part of March, about the
middle of March they began to arrive in numbers, and by April 1 were
most abundant. Primarily a bird of the oak woods they seldom venture
into the higher parts of the mountains, breeding almost entirely below
6,000 feet.”
_Courtship._--We found this woodpecker quite common on the steep slopes
of the Huachuca Mountains in May 1922, especially in the vicinity
of Ramsay Canyon, between 5,000 and 6,000 feet elevation. They were
usually seen in the open groves of tall pines mixed with oaks. A
tall dead pine seemed to be one of their favorite resorts for their
courtship displays, which were both showy and noisy. They reminded me
of flickers as they dodged about the branches, chasing each other and
displaying their conspicuous markings.
_Nesting._--I have the records of four sets of eggs, all taken in the
Huachuca Mountains but in a variety of nesting sites. There are two
sets in the Thayer collection; one, containing six eggs, was taken on
May 10, 1897, from a hole 8 inches deep in the dead limb of a sycamore,
30 feet from the ground; the other set of five eggs was taken on June
1, 1902, from a cavity 10 inches deep in an ash stump, 20 feet from the
ground. A set of three eggs, in my collection, was collected by O. W.
Howard on May 31, 1901; the nest was 6 feet above ground in a dead oak
stump. Frank C. Willard took a set of five eggs on May 31, 1899, from a
cavity 15 inches deep, 35 feet up in a large dead pine stub.
_Eggs._--Mearns’s woodpecker evidently lays three to six eggs. Major
Bendire (1895) mentions a set of ten eggs, taken by F. H. Fowler,
which were “evidently the product of two females.” The eggs are pure
white, of course, and vary from short-ovate to rounded-ovate, with
only a slight gloss. The measurements of 20 eggs average 24.07 by
18.91 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =26.8=
by =17.8= (a long narrow egg), 23.9 by =20.8=, and =22.4= by 19.5
millimeters.
_Plumages._--Mr. Swarth (1904) writes:
About July 1 the young birds begin to make their appearance
so like the adults in general appearance that it is
difficult to distinguish between them. The young of both
sexes usually have the entire crown red, as in the adult
male, but of a duller color, more of a brick red; but one
young female secured has the red area very limited and
coming to a point behind, so as to form a small, triangular
shaped patch on the crown. Of seventeen specimens collected
in the Huachucas, three show, more or less distinctly,
white markings on the outer tail feathers. In one of
these, an adult female, the marks consist of indistinct
white spots, mostly on the inner web. The other two,
juvenile females, have the outer feathers distinctly,
though irregularly, barred with white for about half their
length.
_Food._--The food of this woodpecker is evidently similar to that of
other races of the species. Dr. Mearns (1890b) remarks: “Its habit of
industriously hoarding food in the bark of pines, and in all sorts
of chinks and hollows, is well known. These stores are the source of
unending quarrels between this woodpecker and its numerous pilfering
enemies; and I have laid its supplies under contribution myself, when
short of provisions and lost from the command with which I had been
traveling, by filling my saddlebags with half-dried acorns from under
the loose bark of a dead pine.”
_Behavior._--Mrs. Bailey (1928) says: “An odd habit of the woodpeckers
was happened on by Mr. Ligon in the Black Range. At dark, on March
15, 1913, seeing a bird enter a hole about eight feet up in an oak he
closed it after it, and in the morning when he returned was surprised
to find six birds in the one hole. As the woodpeckers do not nest until
the last of May, and then in high dead pines, it was, of course, a
night roost.”
Ed. S. Steele (1926) tells the following story:
I was camping in a pine forest not many miles from Reserve,
N. Mex., accompanied by a small English terrier. In front
of my tent stood a large dead pine, near the top of which
there were a number of holes, evidently the homes of four
pairs of Ant-eating Woodpeckers (_Balanosphyra formicivora
aculeata_). A gray tassel-eared squirrel came scampering
along, and was at once spied by the dog, which gave chase.
The squirrel ran up the dead tree mentioned above, to be
instantly assailed by the woodpeckers. Their constant cries
and their sharp bills made things so uncomfortable for the
squirrel that it ran down the tree to within a few feet of
the dog, who sent him scampering to the top again with his
eight antagonists constantly flaying him.
About this time there was a swish of wings, and a
sharp-shinned hawk (_Accipiter velow_) darted like a streak
among the woodpeckers. For an instant it seemed that one
of them was doomed, but by a small margin it managed to
escape, and in an instant they had all darted to cover
among the green boughs of surrounding trees. All was quiet
for a few brief seconds, when the woodpeckers returned to
the attack, except one which perched on the topmost bough
of a near-by tree, as guard or lookout, watching for the
hawk. The other seven took up the fight with the squirrel.
In a few minutes the hawk again appeared on the scene,
the guard gave a shrill call of warning, and all the
woodpeckers were under cover before their enemy could reach
them. The hawk, then, finding the birds on their guard,
left and did not return. The terrier soon abandoned the
tree, and the squirrel hurried down and scampered away; the
woodpeckers quickly quieted down and went peacefully about
their home affairs. I believe that the birds recognized in
the squirrel a danger to their eggs or young.
BALANOSPHYRA FORMICIVORA MARTIRENSIS Grinnell and Swarth
SAN PEDRO WOODPECKER
HABITS
The acorn-storing woodpecker of the Sierra San Pedro Martir,
northwestern Baja California, has been separated and described by
Grinnell and Swarth (1926) under the above name, to which they have
added the long common name “San Pedro Martir acorn-storing woodpecker.”
Its distinguishing characters are given as follows:
Most nearly like _B. f. bairdi_. Distinguished from that
species primarily by shorter wing, and by slightly shorter
and notably weaker, more slender bill; also by average
differences in head markings as set forth below. * * *
The relatively feeble bill of this bird, as compared
with that of the upper California _bairdi_, is the most
conspicuous character of this subspecies. In bill structure
it is closely similar to _B. f. aculeata_, of Arizona.
The character of the head markings in the female is
suggestive again of _aculeata_, the red area being usually
more nearly square, as in that form, rather than shorter
than wide, as in _bairdi_. The white frontal band averages
slightly narrower than in _bairdi_, an approach toward the
condition in _angustifrons_, of the Cape San Lucas region.
The yellowish white (more dilutely yellow than in _bairdi_)
U-mark on the lower throat in both sexes averages very much
narrower in our specimens of _martirensis_ than in a large
series of _bairdi_ usually only about half the width of the
former as in the latter. This we are not quite confident of
as a real character, in that there is a chance that “make”
of specimen (whether or not the skin of the throat was
stretched) affects the width of the white band. * * *
In character of the markings on the feathers of the breast
there is no departure from the condition in _bairdi_. The
upper breast is broadly and solidly black, the black band
not penetrated posteriorly with white streaks to such an
extent as in _aculeata_ and _angustifrons_.
The range is given as, “so far as now known, only parts of the Sierra
San Pedro Martir, in northern Lower California, between latitudes
30° and 31°30″; altitude 5,800 to 7,200 feet; life-zone mainly Upper
Sonoran (live-oak association), but also Transition locally or
sporadically.”
The eggs are similar to those of other races of the species. The
measurements of 12 eggs average 26.19 by 18.35 millimeters; the eggs
showing the four extremes measure =25.1= by =19.4=, =19.0= by 18.5, and
22.8 by =16.8= millimeters.
ASYNDESMUS LEWIS (Gray)
LEWIS’S WOODPECKER
PLATE 29
HABITS
My first impression of this curious and interesting woodpecker was of
a large, black bird that looked more like a crow than a woodpecker and
that flew with the strong, steady flight of a crow or a jay, with
none of the undulations common to so many woodpeckers. I made the same
comment the second time I saw it, and am interested to see that the
same impressions were made on many others.
It is essentially a bird of the more open country and among scattered
large trees, rather than of the heavily forested regions. S. F. Rathbun
writes to me of its haunts in western Washington: “In this section of
the State are many tracts of land commonly known as ‘old burns.’ At
one time all were forested, then later they were swept by fire and in
some instances more than once; but even now, on many, still stand the
scarred and blackened trunks of what formerly were large, tall trees;
and it is in or about these unattractive places that this woodpecker is
more apt to be found, although by no means is it restricted to them.”
Major Bendire (1895) says: “I have rarely seen Lewis’s woodpecker in
deep forests; far more frequently just on the outskirts of the pines,
in juniper groves on the table-lands bordering the pines, as well as in
the deciduous timber along streams in the lowlands, and occasionally
even in solitary cottonwoods or willows, near some little spring, in
the drier sagebrush-covered flats, miles away from the nearest forest.”
Winton and Donald Weydemeyer (1928) say that in northwestern Montana it
is--
a common summer resident throughout most of the Transition
zone. It occurs most regularly in mixed broadleaf and
conifer woods in river valleys, and in open forests of
yellow pine along the foothills. It rarely ranges into the
higher mountains, although we observed one individual in a
Canadian zone forest of lodgepole pine and alpine fir, at
an altitude of 6,160 feet. In cut-over or burned woods, it
ranges to a higher elevation than in virgin forests.
In the eastern part of the county, this woodpecker is most
common around farms and slashings, and in the more open
woods of fir, larch, and yellow pine. Near Libby, in the
western part, it seems to prefer creek-bottom woods of
aspen, spruce, and cottonwood.
Johnson A. Neff (1928) says that his “acquaintance with this exotically
brilliant woodpecker began in the mountains of Colorado, and even
now the thought of it calls to mind that bleak, wind-blown area at
an elevation of 8,500 feet, where these birds were very much at home
in the dead trunks of spruce and hemlock that had once covered the
mountains with living verdure.”
_Nesting._--Mr. Rathbun says in his notes: “In western Washington this
woodpecker nests in June. Almost invariably the excavation for its
nesting place is in a dead tree, the trunk of which is more or less
blackened by fire, and this may be one reason why the bird is partial
to the old burns. The tree may be one of several scattered about, or,
infrequently, somewhat isolated. But in any event, this woodpecker
shows a liking for a good-sized tree, broken off at quite a height, the
outside of which has been charred or blackened by the flames. We have
found many of its nesting places, and among these was one we shall not
forget. In this case, the tree was a very large one, was broken off at
a height of about 175 feet, and, as usual, had its outer surface burnt.
Not far below its top was the entrance to the nest of a pair of these
woodpeckers. Because it was so high it could be distinctly seen only by
the use of glasses, but often we had noticed one of the birds enter it
or come out of it. This nesting place was used for a number of years,
and when it was in use we have gone out of our way more than once just
to see these woodpeckers; for the top of the tree was used as a lookout
station by the pair of birds, from which at times one or both would
sail into the air after a flying insect.”
Major Bendire (1895) says that--
it is by no means as particular in the choice of a nesting
site as the majority of our Woodpeckers. Shortly after
arriving on their breeding grounds a suitable site is
selected for the nest, and not infrequently the same
excavation is used for successive years. In most cases
the nesting sites are excavated either in the tops of
tall pines or in dry cottonwoods, and in tall rotten tree
trunks, occasionally in partly decayed limbs of sycamores,
oaks, and less frequently in junipers and willows. The
nests, as a rule, are not easily gotten at, and quite a
number are practically inaccessible, varying in height from
6 to fully 100 feet from the ground.
* * * [At Camp Harney, Oreg.] these birds nested mostly in
junipers. * * * The junipers which are selected for nesting
sites were invariably decayed inside, and after the birds
had chiseled through the live wood, which was usually
only from 1 to 2 inches thick, the remainder of the work
was comparatively easy; the same site, if not disturbed,
was occupied for several seasons, and in such the inner
cavity was much deeper, some being fully 30 inches deep and
generally about 4 inches wide at the bottom. The entrance
hole varies from 2 to 2½ inches in diameter, and when this
is made by the birds it is always perfectly circular; but
occasionally a pair will take advantage of an old knot
hole, if it and the cavity it leads to are not too large.
The Weydemeyers (1928) say that in northwestern Montana this species
exercises a wide range of selection for nesting trees; of four nests
that they record, two were in larch stubs, one in a dead cottonwood,
and one in a live yellow pine; these nests were in the Transition Zone
at elevations between 2,000 and 3,100 feet.
Ed. S. Currier (1928) found Lewis’s woodpeckers nesting in what
he called “colonies,” near Portland, Oreg.; in each of two dead
cottonwoods, less than a mile apart, he found three occupied nests all
on the same day.
_Eggs._--Bendire (1895) says:
From five to nine eggs are laid to a set; those of six or
seven are the most common, but sets of eight are not very
rare; I have found several of that number, and a single set
of nine.
The eggs of Lewis’s woodpecker vary greatly in shape and
also in size. They are mostly ovate or short ovate in
shape, but an occasional set is decidedly rounded ovate,
while others are elliptical ovate; the shell is close
grained and, in most cases, dull, opaque white, without
any gloss whatever. Some sets, however, are moderately
glossy, but scarcely as much so as the better-known eggs of
the red-headed woodpecker, and none are as lustrous as the
eggs of the flicker.
The measurements of 58 eggs average 26.22 by 19.99 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =30.48= by 21.34, 26.67 by
=24.38=, and =23.37= by =17.27= millimeters.
_Young._--Major Bendire (1895) says of the young:
Both sexes assist in incubation, and this lasts about two
weeks. The young leave the nest about three weeks after
they are hatched, and are readily tamed. I kept a couple
for several days, but they had such enormous appetites that
I was glad to give them their liberty, as they kept me
busy providing suitable food. They were especially fond of
grasshoppers, but also ate raw meat, and climbed everywhere
over the rough walls of my house. A considerable share of
the food of these birds is picked up off the ground, and
they appear to be much more at home there than woodpeckers
generally are. The young are fed on insects, and I believe
also on berries; I have seen one of these birds alight
in a wild strawberry patch, pick up something, evidently
a strawberry, fly to a tree close by in which the nest
was situated, and give it to one of the young which was
clinging to the side of the tree close to the nesting site.
_Plumages._--The young Lewis’s woodpecker is hatched naked and blind,
but the juvenal plumage is acquired before the young bird leaves
the nest. In fresh juvenal plumage the red “face” of the adult is
replaced by black or dusky, though a young bird taken on July 22
shows some red mixed with the black in this area; the bill is small
and weak; the crown and occiput are dull brownish black, without any
greenish luster; the silvery-gray nuchal collar of the adult is wholly
lacking; the under parts are mostly dull pale gray or dull grayish
white, more or less suffused on the central breast and abdomen with
dull red or orange-red; the whole plumage is softer and more blended
in texture. Dr. J. A. Allen (Scott, 1886) says of some young birds
that he examined: “The back and upper surface of the wings are bronzy
green nearly as in the adult, with, however, in addition, broad bars
of steel-blue on the scapulars and quills. These bars are especially
prominent on the secondaries and inner vanes of the primaries, and are
seen also in some specimens on the rectrices. The steel-blue edging the
outer vanes of the quill feathers in the adult is absent; and the inner
secondaries and longest primaries are tipped more or less prominently
with white.”
This juvenal plumage is worn through the summer and into September,
when the molt into the first winter plumage begins with a sprinkling
of the silvery, bristly feathers appearing on the breast and in the
collar, with the increase of red in the “face,” and with metallic-green
feathers showing on the head. This molt is apparently prolonged and is
not finished until early in winter, when young birds and adults are
practically alike. Adults have a complete annual molt late in summer
and fall; I have observed it as late as October 12.
_Food._--Referring to the food of Lewis’s woodpecker, Major Bendire
(1895) writes:
In summer its food consists mainly of insects of different
kinds, such as grasshoppers, large black crickets, ants,
beetles, flies, larvæ of different kinds, as well as of
berries, like wild strawberries and raspberries, service
berries and salmon berries, acorns, pine seeds, and juniper
berries, while in cultivated districts cherries and other
small fruits enter into its daily bill of fare. Here, when
common, it may occasionally do some little damage in the
orchards, but this is fully compensated by the noxious
insects it destroys at the same time. In localities where
grasshoppers are abundant they live on these pests almost
exclusively while they last. Mr. Shelly W. Denton tells
me he noticed this Woodpecker gathering numbers of May
flies (_Ephemera_) and sticking them in crevices of pines,
generally in trees in which it nested, evidently putting
them away for future use, as they lasted but a few days. It
is an expert flycatcher, and has an extremely keen vision,
sallying forth frequently after some small insect when this
is perhaps fully 100 feet from its perch.
On this latter subject, Mr. Rathbun writes to me:
Lewis’s woodpecker is an expert at catching insects on the
wing. When in this act, its perch is some vantage spot,
such as the top of a dead tree or a bare limb in the open.
Here it sits motionless, except to turn its head from side
to side on the lookout for its prey; and when this is seen,
the bird glides from its resting place to make a capture.
On one occasion for more than an hour, we watched a pair of
these woodpeckers seize flying insects, and in that length
of time not less than 35 were taken. Through our field
glasses we kept a close watch on the birds and soon learned
from their actions when an insect was sighted, thus it was
easy for us to anticipate its capture, and in not a single
instance was a failure made by either of the birds. Once,
a light puff of air changed the course of the insect just
at the time it was about to be taken, but the woodpecker
made a quick turn upward at the same time, dropped its legs
straight down, and neatly made the take. When busy catching
insects on the wing, this bird leaves its perch by easy
wing beats or a long, slow, graceful glide; then, after its
prey is caught, rises in its flight and, quickly wheeling,
returns to its lookout station.
But, as if not content with hunting insects after the
manner of a flycatcher, sometimes this bird mingles with
the swallows as they hawk over the ground. On one occasion
in summer, as we came to a very open pasture, we noticed
numbers of barn and cliff swallows in flight over it after
insects, and in company with them was a pair of Lewis’s
woodpeckers. Back and forth over the meadow flew these
dark birds, busy in an attempt to catch flying insects,
and their actions as they flew were in marked contrast to
those of the graceful swallows. Although we watched the
woodpeckers for more than half an hour, throughout that
time neither one alighted; and when we left the place both
still coursed busily above the field.
About one-third of the food of Lewis’s woodpecker consists of acorns.
It shares with the California woodpecker the interesting habit of
storing acorns, though its method of storing them is quite different,
for it seldom, if ever, makes the neat round holes to fit the acorns,
so characteristic of the other species; and its stores of acorns are
never so extensive, so systematic, or so conspicuous as those of the
California woodpecker. Charles W. Michael (1926) writes:
Recently we watched a Lewis Woodpecker making trips back
and forth between a Kellogg oak and his home tree, a
cottonwood. He was busy storing away his winter supply of
acorns. Occasionally he picked a fallen acorn from the
ground; more often he flew into the lesser branches of the
oak, and hanging like a great black chickadee he plucked
the acorn from the cup. With crow-like flappings, his broad
wings carried him back to the dead cottonwood with his
prize in his bill. Alighting somewhat below the summit of
his tree he would, by a series of flight jumps, come to a
certain shattered stub where a fissure formed a vise. Into
this he would wedge the acorn.
With the acorn held firmly in place he would set about
cutting away the hull, and strong strokes of his bill would
soon split away the shell and expose the kernel. But he was
not satisfied in merely making the kernel accessible, he
must go on with his pounding until he had broken it into
several pieces, and then with a piece in his bill he would
dive into the air like a gymnast, drop twenty or thirty
feet and come with an upward swoop to perch on the trunk
of the same tree. A few hitching movements would bring him
to a deep crack that opened into the heart of the tree.
Here he would carefully poke away, for future reference,
his morsel. Usually the acorn was cut into four parts,
involving four such trips, and on the last trip to the vise
he would take the empty hull in his bill, and with a jerk
of his head, toss it into the air. An examination of the
ground beneath the tree disclosed hundreds of empty acorn
shells. Holding a watch on the Lewis Woodpecker, we found
that he made five trips in five minutes and stored five
acorns.
J. Eugene Law (1929) has published another illuminating paper on this
subject, which is well worth reading; he describes in considerable
detail the woodpeckers’ methods in storing the meats of acorns in
cracks in poles and indulges in some speculation as to the causes and
purposes involved in the habit.
Herbert Brown (1902) found Lewis’s woodpeckers quite destructive to
pomegranates and quinces, near Tucson, Ariz. On September 30 he counted
ten in the pomegranate groves; “they were mostly feeding on pomegranate
fruit. They first cut a hole through the hard skin of the fruit and
then extract the pulp, leaving nothing but an empty shell.” Later, on
October 13, he says: “Now that the pomegranate crop has been destroyed
they have commenced to eat the quinces, of which there are large
quantities. On the tops of some of the bushes I noticed that every
quince had been eaten into, one side of the fruit being generally eaten
away.”
William E. Sherwood (1927) writes:
On June 16, 1923, while collecting near Imnaha, Wallowa
County, Oregon, I frightened a Lewis woodpecker from the
top of a fence post where it was evidently having a feast.
On top of the post it had left a fresh egg, probably its
own; for it was absolutely fresh, of the right size, and
unmarked. The shell had been broken into, but the contents
not yet extracted.
In a knothole on the side of the post was an eggshell (of
the same kind), and a snail shell which had been broken
into. Wedged into the cracks of the post were several
insects (some of them still alive) of the two species
commonly known as “salmon flies” and “trout flies.” On the
ground at the foot of the post were several snail shells,
a green prune (picked into), and several cherry seeds with
stems attached.
Johnson A. Neff (1928) has much to say about the economic status of
this woodpecker, mainly in Oregon. A few quotations from his paper will
serve to show the vast amount of damage to the fruit grower that it
does in sections where it is abundant, mainly in summer and fall. He
says that Prof. Beal (1911) “mentions one case in Washington wherein
the birds tore the paper at the corners of packed boxes of apples left
in the orchard over night, picking into every apple within reach, and
necessitating the repacking of every box attacked.”
S. D. Hill wrote to Mr. Neff:
In some sections and seasons they will destroy carloads of
fruit, especially in orchards near timber. I have known
them to do 50 percent damage to a pear crop in the Peyton
district on upper Rogue River. Jackson Gyger, Ashland,
wrote: “In 1924 the loss on Spitz and Delicious apples was
about 75 percent, on Newtowns about 15 percent; Bosc and
Anjou pears about 10 percent. The loss on trees near oak
timber was nearly 100 percent. This season (1925) due to
hunting them every day the loss was possibly 50 percent
less. I bought $18.00 worth of ammunition to combat them
this year. One man can not keep them out of a seven acre
orchard, as they will work on one end while you are scaring
them out of the other.”
Mr. Neff goes on to say:
These complaints can not be over-looked, for stomach
analyses show only the volume of fruit eaten, not the
percentage of fruit damaged per tree, nor the real loss to
the orchardist. * * *
In Oregon, although it sometimes becomes a nuisance in the
small fruit plantings of various areas, it centers its
destructive activities in the Rogue Valley; there it flocks
in the greatest abundance. * * *
In this area there can be no question of the objectionable
status of the Lewis woodpecker. If the birds would consume
each fruit injured, there would be little complaint of
their taking the quantity which probably would satisfy
them. They are restless and energetic, however, and always
attacking fresh fruit, which with one stroke of the bill
is ruined for commercial use. If one allows only one bite
to each fruit, some of the stomachs studied would have
contained the samples of as high as two bushels of fruit.
In the restricted areas mentioned the Lewis woodpecker is a
pest.
_Behavior._--Lewis’s woodpecker seldom indulges in the undulating
flight so common to other woodpeckers, though it sometimes swings in a
long curve in a short flight from tree to tree. Its ordinary, traveling
flight is quite unlike the flight of other members of the family; it is
strong, direct, and rather slow, with steady strokes of its long, broad
wings. At first glance one would hardly recognize it as a woodpecker,
for its flight and its appearance are more suggestive of a crow, a
Clarke’s nutcracker, or a jay. But it is far from clumsy in the air,
and its skill in catching insects on the wing demonstrates is mastery
of the air in flight. It also indulges in some rather remarkable
aerial evolutions, which one would hardly expect from a member of the
woodpecker family. On this subject, Robert Ridgway (1877) writes:
In its general habits and manners this beautiful species
resembles quite closely the eastern Red-headed Woodpecker
(_M. erythrocephalus_), being quite as lively and of an
equally playful disposition. Some of its actions, however,
are very curious, the most remarkable of them being a
certain elevated flight, performed in a peculiar floating
manner, its progress apparently laborious, as if struggling
against the wind, or uncertain, like a bird which had
lost its course and become confused. At such a time it
presents the appearance of a Crow high in the air, while
the manner of its flight is strikingly similar to that
of Clarke’s Nutcracker (_Picicorvus columbianus_). * * *
After performing these evolutions to its satisfaction, it
descends in gradually contracting circles, often to the
tree from which it started.
Herbert Brown (1902) evidently saw a similar flight, of which he says:
“In flight they have little or none of that laborious undulating
movement so common to its kind, but in action and flight they seem
possessed of peculiarities supposed to belong to birds of a totally
different family. Today not less than fifty of them were circling
through the air, at an elevation of about 500 feet, with all the ease
and grace of the Falconidae. Not a stroke of the wing was apparent.
* * * Those high in the air were sailing in great circles. They kept
it up indefinitely and had the appearance of being so many miniature
crows. When sailing they appear to open their wings to the fullest
extent possible.”
Mr. Neff (1928) states that “these birds love the hottest sunshine,
and are commonly found perched in the tiptop of some tall partly-dead
tree, whence they can scan the air for insect food. They rarely sit
vertically upright on a branch as do most other woodpeckers, but perch
cross-wise with ease. They seldom climb up the trunk or branches,
although perfectly capable of doing so, and are rarely heard tapping.”
They perch occasionally on wires, an uncommon habit with other
woodpeckers.
Major Bendire (1895) observes: “On its breeding grounds Lewis’s
woodpecker appears to be a stupid and rather sluggish bird; it does not
show nearly as much parental affection as most of the other members
of this family, and is much less demonstrative. It is not at all shy
at such times, and will often cling to some convenient limb on the
same tree while its eggs are being taken, without making the least
complaint.”
_Voice._--Bendire (1895) says: “It is by far the most silent woodpecker
I have met, and, aside from a low twittering, it rarely utters a loud
note. Even when suddenly alarmed, and when it seeks safety in flight,
the shrill ‘huit, huit’ given on such occasions by nearly all of our
woodpeckers is seldom uttered by it. Only when moving about in flocks,
on their first arrival in the spring and during the mating season,
which follows shortly afterwards, does it indulge in a few rattling
call notes, resembling those of the Red-shafted Flicker, and it drums
more or less, in a lazy sort of way, on the dead top of a tall pine, or
a suitable limb of a cottonwood or willow.”
Ralph Hoffmann (1927) writes: “For a great part of the year the Lewis
woodpecker is a silent bird, uttering not even a call note, but in the
mating season it utters a harsh _chirr_ and a high-pitched squalling
_chee-up_, repeated at rather long intervals. Adult birds utter near
the nest a series of sharp metallic cries like the syllable _ick, ick,
ick_, which when rapidly repeated become a rattle. The young in the
nest utter the usual hissing sound of young woodpeckers.”
_Field marks._--Lewis’s woodpecker should be easily recognized. At a
distance it appears likes a black bird, the back and the upper and
lower surfaces of the wings being black, with no conspicuous white
showing anywhere, and with a crowlike flight, broad wings and black
tail. At short range, the greenish sheen of the back may glisten in the
sunlight, and the silvery gray collar and pinkish underparts may be
seen, as well as the gray upper breast and perhaps the red face.
_Fall._--This woodpecker seems to be a highly migratory species. From
the northern parts of its range it disappears almost entirely during
winter; and throughout its entire range it is given to extensive
wanderings, being very abundant in certain localities during fall and
winter in certain seasons and at other seasons entirely absent. The
species is highly gregarious in fall, wandering about in large flocks
in search for suitable food supplies.
Mr. Rathbun tells me that this woodpecker is found in Washington from
April to about November and occasionally is seen in winter, and says:
“In this part [western] of the State the fall migration of this bird
seems to begin early in September. Once, very early in the month,
on our arrival at a lake not far from Seattle, we noticed a large
number of these woodpeckers in three or four deciduous trees along
the shore. Occasionally, a few of the birds would make short flights
after insects in the air, but by far the larger number were more or
less inactive and appeared to be resting, as some remained motionless
where perched. And when one did change its position, it did this in
a listless manner. Our arrival at the lake was rather late in the
afternoon, and from the actions of the birds as a whole we gained the
impression that they must have made quite an extended flight that day
on their movement southward. On several other occasions in September we
have seen this woodpecker as it was migrating. In each case a good many
were in company, though rather loosely associated. And once, moving in
a southerly direction with them for a very brief time, were numbers of
nighthawks, swallows, and Vaux’s swifts flying around for insects.”
Mr. Neff (1928) writes:
This species, more than all its kin, moves in flocks in
autumn. After the nesting season it gathers into flocks
of from 10 to 300 or more. In such numbers it drops down
into the fruit districts of southern Oregon and of northern
California, and disaster results. * * *
On August 29, the writer, accompanied by Mr. Richardson,
made a trip to Lake of the Woods, Klamath County. Just
south of Ashland a few scattered individuals were seen. As
the Cascade summit was approached many were seen in the
open fields and meadows. In the flats near the lake, and
in the open meadows near Rainbow Creek, numbers were found
feeding on the mountain huckleberries. Returning to Ashland
on September 1, huge flocks of these birds could be seen
moving steadily toward the lower Valley. * * *
On September 7, also, the growers in the vicinity of
Medford reported the arrival of the first birds there.
Flocks were present until September 19, when almost every
bird in the area disappeared. A few scattering individuals
were left in various foothill areas, but these left during
November. The areas in which they wintered so abundantly
during the 1924-5 season were totally deserted during the
1925-6 season, and not until spring did they return to this
area.
Herbert Brown (1902) states that Lewis’s woodpeckers appeared in large
numbers, during the fall of 1884, in the Santa Cruz Valley, Ariz., the
first he had seen there for 20 years. He saw the first one on September
28 and ten on the 30th. They were very abundant at times during October
but disappeared at intervals. They were last seen on November 16.
_Winter._--W. E. D. Scott (1886) says of its winter habits in Arizona:
About my house it generally appeared about the 20th of
September, and some years was very abundant. It stays as
late as April 20, and then is not seen again till fall,
though I have seen the species in the pine region above me
late in the spring. In 1884, there was an unprecedented
abundance of the species throughout the entire region under
consideration. They came in countless numbers about the
ranches, both on the San Pedro and near Tucson. Arriving
early in September, they did great injury to the fruit
crops raised in these regions, and I heard much complaint
of them. In the oak woods they were equally abundant,
living almost altogether on acorns, but spending much of
the warmer portion of the day catching insects on the wing,
very much as any of the larger flycatchers do, only that
on leaving the perch of observation or rest, the flight is
much more prolonged than in the flycatchers that I have
seen.
Lewis’s woodpeckers sometimes remain in winter, in small numbers, as
far north as the Okanagan Valley in British Columbia. According to
Suckley and Cooper (1860), they are “constant winter residents” near
Fort Dalles on the Columbia River. Of their winter habits, Suckley
writes:
They seem in winter to be semi-gregarious, flying singly,
yet still keeping more or less in each other’s company.
Their flight at this season is high and very erratic,
resembling much, in its characteristic peculiarities,
that of the swallow On warm days they keep up a lively
chattering noise, unlike, in character, that of any other
woodpecker that I have heard. During the cold season they
are so shy that it is difficult to shoot them, as at the
least alarm they betake themselves to the tops of the
highest trees in the vicinity. They at that season subsist
principally upon the larvae of insects, found in the cracks
and fissures of the “red pine” of the country. I dissected
a specimen killed at Fort Dalles, January 9, 1855, finding
the coats of the stomach (gizzard) very thick and muscular,
its cavity filled with the white larvae of insects,
together with fine gravel.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Western United States, southwestern Canada, and northwestern
Mexico; migratory in the northern areas.
_Breeding range._--Lewis’s woodpecker breeds =north= to southern
British Columbia (Courtenay, Okanagan Landing, and Arrow Lake);
Montana (Fortine, Flathead Lake, and Great Falls); and southwestern
South Dakota (Elk Mountains). =East= to southwestern South Dakota
(Elk Mountains); southeastern Wyoming (Laramie Hills and Laramie);
eastern Colorado (Boulder, Denver, Colorado Springs, Boone, and Rouse
Junction); and New Mexico (Bojuaque and Sacramento Mountain). =South=
to southern New Mexico (Sacramento Mountain); Arizona (San Francisco
Mountain and Fort Whipple); and southern California (Paso Robles).
=West= through the coast ranges of California, Oregon, Washington, and
British Columbia (Victoria, Comox, and Courtenay).
_Winter range._--On the Pacific coast the species is resident =north=
to the Columbia River (Portland and The Dalles, Oreg.) and is found
=south= at this season to northern Baja California (Catavina and
Guadalupe Valley). During two different winters these woodpeckers were
recorded wintering in southern British Columbia (Alowna in 1920-21,
Vernon in 1928-29, and Summerland 1928-29).
In the Rocky Mountain region it winters =north= to north-central
Colorado (Boulder and Denver) and is found =south= to central Texas
(San Angelo); southern New Mexico (Guadalupe Mountains); and northern
Sonora (5 miles southwest of Nogales, Ariz.).
_Spring migration._--At neither season is the migratory movement
extensive, but the following early dates of arrival in the
northern parts of the breeding range may be considered typical:
Wyoming--Wheatland, April 15; Laramie, May 5; Yellowstone Park, May 14.
Montana--Fortine, April 27; Big Hole River, May 1; Corvallis, May 6.
Washington--Grand Dalles, April 23; Prescott, April 26; Tacoma, April
27. British Columbia--Okanagan Landing, April 20; Arrow Lakes, April
28; Sumas, May 3.
_Fall migration._--The following are late dates of departure in autumn:
British Columbia--Arrow Lakes, October 16; Kelowna, October 23; William
Head, November 23. Washington--Prescott, September 18; North Dalles,
October 10; Yakima, October 29. Montana--Columbia Falls, September 9;
Missoula, September 17; Gold Creek, September 21. Wyoming--Laramie,
September 24; Careyhurst, September 26; Wheatland, October 4.
_Casual records._--Lewis’s woodpecker has been taken on several
occasions at points east of its normal range. Among these records are
Alberta, Castor, May 7 and 9, 1924; Big Hay Lake, October 12, 1930; and
Lesser Slave Lake, May 22, 1928; Saskatchewan, one specimen at Herschel
on September 23, 1914, three in the Qu’Appelle Valley, one from near
Eastend on September 19, 1915, two in the same vicinity on September
24, 1929, and two in the summer of 1931; North Dakota, a specimen was
taken at Neche, on October 13, 1916, and one was noted at Grafton on
October 10, 1926; Nebraska, recorded at Long Pine during the winter
of 1898-99; Kansas, a specimen at Ellis on May 6, 1878, and another
near Lawrence on November 7, 1908; eastern Oklahoma, one was carefully
observed near Tulsa on December 24, 1922; Iowa, recorded at Sioux City
from November 28, 1928, to April 7, 1929; Illinois, one recorded from
Chicago on May 24, 1923, and another from Argo on May 14, 1932; and
Rhode Island, a specimen collected at Mount Pleasant, near Providence,
on November 16, 1928.
_Egg dates._--California: 19 records, April 18 to June 10; 10 records,
May 3 to 28, indicating the height of the season.
Colorado: 30 records, May 8 to August 6; 15 records, June 2 to 20.
Oregon: 18 records, May 17 to June 24; 9 records, May 30 to June 10.
British Columbia: 6 records, May 31 to June 15.
CENTURUS CAROLINUS (Linnaeus)
RED-BELLIED WOODPECKER
PLATES 30, 31
HABITS
This showy and noisy woodpecker enjoys a wide distribution throughout
much of the eastern half of the United States, except the most northern
and northeastern States. Throughout much of this range, it is one
of the commonest and most conspicuous of the woodpeckers. Arthur H.
Howell (1932) writes: “In Florida, red-bellied woodpeckers are found
chiefly in hammocks, groves, and wet bottomland timber, less commonly
in the pine woods and the cypress swamps. * * * These woodpeckers are
not particularly shy, and they often visit dooryards and orchards.” In
Texas, according to George Finlay Simmons (1925), its favorite haunts
are “heavily timbered bottom lands or swampy woods; open deciduous or
mixed coniferous woodlands with very large trees; heavy woods of oak
and elm along river and creek bottoms; shade trees and dead trees in
town.” Major Bendire (1895) says: “Throughout the northern portions of
its range it prefers deciduous or mixed forests to coniferous, but in
the south it is apparently as common in the flat, low pine woods as in
the oak hammocks. Newly cleared lands in which numbers of girdled trees
still remain standing are favorite resorts for this as well as other
species.”
_Nesting._--Bendire (1895) writes:
Birds that migrate from the northern portions of their
range usually arrive on their breeding grounds rather
early, sometimes by March 20, and shortly afterwards
preparations for nesting are commenced. A suitable site is
readily found in the decayed top of some tree, or in an
old stump, near a stream along the edges of a pasture, or
close to some road, and less often farther in the center
of a forest. Deciduous trees, especially the softer wooded
ones, such as elms, basswood, maple, chestnut, poplar,
willow, and sycamore, are preferred to the harder kinds,
such as ash, hickory, oak, etc. In northern Florida they
nest frequently in pines. Several excavations are often
found in the same tree in which the nest is located, and
occasionally the same site, with slight repairs, is used
for more than one season. * * *
Both sexes assist in excavating the nesting site, as well
as in incubation, which lasts about fourteen days. The
sites selected are usually from 5 to 70 feet from the
ground, and resemble those of our Woodpeckers in every
respect, averaging about 12 inches in depth. It takes from
seven to ten days to excavate a nest, and frequently the
birds rest a week afterwards before beginning to lay; an
egg is deposited daily, and from three to five are usually
laid to a set, rarely more.
Mr. Howell (1932) says that in Florida “almost any kind of a tree
will satisfy the birds for a nesting site, but a partly decayed stub
seemingly is preferred. Where cabbage palms occur, a dead stub of that
tree is often chosen, and cavities in oaks, cypresses, pines, and
other trees are frequently utilized, the nesting hole being anywhere
from 5 to 70 feet from the ground, usually, however, under 40 feet.
Nesting begins in April and continues until June.” The only nest I ever
examined in Florida was found on April 25, 1903, on one of the Bowlegs
Keys, in the Bay of Florida; it was placed in a dead branch of a black
mangrove; the cavity was about 14 inches deep and contained four fresh
eggs.
Mr. Simmons (1925) says that in Texas this woodpecker nests in “dead
limbs of stumps of hackberry, Chinaberry, cedar elm, pecan, and
American water elm trees, particularly the rotten, shaky, skeleton
upper-parts of living hackberry trees in backyards, or in telegraph
poles along city streets and alleys.” In a small village in Texas I
once found a nest containing three eggs in a fencepost near one of the
houses.
Various observers have given quite different measurements of the
nesting cavity. Mr. Simmons (1925) says: “Entrance, diameter 1.75 to
1.96. Cavity, depth 10 to 12; widest diameter near bottom (3 above
eggs) 5.25.” William H. Fisher (1903) found a nest in Maryland in which
“the opening measured 2 by 2¼ inches and it was 5 inches from the outer
edge of the hole to the back wall.”
Charles R. Stockard (1904) located a nest in Mississippi, of which he
says:
In the spring of 1900 a nest of this species was located
in a dead cottonwood tree which stood in an open pasture.
The nest was a burrow fifteen inches deep with a perfectly
circular entrance about forty feet above the ground. A set
of five eggs was taken from it on April 24. The entrance
being small it was found necessary to cut it larger so as
to admit my hand. Twenty-three days later the same nest
contained a second set of five eggs, slightly incubated.
The enlarging of the entrance evidently had no ill effect
except for the fact that the burrow had been deepened
several inches, probably to prevent an extra amount of
light on the floor of the nest. These birds seem to gauge
the depth of their excavations more by the amount of light
admitted than from any instinct to dig a certain distance.
For example, burrows that had their entrance just below a
limb or were situated in shady woods were noticed, as a
rule, to be shallower than those located in exposed fields
or on the sunny side of the tree.
Bayard H. Christy (1931) describes a nest found in Pennsylvania as
follows:
The hole was in the top of a great primeval white oak,
standing in the bottom of a wooded ravine and at the edge
of a neglected clearing, in southern Beaver County. I had
discovered it a month or six weeks before, attracted by
the calls of the bird. The hole was drilled in a dead and
vertically standing bough about eight inches in diameter,
in the very centre of the crown of the oak, and was, I
should say, about eighty feet above the ground; it was
drilled in the northern side of the bough, and beneath the
talus of a branch which had died and fallen away, leaving
a knot-hole a few inches above. The woodpeckers’ hole was
newly cut, and the bark around and beneath it had been
trimmed by use or by design, so that the region about
formed a tawny patch upon the grey of the bough.
S. A. Grimes (1932) mentions four cases that have come under his
observation, in which red-bellied woodpeckers have occupied old nests
of red-cockaded woodpeckers in Florida. F. M. Phelps (1914) mentions
another similar case.
_Eggs._--The red-bellied woodpecker lays three to eight eggs, usually
four or five. It is a persistent layer; if the first set is taken, it
will lay a second set within a week or two, generally in the same nest.
Mr. Stockard (1904) reports his experience with a pair that laid four
sets of eggs, 19 eggs in all, and all in the same nest.
Bendire (1895) says that “the eggs are white, mostly ovate in shape;
the shell is fine grained and rather dull looking, with little or
no gloss, resembling in this respect the eggs of Lewis’s woodpecker
more than those of the red-headed species.” I have seen eggs that are
elliptical-ovate in shape, and decidedly glossy; eggs that have been
incubated for some time become more glossy than when first laid. The
measurements of 50 eggs average 25.06 by 18.78 millimeters; the eggs
showing the four extremes measure =27.00= by 19.79, 25.15 by =23.62=,
=23.00= by 18.70, and 23.11 by =16.76= millimeters.
_Young._--The period of incubation is said to be about 14 days. Both
sexes assist in this and in the feeding and care of the young. In the
more northern portions of its range, probably only one brood is reared
in a season, but in the South this woodpecker is said to raise two and
sometimes three broods.
_Plumages._--Like other woodpeckers, the young are hatched naked and
blind, but the juvenal plumage is acquired before the young leave the
nest. In this the young male closely resembles the adult female, but
the colors are duller, the barring is less distinct, and the white bars
are suffused with brownish white; there are indistinct dusky shaft
streaks on the chest and little or no red on the abdomen, which, if
present, is more orange or yellowish; there is no clear red on the
head, but the gray crown is sometimes suffused centrally with dark red
mixed with the gray; the hind neck is often suffused with pinkish or
yellowish. The juvenal female is similar to the young male, but the
top of the head is darker gray, or dusky, and there is less reddish
or yellowish suffusion anywhere. The juvenal plumage is apparently
worn through the first fall; I have seen it as late as December 20,
but Forbush (1927) says that it is shed between August and October. In
the first winter plumage, there is an advance toward maturity, young
males acquiring more red on the crown and occiput, and young females
on the latter. There is probably a more or less continuous molt during
winter, or a partial prenuptial molt in early spring, by which young
birds become practically indistinguishable from adults. Adults have a
complete postnuptial molt late in summer and early in fall.
_Food._--Bendire (1895) says:
Its food consists of about equal proportions of animal and
vegetable matter, and it feeds considerably on the ground.
Insects, like beetles, ants, grasshoppers, different
species of flies, and larvae are eaten by them, as well
as acorns, beechnuts, pine seeds, juniper berries, wild
grapes, blackberries, strawberries, pokeberries, palmetto
and sour-gum berries, cherries, and apples. In the South
it has acquired a liking for the sweet juice of oranges
and feeds to some extent on them; but as it always returns
to the same one, until this ceases to yield any more
juice, the damage done in this is slight. It has also been
observed drinking the sweet sap from the troughs in sugar
camps. The injury it commits by the little fruit it eats
during the season is fully atoned for by the numerous
insects and their larvae which it destroys at the same
time, and I therefore consider this handsome Woodpecker
fully worthy of protection.
An examination of 22 stomachs by Professor Beal (1895) showed: “Animal
matter (insects) 26 percent and vegetable matter 74 percent. A small
quantity of gravel was found in 7 stomachs, but was not reckoned as
food. Ants were found in 14 stomachs, and amounted to 11 percent of
the whole food. Adult beetles stand next in importance, aggregating
7 percent of all food, while larval beetles only reach 3 percent.
Caterpillars had been taken by only 2 birds, but they had eaten so many
that they amounted to 4 percent of the whole food. The remaining animal
food is made up of small quantities of bugs(_Hemiptera_), crickets
(_Orthoptera_), and spiders, with a few bones of a small tree frog
found in 1 stomach taken in Florida.”
The red-bellied woodpecker eats some corn, which it has been seen to
steal from corncribs and from bunches of corn hung up to dry. Various
berries have been recorded in its food, besides those mentioned above,
mulberries, elderberries, bayberries, blueberries, and the berries of
the Virginia creeper, cornel, holly, dogwood, and poison ivy, also
the seeds of ragweed and wild sarsaparilla, hazelnuts, and pecans. N.
M. MCGuire (1932) saw one feeding at the borings of a yellow-bellied
sapsucker on a sugar maple tree, driving the latter away; he “would fly
at the Sapsucker, causing him to dodge around a limb in order to keep
out of the way.”
Dr. B. H. Warren (1890) first called attention to the orange-eating
habit of the red-bellied woodpecker in Florida, where it is called the
“orange sapsucker” or “orange borer.” He found on inquiry that these
birds often destroyed large numbers of oranges when they were ready
for picking and that “they damaged the orange trees by boring holes in
them and sucking the sap.” He collected 26 of these woodpeckers in one
orchard, 11 of which had “fed to a more or less extent on oranges.”
William Brewster (1889) saw a red-bellied woodpecker eating the pulp of
a sweet orange at Enterprise, Fla. He says that it attacked the orange
on the ground, pecking at it in a slow and deliberate way for several
minutes. On examining the orange he found it to be decayed on one
side. “In the sound portion were three holes, each nearly as large as
a silver dollar, with narrow strips of peel between them. The pulp had
been eaten out quite to the middle of the fruit. Small pieces of rind
were thickly strewn about the spot. Upon searching closely I discovered
several other oranges that had been attacked in a similar manner. All
were partially decayed, and were lying on the ground. I was unable to
find any on the trees which showed any marks of the Woodpecker’s bill.”
Certainly the habit of eating fallen and partially decayed oranges
does no injury to the orange groves, but D. Mortimer (1890) tells a
different story:
While gathering fruit or pruning orange trees, I frequently
found oranges that had been riddled by this woodpecker,
and repeatedly saw the bird at work. I never observed
it feeding upon fallen oranges. It helped itself freely
to sound fruit that still hung on the tree, and in some
instances I have found ten or twelve oranges on one trees
that had been tapped by it. Where an orange accidentally
rested on a branch in such a way as to make the flower end
accessible from above or from a horizontal direction the
Woodpecker chose that spot, as through it he could reach
into all the sections of the fruit, and when this was the
case there was but one hole in the orange. But usually
there were many holes around it. It appeared that after
having once commenced on an orange, the woodpecker returned
to the same one repeatedly until he had completely
consumed the pulp, and then he usually attacked another
very near to it. Thus I have found certain clusters in
which every orange had been bored, while all the others on
the tree were untouched.
The red-bellied woodpecker shares with other species, formerly included
in the genus _Melanerpes_, the habit of storing acorns, nuts, insects,
and other articles of food for future use. Ben. J. Blincoe (1923)
writes:
The red-bellied woodpecker is a heavy feeder on beech and
oak mast. In the early fall its incessant “Cha-cha-cha”
was a familiar sound in the beech woods about Cherry
Hill. I never observed it in the act of storing beech
mast though on numerous occasions red-bellied woodpeckers
were seen carrying beechnuts to a considerable distance
from the trees from which they were secured. Very likely
many of these nuts were wedged in cracks or crevices for
future use. However, in the fall of 1913, a red-belly was
seen storing the acorns from a Chinquapin Oak (_Quercus
acuminata_) which stood over the wood-pile at Cherry Hill.
The acorns were carried, one at a time, to fence posts
ranging from twenty-five to three hundred yards distant
from the oak tree, and were generally wedged in a crack in
the post, usually near the top. One acorn was placed in
a cavity caused by decay, and laid loosely on the rotten
wood. As far as my observations went, but one acorn was
placed in a single post
While Mr. Blincoe was shelling walnuts, he saw one of these woodpeckers
carry off the shells, and apparently eat the remaining meat out of
them. Several times he saw one stealing corn from his corncrib or
flying off with cherries from a tree in his garden and sometimes
carrying them to a fence post to eat. Again he watched one eating
a hole in an apple, and “found that the apple on which it had been
working bore a decayed spot near the stem and just at the edge of it,
but entirely in the solid part of the apple, was a hole about half
an inch across, and three-quarters deep. The bottom of this cavity
contained several tiny holes, markings made by the woodpecker’s
mandibles. In the early winter, frequently, a red-belly would be seen
feeding on an apple that remained on the tree, though decayed and
practically dried up.”
Lester W. Smith writes to me that it seems to be a habit of the
red-bellied woodpecker in Florida to store away insects and other
food. “After digging into and capturing an insect, I see it fly to a
small hole, commonly in the trunk of the cabbage palmetto, and place
the insect in it. At a hole 5 feet from the ground I found a male
_carolinus_ inserting the badly mutilated body of a cockroach. A large
portion of his catches or finds he seems to prefer to hide away. A tree
of small, late tangerines was visited almost daily during the latter
half of May, and sections of the pulp, taken from fruit torn open by
the mockingbird, were carried off and hidden in various places. On
June 3 I saw _carolinus_ go to the base of banana leaves, take out a
section of pulp, and fly away with it. Examination showed other pieces
similarly hidden, some with ants on them.”
M. P. Skinner (1928) says: “Although other woodpeckers carry off
and store bits of food, the red-bellied woodpeckers appear to do it
more than any others in the Sandhills. These birds are rather easily
attracted to artificial feeding stations, especially if suet be offered
them. They will eat nuts and bread crumbs, also, but not as greedily.”
_Behavior._--Mr. Skinner (1928) writes: “In flight, these woodpeckers
are apt to progress step by step from tree to tree. In this respect,
and in that it is undulating, their flight is much like that of other
woodpeckers. In approaching a perch, the red-bellied woodpeckers
usually glide and sweep up to it with the impetus already gained. * * *
These woodpeckers work and hammer on the trunks of trees, on the boles
of oaks, on boles high up in live or blasted pines, and on both living
and dead limbs, usually working up, but working down also if they want
to, using a peculiar partly-sidewise drop downward.”
_Voice._--Mr. Simmons (1925) gives the following elaborate
interpretations of the various calls of this noisy bird:
In fall and winter, a soft scolding _chuh_; _chuh-chuh_;
_chow-chow_; _cherr-cherr_; or _chawh-chawh_. At other
seasons, a variety of calls: a slow, harsh _crer-r-r-r-r-r_
_rrrrrr_ or _chur-r-r-r-r_ _rrrrrr_; a noisy _charr-r-r_ or
_chawh-chawh_; a rather slow, regular _chuh-chuh-chuh-chuh-chuh_,
sometimes uttered in a series of a dozen or more as rapidly
as the syllables can be plainly pronounced; a very rapid
_chuck-a-chuck-a-chuck-a-chuck-a-chuck-a-chuck-a-chuck-a_; a
slow, harsh _sherr_, _cherr_, _cherr_ or _crerr_, _crerr_,
_crerr_, _crerr_, _crerr_; an alarmed _cha-cha-cha_; at
intervals, a loud, bold, running, connected _koo er-r-r-r_;
_qu er-r-r-r-r_; _qui er-r-r-r-r_; or _k-r-r-ring_, uttered
with a distinct rolling of the _r_’s; in the nesting season,
an additional _whicker_.
Bendire (1895) says: “The Red-bellied, like the majority of our
Woodpeckers, is a rather noisy bird. Its ordinary call note resembles
the ‘tchurr, tchurr’ of the red-headed very closely; another sounds
more like ‘chawh, chawh,’ and this is occasionally varied with a
disagreeable creaking note, while during the mating season peculiar,
low, mournful cooing sounds are sometimes uttered, which somewhat
resemble those of the Mourning Dove.”
Various other observers have given somewhat similar descriptions of
some of the above interpretations. When I first saw this woodpecker,
many years ago in Florida, climbing up the trunk of a cabbage palmetto,
its rolling notes sounded to me like those of a tree toad, as heard
before a rain.
_Field marks._--The red-bellied woodpecker is so conspicuously marked
that it could hardly be overlooked. It is a medium-sized woodpecker,
about the size of the hairy; the entire back and rump are conspicuously
barred transversely with black and white; the wings are spotted or
barred with white; the under parts are uniform gray, except for the
inconspicuous reddish tinge on the abdomen; in the male the entire
crown and nape are brilliant scarlet, and a large patch of the same
color adorns the nape of the female.
_Winter._--The migrations of this woodpecker are, apparently, not so
extensive or so regular as those of most migratory birds; they seem
to consist more of irregular wanderings and to depend more on the
abundance of the food supply. The species occurs, in small numbers at
least, more or less irregularly in winter even in the northern portions
of its range. There is, however, usually a general southward movement
in fall, which greatly increases its abundance in the Southern States
in winter. William H. Fisher (1897) says of its winter occurrence in
Maryland: “I have only met with about half a dozen individuals outside
of Somerset County, but there, for the last fourteen years, in either
November, December or January, I have found them to be very abundant.
According to my observations, they prefer the low, swampy woodlands and
clearings, only occasionally being found in the isolated tree in the
field.”
W. E. Saunders tells me that it was formerly quite common in southern
Ontario and came regularly to the feeding stations in winter; evidently
some of these birds did not migrate. On the other hand, Audubon (1842)
says: “In winter I have found the red-bellied woodpecker the most
abundant of all in the pine barrens of the Floridas, and especially
on the plantations bordering the St. John’s river, where on any day
it would have been easy to procure half a hundred.” And C. J. Maynard
(1896) writes: “I found the red-bellied woodpeckers quite abundant
in winter in the piney woods which border the plantations on the Sea
Islands off the Carolinas but as I proceeded south, their numbers
increased and in Florida, they fairly swarmed, actually occurring in
flocks. They accompany the cockaded woodpeckers in the piney woods and
also associate with the yellow-bellies in the swamps and hummocks;
in fact, it is difficult to remain long in any portion of Florida
where there are trees, without hearing the discordant croak of these
woodpeckers and I even found them on the Keys.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Chiefly the Eastern United States, casual west to Arizona and
Colorado; nonmigratory.
The range of the red-bellied woodpecker extends =north= to southeastern
Nebraska (Lincoln and Nebraska City); southeastern Minnesota (St.
Peter and Minneapolis); southern Michigan (Grand Rapids, Howell,
and Plymouth); and southern Ontario (Coldstream, Toronto, and Twin
Lakes). =East= to southeastern Ontario (Twin Lakes); western New York
(Canandaigua, Potter, and probably Ithaca); southern Pennsylvania
(Fulton County); eastern Maryland (Marydel and Church Creek); Virginia
(Dismal Swamp); North Carolina (Mattamuskeet Lake and Orton); South
Carolina (Columbia and Frogmore); Georgia (Savannah, Cumberland Island,
and Blackbeard Island); and Florida (New Smyrna, Eldred, Cape Florida,
and Upper Matecumbe Key). The =southern= limits extend westward along
the Gulf coast to eastern Texas (Giddings and Austin). =West= to
eastern Texas (Austin, Cameron, and Waco); Oklahoma (Caddo, Norman,
and Arnett); eastern Kansas (Harper, Wichita, and Manhattan); and
southeastern Nebraska (Lincoln).
Although not a migratory species, there appears to be some retreat from
the northern parts of the range, particularly during severe winters.
_Casual records._--Red-bellied woodpeckers have been taken or observed
on numerous occasions in New Jersey and eastern New York (including
Long Island). The northernmost records on the Atlantic seaboard are
several from Massachusetts, among which are the following: Springfield,
May 13, 1863; Newton, November 25, 1880; Cohasset, May 28, 1881; and
Clinton, July 17, 1896. One was noted at Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan,
on August 29, 1920; two were reported from Yankton, S. Dak., on April
14, 1923; one was seen in Monroe Canyon, Sioux County, northwestern
Nebraska (date?); in Colorado, a specimen was taken at Fountain in 1873
and another at Limon in May 1899, while one was seen at Greeley in 1895
and another at Yuma on October 1, 2, and 3, 1906. According to Ridgway
(1914), the species is “accidental in Arizona (Fort Grant),” but no
information is available to indicate the authority for this statement.
_Egg dates._--Alabama: 9 records, April 17 to July 11.
Florida: 20 records, April 10 to June 20; 10 records, April 16 to
May 13, indicating the height of the season.
Illinois: 8 records, April 1 to June 3.
Texas: 8 records, April 8 to July 9.
CENTURUS AURIFRONS (Wagler)
GOLDEN-FRONTED WOODPECKER
HABITS
The golden-fronted woodpecker is found, in suitable localities, from
central Texas southward to the Valley of Mexico. It is not, however,
evenly distributed, being common in certain regions that suit its
requirements and entirely absent from other types of surrounding
country. For example, E. M. Hasbrouck (1889) says: “In the single
locality in Eastland County where they are found, they may be said to
be fairly common, but outside of an area of twenty-five square miles
they are unknown in the County. * * * This section of country presents
peculiar characteristics; the timber is entirely of post-oak, and the
ground more or less thickly covered with ‘shinnery,’ and differs from
the surrounding country in that the tops of the trees were affected
some years ago with a blight, and now this entire area is one mass
of dead-topped trees, and this is what apparently suits the present
species.”
George F. Simmons (1925) says of its haunts in the Austin region:
“Mesquite forests with large trees, and mesquite flats; partial to
large timber near mesquite growth, particularly among post oak and
mixed oaks on gravel uplands, and in pecan groves on open and semi-open
bottoms.”
D. B. Burrows (Bendire, 1895) says that, in Starr County, on the lower
Rio Grande, “the golden-fronted woodpecker is a common resident species
in this locality, and much more abundant than Baird’s woodpecker, the
only other variety that I have found here. They may be found wherever
there is a growth of trees sufficiently large to afford nesting places,
but are most numerous in the river bottoms where there is a heavy
growth of old mesquite timber.”
_Nesting._--Major Bendire (1895) writes: “Nidification commences
sometimes in the latter part of March, but usually not much before the
middle of April; both sexes assist in this labor, and it takes from
six to ten days to excavate a proper nesting site; both live and dead
trees are used for this purpose, as well as telegraph poles and fence
posts; the holes are rarely over 12 inches deep, and are situated at
no great distances from the ground, mostly from 6 to 25 feet up.”
As to its nesting in Starr County, he quotes from Mr. Burrows: “The
nest is by preference made in the live trunks of large trees, usually
the mesquite, but sometimes in a dead stump or limb, the same cavity
being used year after year, and it is quite a rare thing to see a
fresh excavation. The nesting season begins in April, and most of the
nests contain fresh eggs by May 10. I took a set of six eggs from a
cavity in a live mesquite tree, the opening being but 2 feet 9 inches
from the ground, but usually they are placed from 8 to 20 feet up.”
And H. P. Attwater wrote to him that “near San Antonio, Texas, where
the golden-fronted woodpecker is a common resident, it nests in all
kinds of tall live timber, pecan, oak, and large mesquite trees being
preferred, but telegraph poles furnished favorite sites here also.
A line running out of San Antonio to a ranch nine miles distant was
almost destroyed by these birds; they came from all sides, from far and
near, and made fresh holes every year, sometimes as many as five or six
in a single pole. Here it also nests occasionally in artificial nesting
sites, like bird boxes, etc., in yards and gardens.”
My only experience with the nesting habits of this woodpecker was in
Cameron County, Tex., where we found this noisy and conspicuous bird
quite common in the trees about the ranches. On May 24, 1923, we found
two nests quite near the buildings on a well-kept Mexican ranch and
collected two sets of four fresh eggs; one was about 8 feet up in an
anaqua tree and the other about 12 feet from the ground in a willow.
_Eggs._--The golden-fronted woodpecker lays four to seven eggs to a
set, usually four or five. The eggs are pure white and vary from ovate
to short or rounded-ovate, with very little or no gloss when fresh.
The measurements of 59 eggs average 25.82 by 19.50 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =28.45= by 20.07, 27.94 by
=20.83=, =22.86= by 17.78, and 25.91 by =18.03= millimeters.
_Young._--Major Bendire (1895) says: “Incubation lasts about fourteen
days, and both sexes share this duty. * * * It is probable that two
broods are occasionally raised in a season, as there are sets of eggs
in the collection taken in June, and two of these in the latter part
of this month.” But Mr. Simmons (1925) says “probably only one brood.”
Both parents assist in the care of the young. In summer and fall the
young may be seen traveling about with their parents in family parties,
but they separate before winter.
_Plumages._--Probably the young are hatched naked and blind, as with
other woodpeckers, and the juvenal plumage is acquired before the young
bird leaves the nest. The young male, in juvenal plumage, is similar to
the adult male but is everywhere duller, with the markings less clearly
defined; the red crown patch is smaller and consists of somewhat
scattered red feathers; there is usually more or less indistinct dusky
barring on the forehead, which is duller yellow than in the adult; the
yellow of the hind neck is paler and duller; the chest is usually more
or less streaked with dusky, and the yellow on the abdomen is paler.
The young female is similar to the young male but without any red on
the head, the yellow band on the hind neck paler, and the under parts
all paler. This juvenal plumage is apparently worn all through fall
and early winter; I have seen it as late as January 5; but probably a
protracted molt during fall and winter produces a gradual change into a
plumage that is practically adult. Adults have a complete postnuptial
molt late in summer and fall, mainly in August and September, according
to what few molting specimens I have seen.
_Food._--Bendire (1895) says: “Their food consists of insects of
various kinds, such as beetles, ants, grasshoppers, also larvae,
acorns, Indian corn, and different kinds of wild berries and fruit.
Considered from an economic point of view, this woodpecker certainly
does more good than harm, and the only thing that can be said against
it is that in certain localities where it is common it may make itself
more or less of a nuisance by injuring telegraph poles.” In this
connection, George B. Sennett (1879) makes the following interesting
remark: “The numerous holes which I observed the previous season in the
telegraph poles, and which I inferred might be nests of Woodpeckers, I
found to be excavations made by the birds in search of a large species
of borer that works in the dry wood.”
Roy W. Quillin writes to me that “this species has an odd habit of
placing shelled mesquite beans in the nesting holes. I have not yet
found any reason for this which seemed plausible.”
_Behavior._--In general habits and behavior, the golden-fronted
woodpecker is much like the red-bellied woodpecker, to which it
is closely related; and it reminded me also of our more familiar
red-headed woodpecker. It is a lively, active, noisy bird, being much
in evidence wherever it is found. It loves to perch for many minutes in
the dead top of some tall tree or on some telegraph or telephone pole,
where it can obtain a good outlook. Mr. Burrows (Bendire, 1895) says:
“During the fall and winter they may be found traveling about from
place to place in pairs, and are easily located by the call note, which
somewhat resembles that of the red-bellied woodpecker, the habits of
the two birds being in many respects quite similar. In the spring, when
nesting, they become very noisy, and when approached, utter their alarm
note with great vigor. I have never known this species to drum on a
dead limb, as most of the other woodpeckers do. When searching for food
they may be seen very diligently at work near the base of old trees,
among the thick bushes, or even on the ground.”
_Voice._--Mr. Simmons (1925) says that this bird is “extremely
noisy,” and describes its notes as “a harsh, rapid, scolding
_chuh-chuh-chuh-chuh-chuh-chuh-chuh_; a metallic _whah-whah_; a loud,
long-drawn _sk-k-k-k-ah-er-r-r-r_ or _tcher-r-r-r_, _tcher-r-r-r_; a
short _check_, _check-check_. Both this species and the red-bellied
woodpecker have the same _chow_, _chow_, _chow_, _chow_ call; however,
there is a striking difference in the tone; the call of the Red-bellied
Woodpecker may be imitated by completely filling the mouth with air and
keeping the lips pushed well forward, while that of the golden-fronted
woodpecker--_choogh-choogh_--is best given by pulling the lips back
tightly, tautening the vocal cords, and making a hoarse, croupy noise
in the throat, since the bird at times sounds as if it had a bad cold.”
Mr. Hasbrouck (1889) writes: “Their note is peculiar, combining the
‘chirp, chirp’ of _carolinus_ with a certain shrillness and accent of
their own, while the call note, either flying or at rest, is similar
to that of _M. erythrocephalus_ and at the same time not unlike that
of _Colaptes auratus_. While their notes once learned are readily
recognized, still it takes not a little practice to distinguish between
a red-head in one tree and the gold-front in the next, or between a
gold-front and a flicker when both are on the opposite side of a ravine
and hidden from view; and I have more than once shot _carolinus_ even
when morally certain it was what I wanted.”
_Field marks._--The golden-fronted woodpecker might easily be confused
with the red-bellied woodpecker, for they are often found in the same
general region, and both have the back and wings barred with black and
white; but all the lower part of the rump is white, instead of barred,
in the golden-fronted and the gray under parts are tinged with yellow,
instead of red; the male red-bellied has the whole upper part of the
head, from forehead to hind neck, bright scarlet, and the female has an
extensive patch of red on the posterior half of the upper head; whereas
the male golden-fronted has a much smaller patch of red on the crown,
a yellow forehead, and an orange-yellow band on the hind neck; and the
female golden-fronted has no red on the head at all. The voice is said
to be more distinctive than the color pattern.
_Enemies._--Mr. Quillin writes to me: “While this species is still
fairly abundant in southern Texas, it was much more plentiful ten or
more years ago. Because of the damage the birds wrought to telephone
and telegraph poles, the various concerns owning such property secured
passage of a law placing all woodpeckers on the unprotected list.
This done, they gave section crews of the railroads shotguns, and the
killing was on in earnest. Hunters and others helped, and the result
has been a marked decrease in the ranks of this species. The killing,
or controlling still continues. However, pressure is now being brought
to place the birds back on the protected list, and this will be done
sooner or later. There is no getting around the fact that the birds did
cause considerable damage. In this species we have a woodpecker which
for centuries had been pecking into hard mesquite trees. Along came the
soft pine poles and these same birds immediately literally ate them
up. I have seen 16 holes, three of which were deep enough for nesting
sites, in one small pole, not over 10 inches in diameter.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--North-central Texas south to Central Mexico; nonmigratory.
The golden-fronted woodpecker ranges =north= to central Texas (San
Angelo and Dallas). =East= to Texas (Dallas, Giddings, Cuero, Corpus
Christi, and Brownsville); Tamaulipas (Matamoros, San Fernando, Ciudad
Victoria, and Tampico); southeastern San Luis Potosi (Valles); Hidalgo
(Ixmiquilipam and Tula); and the Federal District of Mexico (near
Mexico City). =South= to the Federal District of Mexico (near Mexico
City); Michoacan (Querendero, Morelia, and Patzcuaro); and Jalisco
(Ocotlan and Guadalajara). =West= to Jalisco (Guadalajara); Zacatecas
(Calvillo, Aguas Calientes, and Chicalote); northwestern Durango
(Boquilla, Sestin, and Rosario); eastern Chihuahua (Julimes); and
central Texas (Eagle Pass, Fort Clark, Kerrville, and San Angelo).
_Egg dates._--Texas: 66 records, March 30 to June 29; 33 records,
April 24 to May 17, indicating the height of the season.
CENTURUS UROPYGIALIS UROPYGIALIS Baird
GILA WOODPECKER
PLATES 32-34
HABITS
In the desert regions of our southwestern borders, this gay little
woodpecker is one of the commonest, noisiest, and most conspicuous
birds, always much in evidence, and always seeming to protest, in
whining tones, the intrusion of strangers. Its center of abundance
seems to be on the great desert mesas of southern Arizona, where the
infertile soil is scantily covered with a scattered growth of creosote
bushes, low mesquites, an occasional cholla or barrel cactus and
dotted with single specimens or little groups of the giant cactus, or
saguaro. But it is also common in the river bottoms, covered with a
heavier growth of mesquite, and in the canyons of the foothills among
the cottonwoods, willows, and sycamores. It ranges from an elevation of
2,500 feet on the mesas up to 4,000, or even 4,500, feet in the canyons
and foothills.
In this region, it is a dominant species and a very useful neighbor,
even if unintentionally, for the many species of birds and small
mammals for which it provides homes. M. French Gilman (1915) puts it
very well as follows:
Were it not for the Gila woodpecker (_Centurus
uropygialis_) what would become of the several species
of birds that use already prepared cavities for their
domiciles? In some cases these tenants do not even
await the pleasure of the excavators, but take forcible
possession. In holes excavated by Gila woodpeckers there
may regularly be found nesting the elf owl, ferruginous
pigmy owl, ash-throated flycatcher, and Arizona crested
flycatcher. Occasionally a cactus wren makes use of the
handy hollow, and once I saw one occupied by a Lucy
warbler. A big “rough-neck” scaly lizard frequents the
holes when not too high in the cactus, and in two holes in
willow trees I found snakes. It is not pleasant to insert
one’s hand and have a big lizard or snake crawl up the
arm to escape. Rats and mice are sometimes found in the
deserted holes, especially if the tree be much decayed
and with cracks and hollows connecting holes at different
heights in the tree or branch. So these woodpeckers may be
considered among the class of innocent or unintentional
benefactors.
In addition to the species mentioned by Mr. Gilman above, we found
saguaro screech owls, desert sparrow hawks, and western martins
nesting in the old holes made by woodpeckers. Some of these holes were
doubtless made by Mearns’s gilded flickers, perhaps those that were
used by the larger species, as this woodpecker is fairly common in
the same region and nests regularly in the saguaros. These old holes
make ideal nesting sites, for the sap of the cactus hardens around the
excavations, making them fairly permanent nesting boxes; I have seen
these gourd-shaped pockets still persisting in fallen saguaros, where
the pulp had all rotted away, leaving only the skeleton ribs of the
dead giant.
_Nesting._--While collecting with the late Frank C. Willard in
southern Arizona in 1922, we examined seven occupied nests of the Gila
woodpecker. The first of these was found on May 17, at Fairbank, in the
valley of the San Pedro River; the nest was a cavity 15 inches deep
in a dead branch of a cottonwood, 15 feet above ground. Five days,
May 19 to 23, were spent in Pima County, in the vicinity of Tucson,
between the mesquite forest in the valley of the Santa Cruz River and
the southern end of the Santa Catalina Mountains. Two nests were found
in the mesquite forest on May 19, both in mesquite trees, one 20 and
one 25 feet from the ground; one contained only a single fresh egg and
the other held a brood of young. We had an interesting experience here
the next day. While crossing the forest, I saw a Gila woodpecker fly
out from what I supposed was its nesting hole, about 15 feet up in a
mesquite stub; the bird made such a great fuss about it that I felt
sure that we had a set of woodpecker’s eggs within easy reach, and I
called Mr. Willard to investigate it. He climbed the stub and chopped
out the hole, while the woodpecker was flying about, scolding us and
showing the greatest concern. But, much to our surprise, he pulled out
an elf owl and three unmistakable elf owl’s eggs. I killed the owl
and shot the woodpecker, which still seemed much interested; and, on
skinning and sexing both specimens, I found that the woodpecker was a
male and the owl a female. We were naturally much puzzled to figure out
the relationship between the two birds and their interest in the nest.
But, since reading Mr. Gilman’s remarks, quoted above, that sometimes
the woodpecker’s tenants “do not even await the pleasure of the
excavators, but take forcible possession,” it has occurred to me that
probably this was a case in point. The owl may have appropriated the
finished burrow of the woodpecker, and the latter was trying to evict
an unwelcome tenant.
The remaining four nests found in this vicinity, and one found by
Mr. Willard on June 11, were all in saguaros on the desert mesa; the
heights from the ground varied from 16 to 20 feet; and the cavities
varied in depths from 15 to 20 inches; there was one set of five eggs,
two nests held four and one three eggs; and in one nest were two young
and an addled egg.
Referring to the nesting habits of this woodpecker in the vicinity of
the Gila River, in Arizona, Mr. Gilman (1915) writes:
Nesting sites in this locality are restricted to giant
cactus (_Cereus giganteus_), cottonwood and willow, as they
are the only suitable material for a nest excavation. More
nests are found in the giant cactus, as these plants are
more numerous than the others, and more “peckable,” though
the willows and cottonwoods along the river and the canals
are well patronized when sufficiently decayed. Of the nests
I examined I should say that fifty per cent were in the
cactus, and the rest equally divided between the other
trees mentioned. * * *
As to the size of the holes in the cactus as compared with
those in cottonwood and willow, I found no appreciable
difference. I expected the holes in the cactus to average
a little larger owing to possible greater ease in
excavating but the difference was too slight to be sure
of in measuring. Of eighteen holes measured, the average
diameter was 1.95 inches; the largest was 2.25 inches and
the smallest 1.87 inches. The deepest hole was 16 inches,
with the entrance 2 inches in diameter. The shallowest one
was 9 inches, with entrance a little less than 2 inches in
diameter. The average depth of holes measured was a little
more than 12 inches. Many of the holes were not exactly
circular, there being a difference of from ⅛ to nearly ½
inch between the long and short diameter if it be allowable
to use the term in that way. Usually the nest hole runs
straight in for a short distance before turning downward,
the distance seemingly depending on the texture of the
wood. In one case the hole went straight back for nine
inches before turning downward. It was in a big cottonwood
stump, and the bird excavated horizontally until decayed
wood was reached, when the hole turned downward. This was
an extreme case, as the depth horizontally is usually about
three inches. In the giant cactus it varies according to
the diameter of the trunk, the smaller the trunk the less
distance before turning downward. * * *
The same nest hole is used more than one season, both in
cactus and other locations. In 1913 I found a nest in a
big cottonwood stump containing young. The next year it
had young again, and I cut into it to measure the hole and
count them.
Frank C. Willard (1912) says: “I think it is their habit to dig fresh
holes after raising their brood of young. These fresh holes are not
occupied that year but are made use of the next year when the sap has
had a chance to dry and form the hard lining which coats the inside of
all the cavities. I have found but one fresh hole occupied as a nest.”
Bendire (1895) also says that “most of their nesting sites are used for
several years in succession; in fact, I doubt very much if a freshly
excavated hole in a giant cactus is fit to nest in the same season.
Both sexes assist in excavating the nesting site.”
In the heavily incrusted nest cavity in a giant cactus, the eggs lie
on the bare, hard floor of the nest, there being no chips to furnish a
soft bed.
In addition to the trees mentioned above, the Gila woodpecker has been
found nesting more rarely in oaks and palo-verdes.
_Eggs._--The Gila woodpecker lays three to five eggs, three or four
being much oftener found than five. The eggs are pure white and
not very glossy when fresh, but sometimes quite glossy when heavily
incubated; they vary from ovate to elliptical-ovate and are sometimes
quite pointed. The measurements of 52 eggs average 25.14 by 18.56
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =27.43= by
18.80, 26.6 by =20.1=, =22.86= by 17.27, and 23.9 by =16.6= millimeters.
_Young._--Incubation is said to last about two weeks, and is probably
shared by both parents. Mr. Gilman (1915) writes:
It is not easy to determine just what food the young in
the nest are given, but insects play a prominent part, as
I have seen them frequently carried to the young. Fruit
is also used, as I watched one parent carry ripe Lycium
berries several times to the nest; after emerging from the
hole she would halt at the entrance each time and “lick her
chops.” * * *
The young are fed by the parents for a long time after
leaving the nest, and they are regular little beggars. One
pair stayed around our house for several months, and became
quite tame. They were missed during the breeding season
but soon came back with three youngsters to share the good
things found on the bird tables in the yard. The young,
though as large as their parents, would flutter their
wings and sit with open beak as though the old ones told
them to “open your mouth and shut your eyes,” etc. The old
ones would try to get them to eat watermelon placed on the
tables, but the babies would not be shown; the parents had
to put it in their mouths. They followed the parents from
perch to perch, begging for food until I expected to see
them chastised. The pair in question stayed with the three
juvenals until they had them broken to eat for themselves,
and then left. After a proper interval they came back with
two more young ones, thus indicating that a second brood is
sometimes raised. The abundant supply of food may have been
a determining factor in the number of broods raised.
_Plumages._--The nestlings are naked and blind at first but become
fully clothed in the juvenal plumage before leaving the nest. The young
male, in juvenal plumage, is much like the adult male, but the colors
are generally paler, the head and under parts grayer, the barring on
the upper parts less distinct, and the white bars are suffused with
brownish buff; the red patch on the crown is smaller and often consists
of only a few red feathers; and the bill is somewhat smaller and
weaker. The young female is like the young male but has no red on the
head. I have been unable to trace the postjuvenal molt, but young birds
in the following spring are apparently like the adults. Adults have a
complete postnuptial molt in August, September, and October.
_Food._--Major Bendire (1895) says: “Its food consists of insects of
various kinds, such as ants, beetles, grasshoppers, and larvæ, and in
season largely on the sweet, fig-like fruit of the sahuaras, the giant
cactus, and also, to a considerable extent, on the viscous berries of
a species of mistletoe which is commonly found on most of the larger
cottonwoods, oaks, and mesquite trees in these regions. These sticky,
whitish-looking berries are a favorite food of many Arizona birds.”
Mr. Gilman (1915) writes:
The food, of this woodpecker is varied, nearly everything
being grist that comes to his mill. He pecks around decayed
and dying trees as well as green ones, and presumably get
the insects usually found and eaten by such birds. The
giant cactus is pecked into very frequently, and I believe
some of the pulp is eaten. The small punctures made are not
enlarged, and in some cases quite an area is bitten into.
The fruit of the giant cactus is eaten as long as it lasts,
and the berries of the Lycium are also freely eaten. The
Gila woodpecker frequents corn fields, and pecks through
the husks into the ears of corn. The birds may peck in
at first to get a worm, but it is a case similar to the
discovery of roast pig as portrayed by Lamb. They alight on
the ground and feed upon table scraps thrown to chickens,
three of them being regular morning visitors, star
boarders, to a pen of chickens I fed. They are very fond of
peaches and pears, and volubly resent being driven from a
tree of the fruit. They peck holes in ripening pomegranates
and then the green fruit beetle helps finish the fruit They
relish grapes, both white and colored, and will spear one
with their bill and carry it to a convenient crevice where
it may be eaten at leisure. On bird tables I have tried
them with various articles of food and found very little
that they rejected. They would not eat cantaloupe at all
but were regular watermelon fiends, eating it three times
a day and calling for more. They did not care for oranges,
and I had no success in trying to teach them to eat ripe
pickled olives. I tried the olive diet on them because two
Mocking-birds in our yard learned to eat this fruit. Meat,
raw and cooked, was eaten, and they ate suet greedily.
Their favorite cut of beef was the T-bone steak and we
always left some meat on the bone for them. They picked it
clean, and if a new supply was slow in coming the softer
parts of the bone were devoured. * * * Mr. Frank Pinkley,
custodian of the Casa Grande Ruins told me of a pair of
these woodpeckers that stayed around his home and became
quite tame, coming into the shed to drink from a can of
water. He said they got into the habit of sucking the eggs
in the chicken house, or at least pecking into them and
eating of the contents. * * *
The Indians store corn in the ear on the flat tops of their
houses and sheds, * * * and each home has one or more of
woodpecker retainers or pensioners hanging about most of
the time. This corn provides an abundant and sure source
of food, and the birds make the most of it. I have never
seen any indication of food-storage on the part of the Gila
woodpecker, as with the California Woodpecker, for they
live in a claw-to-beak fashion. They peck at a kernel until
it comes off the cob, when it is carried to a post or tree
and placed firmly in a crack. Here it is pecked to pieces
and eaten. They seem never to swallow a kernel whole but
always break it up.
W. L. Dawson (1923) says that this woodpecker indulges in “a systematic
search for birds’ eggs, especially those of the Lucy warbler, yellow
warbler, and Arizona Least Vireo. In case of the first-named, the
eggs are devoured in spite of the most emphatic protests of the tiny
parents; but eggs of Cardinal, Cooper Tanager and Towhee must be
obtained by stealth.”
A. H. Anderson (1934) writes:
In the Tucson, Arizona, area a gall-insect (_Pachypsylla
venusta_) frequently attacks the leaves of the hackberry
tree (_Celtis reticulata_). The galls form on the leaf
petiole, becoming from a quarter to half an inch in
diameter. During the winter the outer shell hardens like a
nut.
I have often seen the Gila woodpeckers tear the galls loose
from the twigs and, flying to a fence post, proceed to
chisel out the contents. The hard gall is wedged into a
crack on the post and then opened by repeated hammering.
Around the base of one fence post I counted nearly 300
empty shells. Sometimes cracks in nearby trees are used. At
one time five of these woodpeckers were seen in a single
tree, all of them feeding on the galls.
_Behavior._--The Gila woodpecker is not only the most abundant
woodpecker, in fact one of the most abundant birds, in the region it
inhabits, but it is more conspicuous, noisier, and more active than
any of its neighbors. It is always much in evidence, always protesting
the intrusion of a stranger, and shows the greatest concern when
its nest is approached, especially if it has young. It is a close
sitter and will often remain in the nest hole to peck viciously at an
investigating hand; while the nest is being robbed, it flits nervously
about, scolding vociferously with all the vile epithets it can muster.
As to its behavior with other species, Mr. Gilman (1915) writes:
This woodpecker has not the best disposition in the world,
for he is very quarrelsome and intolerant. He fights his
own kin and all the neighbors that he dares. He, or she,
is a great bluffer however and when “called”, frequently
side-steps, subsides, or backs out entirely. I saw one
approach a Bendire Thrasher that was eating, and suddenly
pounce on him. He had the thrasher down and I was thinking
of offering my friendly services as a board of arbitration,
when the under bird crawled from beneath and soon gave
the woodpecker the thrashing of his career. Several times
I have seen the woodpeckers start to attack Bendire and
Palmer thrashers, but they were always bluffed or beaten at
the game. With the Bronzed Cowbirds it is a drawn battle,
sometimes one and then the other backing down. Most other
birds, such as Cardinals, Abert Towhees, Dwarf Cowbirds and
Cactus Wrens do not attempt to assert their rights, but
always take a rear seat. But when it is woodpecker versus
woodpecker it seems not to be a case of “Thrice armed is he
who hath his quarrel just”, but rather, “Four times he who
gets his blow in fust”.
I had two bird tables about twenty feet apart, and
frequently one woodpecker might be peacefully assimilating
watermelon, when another one would come hurrying up and
make a dive at him, causing a retreat to the other table.
Frequently the new-comer would then follow and drive him
from the second table. He seemingly would rather fight than
eat if another was eating at the same time. One day I saw
him, or her, I forget which, hanging to the edge of the
table busily eating steak, when another one perched on the
table and made a vicious stab at him. He dodged backward
clear under the table, though retaining his hold, and then
bobbed up again, just like the Punch and Judy show. The
attack was renewed, and the dodging as well, but this time
he did not “come back”. Another day one of them was at
work on a piece of melon when one of his fellows came and
perched on the end of the table. The diner made a pass at
the new comer, and seizing him by the feathers of the neck
held him suspended over the end of the table for a few
seconds.
_Voice._--Major Bendire (1895) says: “Its ordinary call note, sounding
like ‘dchürr, dchürr,’ can be heard in all directions in the spring;
when flying from one point to another it usually utters a sharp, shrill
‘huit’ two or three times, resembling the common call note of the
Phainopepla, and which may readily be mistaken for it. It is also more
or less addicted to drumming on the dead tops of cottonwood, sycamore,
and mesquite trees.”
Mr. Gilman (1915) writes:
As a neighbor, the Gila Woodpecker is permanently on the
map, and is afraid neither of being seen nor heard. He is
much in the public ear with a variety of notes and calls.
His sociable conversational notes somewhat resemble those
of the California Woodpecker but are shriller. In such of
his notes as are directed at humanity there is a peevish
complaining tone, especially if closely approached when
feeding on fruit or some other delicacy. In such cases
there is only one term that exactly describes his attitude
and utterances, and that is the phrase “belly-aching.”
In fact all of his talk at us has a distinctly “colicky”
tone and one feels like giving him something to whine
about. His ordinary call slightly resembles that of the
Flicker but is not quite so loud; altogether he is quite a
conversationalist.
_Field marks._--The Gila woodpecker should be easily recognized as a
medium-sized woodpecker, about the size of a hairy woodpecker, with a
grayish-brown head, neck, and under parts and a back narrowly barred
with black and white; in flight a white patch shows in the wing and
basal half of the primaries, and the black and white barring on the
central tail feathers is rather conspicuous; the red crown patch of the
male is conspicuous only at short range.
_Fall._--This woodpecker is apparently somewhat given to wandering in
fall and spring, for W. E. D. Scott (1886) says that he does not see it
about his house, at an elevation of 4,500 feet in Pinal County, Ariz.,
in summer, but that it is rather common there in fall and spring.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Southwestern United States and western Mexico; nonmigratory.
The range of the Gila woodpecker extends =north= to extreme southern
Nevada (Clark County); southern Arizona (Sacaton, Rock Canyon, and
Tombstone); and southwestern New Mexico (Red Rock and probably Gila).
=East= to New Mexico (probably Gila); eastern Sonora (Fronteras, Boca
de Huachy, and Nuri); southwestern Chihuahua (Batopilas); western
Durango (Chacala); and western Zacatecas (Calvillo). =South= to
southwestern Zacatecas (Calvillo); and Jalisco (Guadalajara, Santa
Ano, and Rio Ameca). =West= to Jalisco (Rio Ameca); Nayarit (Tepic and
San Blas); southwestern Sinaloa (Escuinapa, Labrados, and Mazatlan);
Baja California (Cape San Lucas, Santa Margarita Island, San Ignacio,
Rosario, San Quintin, Las Palmas, and the Alamo River); southeastern
California (Calexico, probably Brawley, Palo Verde, and Needles); and
southern Nevada (Clark County).
This species has been separated into three geographic races, or
subspecies. Typical _C. u. uropygialis_ is the form found in that part
of the range lying in the United States, and this race also is the one
found in the western mainland of Mexico. The cardon woodpecker (_C. u.
cardonensis_) is found in the northern part of Baja California south
to about latitude 28° N. Brewster’s woodpecker (_C. u. brewsteri_)
occupies the cape district of Baja California north to San Ignacio and
including also Santa Margarita Island.
_Egg dates._--Arizona: 26 records, April 7 to May 30; 13 records,
May 5 to 25, indicating the height of the season.
Baja California: 10 records, April 21 to June 2.
CENTURUS UROPYGIALIS CARDONENSIS Grinnell
CARDON WOODPECKER
HABITS
In describing and naming this race, Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1927a) says:
In its main characters similar to _Centurus uropygialis
uropygialis_, but general coloration much darker: whole
head (except for red patch on crown) and anterior lower
surface strongly tinged with snuff brown rather than pale
drab; and white barring on closed wings, tail, dorsum,
rump, flanks, and lower tail coverts, narrower, leaving
the black-barring correspondingly broader. Similar to _C.
u. brewsteri_, but size larger, and coloration darker, in
the same respects though not to quite so great a degree as
shown in comparison with _uropygialis_. In other words, the
new form differs from both the previously known races in
the deeper brown tinge of the head and lower surface and in
the greater degree of predominance of black over white in
the barring.
He says of its range: “So far as now known, only the giant cactus
(cardon) association in the northern section of the Lower Californian
peninsula, from about latitude 30° to latitude 31°. Life-zone, Lower
Sonoran.” The 1931 Check-list extends the range northward “along the
western rim of the Colorado Desert to about latitude 32°.”
A. W. Anthony (1895a) says of the haunts of this woodpecker in Baja
California: “The range of this species along the Pacific slope is
exactly coextensive with that of _Cereus pringlei_, becoming common
with that cactus a short distance below Rosario and seldom if ever
being seen at any distance from the shelter of its mighty branches. At
the mission, where the cardons were very large and abundant, to within
a short distance of the mesquite thickets, this Woodpecker delighted
in making frequent forays into the lesser growth, spending hours in
hammering on the mesquite trunks and hunting through their branches,
always beating a precipitate retreat to the cactus on the hillsides
above at the first sign of danger.”
I can find nothing further of consequence published on the habits of
the cardon woodpecker, which doubtless do not differ materially from
those of its Arizona relative.
The eggs are similar to those of the Gila woodpecker. The measurements
of 11 eggs average 23.59 by 18.30 millimeters; the eggs showing the
four extremes measure =25.6= by 18.1, 24.5 by =19.8=, =21.9= by 17.8,
and 22.1 by =17.3= millimeters. Griffing Bancroft has a still larger
egg, which measures 26.4 by 21.8 millimeters.
CENTURUS UROPYGIALIS BREWSTERI Ridgway
BREWSTER’S WOODPECKER
HABITS
In the Cape region of Baja California, we find this local race, which
Ridgway (1914) describes as “similar to _C. u. uropygialis_ but
smaller, with relatively (often absolutely) larger bill, bars on back,
etc., averaging decidedly narrower (the white ones about 1.5-2 mm.
wide), black bars on lower rump and upper tail-coverts narrower or more
numerous, and white bars on lateral rectrices as well as black ones on
inner web of middle rectrices narrower.”
William Brewster (1902) says: “In the Cape Region the Gila Woodpecker
has apparently much the same distribution as _Dryobates lucasanus_.
Neither Mr. Belding nor Mr. Frazar found it in the higher mountains,
but both note its abundance throughout the low country, and Mr. Frazar
obtained many specimens at Triunfo which is within the lower edge of
the oak belt.”
Griffing Bancroft (1930) referred the woodpeckers of this species that
he found breeding in central Lower California to this southern race.
Probably they are intermediate between this and _cardonensis_. He says
of it:
The most abundant bird of its order, ranging throughout
the territory examined. It is to be found in the suburban
gardens of Santa Rosalia, among the palms of San Ignacio,
and everywhere through the desert cactus belt. Its favorite
choice of a home is a site high in a candelabra cardón; but
it will also nest, even when not driven by necessity, in
palms and tree yucca.
Its breeding season is quite long, fresh eggs being found
from the latter part of April until well into June. The
number laid is irregular. About half the sets are of two,
but there are four’s and even five’s. Sixteen eggs taken in
the vicinity of San Ignacio average 24.0 by 18.9 mm.
The birds are quite tame and often cannot be flushed. More
than once, on opening cavities, we have lifted an adult
from eggs or young, or even from an empty hole. Repeatedly
a bird has been seen flying into a nest, either to feed
young or to go onto eggs, while people were standing at
the foot of the tree. When their homes are being examined
the birds often approach within a few feet to voice their
protests. Such fearlessness is unusual on this desert.
COLAPTES AURATUS AURATUS (Linnaeus)
SOUTHERN FLICKER
PLATE 35
HABITS
The type name _auratus_ is now restricted to the flickers of the South
Atlantic and Gulf States, from North Carolina to southern Florida
and central Texas north to extreme southern Illinois and Indiana,
southeastern Missouri, and southeastern Kansas, because the above
Linnaean name was based on birds described by Catesby, which belonged
to the smaller southern race.
The habits of the southern flicker are so similar to those of the
northern flicker that the following account given for the northern race
will serve very well for both. It is a common bird, widely distributed
and well known throughout its range. In Florida we found it rather
partial to open, burned-over tracts in the flat pine woods, nesting
in the charred stumps, but it was also common in more open country in
thinly settled regions, where we often found it nesting in isolated
trees or dead stubs of palmettos or pines.
W. J. Erichsen (1920) says of its haunts in Chatham County, Ga.:
“Wherever there are areas of cut-over lands on which remain an
abundance of dead trees this species will be found in large numbers.
At all seasons it exhibits a preference for open pine barrens, but,
particularly during the breeding season, is occasionally met with
about the edges of swamps if they contain suitable nesting sites. It
is abundant on all of the wooded islands, particularly Ossabaw island,
where I observed it in large numbers in May, 1915. Here it is oftenest
seen in the woods close to the salt marsh or adjoining the beach,
apparently not frequenting in any numbers the more heavily forested
interior of the island.”
_Nesting._--Capt. H. L. Harllee writes to me that southern flickers
raise two broods in a season in South Carolina and are not very
particular as to their nesting sites. They nest in holes of their
own excavation in dead trees of many species, 3 to 100 feet from
the ground, either in thick woods or in a lone dead tree in an open
cultivated field; they also nest in natural cavities in trees. He
found one pair of these birds nesting in a hole made by fire in an old
burned-out stump; the cavity was about two feet deep and eight inches
in diameter; “the opening was slightly arched over with grass growing
around it; a small quantity of pine straw was the only lining.”
Arthur H. Howell (1932) says: “The nests are placed in pines, oaks,
cabbage palms, or other trees, at heights varying from a few feet to
60 feet above the ground. At Ponce Park, in May, 1925, I observed a
Flicker using a hole in a palmetto pile under the dock on the shore
of the Halifax River, only 2 feet above the salt water at high tide.
Nicholson found a nest 12 inches above the ground in a sawed-off stump
of a palmetto on a ditch bank.”
Alexander Sprunt, Jr. (1931), mentions a concentration of hole-nesting
birds in a tree in a yard in Beaufort, S. C.; the tree measured only 20
feet in height and contained nests of two pairs of flickers, and one
nest each of crested flycatcher, screech owl, and downy woodpecker.
“All five cavities were contained in a radius of ten feet, and four
were within six feet of each other.”
A. F. Ganier (1926) writes:
While in the suburbs of Chattanooga, Tennessee, last
spring, I noticed a Flicker engaged in what appeared to
be a hopeless task in the way of nest excavation. An iron
water tank, supported by steel columns forty feet high,
was fed by a large iron pipe through its bottom, and, to
keep this pipe from freezing in winter, it had been encased
with a plank shaft two feet square that was filled with
cedar sawdust. Our friend _Colaptes auratus_ had evidently
sounded the boards, and, sensing easy digging, had drilled
a hole in the middle of one side about thirty feet up. When
espied, he was enthusiastically pitching out quantities of
sawdust, which I presume caved in about as fast as he dug,
but during the half hour I was engaged near by there was
no let up in the work. About a month later I was again in
the vicinity and made it a point to go by the tank. On the
ground below the hole was at least a bushel of sawdust, and
in a few minutes I had the pleasure of seeing a Flicker
enter the hole with food in its mouth, presumably to feed
the young that had come to reward his perseverance.
_Eggs._--The southern flicker lays five to ten eggs, ordinarily, but
shares with its northern relative its reputation as a prolific egg
layer; it will continue to lay again and again after being robbed,
as many as 30 or 40 eggs and often three or four sets. The eggs
are similar to those of the northern flicker, except for a slight
difference in size. The measurements of 44 eggs from South Carolina
average 28.57 by 22.01 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes
measure =30.15= by =24.56= and =24.13= by =20.32= millimeters. These
seem to run larger than eggs from farther north.
In all other respects, the habits of the southern flicker are similar
to those of the species elsewhere, with due allowance for the
difference in environment. Two items of interest, however, are worth
quoting. Charles R. Stockard (1904) writes from Mississippi:
On April 18 a burrow of a Flicker containing only one fresh
egg was found. The egg was not disturbed. When visiting
the nest again on April 28 a flying squirrel was found in
possession. On my arrival the bird was at the entrance of
the burrow peering in at the intruder. It was supposed that
the squirrel was eating the eggs, but on examining the nest
it was found to contain one spoilt egg. The squirrel had
then probably been in possession for the ten days since the
nest was observed, so the bird had been unable to enter and
lay. * * * The Flicker must then have remained about her
nest for this length of time, and as soon as the squirrel
was removed she again took charge. On visiting the nest
May 5, seven days later, it contained seven fresh eggs and
the old one that had been left. * * * This was undoubtedly
a case of discontinuous laying unless she had dropped her
eggs on the ground while the squirrel was occupying the
nest.
Mrs. Sanford Duncan (1932), of Nashville, Tenn., tells an interesting
story of a flicker that was captured by a bullsnake. She heard a great
commotion among the birds in her yard and went out to investigate
the cause of the excitement. “The Flickers were leading the battle,
dashing and darting at a bundle of something on the ground. Closer
inspection with field glasses showed it was a snake, all tied up in
a curious knot. He was too big for me to attack with the hoe I had,
so I shot into the ‘bundle’ with a shotgun. As if by magic the snake
flung himself into the air and fell, straightened out, over five feet
long, and disclosed a full-grown Flicker that he had wrapped himself
around many times. The Flicker was still alive, but died very shortly,
probably from the gunshot that killed the bullsnake.”
Lester W. Smith writes to me that he watched a southern flicker digging
white grubs out of a lawn and killing them by repeated blows and
shaking; meantime a loggerhead shrike was attempting to rob the flicker
of its prey.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--North America, chiefly east of the Rocky Mountains, and from
the limit of trees south to the Gulf coast.
_Breeding range._--The breeding range of the flicker extends =north=
to Alaska (Circle); northwestern Mackenzie (probably Fort McPherson,
Fort Anderson, McVicar Bay, Fort Rae, and Hill Island Lake); northern
Saskatchewan (Reindeer Lake); northern Manitoba (probably Lake Du
Brochet and Fort Churchill); Ontario (Lac Seul and probably Moose
Factory); Quebec (probably Fort George, probably Lake Mistassini,
Godbout, and Mingan Island); and Labrador (Cartwright). From this
northeastern point the range extends =southward= through Newfoundland,
along the Atlantic coast to Key West, Fla. The =southern= limits of
nesting are the Gulf coasts of Florida and Alabama, thence in the
interior to Louisiana (St. Francisville and Genoa); and Oklahoma
(Okmulgee and Norman). =West= to Oklahoma (Norman); central Kansas
(Harper, Hay, and Stockton); Nebraska (Red Cloud, Alda, and Chadron);
eastern Wyoming (Midwest and Newcastle); Montana (Terry, Fairview, and
Great Falls); Alberta (Morrin, Henry House, and Lesser Slave Lake);
northwestern British Columbia (Telegraph Creek and Atlin); Yukon
(Caribou Crossing and Selkirk); and eastern Alaska (Circle). This
species, more or less crossed with the red-shafted flicker (_Colaptes
c. collaris_), also is found occasionally in eastern Colorado
(Hallvale, Denver, and Fort Morgan).
_Winter range._--During the winter season the flicker is found with
more or less regularity =north= to southeastern South Dakota (Yankton,
Vermillion, and Sioux Falls); southern Minnesota (Hutchinson and
Minneapolis); southern Wisconsin (North Freedom and Milwaukee);
southern Michigan (Kalamazoo, Jackson, Ann Arbor, and Detroit);
southern Ontario (Plover Mills, Hamilton, and Toronto); New York
(Rochester, Syracuse, and Rhinebeck); and rarely Maine (Waterville).
From this point it is found =south= along the Atlantic coast to
southern Florida (St. Lucie and Fort Myers). The southern limits of
the winter range are found on the Gulf coast from Florida (Fort Myers)
to Texas (Brownsville). =West= to Texas (Brownsville, San Antonio,
San Angelo, and Abilene); central Oklahoma (Norman, Oklahoma City,
and Tonkawa); Kansas (Wichita and rarely Hay); Nebraska (Red Cloud
and North Loup); and southeastern South Dakota (Yankton). It also has
been taken or observed at this season north to southern Saskatchewan
(Eastend); Quebec (Montreal); New Brunswick (St. John); and Nova Scotia
(Bridgetown).
The range as outlined is for the entire species, of which two
subspecies are currently recognized. The typical form, known as the
southern flicker (_C. a. auratus_), is found from southern Florida and
Texas north to southeastern Kansas, southeastern Missouri, southern
Illinois and Indiana, and North Carolina. It probably is nonmigratory.
The rest of the range is occupied by the northern flicker (_C. a.
luteus_).
_Spring migration._--Early dates of arrival in regions north of the
winter range as outlined, are: Nova Scotia--Wolfville, March 26;
Halifax, April 7. New Brunswick--Scotch Lake, April 5; Grand Manan,
April 12. Quebec--Quebec City, April 27; Godbout, May 2; Paradise,
June 5. North Dakota--Fargo, March 29; Charlson, March 30; Grand
Forks, April 2. Manitoba--Winnipeg, March 30; Alexander, April 14;
Raeburn, April 15. Saskatchewan--Eastend, April 3; McLean, April 3.
Wyoming--Cheyenne, April 7; Laramie, April 12. Montana--Great Falls,
April I; Terry, April 4; Jackson, April 14. Alberta--Banff, April 4;
Flagstaff, April 13; Edmonton, April 17. Mackenzie--Fort Simpson, May
4; Fort Reliance, May 2. Alaska--Fairbanks, April 25; Fort Yukon, May 1.
_Fall migration._--Late dates of fall departure are: Alaska,--Wrangell,
October 11; Craig, October 21. Mackenzie--near McVicar Bay, September
10; Great Slave Lake, September 11; Fort Simpson, October 16.
Alberta--Lac La Biche, September 25; Glenevis, October 2; Calgary,
October 10. Montana--Bozeman, September 24; Saskatchewan--Eastend,
October 14. Manitoba--Alexander, October 22; Aweme, October 27. North
Dakota--Arlington, October 19; Argusville, October 21; Fargo, October
21. Northern Michigan--Sault Ste. Marie, October 24. Quebec--Montreal,
November 25. New Brunswick--St. John, November 5; Scotch Lake, November
22. Nova Scotia--Wolfville, November 19.
The records of flickers that have been banded and subsequently
recovered throw much light upon the migrations of this species. In
the files of the Biological Survey there are long series of cases
where birds banded at their nests in the northern parts of the
breeding range (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Michigan, New York,
and Massachusetts) have returned to the same point one to four years
later. These birds probably all belonged to the subspecies _luteus_.
Similarly, similar data also are available for areas (Missouri,
Kentucky, Tennessee, and Florida) within the range of _C. a. auratus_,
which probably is nonmigratory.
Definite migrations of individual banded birds are indicated by the
records of flickers banded in Saskatchewan and recovered in Iowa,
Oklahoma, and Texas; banded in Missouri and recovered in Texas;
banded in Iowa and recovered in Louisiana; banded in South Dakota
and recovered in Arkansas and Oklahoma (4); banded in Illinois and
recovered in Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas (2), and Louisiana
(3); banded in Indiana and recovered in Mississippi; banded in Michigan
and recovered in Arkansas and Louisiana; banded in Ohio and recovered
in Alabama and Mississippi; banded in Pennsylvania and recovered in
Georgia; and banded in Nova Scotia and recovered in North Carolina.
_Casual records._--In southern British Columbia a specimen was
collected at Sumas on April 8, 1903, and two were seen at Vernon on
December 26, 1906; a specimen was taken at Orcas Island, Wash., on
October 15, 1907; one was collected at Blaine, Oreg., on November 3,
1921; and one was taken at Cliff Spring, Nev., on September 29, 1931.
There are several records for California as follows: Furnace Creek,
April 12, 1917; St. Geronimo, December 18, 1893, and January 14, 1895;
Point Lobos, December 14, 1934; Los Angeles, February 20, 1901; San
Diego, December 4, 1931; and Eldridge, January 4, 1913.
At least four occurrences well north of the breeding range in Alaska
have been recorded: St. George Island, fall of 1904; Cape Etolin,
September 14, 1927; Wainwright, a specimen in 1924; and Cape Halkett,
in the fall of 1927.
A specimen was collected on Okpatok Island in Hudson Strait in October
1882, one was taken in Sandwich Bay in August 1908, and a specimen
has been reported from Cape Wolstenholme on the Ungava Peninsula. The
species also has been recorded from Bermuda where at least one specimen
was collected in 1871.
_Egg dates._--Arctic America: 6 records, June 3 to 16.
Florida: 18 records, March 25 to July 18; 9 records, April 16 to
May 18, indicating the height of the season.
Illinois: 22 records, April 30 to May 30; 11 records, May 13 to 21.
Michigan: 16 records, April 17 to June 24; 8 records, May 12 to 30.
New York: 15 records, May 13 to June 15; 8 records, May 25 to 29.
COLAPTES AURATUS LUTEUS Bangs
NORTHERN FLICKER
PLATE 36
HABITS
I can remember as clearly as if it were only yesterday my boyish,
enthusiastic admiration for this beautiful bird, though it was between
50 or 60 years ago that my father first showed me a freshly killed
flicker. I was simply entranced with the softly blended browns, the
red crescent on the head, the black crescent and bold spotting on the
breast, and, above all, with the golden glow in the wings and tail. Few
birds combine such charming colors and pleasing contrasts. I have never
lost my admiration for it, and still consider it one of nature’s gems.
It, and its close relative, the red-shafted flicker, together are
widely distributed over nearly all the wooded regions of North America.
Consequently it is widely known and over most of its range is a common
and familiar species. Its prominence and popularity are attested by the
long list of vernacular names by which it is locally known. Franklin L.
Burns (1900), in his monograph of the species, lists 123 such names;
and later he adds nine more, bringing the list up to 132 names. These
are far too many to be quoted here, and many of them are “very local or
very slight orthographical or cacographical variants.” I have always
loved our local name “partridge woodpecker,” suggestive of my boyhood
days, when flickers, meadowlarks, and robins were considered legitimate
game. But now the name yellow-shafted flicker seems appropriate to
distinguish it, from the red-shafted flicker.
The haunts of the flicker are almost everywhere in open country or
lightly wooded regions; it can hardly be called a forest-loving
species, though I have often found it nesting in more or less extensive
deciduous woods; its favorite haunts during the summer seem to be in
the rural districts among the farms, orchards, and scattered woodlots;
it seems to be at home, also, in villages and small towns, and even
in some of the smaller cities, where spacious grounds and gardens
provide suitable surroundings. In fall and winter it is more apt to
wander about in open woodlands, fields, and meadows or seek shelter in
coniferous woods or swamps.
_Spring._--Although many flickers remain all winter in the Northern
States, there is a decided spring migration of the great bulk of
northern-bred birds that have wintered in the Southern States. These
birds gather in flocks during the late winter, and the northward
movement starts with the first mild weather, the migration being
largely performed during the night. Mr. Burns (1900) says that at
Berwyn, Pa., the forerunners, consisting of solitary old males, appear
“as early as Feb. 2 or as late as April 6, according to the promises of
the season, correlating in a measure with the date at which the first
frog is heard peeping. * * *
“It becomes common soon after the hardy willow has unfolded its leaves,
and about the time the fragrant spicewood blossoms, when the ants,
spiders and beetles become active once more, and just in the height of
the arbutus season. The northward movement is far from being steady
or regular, being largely governed by weather conditions; Mr. Burns
calculates from his mass of data that the average distance traveled
daily is about 12 miles, varying according to season and weather
conditions from 7 to 48 miles per night. It is absolutely certain that
it does not move steadily night after night, but only as the weather
permits or necessitates and its physical condition allows.”
Flickers often migrate in companies of considerable size, in
loose, scattered flocks, noisy and active, flying from tree to
tree and calling excitedly. Their arrival is announced by the loud
challenge-call, given from the top of some tall tree, _wicker_,
_wicker_, _wicker_, or _wake-up_, _wake-up_, _wake-up_, as the male
challenges his rivals or invites his prospective mate to join him in
courtship. This, one of the most welcome sounds of early spring, is
indeed a call to “wake up,” for all nature is awakening, buds are
swelling on the trees, verdure is appearing in the woods and fields,
the early flowers are beginning to blossom, the hylas are peeping in
the warming pools, insects are becoming active, and the songs of the
early birds announce that spring is here. Another spring sound soon
strikes our ears, a loud, far-reaching, vibrant sound, the long, almost
continuous roll of the flicker’s drumming, another challenge-call, a
preliminary of the courtship performance; at frequent intervals, often
repeated over a long period in early morning, he beats his loud tattoo
on some hollow, resonant limb.
_Courtship._--The courtship of the flicker is a lively and spectacular
performance, noisy, full of action, and often ludicrous, as three or
more birds of both sexes indulge in their comical dancing, nodding,
bowing, and swaying motions, or chase each other around the trunk or
through the branches of a tree. From the time of Audubon to the present
day, many observers have noted and described the curious antics of this
star performer. But I prefer to quote first from some extensive notes
recently contributed by Francis H. Allen, as follows: “The courtship
of the flicker is an elaborate and somewhat puzzling performance.
Two birds face each other on the branch of a tree or cling side by
side, though at a little distance apart, on the trunk, and spread
their tails and jerk their heads about in a sort of weaving motion,
frequently uttering a note that is peculiar to this performance, a
_wick-up_ or _week-up_. The head motion is a series of backward jerks
with the bill pointing up at an angle of perhaps 60° and the head at
the same time swinging from side to side. Sometimes a short, low _wuck_
is uttered from time to time during the performance. These bouts occur
not only between male and female, but frequently between two males or
two females.
“In April 1934, for more than a week I saw a trio of flickers about
my house. Invariably the two females went through courtship antics
together, while the male fed on the ground nearby, apparently
completely indifferent to them. One of the females was much more active
than the other, which usually kept a stiff pose with head drawn in,
only occasionally responding with feeble head-waggings. At no time did
the active female use any other display than the head-wagging, and
there was never any suggestion of combat or intimidation.
“A year later, 1935, the flickers near my house behaved differently.
In the afternoon of April 24, the two males were singing loudly and
frequently in the woods, about an eighth of a mile away and at some
distance apart. By singing I mean, of course, the prolonged laughing
call of _wick-wick-wick_, etc. Presently they stopped singing, and one
flew toward the other, stopping about halfway. Very soon the other
joined him, and a long period of posturing and _wick-up_-ing ensued.
Both birds had the black mustaches of the male. The posturing was
the regular ‘weaving’ of the head and the fanning of the tail. The
notes, after the first at least, were much subdued in tone. There were
frequent intervals of quiet. The birds kept close together most of
the time, often with heads only two or three inches apart, or perhaps
less. They flitted about frequently, sometimes clinging to the trunk
of an oak, sometimes perched on a horizontal branch, and once or
twice they alighted on the stems of underbrush. After a long period
of posturing, they met in a momentary tilt, and presently there was
another clash after more posturing, then a third clash, and after that
they separated. The same bird was the aggressor in at least two of
the clashes. As often in such encounters, the attacked bird stood his
ground and the attacker veered off. It was very mild warfare, if it was
really serious at all.
“Two days after the bout of the two males, I saw two females engaged in
the dance in one of our pear trees. It lasted only a few minutes, and I
heard no notes. Not long after the dance of the two females a prolonged
‘sexual flight’ took place. It lasted five or ten minutes, as nearly as
I could tell, with a few short intervals of resting. I could at no time
determine the sexes of the two birds thus engaged, but occasionally a
snatch of faint song was heard (_wick-wick-wick_), and I assume that
they were male and female. They flew rather slowly and kept only a
few feet apart. It was evident that the spacing was intentional and
that the pursuer made no attempt to catch up with the other. The flight
covered a territory of several acres. It was a graceful and interesting
performance.
“I supposed at the time that this sexual flight indicated that the
affair was completed, but later that afternoon I several times saw a
male and two females together, the females posturing and _wick-up_-ing,
the male motionless. The females showed no enmity toward each other and
did not face each other, as the males of two days before did. They kept
rather farther apart. At one time a second male appeared and stayed
about for a time, but he disappeared, apparently without becoming a
serious factor in the situation.
“Three days later a pair of flickers, male and female, were feeding
peacefully together on the lawn in the morning and in the afternoon,
and I judged that the marital arrangements of at least two of my
flickers had been completed.”
More active courtship on the part of a female flicker is thus described
in some notes from Lewis O. Shelley: “On April 24, coincident with
a male flicker’s message from the elm stub, a female and a second
male appeared. All three were later in the cherry tree by our garden,
perched on branches some three feet apart. The female took the
initiative in the following activities and, perched crosswise of the
branch, often bobbed and ducked up and down, then crosswise of the
branch jerked to left, right, left, right, head cocked erect and with
tail fully spread. At times the males, less actively, did likewise, but
for the most part perched noncommittally, silent and still, giving but
few calls. At one time, after the female had displayed intermittently
several times, and when the males had been still for some five minutes,
she sidled up to the nearest male and again displayed with much
wing-fluttering and tail-spreading and sidewise twitchings; then the
same to the other male who flew when her actions of bobbing and bowing
face to face commenced. Not to be outdone, or so affronted, she flew
after him, then the second male followed.”
C. W. Leister (1919) noticed an aerial courtship evolution of the
flicker, of which he says: “When first noticed, he was about fifty
feet from the ground and ascending in peculiar, bumpy, and jerky
spirals. This was maintained until a height of about 350-400 feet was
reached, when, after a short pause, a reverse of practically the same
performance was gone through. The Flicker (_Colaptes auratus luteus_),
for as such he was identified by this time, then alighted in a cherry
tree, just above a female that we had previously failed to notice, and
completed the performance by going through his more familiar courting
antics.”
A recrudescence of the amatory instinct is sometimes seen in fall. On
September 22, 1933, a clear, warm morning, a pair of flickers, male and
female, were watched for some time as they performed their courtship
dance on the top of one of my chimneys, where there might have been
some warmth remaining from a fire that had since died out. They danced
around on all four sides of the chimney, always facing each other, both
of them bowing and swaying the head and neck, or whole body, from side
to side, with the neck extended and the bill pointing almost straight
upward. Sometimes they stopped for a few seconds, holding the upright
posture, or one performed while the other posed. There was no wing or
tail display that I could see. Lewis O. Shelley tells me that he has
seen flickers in courtship display while the young were just leaving
the nest.
_Nesting._--Soon after mating is accomplished the choice for a nesting
site is made, and often the selection is made during courtship,
especially if a nesting cavity of the previous year is to be used.
Probably the female usually makes the final decision, though there is
some evidence to indicate that in many cases the male selects the site
and persuades his mate to accept it.
Miss Althea R. Sherman (1910) made some very thorough studies of the
nesting habits of the northern flicker at National, Iowa, in some boxes
so arranged on her barn that she could observe the home life of the
birds at close range. The male and the female had been occupying two
different boxes as roosting places, and the eggs were laid in the box
occupied by the male, from which it became evident “that the male bird
chose the nesting place, and persuaded his mate to lay her eggs there,
even when she was inclined to nest elsewhere, and when she had a box
quite as good as his.”
Often the male “stakes out his claim,” so to speak, in the vicinity of
an old nest, where, during the courtship period, he utters his loud
mating call for several days, or even weeks, before the female answers
the invitation. Then, after mating is accomplished, his chosen mate may
or may not accept his choice of a nesting site. The desirability of the
nesting site may in such cases influence the female’s choice of a mate,
for she is as much interested in having a comfortable and safe home as
in choosing a handsome husband.
Having chosen the site, the pair set about repairing the old cavity or
excavating a new one, at which both birds work diligently for anywhere
from a week to three weeks, depending on the conditions they find.
Mr. Shelley tells me that, in his experience with several nests, the
nesting cavity is completed from a week to a fortnight before the eggs
are laid. The chips are usually, but not always, carried away to some
distance from the nest tree, but often chips are merely scattered about
the base of the tree. William Brewster (1936) gives the following
account of rather peculiar behavior of a flicker while excavating its
nest:
Found a Flicker at work excavating a hole in an apple-tree
in Bensen’s orchard. I was passing the tree within six feet
when I heard a low tapping, accompanied by a continuous
muffled whining sound. Turning, I at once saw the bird’s
tail projecting from the hole, which was not over five
feet above the ground. For a minute or more the pecking
and whining continued uninterruptedly, the tail wriggling
violently the while. Evidently the bird had carried in the
hole to just that point where she had less room to work
than she had had before or would have afterwards. In other
words, she had just about reached the point where the
entrance hole must begin to be expanded into a chamber and
to turn downward. It seemed to me that the whining sound
expressed rage or impatience. Perhaps it was the Flicker’s
form of swearing!
The northern flicker seems to show no very decided preference for any
one species of tree in its choice of a nesting site, though I believe
it does prefer a dead tree, or a dead stub on a living tree, or a tree
that has a soft or partially decayed heart. It has always seemed to
me that in New England we find more nests in large apple trees in old
orchards than elsewhere, the nest being excavated in the main trunk, or
large upright branch, at no great height from the ground. Such trees
may have a hard outer shell, but the interior is often more or less
soft. Old orchards are becoming scarce in my vicinity, which forces the
flickers to look elsewhere. Next in importance here as a common nesting
site is the trunk or stub of a dead white pine tree. Mr. Burns (1900)
mentions one dead pine “perforated with 25 or 30 holes, most of which
were in use at one time or another.” He lists, as favorite trees in the
Middle and Eastern States, “apple, sycamore, oak, butternut, cherry,
elm, chestnut, maple, poplar, beech, ash, pine, hickory, etc.” In
Pennsylvania, he says that J. Warren Jacobs has “found the sycamore to
be the favorite, with the apple and maple second, the beech and locust
third, oak and cherry fourth, and all other varieties fifth.”
Mr. Burns continues: “From Ohio westward the apple orchard is a
favorite with the poplar, willow, maple, oak, elm, walnut, cottonwood,
etc., more or less resorted to, according to availability. It very
seldom nests in a living coniferous tree, though it has been known to
nest in a living red cedar and in dead hemlocks and spruces.”
Telegraph, telephone, and other tall poles, as well as fenceposts,
are favorite nesting sites in the prairie regions and other parts of
the West, where trees are scarce. Frank L. Farley writes to me that
in the timbered country of northern Alberta, “where there are many
suitable nesting trees and stubs, the telephone and telegraph poles are
frequently used for nesting. These poles are usually cedar and it is
assumed that the birds prefer these for nesting, because of the ease
with which they can excavate.”
Flickers quite often nest in boxes erected for that purpose and in
buildings, much to the annoyance of the owners. I have frequently
seen nests in icehouses; these have double walls, the intervening
space being filled with sawdust; the birds drill through the outer
walls and make their nests in the sawdust. The cornices and walls
of many buildings on the farms, as well as the towers of churches
and schoolhouses, are perforated, and the eggs laid on the beams or
boarding within. Mr. Burns (1900) records the following interesting
case:
Mr. Burke H. Sinclair found a nest containing eggs in the
garret of the town high school. The birds obtained entrance
to this large three-story brick building by means of a
displaced brick. As in all infloored lofts it consists of
nothing but the parallel rafters, with attached lath and
plaster, which forms the ceiling of the room below. This
frail floor is about ten inches below the entrance hole,
and the nest was situated about one foot from and directly
in front of the entrance. The place had evidently been
used for several years, there being at least a peck of
wood chippings, some fresh, but a large quantity old and
discolored with age. The nest was placed between two of the
parallel rafters and composed of these chippings, being
about six inches thick by eighteen inches in diameter. This
material had been all cut from the rafters on the floor and
the roof overhead.
A number of other unusual nesting sites have been recorded. F. A. E.
Starr tells me of a nest that “was in an old stump two feet high; the
six eggs were on a bed of rotten wood at ground level.” Dr. Jonathan
Dwight, Jr. (1893), reports a nest that he found on Prince Edward
Island; the “nest with fully fledged young was examined in the top of
a hollow fence post. No excavation had been made by the bird, and the
young were entirely exposed to the weather.” Flickers occasionally nest
in natural cavities in trees, where no excavation is needed beyond
enlarging the opening, if necessary, or cleaning out the interior.
Ned Hollister (1918) reports that a pair of flickers and a pair of
house wrens nested in holes in an old stump in a lion’s cage in the
National Zoological Park in Washington. Mr. Burns (1900) writes: “It
has been found breeding far out on the prairie in an old wagon hub,
surrounded by weeds; also in barrels, and one instance of an excavation
of the regulation size in a hay stack is on record; another nested in
a crevice of an unused chimney for several years; and stranger yet it
has been found more than once occupying Kingfisher’s and enlarged Bank
Swallow’s burrows.”
The haystack nest is reported by Major Bendire (1895), on the authority
of William A. Bryant, of New Sharon, Iowa, as follows:
On a small hill, a quarter of a mile distant from my home,
stood a haystack which had been placed there two years
previously. The owner, during the winter of 1889-’90,
had cut the stack through the middle and hauled away
one portion, leaving the other standing with the end
smoothly trimmed. The following spring I noticed a pair
of yellow-shafted flickers about the stack showing signs
of wanting to make it a fixed habitation. One morning
a few days later I was amused at the efforts of one of
the pair. It was clinging to the perpendicular end of
the stack and throwing out chipped hay at a rate to defy
competition. This work continued for nearly a week, and
in that time the pair had excavated a cavity 20 inches in
depth. The entrance was located 8½ feet above ground, and
was 2½ inches in diameter and dug back into the stack for 6
inches, where it turned sharply downward and was slightly
enlarged at the bottom. On May 28 I took a handsome set
of seven eggs from the nest, the eggs lying on a bed of
chipped hay. The birds lingered about the stack and by June
14 had deposited another set of eggs. * * * I never could
quite understand the philosophy of their peculiar choice of
this site, as woodland is abundant here. A well-timbered
creek bottom was less than half a mile distant, while large
orchards and groves surround the place on every hand.
Kumlien and Hollister (1903) and J. A. Farley (1901) record instances
of flickers nesting on hay; in each case the birds bored a hole through
the walls of a barn and laid their eggs in a hollow in a pile of hay
near the entrance hole. William Brewster (1909) published an account
of a flicker’s nest on the open ground, found by some ladies on Cape
Cod and seen by him. Beside a sandy road, “fully a quarter of a mile
from the nearest house and bordered on both sides by dense woods of
pitch pines, the ladies found five eggs of the Flicker lying together
in a hollow in the ground within a few feet of the deeply rutted wagon
track.” The nest “was a circular, saucer-shaped depression, measuring
21¼ inches across the top, by 3 inches in depth. Dry yellowish sand
mixed with fine gravel and wholly free from vegetation of any kind,
living or dead, formed its bottom and the gently sloping sides, as well
as the surface of the level ground about it for two or three yards in
every direction, but a little further back there were weeds and grasses
growing sparingly, in slightly richer soil.” Photographs of two nests
similarly located may be seen in Bird-Lore, volume 18, page 399, and
volume 36, page 105.
Mr. Burns’s data show that the height of the nest from the ground
varies in middle and eastern States from 2 to 60 feet, and in central
western States from ground level to 90 feet. His accumulated data
on the measurements of nesting cavities show that the depth of the
excavation is “greatest in New York and New England (10 to 36 inches),
Illinois (14 to 24 inches), Pennsylvania (10 to 18 inches), and
Minnesota (9 to 18 inches).” Probably the depth of the cavity depends
on the quality of the wood and the age of the nest; when an old cavity
is used, it is usually deepened somewhat. Dr. H. C. Oberholser (1896)
gives the measurements of four Ohio nests; the total depth varied from
7 to 18 inches; the diameter of the entrance varied from 2.00 by 2.00
to 4.00 by 4.00 and averaged 2.94 by 2.72 inches. Mr. Burns (1900)
says the diameter of the cavity near the bottom varies from 4.50 to
10.00, and averages 7.67 inches. No nesting material is taken in from
outside, but enough fine chips are left in the bottom of the hole
to make a soft bed, in which the eggs are partially buried. Carl W.
Buchheister tells me that he once found a nest “the bottom of which
was 6 inches below the ground level and 12 inches below the opening, a
round hole which was 6 inches above the ground. There was but one egg.”
_Eggs._--The flicker is notorious as a prolific egg layer, but under
ordinary circumstances, when not disturbed, the average set consists of
six to eight eggs. Incubated sets of as few as three or four have been
found, sets of nine and ten are not very rare, and as many as 17 have
been found in a nest at one time; the large numbers may be products of
two females. Mr. Burns (1900) records the contents of 169 sets of the
northern flicker as 11 sets of four, 16 sets of five, 35 sets of six,
34 sets of seven, 38 sets of eight, 17 sets of nine, 13 sets of ten, 3
sets of twelve, and one each of thirteen and fourteen. Major Bendire
(1895) states that Steward Ogilby, of Staten Island, N. Y., reports
“finding a brood of not less than nineteen young Flickers in one nest,
all alive and apparently in good condition.”
If robbed of its eggs, the flicker will continue to lay new sets for a
long time. Dr. Barton W. Evermann (1889) “obtained thirty-seven eggs
in forty-nine days from a ‘yellowhammer’ which had its nest near my
house. The eggs were in seven sets, five, five, five, six, seven, four,
and five eggs respectively.” J. Parker Norris (1888) took five sets of
six eggs each from a nest in Pennsylvania between May 16 and June 18.
Several other similar cases of persistent laying have been reported,
all of which indicate that an egg is laid each day and that the birds
begin at once to replace the lost set. Mr. Burns (1900) lists a number
of such cases, where no nest egg was left to induce the bird to keep
on laying; the largest number reported was 48 eggs in 65 days. My
neighbor, Charles L. Phillips, tried the experiment of taking one egg
each day, leaving one as a nest egg; he holds the extraordinary record
of having taken 71 eggs from one nest in 73 days; the poor bird rested
only two days in the long strain of over two months.
Eggs of the flicker have sometimes been found in the nests of other
birds. In an old orchard, not far from my home, I once found a
flicker’s egg in a bluebird’s nest, with five eggs of the latter; and
in another cavity in the same tree was a tree swallow’s nest containing
five eggs of the swallow and an egg of the flicker. As this was in a
remote locality, it is hardly likely that the eggs were placed there
artificially, and the chances are that the flicker’s nest had been
destroyed and she was forced to lay in the nearest available cavity.
Mr. Burns (1900) says: “A similar instance is recorded by E. G. Elliot,
Bradford, Mass., May 16th, ’84, of a set of five eggs of bluebird
and one of flicker, nest of grass and feathers. Records of European
house sparrow and red-headed woodpecker eggs in freshly excavated
quarters with one or more eggs of the Flicker are not uncommon, and
upon investigation the latter proved to be the aggrieved party in every
instance.” He also tells of a flicker that laid an egg in a mourning
dove’s nest.
The eggs of the flicker are pure lustrous white, with a brilliant
gloss; the shell is translucent, and, when fresh, the yolk shows
through it, suffusing the egg with a delicate pinkish glow, which is
very beautiful.
The shape is quite variable, but the majority are ovate; some are
short-ovate or elliptical-ovate, some nearly oval, and some rarely
somewhat pointed. The measurements of 57 eggs average 26.85 by 20.58
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =30.48= by
22.86, 28.19 by =24.38=, =24.45= by 21.34, and 27.68 by =19.05=
millimeters.
_Young._--The period of incubation of the flicker has been said to
be from 14 to 16 days. Miss Sherman’s (1910) careful observations on
marked eggs, laid on known dates, indicate a shorter period. From
some former nests she had learned “that sometimes the eggs hatched
in nine days, but more frequently in ten days after the laying of
the last egg.” In these cases, incubation may have begun before the
set was complete, or the eggs may have received some heat from the
body of the male, for she said that, in at least one case, “while the
eggs were being laid, and before incubation began the male roosted in
the box with the eggs.” According to a later observation, “the exact
time for incubation had been twelve days, three hours and fifty-two
minutes. The seventh egg hatched four hours later making its period of
incubation eleven days and eight hours nearly.” After another similar
experience with the hatching of nine marked eggs, which extended over a
period from 5:40 a. m. one day until 10:48 a. m. the next day, she says:
“Roughly speaking, then, the time that our Flickers take for incubation
is from eleven to twelve days.”
Her observations showed that the duties of incubation are shared by
both sexes, that the male usually incubates during the night, but “by
day the duties of incubation seem to be shared about equally between
the two birds, who are close sitters, the eggs seldom being found
alone. Of the length of the sittings no adequate record has been kept,
but those lasting from one hour and a half to two hours have been
noted.”
Miss Sherman (1910) noted that “the usual time for depositing the eggs
in the nest appears to be the hour between five and six o’clock in the
morning,” though in one case an egg was laid between 11 a. m. and
4 p. m.
Some of her observations on the young follow:
Until the young are about eleven days old, they lie in a
circle in the nest, their long necks stretched over each
other, then for nearly a week they press against the side
of the nest. At seventeen or eighteen days of age, their
claws having acquired a needlelike sharpness, they begin
to cling to the wall of the nest, and when three weeks old
they are able to climb to the hole and be fed while the
parent hangs outside.
Although the eyes of the nestlings are not open until
they are ten days old yet these organs are by no means
dormant. An easy proof of this is made by placing the hand
noiselessly over the entrance hole when they are no more
than three or four days old, and are lying apparently
asleep; up comes every head and they beg for food, getting
none they soon sleep, when the experiment may be repeated,
gaining from the young the same response that is given when
a parent darkens the hole.
That cry of the young which is so often described as a
hissing sound, begins very soon after they are hatched.
At first exceedingly faint it soon grows stronger, and is
uttered day and night for two weeks. A parent upon taking
its place to brood these wailing nestlings begins to croon
a lullaby and continues this musical murmur until it falls
asleep, which is often quite soon. It has no effect in
lessening the noise of the youngsters, yet the parent
faithfully renders its cradle song until the young cease
to make this noise which is about the time they begin to
show fear. Of other cries that they make, there is the
chuckling noise uttered when the little one is in the act
of seizing the food-bearing bill, and there is a cry that
sounds like a whine. Still another one is a note of alarm
given when the young are disturbed by some such thing as
the opening of the trap door. This uttered in unison has a
very theatrical effect strongly suggesting the chorus of
the stage. After they have commenced to move about freely
in the nest they make much of the time a pleasant sound
like a chatter or quack, as if talking to each other. And
lastly comes the grown-up Flicker “pe-ap”, which they begin
to call as soon as they climb to the hole. * * *
Some broods are much more quarrelsome than others. Their
battle ground is in the vicinity of the hole. The one in
possession of the hole maintains his supremacy there by
occasional withdrawals of his head from the hole in order
to deliver vigorous blows on the heads of all within his
reach. This is the case with the stronger ones, the weaker
ones frequently are driven from the vantage place. When
the hole is large enough for two to thrust out their heads
together, they draw within after the serving of a meal and
fight furiously, while a waiting third may slip up and gain
the coveted hole. But all their fighting days seem to be
confined to a few in the fourth week of their lives.
* * * In very early life a meal is served to baby Flicker
with many insertions of the parent’s bill, as many as
thirty-four have been counted, but from eight to twenty are
the ordinary number, decreasing to three or four before the
young leave the nest. A record made during a continuous
watch of six hours and thirty-two minutes shows that each
parent fed five times; that the father delivered his supply
with eighty-two insertions of the bill, while the mother
used but forty-one. Probably the father brought more food
since on every count he proved himself the more devoted
parent. In grasping the bill the point of the youngster’s
bill is at right angles with that of the parent’s, thus
the opening between the food-bearing mandibles is covered
after the young have attained a few days of age, and
any over-dropping of food is prevented. This accident
frequently happens in the early days of the nest, then the
mussed up ants that fall are carefully picked up by the
frugal parent when the feeding is over. * * *
Experiments show that to a nestling weighing 743 grains was
given a breakfast that weighed 76 grains, to one weighing
1,430 grains a dinner of 118 grains, and to another that
tipped the scales at 1,530 grains a supper of 103 grains.
Probably the weight of the average load is not far from one
hundred grains. * * *
When the young were eighteen days old during a watch of
four and one-half hours twenty-five meals were given to
five nestlings that wore distinguished marks. Three of
these are positively known to have received five meals
apiece, and two received four apiece. * * * At this age the
young Flickers every hour partake of food to the amount of
one-sixteenth of their own weight, or in one day consume
their full weight of food.
She says that flickers are very solicitous to keep a clean nest; for
the first nine or ten days the parents eat the excrements, but after
that the dejecta are carried out in the tough white sacks in which they
are enclosed. If no sacks of excrement are found in the nest after
feeding, the parent solicits them; “this is done by biting the heel
joints sometimes, but more often the fleshy protuberance that bears
that budding promise of the tail.”
She says that the male “staid with the young every night until they
were three weeks old, brooding all of them until nearly two weeks of
age, when they began pressing their breasts against the side of the
nest, and he could cover the tails of two or three only, after which
for two or three nights he sat upon the bottom of the nest apart from
the young; then for four nights he hung upon the wall of the nest near
the hole; thereafter he staid with them no more.”
Her records show that the young remained in the nest nearly or quite
four weeks, or from 25 to 28 days. During the last three or four days
nearly all of them lost weight; this may have been due to the period
of the heaviest feather growth, or because the parents may have let up
on the feeding to induce the young to leave the nest. Miss Sherman’s
statements, as to the period of incubation and the length of time that
the young remain in the nest, are quite at variance with statements
made by others, but her observations were so carefully and thoroughly
made under such favorable circumstances that they are more convincing
than less accurate observations of others.
Some others have also described the method of feeding the young by
regurgitation in a manner that differs from that observed by Miss
Sherman. Mr. Brewster (1936), for example, says:
Standing on the edge of the hole, the parent would select
one--usually the nearest, I thought--and bending down would
drive his bill to its base into the gaping mouth which
instantly closed tightly around it, when the head and bill
of the parent was worked up and down with great rapidity
for from one to one and one-half seconds (timed with a
stop watch), the young meanwhile holding on desperately
and apparently never once losing its grasp, although its
poor little head was jerked up and down violently. The
first, or entering downward thrust of the parent’s bill
looked like a vicious stab, the bird apparently striking
with all its force and as if with the design of piercing
his offspring to the vitals. The subsequent up and down
motion was invariably rapid and regular and resembled the
bill movement of a woodpecker while “drumming.” It also
suggested the stroke of a piston.
In this case the top of the stump had been broken off, leaving the
nest open and exposed, so that every motion could be clearly seen from
a distance of not over 15 feet. After the young had left the nest, he
discovered that “the nest was left in a terribly foul state, the bottom
being a disgusting mass of muddy excrement alive with wriggling worms.
* * * These young, however, managed to keep very clean and all, so far
as I could discover, were perfectly free from vermin.” Apparently the
old birds find it difficult to clean the nest after the young reach a
certain size.
W. I. Lyon (1922) tells an interesting story of a screech owl that
adopted and brooded a family of young flickers, after its own nest in
the same tree had been broken up twice; the owl even brought in part of
a small bird, perhaps intending to feed it to the young flickers, which
were all the time being fed by their parents and were successfully
raised.
_Plumages._--Miss Sherman (1910) gives a very good description of the
naked and blind nestling, as follows: “The pellucid color of the newly
hatched Flicker resembles that of freshly sun-burned human skin, but
so translucent is the nestling’s skin that immediately after a feeding
one can see the line of ants that stretches down the bird’s throat and
remains in view two or three minutes before passing onward. This may be
witnessed for several days while the skin assumes a coarser red, until
it begins to thicken and become a bluish hue, before the appearance of
the pin-feathers. These may be detected under the skin on the fifth day
at the same time that bristle-like projections about one-sixteenth of
an inch long announce the coming of the rectrices and remiges.”
Mr. Burns (1900) says: “It is not known when the white membranous
process which extends from either side of the base of the lower
mandible disappears, but it probably goes at a very early age. This
formation is apparently peculiar to all young woodpeckers, as suggested
by Frank A. Bates, in the _Ornithologist and Oologist_, Vol. XVI, p.
35, but its use is unknown.” A photograph, published by E. H. Forbush
(1927), shows that this does not wholly disappear until the young
bird is nearly fledged; its function is probably to help guide the
regurgitated food from the mouth of the adult into the throat of the
young bird during the feeding method noted by Miss Sherman (1910).
The young flicker is fully fledged in its juvenal plumage when it
leaves the nest; and, contrary to the rule among birds, this plumage
more nearly resembles the plumage of the adult male than that of the
old female, as the young of both sexes have the black malar patches.
The black bands on the upper parts are much broader, the vinaceous
portions of the head and neck are more tinged with gray, the malar
patches are duller black, and the lower parts are paler with duller and
larger black spots than in the adult. The crown is usually more or less
suffused with dull red, especially in young males, and sometimes the
red nuchal crescent is somewhat wider or more extensive; the crescent
on the breast is usually smaller; the yellow on the under sides of
the wings and tail is duller and more greenish; the black tips in the
tail are duller and not so sharply defined against the yellow; and the
upper tail coverts are black with white spots, instead of being white
and boldly barred with black, as in the adult. The plumage is soft and
loose in texture and the bill is small and weak.
This plumage is worn but a short time, as a complete molt begins in
July and is usually finished in September or October, producing a
first winter plumage that is practically adult. Adults have a complete
postnuptial molt at about the same time of year. A detailed account
of the progress of the molt of young birds is given by William Palmer
(1901) and one of the adults by Burns (1900); both accounts are too
long to be quoted here. Fall adults in fresh plumage are very handsome
birds, more deeply and richly colored than spring birds; the upper
parts are deeper brown and the lower parts are suffused with yellowish
buff; wear and fading produce a more contrasted plumage in the spring
in which the dark markings are less obscured and the soft suffusion has
disappeared.
The interesting and extensive hybridizing with the red-shafted flicker
will be discussed under the latter species.
_Food._--The flicker is more terrestrial in its feeding habits than
any of our other woodpeckers. It is a common sight to see one of them
hopping about on a lawn, or in an open place in the woods and fields,
probing in the ground for ants or picking up ground insects or fallen
berries. It is one of our most useful birds, worthy of the fullest
protection. Professor Beal (1911) has shown that 60.92 percent of its
food consists of animal matter and 39.08 percent of vegetable matter.
About 75 percent of the animal food, or 45 percent of the entire food,
consists of ants. The flicker eats more ants than any other bird;
ants were found in 524 of the 684 stomachs examined, and 98 stomachs
contained no other food; one stomach contained over 5,000 ants, and
two others held over 3,000 each. If it had no other beneficial habit,
the flicker would deserve protection for the good it does in keeping
in check these injurious and annoying insects. Ants protect plant lice
of various species, which may become very injurious to many kinds of
cultivated plants, inflicting serious losses for the agricultural
interests; the plant lice, or aphids, secrete a sweet honey-dew juice,
of which the ants are very fond; consequently these tiny insects are
herded by the ants and milked like cows. The ants take good care of
their honey-producing “cattle,” driving them away from ladybugs and
other enemies, leading them to new pastures, if the old ones dry up,
sheltering the aphid eggs in their nests, and carrying the young aphids
out onto the plants to feed. Mr. Forbush (1927) also says: “Ants riddle
posts set in the ground or any timber or lumber resting upon or in
contact with the ground. They destroy the sills of buildings set close
to the ground and often ruin living trees, especially such as have a
few dead roots. They infest lawns and buildings, destroying grass on
the lawns and food in the house, and are difficult to eradicate. They
sometimes eat alive the young of certain ground-nesting birds. They are
very prolific and require a severe check on their numbers. Otherwise
they would become unbearable pests.”
The flicker explores the ground, often scratching away leaves or
rubbish, to locate the ant nests, digs into the nest with its long
bill, and, as the ants come pouring out, it laps them up in quantities
or inserts its long, sticky tongue deep down into the nest to get the
young and eggs. Early in spring it digs into the large mounds of the
mound-building ants, while the ants are less active, or tears open some
rotten stump to uncover a nest. Only a few days ago, I dug into an old
apple-tree stump for some rotten wood to put on some of my wildflowers
and uncovered a large nest of ants; within a very few minutes my pair
of flickers were on the job cleaning up the ants and their pupae.
Other insect food of the flicker includes a variety of beetles,
wasps, grasshoppers, crickets, mole crickets, chinch bugs, wood lice,
caterpillars, grubs, and various flying insects, which it sometimes
catches on the wing, darting after them like a flycatcher (Burns, 1900).
According to Beal (1911), 39.08 percent of its food is vegetable
matter. Most of this consists of wild fruits and berries, such
as the berries of the dogwood (_Cornus_) and Virginia creeper,
hackberries, blueberries, huckleberries, pokeberries, serviceberries
(_Amelanchier_), elderberries, barberries, mulberries, blackberries,
wild grapes, wild black cherries, choke cherries, cultivated cherries,
and the berries of the black alder, sour gum, black gum, greenbrier
(_Smilax_), spicebush (_Benzoin_), red cedar, hawthorn, mountain
ash, and woodbine. Harold H. Bailey (1913) says that while the fall
migration is at its height in Virginia, about October first, “they are
particularly fond of the blue berry of the black-gum tree, and after
once finding a tree with fruit, will continue to come to it until every
berry is gone, even though continually shot at. I remember a case a few
years back, when a local gunner killed fifty-seven flickers from one
black-gum tree in one forenoon. After the gumberries are gone, they
take to the dogwood berry for their main article of food, a fine red
berry and always plentiful in Tidewater.”
The flicker feeds freely on the seeds of the poison ivy and poison
sumac and perhaps does some harm in distributing the seeds of these
noxious plants. Professor Beal (1895) also includes the seeds of
other sumacs, clover, grasses, pigweed, mullein, ragweed, and other
unidentified seeds, and the seeds of the magnolia and knotweed. Mr.
Burns (1900) adds wild strawberries, dewberries, raspberries, and wild
plums, also acorns, beechnuts, corn from shocks, and oats, wheat, and
rye from stacks.
The birds that Miss Sherman (1910) watched in their nesting box
ate considerable sawdust. “That at one time the male ate three
tablespoonfuls is deemed a modest estimate. An attempt to measure the
amount both ate by a fresh supply daily showed the consumption of three
or more handfuls. The sawdust came from sugar maple, white and red oak
wood.” She seemed to think that flickers have “little use for water,”
having seen them drink only twice, during many hours of watching from
a blind, “all of which taken together would amount to weeks.” Owen
Durfee speaks in his notes of having seen three flickers drinking, or
eating, snow on a cold day in winter; he saw one drop down onto a patch
of snow on a stone wall and begin eating the snow. “His motions were
just like a chicken drinking water--the partly closed bill was dipped
into the snow and then held up in the air and the mandibles worked as
though chewing or dissolving it, when another dip would be made. Soon
two other flickers flew down in the same manner and secured some snow
water. On approaching, I found the footprints and several little round
holes somewhat smaller than a pencil.”
I have often seen them drinking water and so have other observers;
perhaps they drink copiously but not often.
Francis H. Allen says in his notes: “I have seen one feeding in the
manner of a chickadee among the twigs of a tree, perching crosswise of
the twig and flitting about actively, gleaning some minute food. Mr.
Brewster told me that he had seen a flicker feeding this way.”
Joseph J. Hickey tells me that he has seen a flicker feeding after the
manner of an Arctic three-toed woodpecker, deliberately scaling off the
bark in search for food; this bird had denuded about half the bark of a
hemlock.
_Behavior._--In ordinary short flights, the flicker proclaims its
relationship to the other woodpeckers by its rhythmic bounding flight,
the wings beating more rapidly on the rises and much less so on the
dips, which are usually followed by a short sail on motionless wings.
Mr. Burns (1900) noted that the dips occur about every 15 or 20 feet
and that the bird drops about 3 feet on each dip. On more prolonged
flights the flight is steadier, more direct, strong, and fairly swift.
It does not ordinarily fly at any great height, except when migrating.
When alighting on a tree trunk, there is a graceful upward glide,
the trunk is grasped with the feet, and the tail is used as a prop in
true woodpecker fashion; but the flicker is more apt to alight on a
horizontal branch than other woodpeckers, when there is less upward
glide and an upright posture is assumed, as balance is acquired.
On the ground, the flicker proceeds slowly by short hops, but sometimes
it runs rapidly for a few steps and then stops; it seems content to
confine its foraging to a rather limited area and does not appear very
active.
Spring drumming on a resonant limb, or inside a nesting cavity, is
an essential part of the call to courtship or mating, and perhaps a
signal call for other purposes; but it is used at other times, perhaps
for sheer amusement. This habit sometimes becomes a nuisance, since
the bird has discovered that the tin roof of a house serves as the
best kind of a drum; here he comes morning after morning while we are
enjoying our slumbers, from which we are rudely awakened at an unseemly
hour. Mr. DuBois writes to me that, on an afternoon in June, “a flicker
was drumming on the lid of a large galvanized iron ash or garbage can
at the corner of the back porch of a residence; he stood on the top of
the lid and, at intervals, after looking around, he beat an extremely
rapid roll on this metallic drum; the effect was startling.”
As to the roosting habits of flickers, Miss Sherman (1910) writes:
“Of all our birds the flickers are the earliest to retire at night,
sometimes going to their lodgings an hour before sundown, the customary
time being about a half hour before sunset. Generally they go out soon
after sunrise, but on cool autumn mornings they have been known to
linger much longer. During a rainstorm in the middle of the day they
have been seen to seek their apartments, also in fine weather they have
been found there enjoying the seclusion thus afforded.”
Frank R. Smith, of Hyattsville, Md., sends me the following note, dated
February 28, 1936: “For some nights, a flicker has been roosting in the
shell of a dead tree, from which one side has decayed away, leaving a
troughlike section of its trunk standing. He roosts about 12 feet from
the ground. This morning it was cloudy and he left the roosting place
at 7:25, although official sunrise is at 6:37.” Mr. Shelley tells me
that he flushed a male from the nest tree, “where he clung each night
about 3 feet above the nest hole, with the female brooding the young
within.” Flickers will roost in any open cavity in a tree, or even in a
partially sheltered spot on the open trunk; they often drill holes in
barns or under the eaves of houses for winter roosts; a favorite winter
roosting place is in the sawdust between the double walls of icehouses.
Sometimes they dig a hole into a vacant building and fail to find their
way out; I once found one dead inside the garage at my summer cottage,
which had been closed all winter. Mr. Forbush (1927) says that “during
one winter at Wareham one apparently slept on the wall of my summer
cottage under the eaves, clinging to one of the ornamental battens in
an upright position as it would cling to a tree trunk. This bird for
some unaccountable reason chose the north side of the cottage. He was
there night after night at dusk and also at daylight each morning.
Mr. K. F. Carr tells of a flicker that was accustomed to pass winter
nights in a chimney of an unoccupied dwelling in a thickly settled
neighborhood which undoubtedly was a more comfortable roosting place
than the north side of my cottage.”
Dr. Lynds Jones told Mr. Burns (1900) that “at Oberlin College a single
bird roosted between the vertical water pipe and wall of Spear Library
for two successive winters, and another occupied the cupola of the
Theological Seminary the succeeding winter.”
Flickers are generally regarded as peaceful harmless birds, but the
following two quotations indicate that they are sometimes otherwise.
O. P. Allert (1934) writes from Giard, Iowa: “On June 4, 1933, while in
the yard of my home, I was attracted by the cries of a pair of Robins
and saw a female Flicker in the act of killing the two young that the
Robins’ nest contained. One was killed in the nest, and the other
either fell or was thrown to the ground, where the Flicker followed and
dispatched it.”
Dr. Dayton Stoner (1932) writes: “While the flicker is not habitually
belligerent, it does on occasion show some aggressiveness. This most
frequently occurs during the breeding season. For example, on July
11, 1929, in the Parker woods south of Lakeport, I came upon several
flickers and two or three crows that were tormenting a red-shouldered
hawk. The flickers were pecking excitedly on the limbs of the tree on
which the hawk perched, and clamoring loudly at it. When the hawk flew
off the flickers darted after it, pecking it unmercifully until it lit
again, when they were cautious about approaching close to the harassed
hawk. This quarrel was continued for more than half an hour.”
_Voice._--The flicker has an elaborate vocabulary; no other woodpecker,
and few other birds, can produce a greater variety of loud striking
calls and soft conversational notes. A number of its many vernacular
names are based on a fancied resemblance to some one of its notes, and
in most cases these names give a very fair idea of the note. A few of
such names are “flicker,” “yucker,” “wacup,” “hit-tock,” “yarrup,”
“clape,” and “piute”; and there are other modifications of these in
different combinations of letters.
The commonest and most characteristic note is the loud spring call, of
which Eugene P. Bicknell (1885) says: “Its long rolling call may be
taken as especially representative of song, and is a characteristic
sound of the empty woodland of early spring. It is usually given from
some high perch, and has a free, far-reaching quality, that gives it
the effect of a signal thrown out over the barren country, as if to
arouse sleeping nature. This call continues irregularly through the
summer, but then loses much of its prominence amid the multitude of
bird voices. It is not infrequent in September, but later than the
middle of October I have not heard it.”
This is a sharp, penetrating note, which can be heard at a long
distance; the syllables _wick, wick, wick, wick_, or _yuck, yuck,
yuck, yuck_, are very rapidly uttered and repeated in long series.
Dr. Elon H. Eaton (1914) says that “it may be heard for more than
half a mile and has been variously syllabized, usually written as
‘_cuh-cuh-cuh-cuh_’,” which hardly represents my idea of the song.
A softer note, heard during active courtship and display, sounds
like _wake-up, wake-up, wake-up_, or _yarrup, yarrup, yarrup_,
given more deliberately in subdued tones and not so prolonged. This
has been referred to as the scythe-sharpening, or rollicking, song
and has also been written as _yucker, yucker, yucker_, or _wicker,
wicker, wicker_, or _hick-up, hick-up, hick-up_, or _flicker,
flicker, flicker_. Mr. Bicknell (1885) has recorded these notes from
April 8 to September 5; there seems to be no seasonal regularity
about them, as they are probably affectionate notes of greeting.
Mr. Burns (1900) “heard an apparently rare variation, a metallic
_Ka-wick-wick-wick-wick-wick-wick-wick-wick-wick-wick-ka_ by the male
while close to the nest.”
He gives as conversational, or soliloquizing notes, “commonly a
scanny, gurgling, almost involuntary _chur-r-r-r_ as danger seems
to threaten it when on the wing, or when flushed from the ground or
just before a-lighting, which may be interpreted as a note of warning
or announcement of arrival according to the circumstances. I have
heard a low guttural _who-del_ as it endeavored to balance itself on
a slender branch immediately after arrival.” A bird on a house roof,
in December, “uttered an odd guttural call of _huck-a-woó-ah_ or
again only _woo woo_ evidently for his own edification.” Other soft
conversational notes sound like _ouit-ouit_, or _puir-puir_, or a
cooing _yu-cah-yu-cah_.
Dr. Eaton (1914) says: “When the flicker flies up from the ground
and alights on a stub or fence post, he frequently bobs and bows to
an imaginary audience and immediately thereafter jerks his head high
upward giving voice to a sharp note like the syllable ‘clape.’” This is
a loud, explosive note and may indicate defiance or surprise.
A common note, oftenest heard during summer and fall, is a plaintive
call suggesting one of the notes of the blue jay or the red-shouldered
hawk. It is a loud and rather musical note, which has been variously
interpreted as _pee-ut_, _ye-a-up_, _pee-up_, _que-ah_, _kee-yer_,
etc., given singly or repeated two or three times, as a ringing call of
considerable carrying power.
_Field marks._--While hopping about on the lawn, the flicker may be
recognized as a brown bird somewhat larger than a robin and with a
rather long bill; if facing the observer, the black crescent on the
spotted breast is rather conspicuous, but the red crescent on the
nape does not show up much except at short range, nor does the black
malar patch of the male. The most conspicuous field mark is the white
rump, which shows plainly as the bird rises from the ground and flies
away; this probably serves as a direction mark, or a warning to the
companions with which it is often associated. Then, of course, the
flash of bright yellow in the wings and tail marks the bird in flight,
chiefly when high in the air, but somewhat also in straightaway flight.
_Enemies._--When I was a boy, 50 or 60 years ago, flickers,
meadowlarks, and robins were considered legitimate game, and they were
very good to eat. Bunches of these birds were often seen hanging in the
game dealers’ stalls. During our fall vacations on the coast, when the
weather was unfavorable for coot shooting, my father and uncle used
to resort to the uplands to shoot “partridge woodpeckers” and “brown
backs” (robins) among the bayberry bushes and sumacs. And flickers were
slaughtered in large numbers in the South. Man was then the flicker’s
worst enemy, but that is now all ancient history, as these birds are
now protected. But a new enemy has been introduced, which is probably
worse than the old one. The European starling has come to compete with
the flicker in its search for a food supply. The starlings are now
so abundant that they swoop down in flocks on the formerly plentiful
supply of wild fruits and berries, stripping the trees and bushes clean
of the fruits on which the flickers and robins depended for their
summer and fall food. They also compete for nesting sites, fighting
for or usurping every available cavity, even driving the flickers
from the homes that they had made. Lester W. Smith writes to me: “For
several years after the starling became common in Connecticut, other
birds, especially the flicker, were seldom ejected, or not until all
available nesting possibilities about buildings were used and filled
up. Never have I seen the flickers actually fight to retain their hole
or bird house. On the sanctuary they were exceptionally noisy whenever
starlings attempted to take or had taken possession. On one occasion
three starlings took part; one remained in the entrance hole of the box
and took dry grass that a second brought to it; the third chased off
either of the pair of flickers, as it flew near the nest box, which
was about 8 feet from the ground on a sawed-off tree in a white-pine
grove. On shooting one of the starlings, the other four birds flew away
temporarily, and, on examination, I found a thin layer of grass over
the flicker’s eggs. In 15 minutes the starlings returned and a second
was shot. I removed the grass, and, hiding nearby, I saw nothing more
of the third starling; but the flickers returned soon, took possession
of the box, and later raised the five young.”
Sydney R. Taber (1921) tells an interesting story of a battle between
a male flicker and a pair of starlings for the possession of the
flickers’ nest. The flicker had once pulled one of the starlings out of
the hole, but, during his absence, both of the starlings entered the
hole.
On this second occasion, despairing of being able to pull
the two out at long range, so to speak, the Flicker also
plunged into the hole. Then followed a battle royal,
lasting for what seemed minutes. It was rather ghastly
to imagine the blows that were being dealt at closest
quarters; not a sound was emitted, but one could imagine
what was going on within the hole by the feathers that flew
from it. The first bird to emerge--that is, to be pushed
out, by fractions of an inch--was one of the Starlings,
which then flew away. The fight between the other two birds
then continued out of sight until something appeared at
the mouth of the hole. This proved to be the tail of the
Flicker. When he had backed out of the hole into view once
more, it appeared that he and the remaining Starling had
clinched in a desperate grapple. With the latter gripping
one of the wings of the Flicker, they fell, fluttering and
fighting, a distance of nearly 40 feet; but just before
touching the ground, they parted and flew in different
directions. * * *
The above events occurred a fortnight ago. Since then the
Starlings have been in full possession of the hole of
contention.
Flickers figure largely in the food of duck hawks; their brightly
colored feathers are often found about the aeries. Other hawks
take their toll. O. A. Stevens sends me the following note on a
sharp-shinned hawk attacking a flicker, perhaps only in sport: “The
hawk settled in a partially dead, spreading pine tree, some 8 feet
from the top. A flicker perched about 6 feet above him, apparently
from curiosity. For some time they remained, the hawk sitting quietly,
preening, occasionally casting a glance at the flicker. The latter
teetered about on his perch, craning his neck at the hawk and even
dropping down a foot or so. After at least 10 minutes, the hawk
suddenly darted at the flicker and away they went, the flicker twisting
and escaping. It seems odd that an apparently heavy flier like a
flicker would escape so easily.”
Mr. Burns (1903) adds the broad-winged hawk to the flicker’s enemies;
“a nest of lusty young hawks examined in July, ’01, contained the
primaries and rectrices of one or two young Flickers, probably just
out of the nest. * * * To the above Mr. Benj. T. Gault adds the
Blacksnake--one having been killed and cut open by a farmer’s lad at a
place he was stopping at in Reynolds county, Missouri, contained the
body of one of these woodpeckers.” I have positively recorded flickers
in the food of the marsh hawk, Cooper’s hawk, and red-shouldered
hawk; probably they are killed by all the larger hawks and owls.
Taverner and Swales (1907) say that the sharpshin flights at Point
Pelee discommoded the flickers less than any other species of small
birds. “Though at times they seemed uneasy and restless, they were
perfectly able to take care of themselves and easily made their escape
when attacked. * * * The usual course of procedure of the Flicker,
when attacked by a hawk, was to wait until the last minute, when the
hawk, in its swoop, was just about to seize its victim, and then dodge
quickly to the other side of the limb. In every case observed the ruse
worked perfectly, and we found only once the feather remains which
proved that once in a while the hawk was a little too quick for the
Flicker.”
Mr. Burns (1900) says that the eggs and young are sometimes destroyed
by squirrels, weasels, mice, crows, jays, and the red-headed
woodpecker. Fred. H. Kennard records in his notes that a pair of
flickers, nesting in one of his boxes, were robbed of their eggs by
some red squirrels, who ate the eggs in the box, built their own nest
in the box, and brought in their young from another nest.
_Fall._--As soon as the young are strong on the wing and the molting
season is over, the flickers, old and young, begin to gather into loose
flocks or scattered parties, perhaps family parties, late in summer
and early in fall. On cold, windy autumn days they may be found in
close companionship in hollows and sheltered localities in woodland
clearings, protected from the cold winds, and feeding in the bayberry
patches and clumps of staghorn sumac. At such times, they lie close and
can be easily approached.
In southern Canada and the Northern States, the great bulk of the
flickers start to migrate in September, continuing to pass southward
during October. Mr. Burns (1900) says of the fall migration: “While the
retrograde movements are conducted in larger numbers, being recruited
by great numbers of birds of the year, it is scarcely as noticeable,
lacking the noise and bustle of Spring arrivals. Like the Robin, its
whole nature seems to have undergone a change. It no longer solicits
notice by song or display, but becomes shy and suspicious, and while
gregarious to a great extent, in flight every one is capable of looking
out for itself. The mature birds are the most wary, and by example
prepare the young for the dangers of migration and Winter residence in
the South, where it is constantly menaced by hunters.”
During migration, they fly rather high, well above the treetops, in
widely detached flocks, often far apart, but keeping more or less in
touch with each other and sometimes fairly close together; hundreds
may be counted, as they pass in a steady stream for hours at a time.
Taverner and Swales (1907) report heavy flights across Lake Erie from
Point Pelee: “During September it has always been one of the most
abundant birds of the Point. Keays reports a flight in 1901 when he
noted four hundred September 21.” Long Point, which extends well out
from the north shore of Lake Erie, is another favorite crossing place;
here, according to L. L. Snyder (1931), “the flight observed by Mr.
James Savage on September 30, 1930, was very remarkable, individuals
estimated to be from one to two hundred yards apart, forming a
scattered and straggling flock, passed in an almost steady stream
throughout the morning hours.”
Mr. Burns (1903) writes:
In south New Jersey, in the region of the Upper Delaware
Bay, which runs due south, some time in October of every
year the migrating Flickers are found flying north just
previous to and during a northwest storm. At this time the
wind is generally high and the birds fly against it. This
peculiarity of flight affects a large territory extending
inland from the east shore of the bay some fifteen or
twenty miles. While the birds prefer to breast a wind,
it is also probable that they are reluctant to cross the
lower part of the bay during such a storm which would
tend to drive them seaward, rather preferring to return
northward to the more narrow river where they could cross
in comparative safety.
_Winter._--Winter finds most of the flickers gone from the northern
States and southern Canada. Most of the birds wintering in New England
seek the milder climate of the seacoast, where they feed in the
extensive bayberry patches and on the semidormant insect life in the
rows of drift seaweed along the beaches. The few that remain inland
during mild winters are usually to be found in sheltered hollows or
along the sunny sides of the woods, feeding on the ground or on what
berries and dry fruits still remain on the bushes, often in company
with merry little winter parties of juncos, tree sparrows, chickadees,
nuthatches, and perhaps a downy or hairy woodpecker. Favorite resorts
at that season are the southern slopes of the hills overgrown with
thick stands of red cedars, mixed with staghorn sumacs, barberries,
and other berry-bearing bushes. They probably seek shelter at night in
the dense cedar swamps or in the holes excavated for that purpose in
icehouses or other buildings, or in hollow trees.
L. H. Walkinshaw, of Battle Creek, Mich., writes to me that there, “in
deep winter, flickers can be found in the deep tamarack swamps, coming
to the edge during periods of the day. They often flush, even when snow
is deep, from mounds on the ground or from dead or dying stubs along
the border.”
O. A. Stevens says in his notes: “At my farm home in Kansas, the
flickers caused some annoyance by seeking entrance to the barn for
winter nights. They enlarged other openings for this purpose and
sometimes started openings which would not lead them inside. One bird
at least, enlarged the opening about the hayfork track and roosted on
the iron track just inside the door.”
Dr. Paul L. Errington (1936) writes an interesting story on the
winter-killing of flickers in central Iowa. By a careful study of
the droppings of the three birds that he studied, it appeared that
they were much weakened by improper food, too large a proportion of
indigestible seeds, mainly those of the sumac, and not enough animal
food, which ordinarily amounts to more than half of the average food
supply.
M. P. Skinner (1928), writing of the Sandhills of North Carolina,
says: “Flickers stay in the Sandhills all winter, but the infrequent
snowstorms cause them lots of trouble in finding food. On January
10, 1927, I found quite a little coterie of birds had scratched the
leaves under a dogwood tree until they had a space twelve feet in
diameter more or less cleared of snow. Here, among other species of
birds, were two Flickers foraging among the leaves for fallen dogwood
berries. These berries were probably eaten until weather conditions
became better for insect catching. Even during winter, ants are fairly
plentiful for the Sandhill Flickers, especially on warm days.”
COLAPTES CAFER COLLARIS Vigors
RED-SHAFTED FLICKER
PLATE 37
HABITS
This western representative of our well-known eastern flicker is so
closely related to it and so similar to it in all its habits that
practically all that has been written about the northern flicker
would apply equally well to the red-shafted species. The two differ
strikingly in coloration, but the color pattern is similar in both,
and the fact that they interbreed so freely and extensively where
their ranges come together shows their close relationship. The only
differences in their habitats, nesting, and feeding habits are due to
the differences in environments.
The red-shafted flicker is a wide-ranging species through many types
of open country or sparsely wooded regions, from the Rocky Mountains
to sea level on the Pacific coast. It is a common bird near human
habitations in thinly settled towns and villages and in agricultural
regions, as well as in the wilder foothills and mountain slopes up to
timberline, but not on the treeless plains or deserts. The Weydemeyers
(1928), referring to its haunts in northwestern Montana, give a good
idea of its habitat there, which would doubtless apply equally well
throughout its range elsewhere; they say: “The Flicker is most abundant
about farms and in cut-over woods, nesting commonly near barnyards and
in pastures. An observer will note fewer and fewer individuals as he
passes from cultivated farms into stump-lands; from there to virgin
forests of fir, larch, and yellow pine; thence into the lodgepole pine
and white pine woods of the lower part of the Canadian zone; and onward
into denser forests of alpine fir, spruce, and arborvitae. But he will
find the birds increasing in numbers on the rocky mountain slopes
and upward through the Hudsonian zone, where the species ranges to
timberline.”
Milton P. Skinner says in his Yellowstone Park notes: “This bird is
found at all elevations from the lowest at 5,300 feet to timberline at
9,500 feet, and in practically all kinds of habitat except the largest
opens, and even there I have seen it flying across from side to side.
It is in the sagebrush areas, in the borderland between forest and
open, in detached groves, and even in heavy forest.
“They are often seen on the ground, especially in May, but also in June
and July. Sometimes they are in the road. I have seen them frequently
in the grass and perched on a bowlder or a prostrate log. In addition
to these treeless and brushless localities, I often see flickers on the
ground under sagebrushes and greasewood; on the ground in a grove of
cedars and limber pines; under aspens, willows, cedars, firs and on
the ground amid the stumps of a former fir forest. I have-seen them in
groves of mixed lodgepole pines and aspens and in meadows where there
were only groves of willow bushes.”
_Courtship._--In the same notes Mr. Skinner says: “On April 29, 1915, I
saw a pair of flickers ‘dancing.’ They were on a dead lodgepole, and
although there was not much movement of the feet, the body was bent
from side to side and there was a constant ‘juggling’ or ‘jigging’
motion. The head was tilted back and the bill pointed up at an angle
of sixty degrees, with the neck outstretched. The neck, head, and
bill were in constant motion; the motion of the bill reminded me of a
musical director’s baton. Intervals of rest alternated with periods of
motion; the whole thing lasted perhaps 5 minutes.”
_Nesting._--Major Bendire (1895) says on this subject:
Its favorite nesting sites are old rotten stubs or trees,
such as cottonwoods, willows, sycamores, junipers, oaks,
and pines. It nests also in holes in banks, in the sides of
houses, in gate posts, etc. * * *
Among some peculiar nesting sites of this species the
following deserve mention:
Mr. Walter B. Bryant gives the following: “One of these
was in a bridge bulkhead, a few feet above the Carson
River, Nevada. The interior of the structure was filled
with gravel and large stones, among which the eggs
were deposited. Another pair used a target butt, at a
much-frequented range, as a substitute for a stump. A third
nest was in a sand bank, 3 feet from the top and 10 from
the creek. This hole was apparently specially prepared,
and not one made by a ground squirrel, such holes being
sometimes used by these birds.”
Mr. Charles A. Allen, of Nicasio, Calif., found a pair of
red-shafted flickers nesting in a similar situation in a
creek bank, the burrow containing seven eggs, which he
took. About ten days later, happening to pass the same
spot, he examined the hole again and found it occupied by a
California Screech Owl, which in the meantime had deposited
four eggs. Some two weeks subsequently he examined it for
a third time, and on this occasion the tenant proved to be
a Sparrow Hawk, which was setting on five handsome eggs.
There was no nesting material present on any occasion, the
eggs lying on some loose dirt.
Others have noted the bank-nesting habit of this flicker, which seems
to be rather common. Most of the nests, however, are excavated in
trees or stubs, at heights varying from ground level to 100 feet above
the ground. We found them nesting commonly in the Huachuca Mountains,
Ariz., in the sycamores in the canyons and in the tall pines near the
summits at 9,000 feet. A large majority of the nests will be found
between 8 and 25 feet above the ground. Dawson (1923) mentions a nest
“in a stump only two feet high, and its eggs rested virtually upon
the ground.” Walter P. Taylor (1912) mentions a nest in a cavity in
a haystack, in the desert regions of Humboldt County, Nev., where
there were practically no trees. This flicker also nests frequently in
telegraph and other poles, also far too often in buildings, where it
drills a hole through the outer wall and lays its eggs on a beam or
other flat surface, accumulating enough chips to keep the eggs from
rolling.
Florence A. Merriam Bailey (1896) watched a red-shafted flicker
excavating its nest-hole, of which she says: “The flicker hung with
claws planted in the hole, and with its tail braced at an angle under
it, leaned forward to excavate. Using its feet as a pivot, it gradually
swung in farther and farther; and when it had gone so far that it had
to reach back to throw out its chips, it swung in and out on its feet
like an automatic toy wound up for the performance. When it had been
building for a week, only the tip of its tail protruded from the nest
hole as it worked.”
Mrs. Irene G. Wheelock (1904) says: “The site having been chosen, the
male clings to the surface and marks with his bill a more or less
regular circle in a series of dots, then begins excavating inside this
area, using his bill, not with a sidewise twist, as do many of the
woodpecker family, but striking downwards and prying off the chips as
with a pickaxe. When his mate has rested and wishes to share in the
labor, she calls from a near-by tree and he instantly quits his task.”
Dr. and Mrs. Grinnell (Grinnell, Dixon, and Linsdale, 1930) made the
following observations on this species, while excavating its nest-hole:
The bird entered the hole, entirely out of view, at 8:54,
reappeared from within at 9:05, when it rested a minute
with the head partly out; then it proceeded to bring out
from within load after load of chips, which showered
down as if of fine, almost sawdust-like size. Forty-five
such loads were counted to 9:10, delivered with striking
regularity. Twelve loads delivered were counted in one
sixty-second period. At 9:10 the bird disappeared again
till 9:15, when its head appeared and twenty-seven loads
were flipped out in three minutes; then after a long pause,
till 9:19, the other flicker arrived, with scythe-whetting
note, and both birds flew off. One of them returned at
9:29, flipped out several loads of chips and left at 9:31.
Digging in this particular stump must have been easy and
hence rapid.
_Eggs._--The red-shafted flicker lays five to twelve eggs to a set.
Probably, if the experiment were tried, it would prove to be as
prolific an egg layer as its eastern relative, though I have found no
evidence to that effect. The eggs are indistinguishable from those of
the northern flicker. The measurements of 57 eggs average 28.18 by
21.85 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =35.56=
by 20.32, 27.94 by =24.89=, =25.40= by 20.83, and 27.68 by =19.30=
millimeters.
_Young._--Mrs. Wheelock (1904) says of the young: “For nearly three
weeks they are fed by regurgitation, and after that time the insects
brought are masticated by the parents. * * *
“After they are old enough to leave the nursery, they follow their
parents about for nearly two weeks, begging to be fed and gradually
learning to hunt for themselves. This lesson is wisely taught by the
parents, who place the food under a crevice in the bark, in full sight
of the young, who must pick it out or go hungry. The baby cocks his
head wisely, looks at it, and proceeds to pull it out and dine.”
_Plumages._--The sequence of plumages and molts, from fledgling to
adult, in the red-shafted flicker is similar to that of the northern
flicker, but there is one marked difference in the color pattern in the
juvenal plumage; whereas in _auratus_ young birds of both sexes have
black malar patches, in _cafer_ only the young male has the red malar
patches. Kidgway (1914) describes the juvenal male of the red-shafted
flicker as “similar to the adult male, but coloration duller, gray of
throat, etc., duller, more brownish, black jugular patch smaller and
less sharply defined, black spots on under parts less sharply defined,
less rounded, feathers of pileum indistinctly tipped with paler, and
red malar stripes less bright, less uniform, and black terminal area on
under side of tail not sharply defined.” The young female is similar to
the young male, but the malar region is grayish brown instead of red.
The juvenal plumage is worn through summer, and a complete molt during
fall produces a first-winter plumage that is practically adult. Adults
have a complete annual molt late in summer and fall.
A most interesting and unique case, among American birds at least, of
hybridizing on an extensive scale over a wide region occurs between
_Colaptes auratus_ and _Colaptes cafer_. We found this most beautifully
illustrated in southwestern Saskatchewan, where pure-blooded birds of
both species were taken, together with quite a series of hybrid birds
showing all the intermediate grades of plumage. Almost all the males
showed some traces of the red malar stripes of _cafer_, and nearly all
showed some traces of the red nuchal crescent of _auratus_; the other
characters seemed to be less constant. I collected a pure-blooded
male _auratus_ and a nearly pure-blooded _cafer_ female, which were
apparently mated. And two young in juvenal plumage, one almost pure
_cafer_ and the other equally near _auratus_, were taken from the same
family.
Although the general color _patterns_ of the two species are strikingly
similar, or parallel, the characters that separate them are radically
qualitative rather than quantitative, so that the numerous hybrids
cannot by any means be considered as intermediates between subspecies.
No two species of a genus could well present more striking contrasts in
_coloration_ in such similar patterns.
In one species the quills are red, in the other yellow; the male has a
red malar stripe in one and a black stripe in the other; neither sex
in _cafer_ has the red nuchal crescent, while both sexes have it in
_auratus_; _cafer_ has the throat and fore neck gray and the top of the
head and hind neck brown, while these colors are reversed in _auratus_.
These contrasting colors may be blended or mixed in an almost endless
variety of patterns in the hybrids; and the patterns are often
asymmetrical, the opposite sides of the bird being quite different.
Some specimens of _cafer_ show the first traces of _auratus_ blood by
the presence of a few black feathers in the malar stripe, or traces of
the red nuchal crescent. Slight traces of _cafer_ blood in _auratus_
appear with a mixture of red in the black malar strip, or with a tinge
of orange or reddish in the wings or tail. Between these two extremes
there is every degree of blending or mixture of the characters.
For many years after these interesting hybrids were discovered and
described by Baird (1858), they were known only from the upper Missouri
and Yellowstone River region. Later they were found to be widely
distributed from the western border of the Great Plains westward to
the Pacific coast, and from Texas to southern Canada. While the center
of abundance of birds showing thoroughly mixed characters seems to lie
between the Great Plains and the Rocky Mountains, evidence of hybrid
blood is much more widely dispersed in a gradually diminishing degree,
more strongly westward and to a lesser degree eastward. Dr. J. A.
Allen (1892), in his excellent paper on this subject, says: “Specimens
with a slight amount of red in the malar stripe are represented in the
material I have examined from Massachusetts, Long Island, New Jersey
(five specimens), Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida (several), Louisiana
(several), Tennessee, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois (several), Michigan
(two), and Minnesota. They seem to be quite as frequent along the
Atlantic seaboard as at any point east of the Mississippi River.”
_Food._--Professor Beal’s (1910) study of 118 stomachs of the two
western races of the red-shafted flicker showed that 54 percent of the
food was animal and 46 percent vegetable matter. Of the animal food,
beetles constituted 3 percent, most of which were harmful; there were
only a few predatory carabids; ants made up 45 percent of the year’s
food; other Hymenoptera totaled 1 percent, and miscellaneous items,
such as caterpillars, crickets, and spiders, amounted to 5 percent of
the food.
Of the vegetable food, acorns formed 10 percent of the yearly food;
grains, including rye, corn, barley, and oats, amounted to 4 percent;
fruits, averaging 15 percent, included pears, apples, grapes, cherries,
and prunes; and the other 17 percent was made up of wild fruits, such
as pepperberries, elderberries, and gooseberries and the seeds of the
poison oak and sumac and of a few weeds. He says of the poison-oak
seeds:
The consumption of these seeds would be a decided benefit
to man if they were ground up and destroyed in the
stomachs. Unfortunately they are either regurgitated or
pass through the intestinal tract uninjured and ready to
germinate. The action of the stomach simply removes the
outer covering, a white, wax-like substance, which is
probably very nutritious, and is evidently relished by many
birds. Birds are probably the most active agents in the
dissemination of these noxious shrubs. On the other hand,
these seeds, which are wonderfully abundant, afford food
for thousands of birds during the winter, when other food
is hard to obtain, and thus enable the birds to tide over
the cold season to do their good work of destroying insects
the next summer.
Johnson A. Neff (1928) says that “in a great many instances they are
known to feed on the larvæ of the codling moth”; and that “ants were
the largest item of food for the year, averaging 40.30%, taken during
every month; several stomachs held over 2,000 each, and many of them
contained over 500.” Among the vegetable food he lists manzanita
berries and seeds and such wild fruits as madrona, dogwood, haw,
serviceberry, elderberry, Oregon crab, and huckleberry; seeds of poison
oak averaged 7.5 percent, but in December the percentage was 33.3.
Referring to the fruit-eating habits of this flicker in Los Angeles
County, Calif., Robert S. Woods (1932) writes:
Fortunately for the grower, and perhaps for the birds as
well, the rind of an orange is impervious to the attacks
of any ordinary bird, though when once opened the fruit is
well liked by many of them. Only the Red-shafted Flicker
(_Colaptes cafer collaris_) is able to chisel through the
tough skin; after making a round opening large enough for
the insertion of its bill, it scoops out a large portion
of the pulp with its tongue. Examples of this sort of
damage, however, are infrequent and usually, as it seems,
in oranges which have fallen to the ground, where they are
more easily reached.
The flicker’s attacks on avocados appear more serious,
though this is partly due to the smaller numbers of the
fruit available. Avocados which hang near a convenient
perch are often found to have a roughly circular hole
extending through to the seed. In a few of the fruits these
holes have been considerably enlarged, but usually they are
not much larger than the base of the bird’s bill.
Jack C. von Bloeker, Jr. (1935), saw three red-shafted flickers capture
scarab “beetles in flycatcher fashion. In each case, the bird attained
a position behind its intended victim, then, taking up the erratic
zigzag course of the beetle, suddenly swooped down and captured it in
mid-air.”
Major Bendire (1895) also says: “Besides the usual insects and larvæ
upon which this species feeds, I have seen it catch grasshoppers, both
on the ground and on the wing, and it is likewise very fond of wild
strawberries.”
_Behavior._--I can find nothing in the behavior or general habits of
the red-shafted flicker that is essentially different from the habits
of the northern flicker. It has the same annoying habit of drumming on
the resonant parts of dwellings at early hours in the morning, which
is quite disturbing to sleepers. It also does considerable damage
to buildings by drilling holes in the eaves or walls for nesting or
roosting places, spending winter nights or even stormy days in such
sheltered retreats. John G. Tyler (1913) says on this subject:
Unfortunately these handsome birds have fallen into
disfavor among a large number of both city dwellers and
country residents, on account of their habit of drilling
holes in the gable ends of buildings. When once a house
has been selected it seems that nothing short of death
will cause them to cease their drilling operations until
one, and in some cases three or four, holes have been
cut through the outer wall of the building. Whether
these holes, which are generally made in the winter, are
excavated for roosting places or simply through a sort of
nervous energy seems a matter of doubt; but certain it is
that the birds spend much time in them as soon as they
succeed in completing their work. It is a common sight, on
rainy days, to see a Flicker’s head peering out from his
open doorway.
The speed in flight of the red-shafted flicker has been recorded as
from 25 to 27 miles an hour, as measured with the speedometer of an
automobile.
Grinnell and Storer (1924) write of its habits:
The tramper in almost any part of the Yosemite region
can hardly fail to at least hear one or more Red-shafted
Flickers in a half-day’s circuit. Although these birds are
never seen in true flocks, he may flush from favorable
places as many as 6 of them within a few yards. This is
particularly true on the floor of Yosemite Valley during
the autumn months. This omnivorous woodpecker then almost
completely forsakes the timber and forages in the brush
patches, eating berries of various sorts, especially
cascara; it often seeks the open meadows where it gathers
ants and grasshoppers.
The birds flush one or two at a time, often not until the
observer is almost upon them; then the sudden flapping of
broad pinkish-red wings, the view of the white rump patch
fully displayed, leave no doubt in the observer’s mind as
to the identity. A bird seldom flies far before alighting,
not against an upright tree trunk as with most other
woodpeckers, but perching on a branch, to bow deeply this
way and that and perhaps utter its explosive _claip_.
_Voice._--The notes of the red-shafted flicker are almost identical
with those of the northern flicker, though George F. Simmons (1925)
evidently thinks that the voice is “much coarser, rougher, and heavier,
* * * easily distinguished when the two are heard calling near each
other.”
_Field marks._--The white rump is the most conspicuous recognition
mark for both species, and the color _pattern_ is similar for both,
but the flashing colors in the wings and tail, as well as the other
contrasting colors, will serve to distinguish the red-shafted from the
yellow-shafted species.
_Winter._--During the winter that I spent in Pasadena, flickers were
common or abundant all winter in an arroyo on the outskirts of the
city. I could always find them picking up food among the dry leaves on
the ground, or flying about among the large sycamores and live oaks.
On a bright, sunny morning, after a frosty night, they could be seen
perched in the topmost branches of the tallest trees, which were the
first to catch the warmth of the rising sun. On February 14, 1929, I
saw two males perched close together facing each other, bowing and
nodding, or bobbing up and down, as if beginning to feel the urge of
spring.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Western North America south to the Isthmus of Tehuantepec.
_Breeding range._--The red-shafted flicker breeds =north= to
southeastern Alaska (Sitka and Portage Cove); central British Columbia
(158-mile House and Horse Lake); west-central Alberta (Jasper House);
southern Saskatchewan (Cypress Hills); and North Dakota (Fort Union,
Oakdale, and Fort Clark). =East= to central North Dakota (Fort Clark);
South Dakota (Reliance and Yankton); northwestern Nebraska (Chadron);
Colorado (Fort Morgan, Denver, Colorado Springs, and Beulah); extreme
western Oklahoma (Kenton); central New Mexico (Santa Fe, Cloudcroft,
and Mesilla); western Chihuahua (San Luis Mountains and Pinos Altos);
Durango (Rio Sestin, Arroyo del Buey, and Durango City); Tamaulipas
(Ciudad Victoria); Hilaygo (Real del Monte); Vera Cruz (Jalapa and
Orizaba); and eastern Oaxaca (Villa Alta and Totontepec). =South= to
Oaxaca (Totontepec); Guerrero (Omilteme); and Jalisco (Zapotlan and
Volcan de Colima). From this southwestern point the species ranges
north through the mountains of western Mexico, including northern
Baja California and (formerly) Guadalupe Island, California, Oregon,
Washington, and British Columbia, to southeastern Alaska (Sitka).
_Winter range._--The red-shafted flicker is a resident species over
most of its range, withdrawing from the more northern parts only
during severe winters. At this season it is found =north= regularly to
southern British Columbia (Comox, Okanagan, and Edgewood); northern
Montana (Fortine and Great Falls); eastern Wyoming (Midwest); and
rarely southeastern South Dakota (Yankton).
The range as outlined applies to the entire species, of which four
subspecies or geographic races are now recognized. The typical form,
known as the northwestern flicker (_Colaptes c. cafer_), is found
in the northern Pacific coast regions from southeastern Alaska and
western British Columbia south to northern California. The red-shafted
flicker (_C. c. collaris_) occurs over all the remaining parts of
the range except for certain mountainous areas in northern Baja
California and Guadalupe Island, occupied by the San Pedro flicker
(_C. c. martirensis_) and the now extinct Guadalupe flicker (_C. c.
rufipileus_).
_Migration._--Such migratory movements as are made by this species
cannot be satisfactorily portrayed by the use of dates. The most
conspicuous migration is vertical rather than lateral, for during
fall and winter in the eastern part of the range there is a more or
less well-defined movement east from the Rocky Mountain region onto
the Great Plains. At these seasons the species may travel eastward to
Iowa (Forest City, Boone, and Des Moines); Missouri (Kansas City);
Arkansas (Van Buren); southeastern Oklahoma (Caddo); and eastern Texas
(Gainesville, Waco, Somerset, and Brownsville).
_Spring migration._--In the northern part of the breeding range, from
which the species appears to withdraw in winter with more or less
regularity, the following are early dates of spring arrival: South
Dakota--White River, March 28; Yankton, April 1. North Dakota--McKenzie
County, March 31; Arnegard, April 11. Alberta--Banff, April 3; Warner,
April 24; Edmonton, April 29. Alaska--Kupreanof Island, April 12.
_Fall migration._--Late dates of departure from northern areas
are: Alaska--Wrangell, November 26. Alberta--Jasper, September 8;
Henry House, September 22. North Dakota--Grafton, October 7 (one
was collected in the Red River Valley on December 6, 1924). South
Dakota--Faulkton, October 15.
Although red-shafted flickers have been banded in considerable numbers,
the Biological Survey files do not contain any data indicative of an
extensive flight from the point of banding. There are, however, many
cases of recapture in succeeding seasons at the banding station.
_Casual records._--Among the few records where this species has been
collected or observed outside its normal range are the following: One
was taken at Grafton, N. Dak., April 19, 1925, and another was shot
near Winnipeg, Manitoba, September 30, 1904. There are two records for
northern Alberta, one at Fort Chipewyan, May 21, 1893, and the other
at Smiths Portage, June 8, 1908. Other records, some of which are
from points farther east (as Minnesota), are for hybrids between this
species and _C. auratus_.
_Egg dates._--British Columbia: 13 records, May 8 to June 7; 7
records, May 14 to 26, indicating the height of the season.
California: 75 records, April 9 to July 2; 38 records, May 3 to 28.
Colorado: 22 records, May 5 to July 1; 11 records, May 22 to 31.
Guadalupe Island: 6 records, April 8 to June 8.
Oregon: 33 records, May 3 to June 12; 17 records, May 12 to June 1.
Washington: 17 records, April 29 to June 10; 9 records, May 12 to 24.
COLAPTES CAFER CAFER (Gmelin)
NORTHWESTERN FLICKER
PLATE 38
HABITS
The northwestern flicker was formerly known as _Colaptes cafer
saturatior_ Ridgway, type locality Neah Bay, Wash. But it has since
been learned that Gmelin’s name _Picus cafer_ was based on a bird taken
at Bay of Good Hope, Nootka Sound, British Columbia. As this locality
is well within the range of the northwestern flicker, Gmelin’s name has
priority over Ridgway’s _saturatior_.
This larger and more richly colored race of _Colaptes cafer_ inhabits
the humid Northwest coast region, from Sitka, Alaska, to northern
California, Humboldt County, including most of southern British
Columbia east to the Kootenay district. It is not only larger than
_Colaptes cafer collaris_, but its upper parts are browner and its
under parts are more strongly suffused with vinaceous.
D. E. Brown writes to me that this “is the common woodpecker of western
Washington. It will outnumber all the other woodpeckers two to one.”
Referring to its haunts on Mount Rainier, Taylor and Shaw (1927)
say: “As the noisiest and most conspicuous, adaptable, and broadly
distributed woodpecker in the park, the flicker is bound to achieve
some notoriety. It avoids the dark woods, and undoubtedly prefers the
tracts of dead stubs which are encountered at fairly frequent intervals
around the mountain; for here both nesting sites and food are present
in great abundance.”
Major Bendire (1895) says that “in western Oregon, and probably also in
northwestern California, it appears to be found only on the summits of
the different mountains between the Cascades and the coast during the
breeding season, where the same moist climate prevails as is found in
the immediate vicinity of the coast, while in the drier lowlands, such
as the Umpqua, Rogue, and Willamette river valleys, it is replaced by”
_Colaptes cafer collaris_.
_Nesting._--The nesting habits of the northwestern flicker do not seem
to differ materially from those of its close relative farther south.
D. E. Brown tells me that this bird “will nest anywhere where there is
room to dig out a cavity large enough for the nest. I have found them
in large stumps and in fenceposts and from 18 inches from the ground
to 100 feet up. They will nest in birdboxes of suitable size and will
use them for winter homes. The eggs are from 5 to 10 in number and may
be found May 1 to August. Both birds incubate and, when incubation is
advanced, sit very close; sometimes they are removed by hand.”
Harry S. Swarth (1911a) reports a nest, found at Portage Cove,
Revillagigedo Island, Alaska, that “was in a dead stub, some fifty feet
from the ground. The stump was so rotten that an attempt to climb it
brought down the whole upper portion, including the nest, in a mass
of disintegrated punk. * * * The nest tree was in a valley bordering
a stream, in fairly open country, with clumps of scattered timber
interspersed between the open meadows.”
_Eggs._--The eggs of this race are indistinguishable from those of the
red-shafted flicker, except for a slight average difference in size.
The measurements of 47 eggs average 29.37 by 22.37 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =32.0= by 23.4, 30.6 by =24.3=,
and =26.4= by =20.8= millimeters.
_Food._--What has been said about the food of the red-shafted flicker,
and to a large extent that of the northern flicker, would apply equally
well to the northwestern. D. E. Brown says in his notes: “It puts in
most of its time feeding on the ground and becomes quite tame around
houses. I once placed some cornmeal on the back porch for some small
birds. A flicker lit on the porch and, approaching the meal, laid its
head sideways nearly on the floor and ran its long tongue through the
meal several times; it then turned its head over and repeated the
operation from the other side, leaving a checkered effect on the meal.”
Theed Pearse writes to me from Vancouver Island that he has seen “a
flicker picking up grains of rolled-oats off a flat surface by a
sideways action of the beak.” Flickers at his feeding station fed on
apples, but seemed to prefer suet or fat.
S. F. Rathbun, of Seattle, has sent me the following interesting note:
“On one occasion in November I watched a northwestern flicker for more
than an hour feeding on a closely cut lawn in our yard. At different
times it had visited the spot, and I became somewhat curious to know
what the food represented that the bird found. This time as soon as
the woodpecker alighted it commenced tapping rapidly with its beak the
surface of the lawn, from time to time driving its bill into the earth.
Then when this was withdrawn oftener than not it held an earthworm
or some large grub, which at once was eaten and then the tapping
recommenced. On two occasions I could plainly see that its prey was
cutworms. But what was of particular interest was the painstaking way
in which the flicker worked over every inch of the small space to which
it confined its attentions, for the spot was not larger than 10 by 15
feet, and this was gone over again and again. During the time I watched
the flicker it captured more than a dozen earthworms, all of which were
of good size, and also eight cutworms. Another action of the bird while
it was hunting caught my attention. At odd times it would vigorously
scratch the surface of the lawn as if to uncover some prey, and I
noticed that each time this took place, a worm would be pulled from the
earth by the bird.”
He says further, in a letter, regarding this observation: “At the
time we watched it, the bird was so close we had difficulty at times
in using the field glasses, so could readily see what it obtained.
Sometimes it would pull an angleworm from the ground very much as a
robin does, the worm stretched out to quite an extent.”
_Behavior._--There is nothing peculiar in the behavior of this flicker
that would not apply to its close relatives equally well. But J. Hooper
Bowles (1926) had his attention called in an interesting way to the
regularity of its habits in going to roost. He was calling on a friend
one afternoon in the fall of 1924, of which he writes: “I happened to
remark that it was half past three, when my friend answered quickly,
‘In five minutes it will be bedtime for our Flicker.’ This somewhat
astonished me, but we went outside the house and took a station where
we could command a good view of a certain section of the eaves of
the house. Sure enough, in about five minutes a Northwestern Flicker
swooped up and hung itself woodpecker-fashion against a board under the
eaves, where it composed itself for spending the night. The bird had
been doing this with absolute regularity for some time, although it was
of course broad daylight and bright sunshine.”
COLAPTES CAFER MARTIRENSIS Grinnell
SAN PEDRO FLICKER
HABITS
Under the above name, Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1927b) has separated and
described the red-shafted flicker of the Sierra San Pedro Martir region
of northern Baja California. He describes it as follows:
Similar in general characters to _Colaptes cafer collaris_
Vigors (topotypes from Monterey, California), but averaging
slightly smaller, bill more attenuated (especially more
compressed in terminal half), and tone of ground color on
head and on upper and lower surfaces in fresh plumage much
more gray (rather than brown or vinaceous). * * *
The relative depth and clearness of the gray on the throat
and sides of head and neck in _martirensis_ is a nearly
constant character, as is also the deep fuscous (of
Ridgway, Color Standards and Color Nomenclature, 1912,
pl. XLVI) tone of the back and of the top of the head,
in fresh, new plumage: on the sides of the body, and on
the chest surrounding the big black bar, there is little
hint of the bright vinaceous tinting that characterizes
_collaris_ from throughout upper California. Weathering
of the plumage toward spring tends to rob _martirensis_
of its most characteristic color tones, especially on the
top of the head which then becomes warmer brown, but not,
however, to the degree of brightness seen in _rufipileus_.
The latter is even browner than _collaris_.
He gives, as its range: “Sierra San Pedro Martir (San José, 2,500 feet,
near La Grulla at 7,200 feet, and near Vallecitos at 7,500 feet) and
Sierra Juárez (Laguna Hanson, 5,200 feet).” Elsewhere (1928b), he calls
it a “common resident on the western slopes of the Sierra Juárez and
Sierra San Pedro Martír; in winter invading westwardly to the seacoast.
Breeds in Upper Sonoran and Transition zones.”
Its habits are probably similar to those of the species elsewhere.
Griffing Bancroft has sent me the measurements of a set of eight eggs,
which average 26.87 by 22.16 millimeters; the eggs showing the four
extremes measure =28.2= by 22.0, 26.8 by =22.8=, and =26.2= by =20.7=
millimeters.
COLAPTES CHRYSOIDES CHRYSOIDES (Malherbe)
CAPE GILDED FLICKER
HABITS
Because Malherbe’s name was given to the first gilded flicker to be
described, and because his type came from the Cape region of Baja
California, this race becomes the type race of the species. Its range
extends from about latitude 28° N. to the southern extremity of Baja
California. It is about the same size as its nearest relative to the
northward, _brunnescens_, but is decidedly lighter in coloration. It is
smaller than _mearnsi_ and somewhat darker in coloration.
William Brewster (1902) says of its haunts: “Mr. Belding and Mr.
Frazar agree as to the rarity of the Gilded Flicker on the higher
mountains, where only a few individuals were seen by the former, and
but two (both females, taken on the Sierra de la Laguna, April 29)
obtained by the latter. The bird’s true home is evidently at the bases
of the mountains, and among the foothills extending thence to the
shores of the Pacific on the south and west, and to the Gulf on the
east. Throughout this region it is a common species, although not so
numerously represented as _Melanerpes uropygialis_. On the arid plains
near the coast it breeds in the stems of the giant cactus.”
Griffing Bancroft (1930) says of this species in central Baja
California, south of latitude 28°:
The birds are extremely wild, often flushing from a
distance of a quarter of a mile. They lay in old cavities
and, probably, also in those that are new; scarred sahuaro
dries so rapidly that a definite determination on this
point was not possible. The nests are usually twenty feet
or more above the ground and the cavities are generous; an
eight-inch diameter and a two-foot depth are not unusual.
Occasionally they will use natural openings in the cardón
or holes that have been chopped open by honey gatherers.
The flickers lay from early April until well into June.
The number of eggs in a clutch is normally three. With the
single exception of one set of five we found none larger,
and none smaller in which incubation had commenced.
The eggs of the Cape gilded flicker are apparently similar to those
of other flickers, except in size. Mr. Bancroft (1930) gives the
measurements of 18 eggs as averaging 26.3 by 20.9 millimeters. The
measurements of 8 other eggs average 28.49 by 21.15 millimeters;
the eggs, in this series, showing the four extremes measure =31.35=
by 21.83, 30.15 by =22.22=, =25.90= by 20.70, and 26.70 by =20.00=
millimeters.
Its habits in general are apparently similar to those the gilded
flicker of Arizona, on which more has been published, and the reader is
referred to the following account of _Colaptes chrysoides mearnsi_.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Southern Arizona, southeastern California, and northwestern
Mexico; nonmigratory.
The range of the gilded flicker extends =north= to extreme southeastern
California (Duncan Flats); and southern Arizona (Antelope Peak,
Bigbug, and the Salt River Bird Reservation). =East= to southeastern
Arizona (Salt River Bird Reservation, Desert Wells, Picacho, Oracle,
and Tombstone); central Sonora (Magdalena, Opodepe, Hermosillo,
Cedros, and Camoa); and central Sinaloa (Culiacan). =South= to Sinaloa
(Culiacan); and southern Baja California (Cape San Lucas). =West= to
Baja California (Cape San Lucas, Todos Santos, Triunfo, Santa Margarita
Island, San Javier, San Quintin, and the Alamo River); and southeastern
California (Duncan Flats).
The range as outlined is for the entire species, which has been
separated into three geographic races. The typical race, known as the
Cape gilded flicker (_C. c. chrysoides_), is found in the Cape district
of Baja California and north to about latitude 28° N. The San Fernando
flicker (_C. c. brunnescens_) occurs only within a range of two degrees
latitude in Baja California (lat. 28° to 30° N.). Mearns’s gilded
flicker (_C. c. mearnsi_) is the race found in the southwestern United
States, northwestern Baja California, and the mainland of Mexico.
_Egg dates._--Arizona: 24 records, April 1 to June 11; 12 records,
April 21 to May 20, indicating the height of the season.
Baja California: 16 records, April 6 to May 20; 8 records, April 10
to May 17.
COLAPTES CHRYSOIDES MEARNSI Ridgway
MEARNS’S GILDED FLICKER
PLATE 39
HABITS
Mearns’s gilded flicker is the best known of the three races of this
handsome species. Its range is along our southwestern border in
southwestern Arizona, extreme southeastern California, and in Sonora,
Mexico. It is confined almost entirely, especially in the breeding
season, to the giant cactus region in this area; its distribution seems
to be mainly governed by the distribution of this cactus, on which it
seems to depend for most of the necessities of life. M. French Gilman
(1915) puts it very well, as follows: “The giant cactus is to this
Flicker and the Gila Woodpecker, what the bamboo is to the inhabitants
of some of the eastern islands. * * * The cactus furnishes the birds
with home, shelter, food and possibly drink. They roost in the holes
and seek them as retreat from rain storms.” But he says that this
flicker is also “found in cottonwood and willow groves as well as
wherever the giant cactus grows.”
W. E. D. Scott (1886) writes: “A rather common resident where-ever the
giant cactus occurs throughout the region, but is much more common in
the giant cactus of the southern part of the area under consideration
[southern Arizona] than to the northward. They are common all about
Tucson in such localities as I have indicated, but are more rare in the
San Pedro Valley. I have met with the species in early spring and fall
on the San Pedro slope of the Catalinas as high up as 3,000 feet. I
have now and then seen single individuals in the mesquite timber, far
from any giant cactus. All that I have ever met with breeding have been
in giant cactus.”
_Nesting._--We spent three days, May 21, 22, and 23, 1922, collecting
on the giant-cactus plains near Tucson, Ariz., between the mesquite
forest to the southward and the Catalina Mountains to the eastward from
Tucson. Here we found Mearns’s gilded flicker very common; we climbed
to and examined seven nests and probably passed by a number of others.
The nests were all in the giant cactus, at heights ranging from 12 to
20 feet from the ground; the only cavity measured was about 24 inches
deep. We were rather too late for eggs of this species, as many of
the nests held large young, two in each nest examined, never more nor
fewer. On May 22 we found a nest containing two fresh eggs and another
nest with four addled eggs, probably deserted. At one of the first
nests that I examined I was surprised, when I inserted my hand, to feel
something cold and clammy; my hand was quickly withdrawn and the hole
was chopped out, revealing a large gopher snake that had killed and
half swallowed, head first, one of the large young. At another nest,
containing two large young, I shot the adult male for a specimen, after
which I found the female dead in a nearby hole, which necessitated
taking the two young also. After I had left for home, my companion,
Frank C. Willard, took a set of three fresh eggs on June 11, from a
nest 14 feet up in a small giant cactus; this was probably a second
laying.
Mr. Gilman (1915), who has had considerable experience with this
species, writes:
The nests are found in giant cactus, cottonwood and willow,
and in that order as to frequency, the giant cactus
leading. Nests are in the giant cactus or Saguaro as it
is called, far from water, and in cottonwood and willow
along the river, on banks of the canals, or even standing
in stagnant water pools. Of twenty-seven nests examined,
containing eggs or young, twenty-one were in the Saguaro,
four in willow, and two in cottonwood. Others were seen
in cottonwood but too difficult of access, and many in
the cactus were out of reach. If careful count were made
I believe about ninety per cent would be found in the
cactus. Nests in cottonwood and willow ranged from five
to twenty-five feet from the ground, and in Saguaros from
eleven to twenty-five or thirty feet. * * *
The entrance to the nest holes varies much, as may be seen
from the figures given. The smallest entrance measured 2¾
inches and the largest 4¾ inches. The shallowest hole was
ten inches, and the deepest eighteen inches. * * * The
entrance to the eighteen inch hole was three and one-half
inches in diameter, and while the ratio is not constant,
the shallower holes tend to have smaller entrances, and
the deeper holes have larger entrances. * * * From the few
measurements taken it may be stated that the bottom of
the nest hole is from four and one-half to six inches in
diameter. It is hardly correct to use the term diameter, as
many of the hole bottoms were not nearly circular, one I
measured being four inches one way and six the other. This
variation seemed to be governed by the size of the cactus,
as in the smaller plants there was not room to excavate a
large circular bottom, and it had to be stretched one way.
In the lower Colorado Valley, Dr. Joseph Grinnell (1914) found that
“at least two pairs were nesting in dead cottonwood stumps in the
drowned-out area of the river bottom. A nesting hole located here was
eighteen feet above the ground, in a large stub.” He also mentions
the following nests found in the saguaro belt: “On the Arizona side,
April 22, excavation sixteen and one-half feet above ground in cactus
thirty-one feet high, contained two fresh eggs; April 24, excavation
twenty feet above the ground, not investigated. On the California side,
April 23, excavation ten and one-third feet above the ground, in cactus
twenty-eight feet high, contained one infertile egg and two small
young.”
Major Bendire (1895) writes:
It nests at varying distances from the ground from 8 to 40
feet, generally at heights of about 15 feet. I have the
indurated form of a nesting cavity of this species now
before me, showing its exact shape. The hardened walls
are about one-fourth of an inch thick, and show the inner
contour of the cavity perfectly. The entrance is nearly 3
inches in diameter; inside it is about 7 by 4 inches wide
and 5½ inches deep. The sides and bottom of the cavity
are quite smooth, considering the nature of the substance
(the soft inner pulp of the cactus) out of which it is
excavated. It occupied only one-half of the trunk of one
of these giant cacti, and the rear of the cavity did not
quite reach the center of the plant. The eggs lay on the
hardened floor, and not, as usual, on a layer of chips. I
am inclined to believe that a freshly excavated nesting
site is not habitable for some weeks, as it must require
some time for the exuding sap to harden. The mold before me
somewhat resembles a wasp’s nest, both in color and shape,
and if suspended from the limb of a tree might easily be
mistaken for one.
_Eggs._--As to the number of eggs laid by the gilded flicker, Mr.
Gilman (1915) writes: “Of the twenty-seven nests examined, eight had
five eggs, or young plus eggs, to make count of five for the set;
eleven had four eggs or young, or young plus eggs; six nests contained
three eggs or three young; and two nests had two young each. In no case
did I find five young in a nest, and from the fact that infertile eggs
were found with three and four young in a nest, it may be inferred that
in many of the nests containing two, three or four young, more eggs had
been laid. In no nest did I find more than five eggs, and I conclude
that the set is from three to five eggs.”
The gilded flicker evidently lays fewer eggs than its northern and
eastern relatives, and the surprising thing is that there are so many
cases of infertile eggs, often one and sometimes two in a set. I have
had sets of six and seven eggs reported in collections, but these may
have been products of two females, where nesting holes were scarce or
the region overcrowded by the many birds that use these holes. The
few eggs that I have seen are like other flickers’ eggs but either
dull white or only slightly glossy; this may not be the universal
rule, however. The measurements of 50 eggs average 27.86 by 21.34
millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure =32.0= by 22.0,
27.78 by =22.22=, and =24.61= by =20.04= millimeters.
_Plumages._--Mr. Gilman (1915) says: “The young when first hatched are
not very prepossessing to any one, except perhaps the parents. At first
glance they remind one of the pictured restoration of the Plesiosaurus,
with their long twisting naked necks. The lower mandible was more than
an eighth of an inch longer than the upper, and on the tip of each was
the hard white growth used in opening the shell.”
In the juvenal plumage, which is acquired before the young bird leaves
the nest, the young male is similar to the adult male, but the forehead
is usually tinged with dark red; the red malar patch is duller and less
uniform; the upper parts are grayer, less brownish, and more heavily
barred; the primaries are tipped with brownish white; the under parts
are grayish white, more profusely, but less distinctly, spotted; the
black patch on the breast is smaller and more central; the yellow in
the wings and tail is duller; the black tips on the under side of the
tail are duller and not so well defined; and the bill is much smaller
and weaker. The young female is similar to the young male, but there
is no red in the crown or in the malar patches, the latter being pale
brown.
I have not seen enough material, taken at the proper seasons, to work
out the molts, but these are probably the same as in other flickers.
Several apparent hybrids with _cafer_ have been reported. Dr. Grinnell
(1914), who has made a study of this subject, seems to doubt if there
is any hybridizing between these species; he writes:
The salient fact shown by this comparative examination
is that in _all other characters_ the specimens aberrant
in colors of wing and tail, are perfectly typical of
_chrysoides_ (that is, of its subspecies _mearnsi_). None
of the phenomena consequent upon hybridization is evidenced
in other particulars, such as general size, proportional
dimensions, extent of dorsal barring, colors of body and
head. In all these characters there is no nearer approach
of the red-shafted _chrysoides_ to _collaris_, than of the
yellow-shafted _chrysoides_.
My conclusion is that the strain of _chrysoides_ occurring
at the present time in the lower Colorado Valley shows
proneness to replacement of yellow by red, without there
having been any interbreeding with another species. This
may be accounted for chemico-physiologically, as in the
case of the linnet of the Hawaiian Islands, where, however,
the change has been from red to yellow.
* * * It is quite evident that the aberrant examples
described by Brewster and Swarth from central Arizona, as
referred to above, are of the same nature as the Colorado
Valley specimens. The chances are that they were not
hybrids. So far as shown by the literature at hand, no
unquestioned hybrids have been found between _chrysoides_
(or any of its subspecies) and _collaris_ or _cafer_.
_Food._--The food of Mearns’s gilded flicker seems to be much like
that of the other flickers, including ants and various other insects
and such wild fruits and berries as are available in its territory.
Dr. Grinnell (1914) reports that the stomachs of two birds, taken in
the Colorado Valley, “had their gullets distended with a mass of small
black ants and ant larvae.” Mr. Gilman (1915) says:
They resort regularly to the Indian corncribs and are seen
in corn fields though I have never noticed them actually
engaged on an ear of green corn as I have the Gilas. They
probably attack the green corn but are quiet about the work
instead of advertising their presence. They eat largely of
the cactus fruit and possibly of the pulp at certain lean
seasons. They are very fond of watermelon, and eat freely
of it when it is placed on bird tables or on the ground
in shade of tree or shed. They appear to feed frequently
on the ground in the way the red-shafted does, and are
probably after ants most of the time. I have seen them at
work on an ant hill and even pecking into the ground after
the insects.
_Behavior._--The same writer says on this subject:
The Gilded Flickers are much quieter than the Gilas, and
are not so much in evidence around homes, though they do
not appear to be very timid. They are simply less sociable
I presume. * * *
They are peaceable and impress me as being eminently
practical and matter of fact. Each one minds his own
business and seems willing to live and let live. They do
not assemble in numbers as the Gilas do sometimes, but are
solitary or in pairs. They have the same habit of pecking
the walls of buildings as have the red-shafted flickers,
and one has worked spasmodically at the shingled gable of
the school house here for the past three years. I take it
to be the same individual, for he is rather tame and roosts
each night above one of the window casings. * * *
They are not close sitters, and usually leave the nest
before the tree is reached or the ladder placed against the
trunk. As soon as an intruder’s footsteps become audible
the landlady pokes her head from the entrance, and soon
after departs, never giving opportunity for capturing her
on the nest.
_Voice._--The gilded flicker apparently possesses as good a vocabulary
as any other flicker, uttering practically all the varied notes common
to the genus, but evidently it is not quite so noisy as its relatives.
Mr. Gilman (1915) thinks that its notes are “not so frequent nor quite
so loud” as those of the red-shafted flicker.
_Field marks._--The gilded flicker can be recognized easily as a
flicker by the characteristic markings of the genus, by its flight
and by its voice. It looks like an eastern flicker with a red malar
patch (in the male) instead of a black one, and with no red crescent
on the nape in either sex. It looks like a pale red-shafted flicker
with yellow, instead of red, in the wings and tail. Its smaller size is
hardly noticeable in the field.
COLAPTES CHRYSOIDES BRUNNESCENS Anthony
SAN FERNANDO FLICKER
HABITS
The gilded flicker of middle Baja California, between latitude 28° and
latitude 30° N., is a well-marked subspecies. A. W. Anthony (1895b),
naming it, characterized it as “differing from _C. chrysoides_ in
darker upper parts and slightly smaller size.” He says further: “It
would be quite natural to expect specimens of _Colaptes_ from the
northern half of Lower California to be more or less intermediate
between those of Arizona and Cape St. Lucas. They are, however, further
removed from the type form from the Cape than are those from Arizona
and northern Mexico, and in the series I have examined the Arizona
skins are exactly intermediate in the color of the upper parts between
a series from Cape St. Lucas and my skins from San Fernando.”
Ridgway (1914) describes _brunnescens_ as “similar to _C. c.
chrysoides_, but coloration decidedly darker and browner, color of
pileum more rufescent (russet, or between russet and mars brown, in
typical specimens), immaculate area of rump more restricted (sometimes
whole rump spotted with black), wing and tail averaging shorter, and
bill longer.”
Mr. Anthony wrote to Major Bendire (1895): “The Gilded Flicker is
rather common in the heavy growth of giant cactus, _Cereus pringlei_,
but not adverse to the candlewood forests which cover a large part of
the peninsula between latitudes 28° and 30°.” The general habits of
this flicker do not seem to differ from those of the species elsewhere.
The eggs of the San Fernando flicker are similar to those of the
preceeding subspecies. Griffing Bancroft (1930) gives the average
measurements of 24 eggs as 27.1 by 21.3 millimeters. I have the
measurements of 5 others, which average 28.9 by 22.1 millimeters.
COLAPTES CAFER RUFIPILEUS Ridgway
GUADALUPE FLICKER
HABITS
This insular race of the red-shafted flickers is another member of
the unique avifauna of that interesting island that has followed the
Guadalupe caracara, and other species peculiar to Guadalupe Island,
into extinction. It was discovered by Dr. Edward Palmer in 1875 and was
described and named by Robert Ridgway (1876) as _Colaptes mexicanus
rufipileus_. In his description of it, he remarks: “In the closed tail,
only about half an inch of red is exposed on the under surface beyond
the lower coverts, the remaining 2.50 being uniform black. The main
differences from the continental form consist in the longer bill, more
pinkish rump, and bright tawny forehead. In the latter feature, the
resemblance is closer to _C. chrysoides_, the crown and nape having
about the same gradation from bright cinnamon-tawny anteriorly to dull
grayish-cinnamon posteriorly.” Although it has a decidedly longer bill
than the mainland forms, it has a much shorter wing and tail. The
collector’s notes state that, even then, it was “rare, and apparently
only found in the pine-woods of the north end of the island.”
Walter E. Bryant (1887), who visited Guadalupe in 1885 and 1886, gives
us the best account we have of this little-known bird. He says of its
status and haunts at that time: “Comparatively speaking, this bird
was not rare in the restricted area of the large cypress grove, but
apart from this locality less than a dozen were seen. Three specimens
were taken among some palms within a short distance from the beach on
the eastern side of the island. One only was heard among the pines at
the northern portion, and in the vicinity of the large palm grove on
the northwestern slope they were occasionally seen.” He collected ten
specimens, whereas Dr. Palmer took only three.
In the spring of 1906, W. W. Brown, Jr., with two assistants, collected
for two months on the island for the Thayer Museum, of which Thayer
and Bangs (1908) say: “This well-marked island form is in all
probability doomed to speedy extinction, and will be the next of the
Guadalupe birds to go. Brown and Marsden found in all not more than
forty individuals in the island. In the small cypress grove near the
cabins there were four and in the large cypress woods about thirty-five.
“Mr. Brown tells us that in the breeding season, at least, the species
is wholly confined to the cypresses, none being seen in the pine woods.
The bird is very tame and unsuspicious and falls an easy prey to the
cats.”
_Courtship._--Mr. Bryant (1887) noted Guadalupe flickers in courtship
antics in January and in February. According to his description of
their actions and their notes at such times, these performances are
evidently similar to those of other flickers elsewhere.
_Nesting._--Apparently Dr. Palmer found no nests and collected no
eggs of this flicker, but Mr. Bryant (1887) has this to say about its
nesting habits:
By March 16, the birds were invariably found in pairs,
and my wish to secure a setting of eggs before departing
seemed in a fair way of being fulfilled. Strolling among
the cypresses on the 27th of March, I found four trees upon
which the birds were at work or had been recently, and in
such cases the birds themselves were always to be found in
the immediate vicinity. Passing a half-dead tree I heard
the sounding taps of a woodpecker at work, and as I neared
the spot, the slight noise which I made as I carefully
picked my way over the rock-strewn ground caused a handsome
male bird to suddenly appear at an opening about four feet
high. With a foot grasping either side of the entrance he
gazed upon the intruder. Having comprehended the situation,
he flew to another tree, where he quietly awaited my
inspection and departure. The hole was then down about
fifteen inches. By April 7, it had reached a depth of about
twenty inches and contained six fresh eggs, upon which the
female was then sitting.
Mr. Brown collected, for the Thayer Museum, six sets of eggs, one set
of five, two sets of four, one set of three, and two single eggs, all
of which are now in the Museum of Comparative Zoology in Cambridge,
Mass. The eggs were collected on dates ranging from May 8 to June 8,
1906; the nests were all in cypresses, mostly old or dead trees or
stumps, at heights ranging from 4 to 20 feet above the ground, and
at altitudes of from 3,700 to 4,500 feet above sea level; one of the
cavities was only 2 inches deep, but some of the others were 18 or 20
inches deep and from 3½ to 4 inches in diameter.
_Eggs._--The number of eggs laid by the Guadalupe flicker apparently
ranged from four to six. The eggs that I have seen, in Cambridge, are
ovate, pure white, and decidedly glossy, like other flickers’ eggs.
The measurements of 23 eggs average 27.8 by 21.7 millimeters; the eggs
showing the four extremes measure =30.2= by 21.1, 28.0 by =22.5=, and
=26.8= by =20.5= millimeters.
_Food._--Mr. Bryant (1887) says: “The food of this species during a
portion of the year consists largely of smooth-skinned caterpillars,
besides numerous beetles and ants; the latter are always obtainable and
growing to a large size figure as an important item of their diet.”
_Behavior._--He also remarks: “Of all the species of this family I
have ever met with, none have been so tame and unsuspicious or less
frightened by the report of a gun.”
_Voice._--The notes of the Guadalupe flicker are also similar to those
of the mainland forms, for Mr. Bryant (1887) says: “In addition to
the familiar scythe-whetting notes they have the peculiar ‘wake-up’
call and its rapid prelude of monosyllables. By imitating this call I
decoyed a distant female to within short range, the bird coming through
the thickest of the cypress grove, stopping at short intervals to call
and listen for a reply.”
LITERATURE CITED
ACHILLES, LAURENCE.
1906. Nesting of the Arctic three-toed woodpecker in the
Adirondacks. Bird-Lore, vol. 8, pp. 158-160.
AGERSBORG, GILBERT SMITH.
1881. Novel nesting-sites of woodpeckers (_Colaptes auratus_ and
_Melanerpes erythrocephalus_). Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club,
vol. 6, p. 120.
ALDERSON, V. A.
1890. Hairy woodpecker and potato bugs. Oologist, vol. 7, p. 147.
ALLEN, ARTHUR AUGUSTUS.
1928. Downy woodpecker’s story. Bird-Lore, vol. 30, pp. 415-424.
1937. Hunting with a microphone the voices of vanishing birds.
Nat. Geogr. Mag., vol. 71, pp. 697-706.
ALLEN, ARTHUR AUGUSTUS, and KELLOGG, P. PAUL.
1937. Recent observations on the ivory-billed woodpecker. Auk,
vol. 54, pp. 164-184.
ALLEN, JOEL ASAPH.
1892. The North American species of the genus _Colaptes_,
considered with special reference to the relationships of
_C. auratus_ and _C. cafer_. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist.,
vol. 4, pp. 21-44.
ALLERT, OSCAR PAUL.
1934. Flicker kills young robins. Iowa Bird Life, vol. 4, p. 20.
AMERICAN ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION.
1910. Check-list of North American birds. Ed. 3.
1931. Check-list of North American birds. Ed. 4.
ANDERSON, ANDERS HAROLD.
1934. Food of the Gila woodpecker (_Centurus uropygialis
uropygialis_). Auk, vol. 51, pp. 84-85.
ANDERSON, MALCOLM P., and GRINNELL, JOSEPH.
1903. Birds of the Siskiyou Mountains, California: A problem in
distribution. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, vol. 55,
pp. 4-15.
ANTHONY, ALFRED WEBSTER.
1895a. Birds of San Fernando, Lower California. Auk, vol. 12,
pp. 134-143.
1895b. New races of _Colaptes_ and _Passerella_ from the Pacific
coast. Auk, vol. 12, pp. 347-349.
ARTHUR, EDMUND WATTS.
1934. Courtship dance of the pileated woodpecker. Cardinal, vol.
3, p. 173.
ATTWATER, HENRY PHILEMON.
1892. List of birds observed in the vicinity of San Antonio,
Bexar County, Texas. Auk, vol. 9, pp. 229-238.
AUDUBON, JOHN JAMES.
1842. The birds of America, vol. 4.
BACON, C. C.
1891. A large set or series of the red-headed woodpecker.
Oologist, vol. 8, p. 32.
BAILEY, FLORENCE AUGUSTA MERRIAM.
1896. Notes on some of the birds of southern California. Auk,
vol. 13, pp. 115-124.
1902. Handbook of birds of the Western United States.
1923. Birds recorded from the Santa Rita Mountains in southern
Arizona. Pacific Coast Avifauna, no. 15.
1928. Birds of New Mexico.
BAILEY, HAROLD HARRIS.
1913. The birds of Virginia.
1925. The birds of Florida.
BAILEY, HARRY BALCH.
1878. Some new traits for the red-headed woodpecker (_Melanerpes
erythrocephalus_). Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 3, p. 97.
1883. Memoranda of a collection of eggs from Georgia. Bull.
Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 8, pp. 37-43.
BAIRD, SPENCER FULLERTON.
1858. Pacific Railroad Reports, vol. 9, pt. 2. Birds.
BAIRD, SPENCER FULLERTON; CASSIN, JOHN; and LAWRENCE, GEORGE NEWBOLD.
1860. The birds of North America.
BANCROFT, GRIFFING.
1930. The breeding birds of central Lower California. Condor,
vol. 32, pp. 20-49.
BANGS, OUTRAM.
1898. Some new races of birds from eastern North America. Auk,
vol. 15, pp. 173-183.
1900. A review of the three-toed woodpeckers of North America.
Auk, vol. 17, pp. 126-142.
1910. A new race of the pileated woodpecker. Proc. New England
Zool. Club, vol. 4, pp. 79-80.
BARROWS, WALTER BRADFORD.
1912. Michigan bird life.
BATCHELDER, CHARLES FOSTER.
1889. An undescribed subspecies of _Dryobates pubescens_. Auk,
vol. 6, pp. 253-255.
1908. The Newfoundland hairy woodpecker. Proc. New England Zool.
Club, vol. 4, pp. 37-38.
BAYNARD, OSCAR EDWARD.
1913. Breeding birds of Alachua County, Florida. Auk, vol. 30,
pp. 240-247.
BEAL, FOSTER ELLENBOROUGH LASCELLES.
1895. Preliminary report on the food of woodpeckers. U. S. Dept.
Agr. Div. Orn. and Mamm. Bull. 7.
1910. Birds of California in relation to the fruit industry, pt.
2. U. S. Dept. Agr. Biol. Surv. Bull. 34.
1911. Food of the woodpeckers of the United States. U. S. Dept.
Agr. Biol. Surv. Bull. 37.
BENDIRE, CHARLES EMIL.
1895. Life histories of North American birds. U. S. Nat. Mus.
Spec. Bull. 3.
BEYER, GEORGE EUGENE.
1900. The ivory-billed woodpecker in Louisiana. Auk, vol. 17,
pp. 97-99.
BEYER, GEORGE EUGENE; ALLISON, ANDREW; and KOPMAN, HENRY HAZLITT.
1908. List of the birds of Louisiana. Auk, vol. 25, pp. 173-180,
439-448.
BICKNELL, EUGENE PINTARD.
1885. A study of the singing of our birds. Auk, vol. 2, pp.
249-262.
BLACKWELDER, ELIOT.
1909. Summer birds of Iron County, Michigan. Auk, vol. 26, pp.
363-370.
BLINCOE, BENEDICT JOSEPH.
1923. Random notes on the feeding habits of some Kentucky birds.
Wilson Bull., vol. 35, pp. 63-71.
BOLLES, FRANK.
1891. Yellow-bellied woodpeckers and their uninvited guests.
Auk, vol. 8, pp. 256-270. 1892. Young sapsuckers in
captivity. Auk, vol. 9, pp. 109-119.
BOWLES, JOHN HOOPER.
1926. Regularity in habits of the northwestern flicker.
Murrelet, vol. 7, p. 42.
BRASHER, REX.
1926. Secrets of the friendly woods.
BREWSTER, WILLIAM.
1876a. The yellow-bellied woodpecker (_Sphyrapicus varius_).
Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 1, pp. 63-70.
1876b. Some observations on the birds of Ritchie County, West
Virginia. Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. New York, vol. 11, pp.
129-146.
1882. Impressions of some southern birds. Bull. Nuttall Orn.
Club, vol. 7, pp. 94-104.
1889. _Melanerpes carolinus_ eating oranges. Auk, vol. 6, pp.
337-338.
1897. On the nomenclature of certain forms of the downy
woodpecker. (_Dryobates pubescens_). Auk, vol. 14, pp.
80-82.
1898. Notes on the American three-toed woodpecker (_Picoides
americanus_). Osprey, vol. 2, pp. 73-76.
1902. Birds of the Cape region of Lower California. Bull. Mus.
Comp. Zool., vol. 41, pp. 1-241.
1906. Birds of the Cambridge region. Mem. Nuttall Orn. Club,
no. 4.
1909. Eggs of the flicker (_Colaptes auratus luteus_) found in
an odd place. Bird-Lore, vol. 11, pp. 73-74.
1936. October Farm.
1937. Concord River.
BROOKS, MAURICE.
1934. Some traits of the northern pileated woodpecker.
Bird-Lore, vol. 36, pp. 347-351.
BROWN, HERBERT.
1902. Unusual abundance of Lewis’s woodpecker near Tucson,
Arizona, in 1884. Auk, vol. 19, pp. 80-83.
BRYANT, HAROLD CHILD.
1916. A note on the food of the northern pileated woodpecker.
Condor, vol. 18, p. 32.
1921. California woodpecker steals eggs of wood pewee. Condor,
vol. 23, p. 33.
BRYANT, WALTER (PIERC)E.
1887. Additions to the ornithology of Guadalupe Island. Bull.
California Acad. Sci., vol. 2, pp. 269-318.
BRYENS, OSCAR MCKINLEY.
1926. Actions of the northern pileated woodpecker. Auk, vol. 43,
p. 98.
BURLEIGH, THOMAS DEARBORN.
1931. Notes on the breeding birds of State College, Centre
County, Pennsylvania. Wilson Bull., vol. 43, pp. 37-42.
BURMEISTER, CARL HERMANN CONRAD.
1856. Systematische Uebersicht der Thiere Brasiliens welche
während einer Reise durch die Provinzen von Rio de Janeiro
und Minas Geraës gesammelt oder beobachtet wurden.
BURNS, FRANKLIN LORENZO.
1900. Monograph of the flicker. Wilson Bull., vol. 7, pp. 1-82.
1903. A few additional notes on the flicker. Wilson Bull., vol.
10, pp. 24-26.
1915. Comparative periods of deposition and incubation of some
North American birds. Wilson Bull., vol. 27, pp. 275-286.
1916. One hundred and thirty-two vernacular names for the
flicker. Wilson Bull., vol. 28, pp. 90-91.
BURTCH, VERDI.
1923. Red squirrel eating young hairy woodpecker. Auk, vol. 40,
pp. 340-341.
CARRIGER, HENRY WARD, and WELLS, GURNIE.
1919. Nesting of the northern pileated woodpecker. Condor, vol.
21, pp. 153-156.
CASSIN, JOHN.
1852. Descriptions of birds of the genera _Laniarius_,
_Dicrurus_, _Graucalus_, _Manacus_ and _Picus_, specimens
of which are in the collection of the Academy of
Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci.
Philadelphia, vol. 5, pp. 347-349.
1854. Illustrations of the birds of California, Texas, Oregon,
British and Russian America, pt. 7.
CATESBY, MARK.
1731. The natural history of Carolina, Florida and the Bahama
Islands, vol. 1.
CHRISTY, BAYARD HENDERSON.
1931. Nesting of the red-bellied woodpecker in Beaver County.
Cardinal, vol. 3, pp. 44-45.
COOPER, JAMES GRAHAM.
1870. Geological survey of California. Ornithology, vol. 1. Land
birds.
COUES, ELLIOTT.
1874. Birds of the Northwest.
CURRIER, EDMONDE SAMUEL.
1928. Lewis woodpeckers nesting in colonies. Condor, vol. 30, p.
356.
DAWSON, WILLIAM LEON.
1903. The birds of Ohio.
1923. The birds of California, vol. 2.
DAWSON, WILLIAM LEON, and BOWLES, JOHN HOOPER.
1909. The birds of Washington, vol. 1.
DICE, LEE RAYMOND.
1918. The birds of Walla Walla and Columbia Counties,
southeastern Washington. Auk, vol. 35, pp. 40-51.
DINGLE, EDWARD VON SIEBOLD.
1926. Red-cockaded woodpecker in cornfields. Bird-Lore, vol. 28,
pp. 124-125.
DIXON, JOSEPH SCATTERGOOD.
1927. Black bear tries to gnaw into a woodpecker’s nest. Condor,
vol. 29, pp. 271-272.
DORSEY, GEORGE ANDREW.
1926. A red-headed woodpecker storing acorns. Bird-Lore, vol.
28, pp. 333-334.
DUNCAN, MRS. SANFORD.
1932. Flicker captured by a bullsnake. Migrant, vol. 3, p. 9.
DWIGHT, JONATHAN, JR.
1893. Summer birds of Prince Edward Island. Auk, vol. 10, pp.
1-15.
EATON, ELON HOWARD.
1914. Birds of New York. New York State Mus. Mem. 12, pt. 2.
ECKSTROM, FANNIE HARDY.
1901. The woodpeckers.
EIFRIG, CHARLES WILLIAM GUSTAVE.
1906. Notes on some northern birds. Auk, vol. 23, pp. 313-318.
1919. Notes on birds of the Chicago area and its immediate
vicinity. Auk, vol. 36, pp. 513-524.
EMERSON, WILLIAM OTTO.
1893. Random bird-notes from Merced Big Trees and Yosemite
Valley. Zoe, vol. 4, pp. 176-182.
1899. Fall notes from Haywards, Cal. Bull. Cooper Orn. Club,
vol. 1, p. 28.
ERICHSEN, WALTER JEFFERSON.
1920. Observations on the habits of some breeding birds of
Chatham County, Georgia. Wilson Bull., vol. 32, pp. 133-139.
ERRINGTON, PAUL LESTER.
1936. Winter-killing of flickers in central Iowa. Auk, vol. 53,
pp. 334-335.
EVERMANN, BARTON WARREN.
1889. Birds of Carroll County, Indiana. Auk, vol. 6, pp. 22-30.
FARLEY, JOHN AUSTIN.
1901. Massachusetts bird notes. Auk, vol. 18, pp. 398-400.
FISHER, WALTER KENRICK.
1902. The downy woodpeckers of California. Condor, vol. 4, pp.
68-70.
FISHER, WILLIAM HARMANUS.
1903. Nesting of the red-bellied woodpecker in Harford County,
Maryland, Auk, vol. 20, pp. 305-306.
FLANAGAN, JOHN HENRY.
1911. Some Colorado woodpecker and sapsucker notes. Oologist,
vol. 28, pp. 69-71.
FLEMING, JAMES HENRY.
1901. A list of the birds of the Districts Parry Sound and
Muskoka, Ontario. Auk, vol. 18, pp. 33-45.
FORBUSH, EDWARD HOWE.
1913. Useful birds and their protection.
1927. Birds of Massachusetts and other New England States,
vol. 2.
FOWLER, FREDERICK HALL.
1903. Stray notes from southern Arizona. Condor, vol. 5, pp.
68-71, 106-107.
FRITZ, EMANUEL.
1937. Sapsuckers on redwood. Condor, vol. 39, pp. 36-37.
GANIER, ALBERT FRANKLIN.
1926. An unusual flicker’s nest. Wilson Bull., vol. 38, p. 116.
GIBBS, MORRIS.
1902. The movements of birds. Oologist, vol. 19, pp. 83-85.
GIGNOUX, CLAUDE.
1921. The storage of almonds by the California woodpecker.
Condor, vol. 23, pp. 118-121.
GILMAN, MARSHALL FRENCH.
1915. Woodpeckers of the Arizona lowlands. Condor, vol. 17, pp.
151-163.
GOODPASTURE, A. V.
1909. Woodpeckers and June-bugs. Bird-Lore, vol. 11, pp. 196-197.
GRIMES, SAMUEL ANDREW.
1932. Notes on the 1931 nesting season in the Jacksonville
region. Florida Nat., vol. 5, pp. 57-63.
GRINNELL, JOSEPH.
1900. Birds of the Kotzebue Sound region, Alaska. Pacific Coast
Avifauna, no. 1.
1901. Two races of the red-breasted sapsucker. Condor, vol. 3,
p. 12.
1902. The southern white-headed woodpecker. Condor, vol. 4, pp.
89-90.
1908. The biota of the San Bernardino Mountains. Univ.
California Publ. Zool., vol. 5, pp. 1-170.
1909. Birds and mammals of the 1907 Alexander expedition to
southeastern Alaska. Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 5,
pp. 171-264.
1910. Birds of the 1908 Alexander Alaska expedition, Univ.
California Publ. Zool., vol. 5, pp. 361-428.
1914. An account of the mammals and birds of the lower Colorado
Valley with especial reference to the distributional
problems presented. Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 12,
pp. 51-294.
1927a. A new race of Gila woodpecker from Lower California.
Condor, vol. 29, pp. 168-169.
1927b. Six new subspecies of birds from Lower California. Auk,
vol. 44, pp. 67-72.
1928a. Do willow woodpeckers ever drill in tree-bark? Condor,
vol. 30, pp. 253-254.
1928b. A distributional summation of the ornithology of Lower
California. Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 32, pp.
1-300.
GRINNELL, JOSEPH; Dixon, JOSEPH SCATTERGOOD; and LINSALE, JEAN MYRON.
1930. Vertebrate natural history of a section of northern
California through the Lassen Peak region. Univ. California
Publ. Zool., vol. 35, pp. 1-594.
GRINNELL, JOSEPH, and STORER, TRACY IRWIN.
1924. Animal life in the Yosemite.
GRINNELL, JOSEPH, and SWARTH, HARRY SCHELWALDT.
1926. A new race of acorn-storing woodpecker, from Lower
California. Condor, vol. 28, pp. 176-178.
GRISCOM, LUDLOW.
1929. Changes in the status of certain birds in the New York
City region. Auk, vol. 46, pp. 45-57.
HARGITT, EDWARD.
1886. Notes on woodpeckers--no. 11. On a new species from
Arizona. Ibis, ser. 5, vol. 4, pp. 112-115.
HARLOW, RICHARD CRESSON.
1914. Nesting of the northern pileated woodpecker. Oologist,
vol. 31, pp. 82-85.
HARTERT, ERNST.
1912. Die Vögel der paläarktischen Fauna, Heft 7 (Band 2, I).
HASBROUCK, EDWIN MARBLE.
1889. Summer birds of Eastland County, Texas. Auk, vol. 6, pp.
236-241.
HELME, ARTHUR HUDSON.
1882. Red-headed woodpeckers. Ornithologist and Oologist,
vol. 7, p. 107.
HENDERSON, JUNIUS.
1927. The practical value of birds.
HENSHAW, HENRY WETHERBEE.
1875. Report upon the ornithological collections obtained from
portions of Nevada, Utah, California, Colorado, New Mexico,
and Arizona, during the years 1871, 1872, 1873 and 1874.
1921. The storage of acorns by the California woodpecker.
Condor, vol. 23, pp. 109-118.
HOFFMAN, RALPH.
1927. Birds of the Pacific States.
HOLLAND, HAROLD MAY.
1931. Doves and woodpeckers. Oologist vol. 48, pp. 61-63.
HOLLISTER, NED.
1918, A sanctuary within a sanctuary. Bird-Lore, vol. 20, pp.
158-159.
HOWELL, ARTHUR HOLMES.
1924. Birds of Alabama.
1932. Florida bird life.
HOYT, ROBERT DAY.
1905. Nesting of the ivory-billed woodpecker in Florida.
Warbler, ser. 2, vol. 1, pp. 52-55.
HUEY, LAURENCE MARKHAM.
1927. A discussion of the zonal status of the Sierra San Pedro
Martir, Lower California, Mexico, with descriptions of a
new kangaroo rat and a new woodpecker from that region.
Trans. San Diego Soc. Nat. Hist., vol. 5, pp. 1-10.
INGERSOLL, ERNEST.
1906. The wit of the wild.
JENKS, RANDOLPH.
1934. Unusual nesting records from northern Arizona. Condor,
vol. 36, pp. 172-176.
JENSEN, JENS KNUDSEN.
1923. Notes on the nesting birds of northern Santa Fe County,
New Mexico. Auk, vol. 40, pp. 452-469.
JONES, HOWARD.
1883. An unrecorded habit of the red-headed woodpecker.
Ornithologist and Oologist, vol. 8, p. 56.
KENNARD, FREDERIC HEDGE.
1895. January occurrence of the “sapsucker” in Brookline, Mass.
Auk, vol. 12, pp. 301-302.
KING, FRANKLIN HIRAM.
1883. Economic relations of Wisconsin birds. Geology of
Wisconsin, Survey of 1873-1879, pp. 441-610.
KLUGH, A. B.
1909. A remarkable migration of yellow-bellied sapsuckers.
Ottawa Nat., vol. 23, pp. 115-116.
KNIGHT, ORA WILLIS.
1908. The birds of Maine.
KOPMAN, HENRY HAZLITT.
1915. List of the birds of Louisiana, pt. 6. Auk, vol. 32, pp.
15-29.
KUMLIEN, LUDWIG, and HOLLISTER, NED.
1903. The birds of Wisconsin. Bull. Wisconsin Nat. Hist. Soc.,
new ser., vol. 3, pp. 1-143.
KYLER, MRS. JOHN FRANKLIN.
1927. Bob, the redhead. Bird-Lore, vol. 29, pp. 335-338.
LAING, HAMILTON MACK, and TAVERNER, PERCY ALGERNON.
1929. Notes on birds collected and observed in Chitina River
region, Alaska. Ann. Rep. Nat. Mus. Canada, 1927, pp. 72-95.
LATHAM, JOHN.
1783. A general synopsis of birds, vol. 1.
LAW, JOHN EUGENE.
1929. Another Lewis woodpecker stores acorns. Condor, vol. 31,
pp. 233-238.
LEACH, FRANK A.
1925. Communism in the California woodpecker. Condor, vol. 27,
pp. 12-19.
LEISTER, CLAUDE WILLARD.
1919. Aerial evolutions of a flicker. Auk, vol. 36, p. 570.
LINNAEUS, CARL.
1758. Systema naturae. Ed. 10.
LLOYD, HOYES.
1932. The birds of Ottawa--Addenda. Canadian Field-Nat., vol.
46, pp. 123-127.
LYON, WILLIAM ISAAC.
1922. Owl kidnaps young flickers. Wilson Bull., vol. 84, pp.
230-231.
MACFARLANE, RODERICK ROSS.
1908. List of birds and eggs observed and collected in the
northwest Territories of Canada, between 1880 and 1894.
_In_, Through the Mackenzie Basin, by Charles Mair.
MACOUN, JOHN.
1909. Catalogue of Canadian birds. Ed. 2.
MAYNARD, CHARLES JOHNSON.
1896. The birds of eastern North America. Revised edition.
MCATEE, WALDO LEE.
1911. Woodpeckers in relation to trees and wood products. U. S.
Dept. Agric. Biol. Surv. Bull. 39.
MCGUIRE. N. M.
1932. A red-bellied woodpecker robs a sapsucker. Wilson Bull.,
vol. 44, p. 39.
MEARNS, EDGAR ALEXANDER.
1890a. Descriptions of a new species and three new subspecies of
birds from Arizona. Auk, vol. 7, pp. 243-251.
1890b. Observations on the avifauna of portions of Arizona. Auk,
vol. 7, pp. 251-264.
MERRIAM, CLINTON HART.
1878. Remarks on some of the birds of Lewis County, northern New
York. Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 8, pp. 123-128.
1879. Remarks on some of the birds of Lewis County, northern New
York. Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 4, pp. 1-7.
MERRIAM, ROBERT OWEN.
1920. Snow bathing. Bird-Lore, vol. 22, p. 348.
MERRILL, JAMES CUSHING.
1888. Notes on the birds of Fort Klamath, Oregon. Auk, vol. 5 pp
139-146, 251-262.
MICHAEL, CHARLES WILSON.
1926. Acorn storing methods of the California and Lewis
woodpeckers. Condor, vol. 28, pp. 68-69.
1928. The pileated woodpecker feeds on berries. Condor, vol. 30,
p. 157.
1935. Nesting of the Williamson sapsucker. Condor, vol. 37, pp.
209-210.
MINOT, HENRY DAVIS.
1877. The land and game birds of New England.
MOORE, WILLIAM H.
1902. Notes on some Canadian birds. Ottawa Nat., vol. 16, pp.
130-134.
MORRELL, CLARENCE HENRY.
1901. Notes on the pileated woodpecker. Journ. Maine Orn. Soc.,
vol. 8, p. 32.
MORSE, GEORGE WASHINGTON.
1927. Notes on a red-cockaded woodpecker. Oologist, vol. 44, pp.
22-23.
MORTIMER D. [= B. (BENJAMIN.)].
1890. Notes on habits of a few birds of Orange County, Florida.
Auk, vol. 7, pp. 337-343.
MOUSLEY, HENRY.
1916. Five years personal notes and observations on the birds of
Hatley, Stanstead County, Quebec--1911-1915. Auk, vol. 33,
pp. 57-73.
MUNRO, JAMES ALEXANDER.
1919. Notes on some birds of the Okanagan Valley, British
Columbia. Auk, vol. 36, pp. 64-74.
1923. The pileated woodpecker. Canadian Field-Nat., vol. 37, pp.
85-88.
1930. Miscellaneous notes on some British Columbia birds.
Condor, vol. 32, pp. 65-68.
MYERS, HARRIET WILLIAMS.
1915. A late nesting record for the California woodpecker.
Condor, vol. 17, pp. 183-185.
NAUMAN, E. D.
1930. The red-headed woodpecker. Bird-Lore, vol. 32, pp. 128-129.
1932. The red-headed woodpecker as a mouser. Wilson Bull., vol.
44, p. 44.
NEFF, JOHNSON ANDREW.
1928. A study of the economic status of the common woodpeckers
in relation to Oregon horticulture.
NEHRLINQ, HENRY.
1882. List of birds observed at Houston, Harris Co., Texas, and
in the Counties Montgomery, Galveston and Fort Bend. Bull.
Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 7, pp. 166-175.
NELSON, EDWARD WILLIAM.
1887. Report upon natural history collections made in Alaska
between the years 1877 and 1881. U. S. Signal Service,
Arctic ser., no. 3.
NEWBERRY, JOHN STRONG.
1857. Report upon the zoology of the route. U. S. Pacific
Railroad Reports, vol. 6, pt. 4, pp. 35-110.
NORRIS, JOSEPH PARKER.
1888. Five sets of eggs from one bird in one season.
Ornithologist and Oologist, vol. 13, p. 102.
NUTTALL, THOMAS.
1832. A manual of the ornithology of the United States and of
Canada, vol. 1. Land birds.
NYE, HARRIET AUGUSTA.
1918. The sapsucker wintering in central Maine. Auk, vol. 35,
pp. 353-354.
OBERHOLSER, HARRY CHURCH.
1896a. Descriptions of two new subspecies of the downy
woodpecker, _Dryobates pubescens_ (Linnaeus). Proc. U. S.
Nat. Mus., vol. 18, pp. 547-550.
1896b. A preliminary list of the birds of Wayne County, Ohio.
Bull. Ohio Experiment Sta., vol. 1, pp. 243-353.
1911a. A revision of the forms of the hairy woodpecker
(_Dryobates villosus_ [Linnaeus]). Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
vol. 40, pp. 595-621.
1911b. A revision of the forms of the ladder-backed woodpecker
(_Dryobates scalaris_ [Wagler]). Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.,
vol. 41, pp. 139-159.
OSGOOD, WILFRED HUDSON.
1901. Natural history of the Queen Charlotte Islands, British
Columbia. North Amer. Fauna, no. 21, pp. 7-50.
PALMER, WILLIAM.
1901. The malar stripe of young flickers and the molt. Osprey,
vol. 5, pp. 102-104.
PEARSE, THEED.
1934. Display of Harris woodpecker. Murrelet, vol. 15, pp. 25-26.
PEARSON, THOMAS GILBERT.
1909. Nesting of the red-cockaded woodpecker. Bird-Lore, vol.
11, pp. 265-266.
PENNANT, THOMAS.
1785. Arctic zoology, vol. 2.
PHELPS, FRANK MILLS.
1914. The resident bird life of the Big Cypress Swamp region.
Wilson Bull., vol. 26, pp. 86-101.
PHILIPP, PHILIP BERNARD, and BOWDISH, BEECHER SCOVILLE.
1917. Some summer birds of northern New Brunswick. Auk, vol. 84,
pp. 265-275.
1919. Further notes on New Brunswick birds. Auk, vol. 36, pp.
36-45.
PIERCE, WRIGHT MCEWAN.
1916. More bird notes from Big Bear Valley, San Bernardino
Mountains. Condor, vol. 18, pp. 177-182.
POTTER, JULIAN KENT.
1912. Red-headed woodpecker at Camden, N. J. Bird-Lore, vol. 14,
pp. 216-217.
PURDY, JAMES BRITTON.
1900. The red-headed and other woodpeckers in Michigan in
winter. Auk, vol. 17, p. 174.
REID, SAVILE GREY.
1884. The birds of Bermuda. U. S. Nat. Mus. Bull. 25, pp.
163-279.
RIDGWAY, ROBERT.
1876. Ornithology of Guadeloupe Island. Bull. Hayden Surv.
Terr., vol. 2, pp. 183-195.
1877. United States geological exploration of the fortieth
parallel. Part 3. Ornithology.
1881. An unaccountable migration of the red-headed woodpecker.
Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 6, pp. 120-122.
1898. The home of the ivory-bill. Osprey, vol. 3, pp. 35-36.
1914. The birds of North and Middle America. U. S. Nat. Mus.
Bull. 50, pt 6.
RITTER, WILLIAM EMERSON.
1921. Acorn-storing by the California woodpecker. Condor, vol.
23, pp. 3-14.
1922. Further observations on the activities of the California
woodpecker. Condor, vol. 24, pp. 109-122.
1938. The California woodpecker and I.
ROBERTS, THOMAS SADLER.
1932. The birds of Minnesota, vol. 1.
SAMPSON, ELIZABETH.
1934. Downy goes visiting. Bird-Lore, vol. 36, pp. 356-260.
SAUNDERS, ARETAS ANDREWS.
1921. A distributional list of the birds of Montana. Pacific
Coast Avifauna, no. 14.
1929. The summer birds of the northern Adirondack Mountains.
Roosevelt Wild Life Bull., vol. 5, no. 3.
1935. A guide to bird songs.
SCOTT, WILLIAM EARL DODGE.
1881. On birds observed in Sumpter, Levy and Hillsboro Counties,
Florida. Bull. Nuttall Orn. Club, vol. 6, pp. 14-21.
1886. On the avi-fauna of Pinal County, with remarks on some
birds of Pima and Gila Counties, Arizona. Auk, vol. 3, pp.
421-432.
1888. Supplementary notes from the Gulf coast of Florida, with
a description of a new species of marsh wren. Auk, vol. 5,
pp. 183-188.
SCOVILLE, SAMUEL, JR.
1920. The pileated woodpecker. Cassinia, for 1919, no. 23, p. 14.
SEMPLE, JOHN BONNER.
1930. Red-headed woodpeckers in migratory flight. Auk, vol. 47,
pp. 84-85.
SENNETT, GEORGE BURRITT.
1879. Further notes on the ornithology of the lower Rio Grande
of Texas, from observations made during the spring of 1878.
Bull. U. S. Geol. and Geogr. Surv., vol. 5, pp. 371-440.
SETON, ERNEST THOMPSON.
1890. The birds of Manitoba. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 13, pp.
457-643.
SHARPE, VERNON, JR.
1932. The pileated woodpecker. Migrant, vol. 3, pp. 40-41.
SHELLEY, LEWIS ORMAN.
1932. Inbreeding downy woodpeckers. Bird-Banding, vol. 3, pp.
69-70.
1933. Some notes on the hairy woodpecker. Bird-Banding, vol. 4,
pp. 204-205.
SHERMAN, ALTHEA ROSINA.
1910. At the sign of the northern flicker. Wilson Bull., vol.
22, pp. 135-171.
SHERWOOD, WILLIAM E.
1927. Feeding habits of Lewis woodpecker. Condor, vol. 29, p.
171.
SIMMONS, GEORGE FINLAY.
1915. On the nesting of certain birds in Texas. Auk, vol. 32,
pp. 317-331.
1925. Birds of the Austin region.
SIMPSON, RALPH B.
1910. The northern pileated woodpecker. Oologist, vol. 27, pp.
147-149.
SKINNER, MILTON PHILO.
1928. A guide to the winter birds of the North Carolina
sandhills.
SMITH, AUSTIN PAUL.
1908. Some data and records from the Whetstone Mountains,
Arizona. Condor, vol. 10, pp. 75-78.
SNYDER, LESTER LYNNE.
1923. On the crown markings of juvenile hairy and downy
woodpeckers. Canadian Field-Nat., vol. 37, pp. 167-168.
SNYDER, LESTER LYNNE, and LOGIER, E. B. S.
1931. A faunal investigation of Long Point, and vicinity,
Norfolk County, Ontario. Contrib. no. 4, Royal Ontario Mus.
Zool. Reprint from Trans. Royal Canadian Inst., vol. 18,
pp. 117-236.
SPIKER, CHARLES JOLLEY.
1935. A popular account of the bird life of the Finger Lakes
section of New York, with main reference to the summer
season. Roosevelt Wild Life Bull., vol. 6, no. 3.
SPRUNT, ALEXANDER, JR.
1931. Unusual nesting concentration in a single tree. Auk, vol.
48, pp. 621-622.
STEARNS, WINFRID ALDEN.
1883. New England bird life. (Edited by Elliott Coues.)
STEELE, EDWARD SIMON.
1926. A three-cornered fight. Condor, vol. 28, p. 272.
STOCKARD, CHARLES RUPERT.
1904. Nesting habits of woodpeckers and vultures in Mississippi.
Auk, vol. 21, pp. 463-471.
STODDARD, HERBERT LEE.
1917. Notes on a few of the rarer birds of Sauk and Dane
Counties, Wisconsin. Auk, vol. 34, pp. 63-65.
STONE, WITMER.
1909. The birds of New Jersey. Ann. Rep. New Jersey State Mus.,
1908.
STONER, DAYTON.
1932. Ornithology of the Oneida Lake region: With reference to
the late spring and summer seasons. Roosevelt Wild Life
Ann., vol. 2, nos. 3, 4.
STONER, EMERSON AUSTIN.
1915. Unusual red-headed woodpecker’s nest. Oologist, vol. 32,
p. 54.
SUCKLEY, GEORGE, AND COOPER, JAMES GRAHAM.
1860. The natural history of Washington Territory and Oregon.
SUTTON, GEORGE MIKSCH.
1928a. Notes. Cardinal, vol. 2, pp. 104-105.
1928b. The birds of Pymatuning Swamp and Conneaut Lake, Crawford
County, Pennsylvania. Ann. Carnegie Mus., vol. 18, pp.
19-239.
1930. Notes on the northern pileated woodpecker in Pennsylvania.
Cardinal, vol. 2, pp. 207-217.
SWAINSON, WILLIAM, and RICHARDSON, JOHN.
1831. Fauna Boreali-Americana, vol. 2. Birds.
SWARTH, HARRY SCHELWALDT.
1904. Birds of the Huachuca Mountains, Arizona. Pacific Coast
Avifauna, no. 4.
1911a. Birds and mammals of the 1909 Alexander Alaska
expedition. Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 7, pp. 9-172.
1911b. Description of a new hairy woodpecker from southeastern
Alaska. Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 7, pp. 313-318.
1917. Geographical variation in _Sphyrapicus thyroideus_.
Condor, vol. 19, pp. 62-65.
1922. Birds and mammals of the Stikine River region of northern
British Columbia and southeastern Alaska. Univ. California
Publ. Zool., vol. 24, pp. 125-314.
1924. Birds and mammals of the Skeena River region of northern
British Columbia. Univ. California Publ. Zool., vol. 24,
pp. 315-394.
1929. The faunal areas of southern Arizona: A study in animal
distribution. Proc. California Acad. Sci., vol. 18, pp.
267-382.
TABER, SYDNEY RICHMOND.
1921. A bird battle. Bird-Lore, vol. 23, p. 243.
TAVERNER, PERCY ALGERNON, and SWALES, BRADSHAW HALL.
1907. The birds of Point Pelee. Wilson Bull., vol. 19, pp.
133-153.
TAYLOR, WALTER PENN.
1912. Field notes on amphibians, reptiles and birds of northern
Humboldt County, Nevada, with a discussion of some of the
faunal features of the region. Univ. California Publ.
Zool., vol. 7, pp. 319-436.
TAYLOR, WALTER PENN, and SHAW, WILLIAM THOMAS.
1927. Mammals and birds of Mount Rainier National Park. National
Park Service.
THAYER, JOHN ELIOT, and BANGS, OUTRAM.
1908. The present state of the ornis of Guadaloupe Island.
Condor, vol. 10, pp. 101-106.
THOMPSON, JAMES MAURICE.
1885. By-ways and bird notes.
1896. An archer’s sojourn in the Okefinoke. Atlantic Monthly,
vol. 77, pp. 486-491.
THOMS, CRAIG S.
1927. A close-up of downy. Bird-Lore, vol. 29, pp. 417-419.
THOREAU, HENRY DAVID.
1906. Journal, 1857, edited by Bradford Torrey.
TIBBETS, ELLIOTT R.
1911. A clever trick of the downy woodpecker. Bird-Lore, vol.
13, p. 251.
TOWNSEND, CHARLES WENDELL.
1925. Notes on the nesting habits of the northern pileated
woodpecker. Auk, vol. 42, pp. 132-134.
1932. Are rings of holes in tree bark made by downy woodpeckers?
Condor, vol. 34, pp. 61-65.
TROTTER, SPENCER.
1903. The red-headed woodpecker as a Pennsylvania and New Jersey
bird. Cassinia, no. 7, pp. 6-10.
TYLER, JOHN GRIPPER.
1913. Some birds of the Fresno District, California. Pacific
Coast Avifauna, no. 9.
VAN ROSSEM, ADRIAAN, and PIERCE, WRIGHT MCEWAN.
1915. Further notes from the San Bernardino Mountains. Condor,
vol. 17, pp. 163-165.
VAN TYNE, JOSSELYN.
1926. An unusual flight of Arctic three-toed woodpeckers. Auk,
vol. 43, pp. 469-474.
VICKERS, ERNEST WATERS.
1910. The pileated woodpecker. Bird-Lore, vol. 12, pp. 57-59.
1915. The rolling call of the pileated woodpecker. Oologist,
vol. 32, pp. 44-48.
VON BLOEKER, JACK C., JR.
1935. Flickers and jays feeding on scarab beetles in flight.
Condor, vol. 37, pp. 288-289.
WALTER, ALICE HALL.
1912. The hairy and downy woodpeckers. Bird-Lore, vol. 14, 66.
127-130.
WARD, BILLY.
1930. Red-cockaded woodpeckers on corn. Bird-Lore, vol. 32, pp.
127-128.
WARREN, BENJAMIN HARRY.
1890. Report on the birds of Pennsylvania.
WARREN, EDWARD ROYAL.
1912. Some north-central Colorado bird notes. Condor, vol. 14,
pp. 81-104.
WAYNE, ARTHUR TREZEVANT.
1906. A contribution to the ornithology of South Carolina,
chiefly the coast region. Auk, vol. 23, pp. 56-68.
1910. Birds of South Carolina. Contributions from the Charleston
Museum. I, pp. 87-94.
WEYDEMEYER, WINTON.
1926. Sapsuckers feeding sap to young. Auk, vol. 43, p. 236.
WEYDEMEYER, WINTON, and WEYDEMEYER, DONALD.
1928. The woodpeckers of Lincoln County, Montana. Condor, vol.
30, pp. 339-346.
WEYGANDT, CORNELIUS.
1912. The summer of fire and bird adaptation. Cassinia, no. 15,
pp. 28-34.
WHEELOCK, IRENE GROSVENOR.
1904. Birds of California.
1905. Regurgitative feeding of nestlings. Auk, vol. 22, pp.
54-70.
WHITTLE, CHARLES LIVY.
1920. A colony of three-toed woodpeckers. Bird-Lore, vol. 22,
pp. 351-352.
WILLARD, FRANCIS COTTLE.
1912. A week afield in southern Arizona. Condor, vol. 14, pp.
53-63.
1918. Evidence that many birds remain mated for life. Condor,
vol. 20, pp. 167-170.
WILSON, ALEXANDER.
1832. American ornithology, vol. 1. (1811 edition also cited.)
WOOD, JOHN CLAIRE.
1905. Some nesting sites of the hairy woodpecker (_Dryobates
villosus_). Wilson Bull., vol. 17, p. 66.
WOODS, ROBERT S.
1932. Acquired food habits of some native birds. Condor, vol.
34, pp. 237-240.
WRIGHT, ALBERT HAZEN, and HARPER, FRANCIS.
1913. A biological reconnaissance of Okefinoke Swamp: The birds.
Auk, vol. 30, pp. 477-505.
WRIGHT, HORACE WINSLOW.
1911. The birds of the Jefferson region in the White Mountains,
New Hampshire. Proc. Manchester Inst. Arts and Sci., vol.
5, pt. 1.
1912. Morning awakening and even-song. Auk, vol. 29, pp.
307-327.
WRIGHT, HOWARD W.
1908. A death struggle. Condor, vol. 10, p. 93.
INDEX
abieticola, Ceophloeus pileatus, 164, 165, 170, 171, 191.
Achilles, Laurence, on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 106, 108, 110,
113.
aculeata, Balanosphyra formicivora, 211, 212, 223, 226.
Agersborg, G. S., on red-headed woodpecker, 196, 200.
Alaska three-toed woodpecker, 122.
albolarvatus, Dryobates albolarvatus, 97.
Xenopicus, 101, 105.
albolarvatus albolarvatus, Dryobates, 97.
albolarvatus gravirostris, Dryobates, 104, 105.
Alderson, V. A., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 18.
Allen, A. A., viii, 179.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 1.
on northern downy woodpecker, 57, 62, 64.
Allen, A. A., and Kellogg, P. P., on ivory-billed woodpecker, 3-6, 8,
10, 12.
Allen, C. A., 288.
on Cabanis’s woodpecker, 34.
on northern red-breasted sapsucker, 153.
on willow woodpecker, 70.
Allen, F. H., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 113.
on eastern hairy woodpecker, 13, 20.
on northern downy woodpecker, 53, 64.
on northern flicker, 265-267, 279.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 174-175.
Allen, J. A., on hybrid flickers, 291.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 229.
Allen, R. P., on southern pileated woodpecker, 169.
Allert, O. P., on northern flicker, 281.
Alpine three-toed woodpecker, 124.
Amadon, Dean, viii.
American three-toed woodpecker, 116.
americanus, Picoïdes, 108, 119.
Anderson, A. H., on Gila woodpecker, 254.
Anderson, M. P., and Grinnell, Joseph, on Gairdner’s woodpecker, 50.
angustifrons, Balanosphyra formicivora, 211, 212, 222.
Melanerpes, 82.
Ant-eating woodpecker, 211.
Anthony, A. W., on cardon woodpecker, 257.
on San Fernando flicker, 305, 306.
Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 106.
arcticus, Picoïdes, 106, 118, 119.
Arizona woodpecker, 91.
arizonae, Dryobates arizonae, 91.
Picus, 91.
arizonae arizonae Dryobates, 91.
arizonae fraterculus, Dryobates, 97.
Arthur, E. W., on northern pileated woodpecker, 174.
Asyndesmus lewis, 226.
Attwater, H. P., on golden-fronted woodpecker, 246.
Audubon, J. J., 30.
on Gairdner’s woodpecker, 49.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 2, 4, 5, 8, 10.
on northern downy woodpecker, 53, 57.
on pileated woodpecker, 172, 188.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 244.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 73.
on red-headed woodpecker, 199, 203, 205.
on southern hairy woodpecker, 28.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 167, 169.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 127, 133.
auduboni, Dryobates villosus, 23, 27.
auratus, Colaptes, 290, 291, 295.
Colaptes auratus, 259.
auratus auratus, Colaptes, 259.
auratus luteus, Colaptes, 262-264.
aurifrons, Centurus, 245.
bacatus, Picoïdes tridactylus, 116.
Bachman, John, on southern pileated woodpecker, 169.
Bacon, C. C., on red-headed woodpecker, 197.
Bagg, C. L., 207.
Bailey, A. M., viii.
Bailey, C. E., 22.
on northern downy woodpecker, 63.
Bailey, Mrs. Florence M., on alpine three-toed woodpecker, 126.
on cactus woodpecker, 85.
on Mearns’s woodpecker, 225.
on Natalie’s sapsucker, 162.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 187.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 101, 103.
on Nuttall’s woodpecker, 90.
on red-shafted flicker, 289.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 147.
on white-breasted woodpecker, 45.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 159.
Bailey, H. B., 200.
Bailey, H. H., on northern flicker, 278.
on southern downy woodpecker, 46.
on southern hairy woodpecker, 27.
Bailey, Vernon, 9.
Baird, S. F., on hybrid flickers, 291.
Baird, S. F.; Brewer, T. M.; and Ridgway, Robert, on Williamson’s
sapsucker, 155.
Baird, S. F.; Cassin, John; and Lawrence, G. N., on Williamson’s
sapsucker, 155.
bairdi, Balanosphyra formicivora, 211, 212, 223, 226.
Dryobates scalaris, 79, 80, 82, 83.
Balanosphyra formicivora aculeata, 211, 212, 223, 226.
formicivora angustifrons, 211, 212, 222.
formicivora bairdi, 211, 212, 223, 226.
formicivora formicivora, 211, 222.
formicivora martirensis, 212, 226.
Bancroft, Griffing, on Brewster’s woodpecker, 258.
on cape gilded flicker, 299, 300.
on San Fernando flicker, 306.
on San Fernando woodpecker, 87.
on San Lucas woodpecker, 82, 83.
Bangs, Outram, on American three-toed woodpecker, 116.
on Florida pileated woodpecker, 190.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 171.
on pileated woodpecker, 164.
on western pileated woodpecker, 191.
Bangs, Outram, and Thayer, J. E., on Guadalupe flicker, 307.
Batchelder, C. F., on Newfoundland woodpecker, 38.
on Batchelder’s woodpecker, 51.
Batchelder’s woodpecker, 51.
Bates, F. A., 276.
Beal, F. E. L., on alpine three-toed woodpecker, 126.
on American three-toed woodpecker, 118.
on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 111.
on California woodpecker, 218.
on eastern hairy woodpecker, 17, 18.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 9.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 232.
on northern downy woodpecker, 58, 59.
on northern flicker, 277-279.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 183, 184.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 101.
on Nuttall’s woodpecker, 89, 90.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 240.
on red-headed woodpecker, 198, 199.
on red-shafted flicker, 291, 292.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 168.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 133.
Belding, Lyman, 222, 258, 299.
on Cabanis’s woodpecker, 34.
Bendire, C. E., on Alaska three-toed woodpecker, 123.
on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 109, 112.
on Arizona woodpecker, 93.
on Batchelder’s woodpecker, 51.
on Cabanis’s Woodpecker, 34.
on cactus woodpecker, 84, 86.
on California woodpecker, 213, 218, 220, 221.
on Chihuahua woodpecker, 40.
on eastern hairy woodpecker, 16, 20.
on Florida pileated woodpecker, 191.
on Gila woodpecker, 252, 253, 255.
on golden-fronted woodpecker, 246, 247.
on Harris’s woodpecker, 29, 32.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 5, 6.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 227-230, 233.
on Mearns’s gilded flicker, 302.
on Mearns’s woodpecker, 224.
on Modoc woodpecker, 42, 43.
on northern flicker, 272.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 171, 188.
on northern red-breasted sapsucker, 151-154.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 98, 99, 103.
on northwestern flicker, 296.
on Nuttall’s woodpecker, 87.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 237-240, 243.
on red-headed woodpecker, 196-200, 205.
on red-naped sapsucker, 143-145.
on red-shafted flicker, 288, 293.
on Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker, 36.
on southern hairy woodpecker, 28.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 167.
on western pileated woodpecker, 192.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 157.
on willow woodpecker, 70.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 129, 136, 137.
Beyer, G. E., on ivory-billed woodpecker, 2, 4, 6.
Bicknell, E. P., on northern flicker, 281, 282.
Biological Survey, U. S. Bureau of, viii, 9, 48, 183, 210, 263.
Blackwelder, Eliot, on northern pileated woodpecker, 173.
Blincoe, B. J., on red-bellied woodpecker, 242.
Bolles, Frank, on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 130, 131, 133, 136.
borealis, Dryobates, 72.
Bowdish, B. S., and Philipp, P. B., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker,
107.
on northern hairy woodpecker, 26.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 129.
Bowles, J. H., on northwestern flicker, 298.
Bowles, J. H., and Dawson, W. L., on Gairdner’s woodpecker, 49.
on Harris’s woodpecker, 30, 31, 33.
Brasher, Rex, on eastern hairy woodpecker, 14, 19.
Brewer, T. M. (See under Baird, S. F.)
Brewster, William, on American three-toed woodpecker, 116, 117, 119,
120.
on Brewster’s woodpecker, 258.
on cape gilded flicker, 299.
on downy woodpeckers, 45.
on narrow-fronted woodpecker, 222.
on northern downy woodpecker, 54, 61, 67.
on northern flicker, 269, 271, 275, 279.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 241.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 73.
on San Lucas woodpecker, 82.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 61, 129, 133, 137.
brewsteri, Centurus uropygialis, 257, 258.
Brewster’s woodpecker, 258.
Brooks, Allan, on Alaska three-toed woodpecker, 124.
Brooks, Maurice, on northern pileated woodpecker, 181, 185, 186, 189.
Brown, D. E., on Gairdner’s woodpecker, 49.
on Harris’s woodpecker, 31, 32.
on northwestern flicker, 296, 297.
Brown, Herbert, on Lewis’s woodpecker, 231, 233, 235.
Brown, W. W., Jr., 306, 307.
brunnescens, Colaptes chrysoides, 299, 305.
Bryant, H. C., on California woodpecker, 218.
on western pileated woodpecker, 194.
Bryant, W. A., on northern flicker, 270.
Bryant, W. E., on Guadalupe flicker, 306-308.
on red-shafted flicker, 288.
Bryens, O. M., on northern pileated woodpecker, 182.
Buchheister, C. W., on northern flicker, 272.
Burleigh, T. D., on northern pileated woodpecker, 178.
Burns, F. L., on northern downy woodpecker, 57.
on northern flicker, 264, 265, 269, 270, 272, 277-279, 282,
284-286.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 178.
Burrows, D. B., on golden-fronted woodpecker, 246, 248.
Burtch, Verdi, on eastern hairy woodpecker, 21.
Cabanis’s woodpecker, 33.
cactophilus, Dryobates scalaris, 80, 81, 83.
cafer, Colaptes, 290, 291, 296, 304 (hybrids).
Colaptes cafer, 295, 296.
Picus, 296.
cafer cafer, Colaptes, 295, 296.
cafer collaris, Colaptes, 261, 287, 295, 296, 298.
cafer martirensis, Colaptes, 295, 298.
cafer rufipileus, Colaptes, 295, 299, 306.
cafer saturatior, Colaptes, 296.
California woodpecker, 212.
Campephilus principalis, 1.
Cape gilded flicker, 299.
Cardon woodpecker, 257.
cardonensis, Centurus uropygialis, 257, 258.
carolinus, Centurus, 237.
Carr, R. F., on northern flicker, 281.
Carriger, H. W., 88.
Carriger, H. W., and Wells, Gurnie, on western pileated woodpecker,
192, 193.
Cassin, John, on Williamson’s sapsucker, 155.
(See also under Baird, S. F.)
Catesby, Mark, 164, 259.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 1.
on pileated woodpecker, 171, 184.
Centurus aurifrons, 245.
carolinus, 237.
uropygialis brewsteri, 257, 258.
uropygialis cardonensis, 257, 258.
uropygialis uropygialis, 250, 257, 258.
Ceophloeus pileatus abieticola, 164, 165, 170, 171, 191.
pileatus floridanus, 165, 170, 189.
pileatus picinus, 170, 171, 191.
pileatus pileatus, 164, 171, 189, 192.
Chihuahua woodpecker, 39.
Christy, B. H., viii.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 171.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 239.
chrysoides, Colaptes, 304 (hybrids).
Colaptes chrysoides, 299, 305.
chrysoides brunnescens, Colaptes, 299, 305.
chrysoides chrysoides, Colaptes, 299, 305.
chrysoides mearnsi, Colaptes, 299-301.
Colaptes auratus, 290, 291, 295.
auratus auratus, 259.
auratus luteus, 262-264.
cafer, 290, 291, 296, 304 (hybrid).
cafer cafer, 295, 296.
cafer collaris, 261, 287, 295, 296, 298.
cafer martirensis, 295, 298.
cafer rufipileus, 295, 299, 306.
cafer saturatior, 296.
chrysoides, 304 (hybrids).
chrysoides brunnescens, 299, 305.
chrysoides chrysoides, 299, 305.
chrysoides mearnsi, 299-301.
collaris, Colaptes cafer, 261, 287, 295, 296, 298.
Cooper, J. G., on Williamson’s sapsucker, 155.
Cooper, J. G., and Suckley, George, on Lewis’s woodpecker, 235.
Coues, Elliott, on Williamson’s sapsucker, 160.
Currier, E. S., on Lewis’s woodpecker, 228.
daggetti, Sphyrapicus varius, 140, 146.
Dawson, W. L., on Cabanis’s woodpecker, 34.
on cactus woodpecker, 84, 86.
on California woodpecker, 215, 218, 219, 222.
on Gila woodpecker, 254.
on northern red-breasted sapsucker, 151, 154.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 97, 103.
on Nuttall’s woodpecker, 87-89, 91.
on red-headed woodpecker, 205.
one red-naped sapsucker, 145.
on red-shafted flicker, 289.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 149, 150.
on southern white-headed woodpecker, 105.
on western pileated woodpecker, 193.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 157.
on willow woodpecker, 70.
Dawson, W. L., and Bowles, J. H., on Gairdner’s woodpecker, 49.
on Harris’s woodpecker, 30, 31, 33.
Denton, S. W., on Lewis’s woodpecker, 230.
Dice, L. R., on Batchelder’s woodpecker, 52.
Dingle, Edward, on red-cockaded woodpecker, 76.
Dixon, J. S., 88
on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 114.
on Sitka hairy woodpecker, 41.
(See also under Grinnell, Joseph.)
Doe, C. E., viii.
dorsalis, Picoïdes tridactylus, 122, 124.
Dorsey, G. A., on red-headed woodpecker, 202.
Downy woodpecker, Nelson’s, 68.
northern, 52.
southern, 45.
Dryobates albolarvatus albolarvatus, 97.
albolarvatus gravirostris, 104, 105.
arizonae arizonae, 91.
arizonae fraterculus, 97.
borealis, 72.
homorus, 51.
nuttalli, 87.
Dryobates pubescens gairdneri, 48, 49, 69.
pubescens leucurus, 48, 51.
pubescens medianus, 46, 48, 50, 52, 68.
pubescens nelsoni, 48, 51, 68.
pubescens oreoecus, 51.
pubescens pubescens, 45.
pubescens turati, 48, 49, 69.
scalaris bairdi, 79, 80, 82, 83.
scalaris cactophilus, 80, 81, 83.
scalaris eremicus, 81-83, 86.
scalaris lucasanus, 81, 82, 86, 87.
scalaris scalaris, 81.
scalaris symplectus, 79, 83.
stricklandi, 91, 94.
villosus auduboni, 23, 27.
villosus harrisi, 24, 29, 33, 37, 40, 41.
villosus hyloscopus, 24, 29, 30, 33, 39, 41, 44.
villosus icastus, 24, 39, 44.
villosus leucomelas, 38.
villosus leucothorectis, 24, 33, 39, 41, 44.
villosus monticola, 24, 25, 33, 35, 38, 40, 41, 44.
villosus orius, 24, 33, 39, 41.
villosus picoideus, 24, 37, 40, 41.
villosus scrippsae, 24, 44.
villosus septentrionalis, 23, 25, 35, 40.
villosus sitkensis, 24, 40.
villosus terraenovae, 23, 38.
villosus villosus, 13, 25, 38.
DuBois, A. D., on northern downy woodpecker, 56-59, 61.
on northern flicker, 280.
on red-headed woodpecker, 196-198, 200, 203, 204.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 131.
Duncan, Mrs. Sanford, on southern flicker, 261.
Durfee, Owen, on eastern hairy woodpecker, 14.
on northern flicker, 279.
Dwight, Jonathan, Jr., on northern flicker, 270.
Eastern hairy woodpecker, 13.
Eaton, E. H., on American three-toed woodpecker, 117, 118.
on northern flicker, 282.
on red-headed woodpecker, 195.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 127.
Eckstorm, Fannie H., on red-headed woodpecker, 202.
Eifrig, C. W. G., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 113.
Elliot, E. G., 272.
Emerson, W. O., on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 149.
eremicus, Dryobates scalaris, 81-83, 86.
Erichsen, W. J., on southern flicker, 259.
Errington, P. L., on northern flicker, 286.
erythrocephalus, Melanerpes, 195.
Evermann, B. W., on northern flicker, 272.
Farley, F. L., on northern flicker, 269.
Farley, J. A., on northern flicker, 271.
fasciatus, Picoïdes tridactylus, 122, 124.
Fisher, A. K., 93.
Fisher, W. H., on red-bellied woodpecker, 238, 244.
Fisher, W. K., on willow woodpecker, 69.
Flanagan, J. H., on alpine three-toed woodpecker, 125.
on red-naped sapsucker, 145.
Fleming, J. H., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 108.
Flicker, cape gilded, 299.
Guadalupe, 306.
Mearns’s gilded, 301.
northern, 264.
northwestern, 296.
red-shafted, 287.
San Fernando, 305.
San Pedro, 298.
southern, 259.
Florida pileated woodpecker, 189.
floridanus, Ceophloeus pileatus, 165, 170, 189.
Forbush, E. H., 276.
on American three-toed woodpecker, 119.
on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 111, 114, 115.
on eastern hairy woodpecker, 13, 19, 20, 22.
on northern downy woodpecker, 53, 59, 63.
on northern flicker, 278, 281.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 240.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 131.
formicivora, Balanosphyra formicivora, 211, 222.
formicivora aculeata, Balanosphyra, 211, 212, 223, 226.
formicivora angustifrons, Balanosphyra, 211, 212, 222.
formicivora bairdi, Balanosphyra, 211, 212, 223, 226.
formicivora formicivora, Balanosphyra, 211, 222.
formicivora martirensis, Balanosphyra, 212, 226.
formicivorus, Melanerpes, 223.
Forrest, E. R., viii.
Fowler, F. H., on Arizona woodpecker, 95.
fraterculus, Dryobates arizonae, 97.
Frazar, M. A., 222, 223, 258, 299.
on San Lucas woodpecker, 82.
Fritz, Emanuel, on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 149.
Frost, Allen, viii.
gairdneri, Dryobates pubescens, 48, 49, 69.
Gairdner’s woodpecker, 49.
Gale, Denis, 36, 51.
on Natalie’s sapsucker, 164.
on red-naped sapsucker, 143.
Ganier, A. F., on southern flicker, 260.
Gault, B. T., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 21.
on northern flicker, 284.
on Nuttall’s woodpecker, 87.
Gibbs, Morris, on eastern hairy woodpecker, 20.
Gignoux, Claude, on California woodpecker, 218.
Gila woodpecker, 250.
Gilded flicker, cape, 299.
Mearns’s, 301.
Gillin, J. R., viii.
Gilman, M. F., on Gila woodpecker, 250-256.
on Mearns’s gilded flicker, 301-305.
on red-naped sapsucker, 145.
Golden-fronted woodpecker, 245.
Goldman, E. A., on white-breasted woodpecker, 45.
Goodpasture, A. V., on red-headed woodpecker, 201.
Grant, E. O., on American three-toed woodpecker, 119.
gravirostris, Dryobates albolarvatus, 104, 105.
Grimes, S. A., on red-bellied woodpecker, 239.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 75.
on southern hairy woodpecker, 27.
Grinnell, Joseph, 41.
on Alaska three-toed woodpecker, 123, 124.
on Cabanis’s woodpecker, 33.
on California woodpecker, 218.
on cardon woodpecker, 257.
on Mearns’s gilded flicker, 302, 304.
on red-naped sapsucker, 144, 145.
on San Pedro flicker, 298.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 146.
on southern white-headed woodpecker, 105.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 156, 158.
on willow woodpecker, 71.
Grinnell, Dr. and Mrs. Joseph, on red-shafted flicker, 289.
Grinnell, Joseph, and Anderson, M. P., on Gairdner’s woodpecker, 50.
Grinnell, Joseph; Dixon, J. S.; and Linsdale, J. M., on Arctic
three-toed woodpecker, 112.
on California woodpecker, 212, 219.
on Modoc woodpecker, 41-43.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 99, 100, 102, 103.
on Nuttall’s woodpecker, 90.
on western pileated woodpecker, 192.
on willow woodpecker, 70.
Grinnell, Joseph, and Storer, T. I., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker,
109.
on California woodpecker, 214, 219.
on Modoc woodpecker, 41, 43.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 98, 99, 101, 102, 104.
on red-shafted flicker, 293.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 146, 150.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 159, 160.
on willow woodpecker, 71.
Grinnell, Joseph, and Swarth, H. S., on San Pedro woodpecker, 226.
Griscom, Ludlow, on northern pileated woodpecker, 173.
Guadalupe flicker, 306.
Hairy woodpecker, eastern, 13.
Lower California, 44.
northern, 25.
Rocky Mountain, 35.
Sitka, 40.
southern, 27.
Hamilton, Caroline E., on American three-toed woodpecker, 119.
Hanna, W. C., viii.
Hardy, Manly, on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 112.
Hargitt, Edward, on Arizona woodpecker, 91.
Harllee, H. L., viii.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 74.
on southern flicker, 259.
Harlow, R. C., viii, 123.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 178.
Harper, Francis, and Wright, A. H., on southern pileated woodpecker,
165.
Harris, Edward, 30.
harrisi, Dryobates villosus, 24, 29, 33, 37, 40, 41.
Harris’s woodpecker, 29.
Hartlaub, C. J. G., 51.
Hasbrouck, E. M., on golden-fronted woodpecker, 245, 248.
Helme, A. H., on red-headed woodpecker, 206.
Helton, John, Jr., on red-headed woodpecker, 196.
on southern downy woodpecker, 46.
Hembree, D. V., on red-cockaded woodpecker, 78.
Henderson, Junius, on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 149.
Henshaw, H. W., on Arizona woodpecker, 92, 95.
on California woodpecker, 220.
on Mearns’s woodpecker, 223.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 155.
Hersey, F. S., viii.
Hickey, J. J., viii.
on eastern hairy woodpecker, 23.
on northern flicker, 279.
Hill, S. D., on Lewis’s woodpecker, 232.
Hoffmann, Ralph, on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 113.
on cactus woodpecker, 86.
on California woodpecker, 222.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 234.
on Nuttall’s woodpecker, 90.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 150.
Holland, H. M., on red-headed woodpecker, 204.
Hollister, Ned, on northern flicker, 270.
Hollister, Ned, and Kumlien, Ludwig, on northern flicker, 271.
on red-headed woodpecker, 196.
homorus, Dryobates, 51.
Howard, O. W., 93, 224.
Howell, A. H., on Florida pileated woodpecker, 190, 191.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 237, 238.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 77.
on red-headed woodpecker, 195.
on southern downy woodpecker, 46.
on southern flicker, 259.
on southern hairy woodpecker, 27.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 168.
Hoyt, R. D., on ivory-billed woodpecker, 2, 5, 6, 10, 12.
Huey, L. M., on Lower California hairy woodpecker, 44.
hyloscopus, Dryobates villosus, 24, 29, 30, 33, 39, 41, 44.
icastus, Dryobates villosus, 24, 39, 44.
Ingersoll, A. M., 88.
Ivory-billed woodpecker, 1.
Jacobs, J. W., 269.
Janiec, Joseph, viii.
Jenks, Randolph, on alpine three-toed woodpecker, 125.
Jensen, J. K., on Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker, 36.
Johansen, Melvin, viii.
Jones, Howard, on red-headed woodpecker, 200.
Jones, Lynds, on northern flicker, 281.
Kalm, Pehr, 164.
Keays, J. E., on northern flicker, 285.
Kellogg, P. P., and Allen, A. A., on ivory-billed woodpecker, 3-6, 8,
10, 12.
Kellogg, R. T., 45.
Kennard, F. H., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 114.
on northern flicker, 285.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 139.
King, F. H., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 18.
Klugh, A. B., on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 128.
Knight, O. W., on northern pileated woodpecker, 174, 183.
Kuhn, J. J., on ivory-billed woodpecker, 6, 11.
Kumlien, Ludwig, and Hollister, Ned, on northern flicker, 271.
on red-headed woodpecker, 196.
Kyler, Mrs. J. F., on red-headed woodpecker, 205.
Laing, H. M., and Taverner, P. A., on Alaska three-toed woodpecker,
123.
Latham, John, on pileated woodpecker, 171.
Law, J. E., on Lewis’s woodpecker, 231.
Lawrence, G. N., 79.
(See also under Baird, S. F.)
Leach, F. A., on California woodpecker, 215, 220, 221.
on northern flicker, 267.
leucomelas, Dryobates villosus, 38.
leucothorectis, Dryobates villosus, 24, 33, 39, 41, 44.
leucurus, Dryobates pubescens, 48, 51.
Picus, 51.
lewis, Asyndesmus, 226.
Lewis, H. F., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 107, 112.
Lewis’s woodpecker, 226.
Ligon, J. S., 225.
on white-breasted woodpecker, 45.
Lincoln, F. C, viii.
Linnaeus, C., 164, 171.
Linsdale, J. M. (See under Grinnell, Joseph.)
Lloyd, Hoyes, on northern pileated woodpecker, 189.
Lower California hairy woodpecker, 44.
lucasanus, Dryobates scalaris, 81, 82, 86, 87.
luteus, Colaptes auratus, 262-264.
Lyon, W. I., on northern flicker, 276.
MacFarlane, Roderick, 123.
on northern hairy woodpecker, 26.
Macoun, John, on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 109.
on northern hairy woodpecker, 26.
Malherbe, Alfred, on Natalie’s sapsucker, 162.
Marsden, H. W., 307.
martirensis, Balanosphyra formicivora, 212, 226.
Colaptes cafer, 295, 298.
Maynard, C. J., on northern pileated woodpecker, 191.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 244.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 77.
McAtee, W. L., on red-naped sapsucker, 144.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 148.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 132, 134, 135, 138.
McGregor, R. C., on red-headed woodpecker, 197.
McGuire, N. M., on red-bellied woodpecker, 241.
McIlhenny, E. A., on ivory-billed woodpecker, 4, 5, 8, 11.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 74.
McMullen, T. E., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 15.
Meanley, M. B., Jr., viii.
Mearns, B. A., on alpine three-toed woodpecker, 125.
on Batchelder’s woodpecker, 51.
on Mearns’s woodpecker, 223, 225.
on Natalie’s sapsucker, 162.
on white-breasted woodpecker, 44.
mearnsi, Colaptes chrysoides, 299-301.
Mearns’s gilded flicker, 301.
Mearns’s woodpecker, 223.
medianus, Dryobates pubescens, 46, 48, 50, 52, 68.
Melanerpes angustifrons, 82.
erythrocephalus, 195.
formicivorus, 223.
thyroideus, 155.
Meredith, R. L., viii.
Merriam, C. H., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 108.
on American three-toed woodpecker, 117, 120.
on red-headed woodpecker, 207.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 137.
Merriam, R. O., on northern downy woodpecker, 62.
Merrill, J. C., on Batchelder’s woodpecker, 52.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 101, 103.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 157, 159.
Michael, C. W., on California woodpecker, 217.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 231.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 148.
on western pileated woodpecker, 194.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 156, 158, 160.
on willow woodpecker, 71.
Miller, W. DeW., 173.
Minot, H. D., on northern downy woodpecker, 60.
Modoc woodpecker, 41.
monticola, Dryobates villosus, 24, 25, 33, 35, 38, 40, 41, 44.
Morrell, C. H., on northern pileated woodpecker, 174, 178, 179.
Morse, G. W., on red-cockaded woodpecker, 73.
Mortimer, D., on red-bellied woodpecker, 241.
Moseley, E. L., 9.
Mousley, Henry, on northern hairy woodpecker, 26.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 129.
Munro, J. A., on Alaska three-toed woodpecker, 123.
on Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker, 37.
on western pileated woodpecker, 192, 194.
Murphey, E. E., viii.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 72.
Myers, Harriet W., on California woodpecker, 214.
Narrow-fronted woodpecker, 222.
nataliae, Picus, 162.
Sphyrapicus thyroideus, 162.
Natalie’s sapsucker, 162.
National Association of Audubon Societies, 12.
Nauman, E. D., on red-headed woodpecker, 201, 203.
Neff, J. A., on Gairdner’s woodpecker, 50.
on Harris’s woodpecker, 30, 32.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 227, 232, 233, 235.
on northern red-breasted sapsucker, 151, 153, 154.
on red-shafted flicker, 292.
Nehrling, Henry, on red-cockaded woodpecker, 74.
Nelson, A. L., 183.
Nelson, E. W., on Alaska three-toed woodpecker, 122.
on Nelson’s downy woodpecker, 68.
nelsoni, Dryobates pubescens, 48, 51, 68.
Nelson’s downy woodpecker, 68.
Newberry, J. S., on Williamson’s sapsucker, 155.
Newfoundland woodpecker, 38.
Norris, J. P., on northern flicker, 272.
Northern downy woodpecker, 52.
Northern flicker, 264.
Northern hairy woodpecker, 25.
Northern pileated woodpecker, 171.
Northern red-breasted sapsucker, 151.
Northern white-headed woodpecker, 97.
Northwestern flicker, 296.
nuchalis, Sphyrapicus varius, 140, 141, 146, 151.
Nuttall, Thomas, 62.
on northern downy woodpecker, 53.
on pileated woodpecker, 172.
nuttalli, Dryobates, 87.
Nuttall’s woodpecker, 87.
Nye, A. G., viii.
Nye, Harriet A., on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 139.
Oberholser, H. C., 30, 175.
on Chihuahua woodpecker, 39.
on Dryobates scalaris group of woodpeckers, 79, 83.
on Modoc woodpecker, 41.
on Nelson’s downy woodpecker, 68.
on northern flicker, 271.
on red-headed woodpecker, 196.
on San Fernando woodpecker, 86.
on white-breasted woodpecker, 44.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 128.
Ogilby, Stewart, on northern flicker, 272.
oreoecus, Dryobates pubescens, 51.
orius, Dryobates villosus, 24, 33, 39, 41.
Orr, R. T., viii.
Osgood, W. H., on Queen Charlotte woodpecker, 37.
Owen, V. W., 93.
Palmer, Edward, 306, 307.
Palmer, R. S., viii.
Palmer, William, on northern flicker, 277.
Pearse, Theed, on Harris’s woodpecker, 30.
on northwestern flicker, 297.
Pearson, T. G., on red-cockaded woodpecker, 74.
Pennant, Thomas, on northern pileated woodpecker, 188.
Peterson, R. T., on northern pileated woodpecker, 173.
Phelps, F. M., on red-bellied woodpecker, 239.
Philipp, P. B., 193.
on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 109.
Philipp, P. B., and Bowdish, B. S., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker,
107.
on northern hairy woodpecker, 26.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 129.
Phillips, C. L., 272.
Phinizy, Irving, on red-cockaded woodpecker, 77.
Picidae, 1.
Piciformes, 1.
picinus, Ceophloeus pileatus, 170, 171, 191.
Picoïdes americanus, 108, 119.
arcticus, 106, 118, 119.
tridactylus, 106.
tridactylus bacatus, 116.
tridactylus dorsalis, 122, 124.
tridactylus fasciatus, 122, 124.
picoideus, Dryobates villosus, 24, 37, 40, 41.
Picus arizonae, 91.
cafer, 296.
leucurus, 51.
nataliae, 162.
pileatus, 164.
pubescens, 45.
querulus, 72.
williamsonii, 155.
Pierce, W. M., on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 147.
Pierce, W. M., and Van Rossem, A. J., on northern white-headed
woodpecker, 102.
Pileated woodpecker, Florida, 189.
northern, 171.
southern, 164.
western, 191.
pileatus, Ceophloeus pileatus, 164, 171, 189, 192.
Picus, 164.
pileatus abieticola, Ceophloeus, 164, 165, 170, 171, 191.
pileatus floridanus, Ceophloeus, 165, 170, 189.
pileatus picinus, Ceophloeus, 170, 171, 191.
pileatus pileatus, Ceophloeus, 164, 171, 189, 192.
Pinkley, Frank, on Gila woodpecker, 254.
Potter, J. K., on red-headed woodpecker, 197, 198, 204.
principalis, Campephilus, 1.
pubescens, Dryobates pubescens, 45.
Picus, 45.
pubescens gairdneri, Dryobates, 48, 49, 69.
pubescens leucurus, Dryobates, 48, 51.
pubescens medianus, Dryobates, 46, 48, 50, 52, 68.
pubescens nelsoni, Dryobates, 48, 51, 68.
pubescens oreoecus, Dryobates, 51.
pubescens pubescens, Dryobates, 45.
pubescens turati, Dryobates, 48, 49, 69.
Purdy, J. B., on red-headed woodpecker, 207.
Queen Charlotte woodpecker, 37.
querulus, Picus, 72.
Quillin, R. W., on golden-fronted woodpecker, 248, 249.
Ralph, W. L., on Florida pileated woodpecker, 191.
Rathbun, S. F., on Harris’s woodpecker, 31.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 227, 230, 234.
on northwestern flicker, 297, 298.
Red-bellied woodpecker, 237.
Red-breasted sapsucker, northern, 151.
southern, 146.
Red-cockaded woodpecker, 72.
Red-headed woodpecker, 195.
Red-naped sapsucker, 141.
Red-shafted flicker, 287.
Reid, John, 171.
Richardson, John, and Swainson, William, on Nelson’s downy
woodpecker, 68.
Ridgway, Robert, on Alaska three-toed woodpecker, 122.
on Alpine three-toed woodpecker, 124.
on Batchelder’s woodpecker, 51.
on Brewster’s woodpecker, 258.
on Cabanis’s woodpecker, 33.
on cactus woodpecker, 83.
on Florida pileated woodpecker, 189.
on Gairdner’s woodpecker, 49.
on Guadalupe flicker, 306.
on Harris’s woodpecker, 30.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 2, 7.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 233.
on narrow-fronted woodpecker, 222.
on northern red-breasted sapsucker, 151.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 100.
on Nuttall’s woodpecker, 89.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 245.
on red-headed woodpecker, 208.
on red-naped sapsucker, 142.
on red-shafted flicker, 290.
on Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker, 35.
on San Fernando flicker, 305.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 164.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 146.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 155.
(See also under Baird, S. F.)
Riley, J. H., viii.
Ritter, W. E., on California woodpecker, 216, 217.
Roberts, T. S., on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 109.
on eastern hairy woodpecker, 19.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 176.
on red-headed woodpecker, 202.
Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker, 35.
Rossignol, G. R., on red-cockaded woodpecker, 74.
ruber, Sphyrapicus varius, 140, 146, 151.
rufipileus, Colaptes cafer, 295, 299, 306.
Sampson, Elizabeth, on northern downy woodpecker, 64.
San Fernando flicker, 305.
San Fernando woodpecker, 86.
San Lucas woodpecker, 82.
San Pedro flicker, 298.
San Pedro woodpecker, 226.
Sapsucker, Natalie’s 162.
northern red-breasted, 151.
red-naped, 141.
southern red-breasted, 146.
Williamson’s, 154.
yellow-bellied, 126.
saturatior, Colaptes cafer, 296.
Saunders, A. A., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 20.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 187.
on Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker, 36.
Saunders, W. E., on red-bellied woodpecker, 244.
Savage, James, 286.
scalaris, Dryobates scalaris, 81.
scalaris bairdi, Dryobates, 79, 80, 82, 83.
scalaris cactophilus, Dryobates, 80, 81, 83.
scalaris eremicus, Dryobates, 81-83, 86.
scalaris lucasanus, Dryobates, 81, 82, 86, 87.
scalaris scalaris, Dryobates, 81.
scalaris symplectus, Dryobates, 79, 83.
Scott, W. E. D., on Arizona woodpecker, 96.
on cactus woodpecker, 86.
on Gila woodpecker, 256.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 2, 4-6.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 235.
on Mearns’s gilded flicker, 301.
Scoville, Samuel, Jr., on northern pileated woodpecker, 172, 178, 187.
scrippsae, Dryobates villosus, 24, 44.
Semple, J. B., on red-headed woodpecker, 206.
Sennett, G. B., on golden-fronted woodpecker, 247.
septentrionalis, Dryobates villosus, 23, 25, 35, 40.
Seton, E. T., on northern hairy woodpecker, 26.
Sharpe, Vernon, Jr., on southern pileated woodpecker, 166, 170.
Shaw, W. T., and Taylor, W. P., on Harris’s woodpecker 32.
on northwestern flicker, 296.
Shelley, L. O., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 14, 21.
on northern downy woodpecker, 55, 56, 61, 65, 66.
on northern flicker, 267, 268, 280.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 174.
on red-headed woodpecker, 203.
Sherman, Althea R., on northern flicker, 268, 273-276, 279, 280.
Sherwood, W. E., on Lewis’s woodpecker, 231.
Simmons, G. F., on golden-fronted woodpecker, 246-248.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 237, 238, 243.
on red-shafted flicker, 293.
on southern downy woodpecker, 46.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 165, 166, 168, 169.
on Texas woodpecker, 80, 81.
Simpson, R. B., on northern pileated woodpecker, 188.
Sinclair, B. H., 270.
Sitka hairy woodpecker, 40.
sitkensis, Dryobates villosus, 24, 40.
Skinner, M. P., on alpine three-toed woodpecker, 125.
on Cabanis’s woodpecker, 35.
on California woodpecker, 213, 218, 219, 221, 222.
on Modoc woodpecker, 42, 43.
on Natalie’s sapsucker, 163, 164.
on northern flicker, 287.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 98, 100.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 243.
on red-headed woodpecker, 201.
on red-naped sapsucker, 142, 145.
on red-shafted flicker, 288.
on Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker, 36.
on southern downy woodpecker, 46.
on southern hairy woodpecker, 28, 29.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 148, 150.
on willow woodpecker, 72.
Smith, A. P., on Arizona woodpecker, 95.
Smith, C. F., on northern white-headed woodpecker, 97, 100, 102.
Smith, F. R., on northern flicker, 280.
Smith, L. W., on northern flicker, 283.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 242.
on southern flicker, 261.
Smith, W. G., on Batchelder’s woodpecker, 52.
on Natalie’s sapsucker, 163.
on red-headed woodpecker, 199.
on Rocky Mountain hairy woodpecker, 36.
Snyder, L. L., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 16.
on northern downy woodpecker, 58.
on northern flicker, 285.
Southern downy woodpecker, 45.
Southern flicker, 259.
Southern hairy woodpecker, 27.
Southern pileated woodpecker, 164.
Southern red-breasted sapsucker, 146.
Southern white-headed woodpecker, 105.
Sphyrapicus thyroideus nataliae, 162.
thyroideus thyroideus, 154, 162.
varius daggetti, 140, 146.
varius nuchalis, 140, 141, 146, 151.
varius ruber, 140, 146, 151.
varius varius, 126.
williamsonii, 155.
Sprot, G. D., 31.
Sprunt, Alexander, Jr., on northern white-headed woodpecker, 102.
on southern flicker, 260.
Stanwood, Cordelia J., viii.
Starr, F. A. E., on northern flicker, 270.
Stearns, W. A., on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 133.
Steele, E. S., on Mearns’s woodpecker, 225.
Stephens, Frank, 34.
on southern white-headed woodpecker, 105.
Stevens, O. A., on northern flicker, 284, 286.
Stockard, C. R., on red-bellied woodpecker, 239.
on southern flicker, 260.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 165, 167.
Stoddard, H. L., 169.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 181.
Stone, Witmer, on red-cockaded woodpecker, 79.
Stoner, Dayton, on northern flicker, 281.
on red-headed woodpecker, 206.
Stoner, E. A., on red-headed woodpecker, 196.
Storer, T. I., and Grinnell, Joseph, on Arctic three-toed woodpecker,
109.
on California woodpecker, 214, 219.
on Modoc woodpecker, 41-43.
on northern white-headed woodpecker, 98, 99, 101, 102, 104.
on red-shafted flicker, 293.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 146, 150.
on Williamson’s sapsucker, 159, 160.
on willow woodpecker, 71.
stricklandi, Dryobates, 91, 94.
Stuart, G. H., 3d, viii.
Suckley, George, and Cooper, J. G., on Lewis’s woodpecker, 235.
Suthard, J. G., on southern hairy woodpecker, 28.
Sutton, G. M., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 13, 15.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 174, 175, 183, 185-188.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 128.
Swainson, William, and Richardson, John, on Nelson’s downy
woodpecker, 68.
Swales, B. H., and Taverner, P. A., on northern flicker, 285.
Swarth, H. S., 162.
on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 109.
on Arizona woodpecker, 92-94, 96.
on cactus woodpecker, 84.
on Chihuahua woodpecker, 39, 40.
on Mearns’s woodpecker, 224.
on Natalie’s sapsucker, 162, 163.
on northern red-breasted sapsucker, 151.
on northwestern flicker, 297.
Swarth, H. S., and Grinnell, Joseph, on San Pedro woodpecker, 226.
symplectus, Dryobates scalaris, 79, 83.
Taber, S. R., on northern flicker, 284.
Taber, Wendell, viii.
on American three-toed woodpecker, 120.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 128.
Tanner, James, 12.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 2, 5-7, 11.
Taverner, P. A., and Laing, H. M., on Alaska three-toed woodpecker,
123.
Taverner, P. A., and Swales, B. H., on northern flicker, 285.
Taylor, W. P., on red-shafted flicker, 289.
Taylor, W. P., and Shaw, W. T., on Harris’s woodpecker, 32.
on northwestern flicker, 296.
terraenovae, Dryobates villosus, 23, 38.
Terrill, L. M., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 22.
Texas woodpecker, 79.
Thayer, J. E., 118.
Thayer, J. E., and Bangs, Outram, on Guadalupe flicker, 307.
Thompson, A. E., viii.
Thompson, Maurice, on eastern hairy woodpecker, 19.
on ivory-billed woodpecker, 5, 8, 11.
on northern downy woodpecker, 65.
Thorns, C. S., on northern downy woodpecker, 57.
Thoreau, H. D., on northern pileated woodpecker, 184.
Three-toed woodpecker, Alaska, 122.
alpine, 124.
American, 116.
Arctic, 106.
thyroideus, Melanerpes, 155.
Sphyrapicus thyroideus, 154, 162.
thyroideus nataliae, Sphyrapicus, 162.
thyroideus thyroideus, Sphyrapicus, 154, 162.
Tibbets, E. R., on northern downy woodpecker, 59.
Townsend, C. W., on northern downy woodpecker, 62, 63, 68.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 180.
Treganza, Antwonet, 126.
tridactylus, Picoïdes, 106.
tridactylus bacatus, Picoïdes, 116.
tridactylus dorsalis, Picoïdes, 122, 124.
tridactylus fasciatus, Picoïdes, 122, 124.
Trotter, Spencer, on red-headed woodpecker, 195.
turati, Dryobates pubescens, 48, 49, 69.
Turner, L. M., on American three-toed woodpecker, 119.
Tyler, J. G., on red-shafted flicker, 293.
Tyler, W. M., viii.
on northern downy woodpecker, 52.
on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 126.
uropygialis, Centurus uropygialis, 250, 257, 258.
uropygialis brewsteri, Centurus, 257, 258.
uropygialis cardonensis, Centurus, 257, 258.
uropygialis uropygialis, Centurus, 250, 257, 258.
Vaiden, M. G., on red-cockaded woodpecker, 73.
on red-headed woodpecker, 196.
on southern downy woodpecker, 46.
on southern hairy woodpecker, 28.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 166.
Van Rossem, A. J., and Pierce, W. M., on northern white-headed
woodpecker, 102.
Van Tyne, Josselyn, on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 114, 115.
varius, Sphyrapicus varius, 126.
varius daggetti, Sphyrapicus, 140, 146.
varius nuchalis, Sphyrapicus, 140, 141, 146, 151.
varius ruber, Sphyrapicus, 140, 146, 151.
varius varius, Sphyrapicus, 126.
Vickers, E. W., on northern, pileated woodpecker, 175, 182, 187.
villosus, Dryobates villosus, 13, 25, 38.
villosus auduboni, Dryobates, 23, 27.
villosus harrisi, Dryobates, 24, 29, 33, 37, 40, 41.
villosus hyloscopus, Dryobates, 24, 29, 30, 33, 39, 41, 44.
villosus icastus, Dryobates, 24, 39, 44.
villosus leucomelas, Dryobates, 38.
villosus leucothorectis, Dryobates, 24, 33, 39, 41, 44.
villosus monticola, Dryobates, 24, 25, 33, 35, 38, 40, 41, 44.
villosus orius, Dryobates, 24, 33, 39, 41.
villosus picoideus, Dryobates, 24, 37, 40, 41.
villosus scrippsae, Dryobates, 24, 44.
villosus septentrionalis, Dryobates, 23, 25, 35, 40.
villosus sitkensis, Dryobates, 24, 40.
villosus terraenovae, Dryobates, 23, 38.
villosus villosus, Dryobates, 13, 25, 38.
von Bloeker, J. C., Jr., on red-shafted flicker, 292.
Walkinshaw, L. H., on northern flicker, 286.
Walter, Mrs. Alice H., on northern downy woodpecker, 57, 59.
Ward, Billy, on red-cockaded woodpecker, 76.
Warren, B. H., 168.
on red-bellied woodpecker, 241.
Warren, E. R., on alpine three-toed woodpecker, 125.
Wayne, A. T., on ivory-billed woodpecker, 12.
on red-cockaded woodpecker, 73.
on red-headed woodpecker, 208.
on southern hairy woodpecker, 27.
on southern pileated woodpecker, 165, 166.
Webster, F. M., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 17.
Webster, Mrs. L. J., viii.
Welch, G. O., 115.
Wells, Gurnie, and Carriger, H. W., on western pileated woodpecker,
192, 193.
Western pileated woodpecker, 191.
Weydemeyer, Winton, on yellow-bellied sapsucker, 131.
Weydemeyer, Winton and Donald, on alpine three-toed woodpecker, 124.
on Arctic three-toed woodpecker, 107.
on Batchelder’s woodpecker, 51.
on Lewis’s woodpecker, 227, 228.
on northern hairy woodpecker, 25, 27.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 172.
on red-naped sapsucker, 142, 143.
on red-shafted flicker, 287.
Weygandt, Cornelius, on northern pileated woodpecker, 186.
Wheelock, Mrs. Irene G., on Cabanis’s woodpecker, 34.
on red-shafted flicker, 289, 290.
on southern red-breasted sapsucker, 147.
on western pileated woodpecker, 193.
White-breasted woodpecker, 44.
White-headed woodpecker, northern, 97.
Whittle, C. L., on American three-toed woodpecker, 117.
Widmann, Otto, on red-headed woodpecker, 205.
Willard, F. C., 39, 224, 251, 302.
on Arizona woodpecker, 93.
on cactus woodpecker, 85.
on Chihuahua woodpecker, 40.
on Gila woodpecker, 252.
williamsonii, Picus, 155.
Sphyrapicus, 155.
Williamson’s sapsucker, 154.
Willow woodpecker, 69.
Wilson, Alexander, 62, 72.
on northern downy woodpecker, 53, 65.
on pileated woodpecker, 172, 179.
on red-headed woodpecker, 206.
Wood, J. C., on eastern hairy woodpecker, 15.
Woodpecker, Alaska three-toed, 122.
alpine three-toed, 124.
American three-toed, 116.
ant-eating, 211.
Arctic three-toed, 106.
Arizona, 91.
Batchelder’s, 51.
Brewster’s, 258.
Cabanis’s, 33.
California, 212.
cardon, 257.
Chihuahua, 39.
eastern hairy, 13.
Florida pileated, 189.
Gairdner’s, 49.
Gila, 250.
golden-fronted, 245.
Harris’s, 29.
ivory-billed, 1.
Lewis’s, 226.
Lower California hairy, 44.
Mearns’s, 223.
Modoc, 41.
narrow-fronted, 222.
Nelson’s downy, 68.
Newfoundland, 38.
northern downy, 52.
northern hairy, 25.
northern pileated, 171.
northern white-headed, 97.
Nuttall’s, 87.
Queen Charlotte, 37.
red-bellied, 237.
red-cockaded, 72.
red-headed, 195.
Rocky Mountain hairy, 35.
San Fernando, 86.
San Lucas, 82.
San Pedro, 226.
Sitka hairy, 40.
southern downy, 45.
southern hairy, 27.
southern pileated, 164.
southern white-headed, 105.
Texas, 79.
western pileated, 191.
white-breasted, 44.
willow, 69.
Woodpeckers, American, 1.
Woods, R. S., on red-shafted flicker, 292.
Wright, A. H., and Harper, Francis, on southern pileated woodpecker,
165.
Wright, H. W., on American three-toed woodpecker, 120.
on California woodpecker, 221.
on northern pileated woodpecker, 187.
Wythe, Miss M. W., viii.
Xenopicus albolarvatus, 101, 105.
Yellow-bellied sapsucker, 126.
Young, C. J., on northern hairy woodpecker, 26.
PLATES
[Illustrations: PLATE 1
Louisiana, April 12, 1935. A. A. Allen.
NESTING SITE OF THE IVORY-BILLED WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 2
Louisiana, April 12, 1935. A. A. Allen.
IVORY-BILLED WOODPECKERS AT THEIR NEST.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 3
Rehoboth, Mass., May 10, 1907. Owen Durfee.
Nesting site.
A. A. Allen.
Adult at nest.
EASTERN HAIRY WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 4
Vancouver Island, British Columbia, May 23, 1928.
Adult at nest.
G. D. Sprot.
Nesting site.
HARRIS’S WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 5
Oregon. W. L. Finley and H. T. Bohlman.
YOUNG HARRIS’S WOODPECKER.
Duval County, Fla., May 13, 1931. S. A. Grimes.
YOUNG SOUTHERN HAIRY WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 6
Huachuca Mountains, Ariz., May 15, 1922.
A. C. Bent.
NESTING SITES OF CHIHUAHUA WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustration: PLATE 7
Logan County, Ill., June 10, 1913. A. D. DuBois.
Nestling looking out and adult with food.
NORTHERN DOWNY WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 8
Ithaca, N. Y. A. A. Allen.
EGGS AND YOUNG OF NORTHERN DOWNY WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 9
Duval County, Fla.
S. A. Grimes.
NESTING SITES OF RED-COCKADED WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 10
A. A. Allen.
Adult at nest.
Duval County, Fla., May 17, 1933. S. A. Grimes.
Adult at nest.
RED-COCKADED WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 11
San Diego County, Calif., April 9, 1929. A. C. Bent.
Nesting site.
W. L. and Irene Finley.
Adult at nest.
NUTTALL’S WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 12
Riverside County, Calif. W. M. Pierce.
Nest.
W. L. and Irene Finley.
Young.
NUTTALL’S WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustration: PLATE 13
Jackson County, Oreg., May 10, 1931.
J. E. Patterson.
NESTING OF NORTHERN WHITE-HEADED WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 14
Tuolumne County, Calif., June 28, 1936. C. F. Smith.
YOUNG NORTHERN WHITE-HEADED WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 15
Klamath County, Oreg., June 10, 1929. J. E. Patterson.
Jackson County, Oreg., May 27, 1928. J. E. Patterson.
NESTING OF ARCTIC THREE-TOED WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 16
Penobscot County, Maine, June 4, 1918. F. H. Kennard.
Nesting site.
New Brunswick. B. S. Bowdish.
Female at nest.]
ARCTIC THREE-TOED WOODPECKER.
[Illustrations: PLATE 17
Lake Umbagog, Maine, June 4, 1897.
William Brewster.
NESTING SITE OF AMERICAN THREE-TOED WOODPECKER.
[Illustrations: PLATE 18
A. C. Bent.
Nesting site.
Lake Winnipegosis, Manitoba, June 1, 1913. H. K. Job.
Adult at nest.
YELLOW-BELLIED SAPSUCKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 19
New Brunswick. B. S. Bowdish.
Ithaca, N. Y. A. A. Allen.
YELLOW-BELLIED SAPSUCKERS.]
[Illustration: PLATE 20
Carver County, Minn., May 29, 1926. A. D. DuBois.
NESTING SITE OF NORTHERN PILEATED WOODPECKER.]
[Illustration: PLATE 21
Carver County, Minn., May 8, 1936. A. D. DuBois.
WORK OF NORTHERN PILEATED WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 22
Carver County, Minn., June 15, 1936.
Feeding young.
A. D. DuBois.
The entrance hole.
NORTHERN PILEATED WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 23
Near Belvidere, Alberta, June 19, 1924. R. H. Rauch.
Adult at nest.
Coos County, N. H., May 18, 1903. Owen Durfee.
Nesting site.
NORTHERN PILEATED WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 24
Ithaca, N. Y. A. A. Allen.
Approaching the nest.
Hennepin County, Minn., June 9, 1929. S. A. Grimes.
Young.
NORTHERN PILEATED WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustration: PLATE 25
Fredericktown, Pa., July 18, 1930. F. R. Smith.
Hennepin County, Minn., July 20, 1935. A. D. DuBois.
NESTING OF RED-HEADED WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 26
Ithaca, N. Y. A. A. Allen.
NESTING OF RED-HEADED WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 27
Baltimore County, Md., June 26, 1936. M. B. Meanley, Jr.
Duval County, Fla., July 6, 1925. S. A. Grimes.
YOUNG RED-HEADED WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 28
Huachuca Mountains, Ariz. F. C. Willard.
NESTING SITE OF MEARNS’S WOODPECKER.]
Riverside County, Calif. W. M. Pierce.
WORK OF CALIFORNIA WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 29
W. L. Finley and H. T. Bohlman.
YOUNG LEWIS’S WOODPECKERS.
Jefferson County, Colo. R. B. Rockwell.
FEMALE NATALIE’S SAPSUCKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 30
Duval County, Fla.
S. A. Grimes.
NESTING SITES OF RED-BELLIED WOODPECKERS.]
[Illustration: PLATE 31
F. N. Irving.
RED-BELLIED WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 32
Pima County, Ariz. F. C. Willard.
Nesting site.
Arizona. W. L. and Irene Finley.
Female at nest.
GILA WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 33
Sacaton, Ariz.
Nest cut open.
M. F. Gilman.
Old hardened cavity removed.
GILA WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 34
Oracle, Ariz., December 9, 1903. E. R. Forrest.
Adult male.
W. L. and Irene Finley.
Adult female.
GILA WOODPECKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 35
F. N. Irving.
Adult male.
St. Cloud, Fla. A. A. Allen.
Nest in palmetto stub.
SOUTHERN FLICKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 36
Brunswick, Maine, June 18, 1932. R. S. Palmer.
Nestling 26 hours old.
Illinois. Cordelia J. Stanwood.
Nestling almost ready to leave the nest.
NORTHERN FLICKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 37
Mulino, Oreg., December 10, 1913. Alexander Walker.
Adult male.
Klamath County, Oreg., May 10, 1934. J. E. Patterson.
Nest.
RED-SHAFTED FLICKER.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 38
W. L. Finley and H. T. Bohlman.
Adult female.
Young just out of the nest.
NORTHWESTERN FLICKERS.]
[Illustrations: PLATE 39
Pima County, Ariz. F. C. Willard.
Nesting site.
Sacaton, Ariz. M. F. Gilman.
Nest cut open.
MEARNS’S GILDED FLICKER.]
A CATALOGUE OF SELECTED DOVER BOOKS IN ALL FIELDS OF INTEREST
A CATALOGUE OF SELECTED DOVER BOOKS IN ALL FIELDS OF INTEREST
CONDITIONED REFLEXES, Ivan P. Pavlov. Full translation of most
complete statement of Pavlov’s work; cerebral damage, conditioned
reflex, experiments with dogs, sleep, similar topics of great
importance. 430pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 60614-7 Pa. $4.50
NOTES ON NURSING: WHAT IT IS, AND WHAT IT IS NOT, Florence
Nightingale. Outspoken writings by founder of modern nursing. When
first published (1860) it played an important role in much needed
revolution in nursing. Still stimulating. 140pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
22340-X Pa. $3.00
HARTER’S PICTURE ARCHIVE FOR COLLAGE AND ILLUSTRATION, Jim Harter.
Over 300 authentic, rare 19th-century engravings selected by noted
collagist for artists, designers, decoupeurs, etc. Machines, people,
animals, etc., printed one side of page. 25 scene plates for
backgrounds. 6 collages by Harter, Satty, Singer, Evans.
Introduction. 192pp. 8⅞ x 11¾. 23659-5 Pa. $5.00
MANUAL OF TRADITIONAL WOOD CARVING, edited by Paul N. Hasluck.
Possibly the best book in English on the craft of wood carving.
Practical instructions, along with 1,146 working drawings and
photographic illustrations. Formerly titled _Cassell’s Wood
Carving_. 576pp. 6½ x 9¼. 23489-4 Pa. $7.95
THE PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICE OF HAND OR SIMPLE TURNING, John Jacob
Holtzapffel. Full coverage of basic lathe techniques--history and
development, special apparatus, softwood, turning, hardwood turning,
metal turning. Many projects--billiard ball, works formed within a
sphere, egg cups, ash trays, vases, jardiniers, others--included.
1881 edition. 800 illustrations. 592pp. 6⅛ x 9¼.
23365-0 Clothbd. $15.00
THE JOY OF HANDWEAVING, Osma Tod. Only book you need for hand
weaving. Fundamentals, threads, weaves, plus numerous projects for
small board-loom, two-harness, tapestry, laid-in, four-harness
weaving and more. Over 160 illustrations. 2nd revised edition.
352pp. 6½ x 9¼. 23458-4 Pa. $6.00
THE BOOK OF WOOD CARVING, Charles Marshall Sayers. Still finest book
for beginning student in wood sculpture. Noted teacher, craftsman
discusses fundamentals, technique; gives 34 designs, over 34
projects for panels, bookends, mirrors, etc. “Absolutely
first-rate”--E. J. Tangerman. 33 photos. 118pp. 7¾ x 10⅝.
23654-4 Pa. $3.50
PRINCIPLES OF ORCHESTRATION, Nikolay Rimsky-Korsakov. Great
classical orchestrator provides fundamentals of tonal resonance,
progression of parts, voice and orchestra, tutti effects, much else
in major document. 330pp. of musical excerpts. 489pp. 6½ x 9¼.
21266-1 Pa. $7.50
TRISTAN UND ISOLDE, Richard Wagner. Full orchestral score with
complete instrumentation. Do not confuse with piano reduction.
Commentary by Felix Mottl, great Wagnerian conductor and scholar.
Study score. 655pp. 8⅛ x 11. 22915-7 Pa. $13.95
REQUIEM IN FULL SCORE, Giuseppe Verdi. Immensely popular with choral
groups and music lovers. Republication of edition published by C. F.
Peters, Leipzig, n. d. German frontmaker in English translation.
Glossary. Text in Latin. Study score. 204pp. 9⅜ x 12¼.
23682-X Pa. $6.00
COMPLETE CHAMBER MUSIC FOR STRINGS, Felix Mendelssohn. All of
Mendelssohn’s chamber music: Octet, 2 Quintets, 6 Quartets, and Four
Pieces for String Quartet. (Nothing with piano is included).
Complete works edition (1874-7). Study score. 283 pp. 9⅜ x 12¼.
23679-X Pa. $7.50
POPULAR SONGS OF NINETEENTH-CENTURY AMERICA, edited by Richard
Jackson. 64 most important songs: “Old Oaken Bucket,” “Arkansas
Traveler,” “Yellow Rose of Texas,” etc. Authentic original sheet
music, full introduction and commentaries. 290pp. 9 x 12.
23270-0 Pa. $7.95
COLLECTED PIANO WORKS, Scott Joplin. Edited by Vera Brodsky
Lawrence. Practically all of Joplin’s piano works--rags, two-steps,
marches, waltzes, etc., 51 works in all. Extensive introduction by
Rudi Blesh. Total of 345pp. 9 x 12. 23106-2 Pa. $14.95
BASIC PRINCIPLES OF CLASSICAL BALLET, Agrippina Vaganova. Great
Russian theoretician, teacher explains methods for teaching
classical ballet; incorporates best from French, Italian, Russian
schools. 118 illustrations. 175pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 22036-2 Pa. $2.50
CHINESE CHARACTERS, L. Wieger. Rich analysis of 2300 characters
according to traditional systems into primitives.
Historical-semantic analysis to phonetics (Classical Mandarin) and
radicals. 820pp. 6⅛ x 9¼. 21321-8 Pa. $10.00
EGYPTIAN LANGUAGE: EASY LESSONS IN EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPHICS, E. A.
Wallis Budge. Foremost Egyptologist offers Egyptian grammar,
explanation of hieroglyphics, many reading texts, dictionary of
symbols. 246pp. 5 x 7½. (Available in U.S. only)
21394-3 Clothbd. $7.50
AN ETYMOLOGICAL DICTIONARY OF MODERN ENGLISH, Ernest Weekley.
Richest, fullest work, by foremost British lexicographer. Detailed
word histories. Inexhaustible. Do not confuse this with _Concise
Etymological Dictionary_, which is abridged. Total of 856pp. 6½ x
9¼. 21873-2, 21874-0 Pa., Two-vol. set $12.00
HISTORY OF BACTERIOLOGY, William Bulloch. The only comprehensive
history of bacteriology from the beginnings through the 19th
century. Special emphasis is given to biography--Leeuwenhoek, etc.
Brief accounts of 350 bacteriologists form a separate section. No
clearer, fuller study, suitable to scientists and general readers,
has yet been written. 52 illustrations. 448pp. 5⅝ × 8¼.
23761-3 Pa. $6.50
THE COMPLETE NONSENSE OF EDWARD LEAR, Edward Lear. All nonsense
limericks, zany alphabets, Owl and Pussycat, songs, nonsense botany,
etc., illustrated by Lear. Total of 321pp. 5⅜ × 8½. (Available in
U.S. only) 20167-8 Pa. $3.95
INGENIOUS MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS AND METHODS, Louis A. Graham.
Sophisticated material from Graham _Dial_, applied and pure;
stresses solution methods. Logic, number theory, networks,
inversions, etc. 237pp. 5⅜ × 8½. 20545-2 Pa. $4.50
BEST MATHEMATICAL PUZZLES OF SAM LOYD, edited by Martin Gardner.
Bizarre, original, whimsical puzzles by America’s greatest puzzler.
From fabulously rare _Cyclopedia_, including famous 14-15 puzzles,
the Horse of a Different Color, 115 more. Elementary math. 150
illustrations. 167pp. 5⅜ × 8½. 20498-7 Pa. $2.75
THE BASIS OF COMBINATION IN CHESS, J. du Mont. Easy-to-follow,
instructive book on elements of combination play, with chapters on
each piece and every powerful combination team--two knights, bishop
and knight, rook and bishop, etc. 250 diagrams. 218pp. 5⅜ × 8½.
(Available in U.S. only) 23644-7 Pa. $3.50
MODERN CHESS STRATEGY, Ludek Pachman. The use of the queen, the
active king, exchanges, pawn play, the center, weak squares, etc.
Section on rook alone worth price of the book. Stress on the
moderns. Often considered the most important book on strategy.
314pp. 5⅜ × 8½. 20290-9 Pa. $4.50
LASKER’S MANUAL OF CHESS, Dr. Emanuel Lasker. Great world champion
offers very thorough coverage of all aspects of chess. Combinations,
position play, openings, end game, aesthetics of chess, philosophy
of struggle, much more. Filled with analyzed games. 390pp. 5⅜ × 8½.
20640-8 Pa. $5.00
500 MASTER GAMES OF CHESS, S. Tartakower, J. du Mont. Vast
collection of great chess games from 1798-1938, with much material
nowhere else readily available. Fully annoted, arranged by opening
for easier study. 664pp. 5⅜ × 8½. 23208-5 Pa. $7.50
A GUIDE TO CHESS ENDINGS, Dr. Max Euwe, David Hooper. One of the
finest modern works on chess endings. Thorough analysis of the most
frequently encountered endings by former world champion. 331
examples, each with diagram. 248pp. 5⅜ × 8½. 23332-4 Pa. $3.75
UNCLE SILAS, J. Sheridan LeFanu. Victorian Gothic mystery novel,
considered by many best of period, even better than Collins or
Dickens. Wonderful psychological terror. Introduction by Frederick
Shroyer. 436pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 21715-9 Pa. $6.00
JURGEN, James Branch Cabell. The great erotic fantasy of the 1920’s
that delighted thousands, shocked thousands more. Full final text,
Lane edition with 13 plates by Frank Pape. 346pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
23507-6 Pa. $4.50
THE CLAVERINGS, Anthony Trollope. Major novel, chronicling aspects
of British Victorian society, personalities. Reprint of Cornhill
serialization, 16 plates by M. Edwards; first reprint of full text.
Introduction by Norman Donaldson. 412pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 23464-9 Pa. $5.00
KEPT IN THE DARK, Anthony Trollope. Unusual short novel about
Victorian morality and abnormal psychology by the great English
author. Probably the first American publication. Frontispiece by Sir
John Millais. 92pp. 6½ x 9¼. 23609-9 Pa. $2.50
RALPH THE HEIR, Anthony Trollope. Forgotten tale of illegitimacy,
inheritance. Master novel of Trollope’s later years. Victorian
country estates, clubs, Parliament, fox hunting, world of fully
realized characters. Reprint of 1871 edition. 12 illustrations by F.
A. Faser. 434pp. of text. 5⅜ x 8½. 23642-0 Pa. $5.00
YEKL and THE IMPORTED BRIDEGROOM AND OTHER STORIES OF THE NEW YORK
GHETTO, Abraham Cahan. Film _Hester Street_ based on _Yekl_ (1896).
Novel, other stories among first about Jewish immigrants of N.Y.’s
East Side. Highly praised by W. D. Howells--Cahan “a new star of
realism.” New introduction by Bernard G. Richards. 240pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
22427-9 Pa. $3.50
THE HIGH PLACE, James Branch Cabell. Great fantasy writer’s
enchanting comedy of disenchantment set in 18th-century France.
Considered by some critics to be even better than his famous
_Jurgen_. 10 illustrations and numerous vignettes by noted fantasy
artist Frank C. Pape. 320pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 23670-6 Pa. $4.00
ALICE’S ADVENTURES UNDER GROUND, Lewis Carroll. Facsimile of ms.
Carroll gave Alice Liddell in 1864. Different in many ways from
final Alice. Handlettered, illustrated by Carroll. Introduction by
Martin Gardner. 128pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 21482-6 Pa. $2.50
FAVORITE ANDREW LANG FAIRY TALE BOOKS IN MANY COLORS, Andrew Lang.
The four Lang favorites in a boxed set--the complete _Red_, _Green_,
_Yellow_ and _Blue_ Fairy Books. 164 stories; 439 illustrations by
Lancelot Speed, Henry Ford and G. P. Jacomb Hood. Total of about
1500pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 23407-X Boxed set, Pa. $15.95
THE CURVES OF LIFE, Theodore A. Cook. Examination of shells, leaves,
horns, human body, art, etc., in “_the_ classic reference on how the
golden ratio applies to spirals and helices in nature....”--Martin
Gardner. 426 illustrations. Total of 512pp. 5⅜ × 8½.
23701-X Pa. $5.95
AN ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF THE NORTHERN UNITED STATES AND CANADA,
Nathaniel L. Britton, Addison Brown. Encyclopedic work covers 4666
species, ferns on up. Everything. Full botanical information,
illustration for each. This earlier edition is preferred by many to
more recent revisions. 1913 edition. Over 4000 illustrations, total
of 2087pp. 6⅛ × 9¼.
22642-5, 22643-3, 22644-1 Pa., Three-vol. set $25.50
MANUAL OF THE GRASSES OF THE UNITED STATES, A. S. Hitchcock, U.S.
Dept. of Agriculture. The basic study of American grasses, both
indigenous and escapes, cultivated and wild. Over 1400 species. Full
descriptions, information. Over 1100 maps, illustrations. Total of
1051pp. 5⅜ × 8½. 22717-0, 22718-9 Pa., Two-vol. set $15.00
THE CACTACEAE, Nathaniel L. Britton, John N. Rose. Exhaustive,
definitive. Every cactus in the world. Full botanical descriptions.
Thorough statement of nomenclatures, habitat, detailed finding keys.
The one book needed by every cactus enthusiast. Over 1275
illustrations. Total of 1080pp. 8 × 10¼.
21191-6, 21192-4 Clothbd., Two-vol. set $35.00
AMERICAN MEDICINAL PLANTS, Charles F. Millspaugh. Full descriptions,
180 plants covered: history; physical description; methods of
preparation with all chemical constituents extracted; all claimed
curative or adverse effects. 180 full-page plates. Classification
table. 804pp. 6½ × 9¼. 23034-1 Pa. $12.95
A MODERN HERBAL, Margaret Grieve. Much the fullest, most exact, most
useful compilation of herbal material. Gigantic alphabetical
encyclopedia, from aconite to zedoary, gives botanical information,
medical properties, folklore, economic uses, and much else.
Indispensable to serious reader. 161 illustrations. 888pp. 6½ × 9¼.
(Available in U.S. only) 22798-7, 22799-5 Pa., Two-vol. set $13.00
THE HERBAL or GENERAL HISTORY OF PLANTS, John Gerard. The 1633
edition revised and enlarged by Thomas Johnson. Containing almost
2850 plant descriptions and 2705 superb illustrations, Gerard’s
_Herbal_ is a monumental work, the book all modern English herbals
are derived from, the one herbal every serious enthusiast should
have in its entirety. Original editions are worth perhaps $750.
1678pp. 8½ × 12¼. 23147-X Clothbd. $50.00
MANUAL OF THE TREES OF NORTH AMERICA, Charles S. Sargent. The basic
survey of every native tree and tree-like shrub, 717 species in all.
Extremely full descriptions, information on habitat, growth,
locales, economics, etc. Necessary to every serious tree lover. Over
100 finding keys. 783 illustrations. Total of 986pp. 5⅜ × 8½.
20277-1, 20278-X Pa., Two-vol. set $11.00
TONE POEMS, SERIES II: TILL EULENSPIEGELS LUSTIGE STREICHE, ALSO
SPRACH ZARATHUSTRA, AND EIN HELDENLEBEN, Richard Strauss. Three
important orchestral works, including very popular _Till
Eulenspiegel’s Marry Pranks_, reproduced in full score from original
editions. Study score. 315pp. 9⅜ × 12¼. (Available in U.S. only)
23755-9 Pa. $8.95
TONE POEMS, SERIES I: DON JUAN, TOD UND VERKLARUNG AND DON QUIXOTE,
Richard Strauss. Three of the most often performed and recorded
works in entire orchestral repertoire, reproduced in full score from
original editions. Study score. 286pp. 9⅜ × 12¼. (Available in U.S.
only) 23754-0 Pa. $7.50
11 LATE STRING QUARTETS, Franz Joseph Haydn. The form which Haydn
defined and “brought to perfection.” (_Grove’s_). 11 string quartets
in complete score, his last and his best. The first in a projected
series of the complete Haydn string quartets. Reliable modern
Eulenberg edition, otherwise difficult to obtain. 320pp. 8⅜ × 11¼.
(Available in U.S. only) 23753-2 Pa. $7.50
FOURTH, FIFTH AND SIXTH SYMPHONIES IN FULL SCORE, Peter Ilyitch
Tchaikovsky. Complete orchestral scores of Symphony No. 4 in F
Minor, Op. 36; Symphony No. 5 in E Minor, Op. 64; Symphony No. 6 in
B Minor, “Pathetique,” Op. 74. Bretikopf & Hartel eds. Study score.
480pp. 9⅜ × 12¼. 23861-X Pa. $10.95
THE MARRIAGE OF FIGARO: COMPLETE SCORE, Wolfgang A. Mozart. Finest
comic opera ever written. Full score, not to be confused with piano
renderings. Peters edition. Study score. 448pp. 9⅜ × 12¼. (Available
in U.S. only) 23751-6 Pa. $11.95
“IMAGE” ON THE ART AND EVOLUTION OF THE FILM, edited by Marshall
Deutelbaum. Pioneering book brings together for first time 38
groundbreaking articles on early silent films from _Image_ and 263
illustrations newly shot from rare prints in the collection of the
International Museum of Photography. A landmark work. Index. 256pp.
8¼ × 11. 23777-X Pa. $8.95
AROUND-THE-WORLD COOKY BOOK, Lois Lintner Sumption and Marguerite
Lintner Ashbrook. 373 cooky and frosting recipes from 28 countries
(America, Austria, China, Russia, Italy, etc.) include Viennese
kisses, rice wafers, London strips, lady fingers, hony, sugar spice,
maple cookies, etc. Clear instructions. All tested. 38 drawings.
182pp. 5⅜ × 8. 23802-4 Pa. $2.50
THE ART NOUVEAU STYLE, edited by Roberta Waddell. 579 rare
photographs, not available elsewhere, of works in jewelry,
metalwork, glass, ceramics, textiles, architecture and furniture by
175 artists--Mucha, Seguy, Lalique, Tiffany, Gaudin, Hohlwein,
Saarinen, and many others. 288pp. 8⅜ × 11¼. 23515-7 Pa. $6.95
THE COMPLETE WOODCUTS OF ALBRECHT DURER, edited by Dr. W. Kurth. 346
in all: “Old Testament,” “St. Jerome,” “Passion,” “Life of Virgin,”
“Apocalypse,” many others. Introduction by Campbell Dodgson. 285pp.
8½ × 12¼. 21097-9 Pa. $7.50
DRAWINGS OF ALBRECHT DURER, edited by Heinrich Wolfflin. 81 plates
show development from youth to full style. Many favorites; many new.
Introduction by Alfred Werner. 96pp. 8⅛ × 11. 22352-3 Pa. $5.00
THE HUMAN FIGURE, Albrecht Dürer. Experiments in various
techniques--stereometric, progressive proportional, and others. Also
life studies that rank among finest ever done. Complete reprinting
of _Dresden Sketchbook_. 170 plates. 355pp. 8⅜ × 11¼.
21042-1 Pa. $7.95
OF THE JUST SHAPING OF LETTERS, Albrecht Dürer. Renaissance artist
explains design of Roman majuscules by geometry, also Gothic lower
and capitals. Grolier Club edition. 43pp. 7⅞ × 10¾.
21306-4 Pa. $3.00
TEN BOOKS ON ARCHITECTURE, Vitruvius. The most important book ever
written on architecture. Early Roman aesthetics, technology,
classical orders, site selection, all other aspects. Stands behind
everything since. Morgan translation. 331pp. 5⅜ × 8½.
20645-9 Pa. $4.50
THE FOUR BOOKS OF ARCHITECTURE, Andrea Palladio. 16th-century
classic responsible for Palladian movement and style. Covers
classical architectural remains, Renaissance revivals, classical
orders, etc. 1738 Ware English edition. Introduction by A. Placzek.
216 plates. 110pp. of text. 9½ × 12¾. 21308-0 Pa. $10.00
HORIZONS, Norman Bel Geddes. Great industrialist stage designer,
“father of streamlining,” on application of aesthetics to
transportation, amusement, architecture, etc. 1932 prophetic
account; function, theory, specific projects. 222 illustrations.
312pp. 7⅞ × 10¾. 23514-9 Pa. $6.95
FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT’S FALLINGWATER, Donald Hoffmann. Full,
illustrated story of conception and building of Wright’s masterwork
at Bear Run, Pa. 100 photographs of site, construction, and details
of completed structure. 112pp. 9¼ × 10. 23671-4 Pa. $5.50
THE ELEMENTS OF DRAWING, John Ruskin. Timeless classic by great
Victorian; starts with basic ideas, works through more difficult.
Many practical exercises. 48 illustrations. Introduction by Lawrence
Campbell. 228pp. 5⅜ × 8½. 22730-8 Pa. $3.75
GIST OF ART, John Sloan. Greatest modern American teacher, Art
Students League, offers innumerable hints, instructions, guided
comments to help you in painting. Not a formal course. 46
illustrations. Introduction by Helen Sloan. 200pp. 5⅜ × 8½.
23435-5 Pa. $4.00
THE SENSE OF BEAUTY, George Santayana. Masterfully written
discussion of nature of beauty, materials of beauty, form,
expression; art, literature, social sciences all involved. 168pp.
5⅜ x 8½. 20238-0 Pa. $3.00
ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF THE UNDERSTANDING, Benedict Spinoza. Also
contains _Ethics_, _Correspondence_, all in excellent R. Elwes
translation. Basic works on entry to philosophy, pantheism, exchange
of ideas with great contemporaries. 402pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
20250-X Pa. $4.50
THE TRAGIC SENSE OF LIFE, Miguel de Unamuno. Acknowledged
masterpiece of existential literature, one of most important books
of 20th century. Introduction by Madariaga. 367pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
20257-7 Pa. $4.50
THE GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED, Moses Maimonides. Great classic of
medieval Judaism attempts to reconcile revealed religion
(Pentateuch, commentaries) with Aristotelian philosophy. Important
historically, still relevant in problems. Unabridged Friedlander
translation. Total of 473pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 20351-4 Pa. $6.00
THE I CHING (THE BOOK OF CHANGES), translated by James Legge.
Complete translation of basic text plus appendices by Confucius, and
Chinese commentary of most penetrating divination manual ever
prepared. Indispensable to study of early Oriental civilizations, to
modern inquiring reader. 448pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 21062-6 Pa. $5.00
THE EGYPTIAN BOOK OF THE DEAD, E. A. Wallis Budge. Complete
reproduction of Ani’s papyrus, finest ever found. Full hieroglyphic
text, interlinear transliteration, word for word translation, smooth
translation. Basic work, for Egyptology, for modern study of psychic
matters. Total of 533pp. 6½ x 9¼. (Available in U.S. only)
21866-X Pa. $5.95
THE GODS OF THE EGYPTIANS, E. A. Wallis Budge. Never excelled for
richness, fullness: all gods, goddesses, demons, mythical figures of
Ancient Egypt; their legends, rites, incarnations, variations,
powers, etc. Many hieroglyphic texts cited. Over 225 illustrations,
plus 6 color plates. Total of 988pp. 6⅛ x 9¼. (Available in U.S.
only) 22055-9, 22056-7 Pa., Two-vol. set $16.00
THE STANDARD BOOK OF QUILT MAKING AND COLLECTING, Marguerite Ickis.
Full information, full-sized patterns for making 46 traditional
quilts, also 150 other patterns. Quilted cloths, lame, satin quilts,
etc. 483 illustrations. 273pp. 6⅞ x 9⅝. 20582-7 Pa. $4.95
CORAL GARDENS AND THEIR MAGIC, Bronsilaw Malinowski. Classic study
of the methods of tilling the soil and of agricultural rites in the
Trobriand Islands of Melanesia. Author is one of the most important
figures in the field of modern social anthropology. 143
illustrations. Indexes. Total of 911pp. of text. 5⅝ x 8¼. (Available
in U.S. only) 23597-1 Pa. $12.95
ART FORMS IN NATURE, Ernst Haeckel. Multitude of strangely beautiful
natural forms: Radiolaria, Foraminifera, jellyfishes, fungi,
turtles, bats, etc. All 100 plates of the 19th-century
evolutionist’s _Kunstformen der Natur_ (1904). 100pp. 9⅜ x 12¼.
22987-4 Pa. $5.00
CHILDREN: A PICTORIAL ARCHIVE FROM NINETEENTH-CENTURY SOURCES,
edited by Carol Belanger Grafton. 242 rare, copyright-free wood
engravings for artists and designers. Widest such selection
available. All illustrations in line. 119pp. 8⅜ x 11¼.
23694-3 Pa. $4.00
WOMEN: A PICTORIAL ARCHIVE FROM NINETEENTH-CENTURY SOURCES, edited
by Jim Harter. 391 copyright-free wood engravings for artists and
designers selected from rare periodicals. Most extensive such
collection available. All illustrations in line. 128pp. 9 x 12.
23703-6 Pa. $4.50
ARABIC ART IN COLOR, Prisse d’Avennes. From the greatest
ornamentalists of all time--50 plates in color, rarely seen outside
the Near East, rich in suggestion and stimulus. Includes 4 plates on
covers. 46pp. 9⅜ x 12¼. 23658-7 Pa. $6.00
AUTHENTIC ALGERIAN CARPET DESIGNS AND MOTIFS, edited by June
Beveridge. Algerian carpets are world famous. Dozens of geometrical
motifs are charted on grids, color-coded, for weavers,
needleworkers, craftsmen, designers. 53 illustrations plus 4 in
color. 48pp. 8¼ x 11. (Available in U.S. only) 23650-1 Pa. $1.75
DICTIONARY OF AMERICAN PORTRAITS, edited by Hayward and Blanche
Cirker. 4000 important Americans, earliest times to 1905, mostly in
clear line. Politicians, writers, soldiers, scientists, inventors,
industrialists, Indians, Blacks, women, outlaws, etc. Identificatory
information. 756pp. 9¼ x 12¾. 21823-6 Clothbd. $40.00
HOW THE OTHER HALF LIVES, Jacob A. Riis. Journalistic record of
filth, degradation, upward drive in New York immigrant slums, shops,
around 1900. New edition includes 100 original Riis photos,
monuments of early photography. 233pp. 10 x 7⅞. 22012-5 Pa. $7.00
NEW YORK IN THE THIRTIES, Berenice Abbott. Noted photographer’s
fascinating study of city shows new buildings that have become
famous and old sights that have disappeared forever. Insightful
commentary. 97 photographs. 97pp. 11⅜ x 10. 22967-X Pa. $5.00
MEN AT WORK, Lewis W. Hine. Famous photographic studies of
construction workers, railroad men, factory workers and coal miners.
New supplement of 18 photos on Empire State building construction.
New introduction by Jonathan L. Doherty. Total of 69 photos. 63pp.
8 x 10¾. 23475-4 Pa. $3.00
THE DEPRESSION YEARS AS PHOTOGRAPHED BY ARTHUR ROTHSTEIN, Arthur
Rothstein. First collection devoted entirely to the work of
outstanding 1930s photographer: famous dust storm photo, ragged
children, unemployed, etc. 120 photographs. Captions. 119pp.
9¼ x 10¾. 23590-4 Pa. $5.00
CAMERA WORK: A PICTORIAL GUIDE, Alfred Stieglitz. All 559
illustrations and plates from the most important periodical in the
history of art photography, _Camera Work_ (1903-17). Presented four
to a page, reduced in size but still clear, in strict chronological
order, with complete captions. Three indexes. Glossary.
Bibliography. 176pp. 8⅜ x 11¼. 23591-2 Pa. $6.95
ALVIN LANGDON COBURN, PHOTOGRAPHER, Alvin L. Coburn. Revealing
autobiography by one of greatest photographers of 20th century gives
insider’s version of Photo-Secession, plus comments on his own work.
77 photographs by Coburn. Edited by Helmut and Alison Gernsheim.
160pp. 8⅛ x 11. 23685-4 Pa. $6.00
NEW YORK IN THE FORTIES, Andreas Feininger. 162 brilliant
photographs by the well-known photographer, formerly with _Life_
magazine, show commuters, shoppers, Times Square at night, Harlem
nightclub, Lower East Side, etc. Introduction and full captions by
John von Hartz. 181pp. 9¼ x 10¾. 23585-8 Pa. $6.95
GREAT NEWS PHOTOS AND THE STORIES BEHIND THEM, John Faber. Dramatic
volume of 140 great news photos, 1855 through 1976, and revealing
stories behind them, with both historical and technical information.
Hindenburg disaster, shooting of Oswald, nomination of Jimmy Carter,
etc. 160pp. 8¼ x 11. 23667-6 Pa. $5.00
THE ART OF THE CINEMATOGRAPHER, Leonard Martin. Survey of American
cinematography history and anecdotal interviews with 5
masters--Arthur Miller, Hal Mohr, Hal Rosson, Lucien Ballard, and
Conrad Hall. Very large selection of behind-the-scenes production
photos. 105 photographs. Filmographies. Index. Originally _Behind
the Camera_. 144pp. 8¼ x 11. 23686-2 Pa. $5.00
DESIGNS FOR THE THREE-CORNERED HAT (LE TRICORNE), Pablo Picasso. 32
fabulously rare drawings--including 31 color illustrations of
costumes and accessories--for 1919 production of famous ballet.
Edited by Parmenia Migel, who has written new introduction. 48pp.
9⅜ x 12¼. (Available in U.S. only) 23709-5 Pa. $5.00
NOTES OF A FILM DIRECTOR, Sergei Eisenstein. Greatest Russian
filmmaker explains montage, making of _Alexander Nevsky_,
aesthetics; comments on self, associates, great rivals (Chaplin),
similar material. 78 illustrations. 240pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
22392-2 Pa. $4.50
DRAWINGS OF WILLIAM BLAKE, William Blake. 92 plates from Book of
Job, _Divine Comedy_, _Paradise Lost_, visionary heads, mythological
figures, Laocoon, etc. Selection, introduction, commentary by Sir
Geoffrey Keynes. 178pp. 8⅛ x 11. 22303-5 Pa. $4.00
ENGRAVINGS OF HOGARTH, William Hogarth. 101 of Hogarth’s greatest
works: _Rake’s Progress_, _Harlot’s Progress_, _Illustrations for
Hudibras_, _Before and After_, _Beer Street and Gin Lane_, many
more. Full commentary. 256pp. 11 x 13¾. 22479-1 Pa. $12.95
DAUMIER: 120 GREAT LITHOGRAPHS, Honore Daumier. Wide-ranging
collection of lithographs by the greatest caricaturist of the 19th
century. Concentrates on eternally popular series on lawyers, on
married life, on liberated women, etc. Selection, introduction, and
notes on plates by Charles F. Ramus. Total of 158pp. 9⅜ x 12¼.
23512-2 Pa. $6.00
DRAWINGS OF MUCHA, Alphonse Maria Mucha. Work reveals draftsman of
highest caliber: studies for famous posters and paintings,
renderings for book illustrations and ads, etc. 70 works, 9 in
color; including 6 items not drawings. Introduction. List of
illustrations. 72pp. 9⅜ x 12¼. (Available in U.S. only)
23672-2 Pa. $4.00
GIOVANNI BATTISTA PIRANESI: DRAWINGS IN THE PIERPONT MORGAN LIBRARY,
Giovanni Battista Piranesi. For first time ever all of Morgan
Library’s collection, world’s largest. 167 illustrations of rare
Piranesi drawings--archeological, architectural, decorative and
visionary. Essay, detailed list of drawings, chronology, captions.
Edited by Felice Stampfle. 144pp. 9⅜ x 12¼. 23714-1 Pa. $7.50
NEW YORK ETCHINGS (1905-1949), John Sloan. All of important American
artist’s N.Y. life etchings. 67 works include some of his best art;
also lively historical record--Greenwich Village, tenement scenes.
Edited by Sloan’s widow. Introduction and captions. 79pp. 8⅜ x 11¼.
23651-X Pa. $4.00
CHINESE PAINTING AND CALLIGRAPHY: A PICTORIAL SURVEY, Wan-go Weng.
69 fine examples from John M. Crawford’s matchless private
collection: landscapes, birds, flowers, human figures, etc., plus
calligraphy. Every basic form included: hanging scrolls,
handscrolls, album leaves, fans, etc. 109 illustrations.
Introduction. Captions. 192pp. 8⅞ x 11¾. 23707-9 Pa. $7.95
DRAWINGS OF REMBRANDT, edited by Seymour Slive. Updated Lippmann,
Hofstede de Groot edition, with definitive scholarly apparatus. All
portraits, biblical sketches, landscapes, nudes, Oriental figures,
classical studies, together with selection of work by followers. 550
illustrations. Total of 630pp. 9⅛ x 12¼.
21485-0, 21486-9 Pa., Two-vol. set $15.00
THE DISASTERS OF WAR, Francisco Goya. 83 etchings record horrors of
Napoleonic wars in Spain and war in general. Reprint of 1st edition,
plus 3 additional plates. Introduction by Philip Hofer. 97pp.
9⅜ x 8¼. 21872-4 Pa. $4.00
THE ANATOMY OF THE HORSE, George Stubbs. Often considered the great
masterpiece of animal anatomy. Full reproduction of 1766 edition,
plus prospectus; original text and modernized text. 36 plates.
Introduction by Eleanor Garvey. 121pp. 11 x 14¾. 23402-9 Pa. $6.00
BRIDGMAN’S LIFE DRAWING, George B. Bridgman. More than 500
illustrative drawings and text teach you to abstract the body into
its major masses, use light and shade, proportion; as well as
specific areas of anatomy, of which Bridgman is master. 192pp. 6½ x
9¼. (Available in U.S. only) 22710-3 Pa. $3.50
ART NOUVEAU DESIGNS IN COLOR, Alphonse Mucha, Maurice Verneuil,
Georges Auriol. Full-color reproduction of _Combinaisons
ornementales_ (c. 1900) by Art Nouveau masters. Floral, animal,
geometric, interlacings, swashes--borders, frames, spots--all
incredibly beautiful. 60 plates, hundreds of designs. 9⅜ x 8-1/16.
22885-1 Pa. $4.00
FULL-COLOR FLORAL DESIGNS IN THE ART NOUVEAU STYLE, E. A. Seguy. 166
motifs, on 40 plates, from _Les fleurs et leurs applications
decoratives_ (1902): borders, circular designs, repeats, allovers,
“spots.” All in authentic Art Nouveau colors. 48pp. 9⅜ x 12¼.
23439-8 Pa. $5.00
A DIDEROT PICTORIAL ENCYCLOPEDIA OF TRADES AND INDUSTRY, edited by
Charles C. Gillispie. 485 most interesting plates from the great
French Encyclopedia of the 18th century show hundreds of working
figures, artifacts, process, land and cityscapes; glassmaking,
papermaking, metal extraction, construction, weaving, making
furniture, clothing, wigs, dozens of other activities. Plates fully
explained. 920pp. 9 x 12.
22284-5, 22285-3 Clothbd., Two-vol. set $40.00
HANDBOOK OF EARLY ADVERTISING ART, Clarence P. Hornung. Largest
collection of copyright-free early and antique advertising art ever
compiled. Over 6,000 illustrations, from Franklin’s time to the
1890’s for special effects, novelty. Valuable source, almost
inexhaustible. Pictorial Volume. Agriculture, the zodiac, animals,
autos, birds, Christmas, fire engines, flowers, trees, musical
instruments, ships, games and sports, much more. Arranged by subject
matter and use. 237 plates. 288pp. 9 x 12. 20122-8 Clothbd. $14.50
Typographical Volume. Roman and Gothic faces ranging from 10 point
to 300 point, “Barnum,” German and Old English faces, script,
logotypes, scrolls and flourishes, 1115 ornamental initials, 67
complete alphabets, more. 310 plates. 320pp. 9 x 12.
20123-6 Clothbd. $15.00
CALLIGRAPHY (CALLIGRAPHIA LATINA), J. G. Schwandner. High point of
18th-century ornamental calligraphy. Very ornate initials, scrolls,
borders, cherubs, birds, lettered examples. 172pp. 9 x 13.
20475-8 Pa. $7.00
THE COMPLETE BOOK OF DOLL MAKING AND COLLECTING, Catherine
Christopher. Instructions, patterns for dozens of dolls, from rag
doll on up to elaborate, historically accurate figures. Mould faces,
sew clothing, make doll houses, etc. Also collecting information.
Many illustrations. 288pp. 6 x 9. 22066-4 Pa. $4.50
THE DAGUERREOTYPE IN AMERICA, Beaumont Newhall. Wonderful portraits,
1850’s townscapes, landscapes; full text plus 104 photographs. The
basic book. Enlarged 1976 edition. 272pp. 8¼ x 11¼.
23322-7 Pa. $7.95
CRAFTSMAN HOMES, Gustav Stickley. 296 architectural drawings, floor
plans, and photographs illustrate 40 different kinds of
“Mission-style” homes from _The Craftsman_ (1901-16), voice of
American style of simplicity and organic harmony. Thorough coverage
of Craftsman idea in text and picture, now collector’s item. 224pp.
8⅛ x 11. 23791-5 Pa. $6.00
PEWTER-WORKING: INSTRUCTIONS AND PROJECTS, Burl N. Osborn. & Gordon
O. Wilber. Introduction to pewter-working for amateur craftsman.
History and characteristics of pewter; tools, materials,
step-by-step instructions. Photos, line drawings, diagrams. Total of
160pp. 7⅞ x 10¾. 23786-9 Pa. $3.50
THE GREAT CHICAGO FIRE, edited by David Lowe. 10 dramatic,
eyewitness accounts of the 1871 disaster, including one of the
aftermath and rebuilding, plus 70 contemporary photographs and
illustrations of the ruins--courthouse, Palmer House, Great Central
Depot, etc. Introduction by David Lowe. 87pp. 8¼ x 11.
23771-0 Pa. $4.00
SILHOUETTES: A PICTORIAL ARCHIVE OF VARIED ILLUSTRATIONS, edited by
Carol Belanger Grafton. Over 600 silhouettes from the 18th to 20th
centuries include profiles and full figures of men and women,
children, birds and animals, groups and scenes, nature, ships, an
alphabet. Dozens of uses for commercial artists and craftspeople.
144pp. 8⅜ x 11¼. 23781-8 Pa. $4.50
ANIMALS: 1,419 COPYRIGHT-FREE ILLUSTRATIONS OF MAMMALS, BIRDS, FISH,
INSECTS, ETC., edited by Jim Harter. Clear wood engravings present,
in extremely lifelike poses, over 1,000 species of animals. One of
the most extensive copyright-free pictorial sourcebooks of its kind.
Captions. Index. 284pp. 9 x 12. 23766-4 Pa. $8.95
INDIAN DESIGNS FROM ANCIENT ECUADOR, Frederick W. Shaffer. 282
original designs by pre-Columbian Indians of Ecuador (500-1500
A.D.). Designs include people, mammals, birds, reptiles, fish,
plants, heads, geometric designs. Use as is or alter for
advertising, textiles, leathercraft, etc. Introduction. 95pp.
8¾ x 11¼. 23764-8 Pa. $3.50
SZIGETI ON THE VIOLIN, Joseph Szigeti. Genial, loosely structured
tour by premier violinist, featuring a pleasant mixture of
reminiscences, insights into great music and musicians, innumerable
tips for practicing violinists. 385 musical passages. 256pp.
5⅝ x 8¼. 23763-X Pa. $4.00
SECOND PIATIGORSKY CUP, edited by Isaac Kashdan. One of the greatest
tournament books ever produced in the English language. All 90 games
of the 1966 tournament, annotated by players, most annotated by both
players. Features Petrosian, Spassky, Fischer, Larsen, six others.
228pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 23572-6 Pa. $3.50
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CARD TRICKS, revised and edited by Jean Hugard. How
to perform over 600 card tricks, devised by the world’s greatest
magicians: impromptus, spelling tricks, key cards, using special
packs, much, much more. Additional chapter on card technique. 66
illustrations. 402pp. 5⅜ x 8½. (Available in U.S. only)
21252-1 Pa. $4.95
MAGIC: STAGE ILLUSIONS, SPECIAL EFFECTS AND TRICK PHOTOGRAPHY,
Albert A. Hopkins, Henry R. Evans. One of the great classics;
fullest, most authoratative explanation of vanishing lady,
levitations, scores of other great stage effects. Also small magic,
automata, stunts. 446 illustrations. 556pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
23344-8 Pa. $6.95
THE SECRETS OF HOUDINI, J. C. Cannell. Classic study of Houdini’s
incredible magic, exposing closely-kept professional secrets and
revealing, in general terms, the whole art of stage magic. 67
illustrations. 279pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 22913-0 Pa. $4.00
HOFFMANN’S MODERN MAGIC, Professor Hoffmann. One of the best, and
best-known, magicians’ manuals of the past century. Hundreds of
tricks from card tricks and simple sleight of hand to elaborate
illusions involving construction of complicated machinery. 332
illustrations. 563pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 23623-4 Pa. $6.00
MADAME PRUNIER’S FISH COOKERY BOOK, Mme. S. B. Prunier. More than
1000 recipes from world famous Prunier’s of Paris and London,
specially adapted here for American kitchen. Grilled tournedos with
anchovy butter, Lobster a la Bordelaise, Prunier’s prized desserts,
more. Glossary. 340pp. 5⅜ x 8½. (Available in U.S. only)
22679-4 Pa. $3.00
FRENCH COUNTRY COOKING FOR AMERICANS, Louis Diat. 500 easy-to-make,
authentic provincial recipes compiled by former head chef at New
York’s Fitz-Carlton Hotel: onion soup, lamb stew, potato pie, more.
309pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 23665-X Pa. $3.95
SAUCES, FRENCH AND FAMOUS, Louis Diat. Complete book gives over 200
specific recipes: bechamel, Bordelaise, hollandaise, Cumberland,
apricot, etc. Author was one of this century’s finest chefs,
originator of vichyssoise and many other dishes. Index. 156pp.
5⅜ x 8. 23663-3 Pa. $2.75
TOLL HOUSE TRIED AND TRUE RECIPES, Ruth Graves Wakefield. Authentic
recipes from the famous Mass. restaurant: popovers, veal and ham
loaf, Toll House baked beans, chocolate cake crumb pudding, much
more. Many helpful hints. Nearly 700 recipes. Index. 376pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
23560-2 Pa. $4.50
A MAYA GRAMMAR, Alfred M. Tozzer. Practical, useful English-language
grammar by the Harvard anthropologist who was one of the three
greatest American scholars in the area of Maya culture. Phonetics,
grammatical processes, syntax, more. 301pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
23465-7 Pa. $4.00
THE JOURNAL OF HENRY D. THOREAU, edited by Bradford Torrey, F. H.
Allen. Complete reprinting of 14 volumes, 1837-61, over two million
words; the sourcebooks for _Walden_, etc. Definitive. All original
sketches, plus 75 photographs. Introduction by Walter Harding. Total
of 1804pp. 8½ x 12¼. 20312-3, 20313-1 Clothbd., Two-vol. set $70.00
CLASSIC GHOST STORIES, Charles Dickens and others. 18 wonderful
stories you’ve wanted to reread: “The Monkey’s Paw,” “The House and
the Brain,” “The Upper Berth,” “The Signalman,” “Dracula’s Guest,”
“The Tapestried Chamber,” etc. Dickens, Scott, Mary Shelley, Stoker,
etc. 330pp 5⅜ x 8½. 20735-8 Pa. $4.50
SEVEN SCIENCE FICTION NOVELS, H. G. Wells. Full novels. _First Men
in the Moon_, _Island of Dr. Moreau_, _War of the Worlds_, _Food of
the Gods_, _Invisible Man_, _Time Machine_, _In the Days of the
Comet_. A basic science-fiction library. 1015pp. 5⅜ x 8½. (Available
in U.S. only) 20264-X Clothbd. $8.95
ARMADALE, Wilkie Collins. Third great mystery novel by the author of
_The Woman in White_ and _The Moonstone_. Ingeniously plotted
narrative shows an exceptional command of character, incident and
mood. Original magazine version with 40 illustrations. 597pp.
5⅜ x 8½. 23429-0 Pa. $6.00
MASTERS OF MYSTERY, H. Douglas Thomson. The first book in English
(1931) devoted to history and aesthetics of detective story. Poe,
Doyle, LeFanu, Dickens, many others, up to 1930. New introduction
and notes by E. F. Bleiler. 288pp. 5⅜ x 8½. (Available in U.S. only)
23606-4 Pa. $4.00
FLATLAND, E. A. Abbott. Science-fiction classic explores life of 2-D
being in 3-D world. Read also as introduction to thought about
hyperspace. Introduction by Banesh Hoffmann. 16 illustrations.
103pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 20001-9 Pa. $2.00
THREE SUPERNATURAL NOVELS OF THE VICTORIAN PERIOD, edited, with an
introduction, by E. F. Bleiler. Reprinted complete and unabridged,
three great classics of the supernatural: _The Haunted Hotel_ by
Wilkie Collins, _The Haunted House at Latchford_ by Mrs. J. H.
Riddell, and _The Lost Stradivarious_ by J. Meade Falkner. 325pp.
5⅜ x 8½. 22571-2 Pa. $4.00
AYESHA: THE RETURN OF “SHE,” H. Rider Haggard. Virtuoso sequel
featuring the great mythic creation, Ayesha, in an adventure that is
fully as good as the first book, _She_. Original magazine version,
with 47 original illustrations by Maurice Greiffenhagen. 189pp.
6½ x 9¼. 23649-8 Pa. $3.50
THE AMERICAN SENATOR, Anthony Trollope. Little known, long
unavailable Trollope novel on a grand scale. Here are humorous
comment on American vs. English culture, and stunning portrayal of a
heroine/villainess. Superb evocation of Victorian village life.
561pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 23801-6 Pa. $6.00
WAS IT MURDER? James Hilton. The author of _Lost Horizon_ and
_Goodbye, Mr. Chips_ wrote one detective novel (under a pen-name)
which was quickly forgotten and virtually lost, even at the height
of Hilton’s fame. This edition brings it back--a finely crafted
public school puzzle resplendent with Hilton’s stylish atmosphere. A
thoroughly English thriller by the creator of Shangri-la. 252pp.
5⅜ x 8. (Available in U.S. only) 23774-5 Pa. $3.00
CENTRAL PARK: A PHOTOGRAPHIC GUIDE, Victor Laredo and Henry Hope
Reed. 121 superb photographs show dramatic views of Central Park:
Bethesda Fountain, Cleopatra’s Needle, Sheep Meadow, the Blockhouse,
plus people engaged in many park activities: ice skating, bike
riding, etc. Captions by former Curator of Central Park, Henry Hope
Reed, provide historical view, changes, etc. Also photos of N.Y.
landmarks on park’s periphery. 96pp. 8½ x 11. 23750-8 Pa. $4.50
NANTUCKET IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY, Clay Lancaster. 180 rare
photographs, stereographs, maps, drawings and floor plans recreate
unique American island society. Authentic scenes of shipwreck,
lighthouses, streets, homes are arranged in geographic sequence to
provide walking-tour guide to old Nantucket existing today.
Introduction, captions. 160pp. 8⅞ x 11¾. 23747-8 Pa. $6.95
STONE AND MAN: A PHOTOGRAPHIC EXPLORATION, Andreas Feininger. 106
photographs by _Life_ photographer Feininger portray man’s deep
passion for stone through the ages. Stonehenge-like megaliths,
fortified towns, sculpted marble and crumbling tenements show
textures, beauties, fascination. 128pp. 9¼ x 10¾. 23756-7 Pa. $5.95
CIRCLES, A MATHEMATICAL VIEW, D. Pedoe. Fundamental aspects of
college geometry, non-Euclidean geometry, and other branches of
mathematics: representing circle by point. Poincare model,
isoperimetric property, etc. Stimulating recreational reading. 66
figures. 96pp. 5⅝ x 8¼. 63698-4 Pa. $2.75
THE DISCOVERY OF NEPTUNE, Morton Grosser. Dramatic scientific
history of the investigations leading up to the actual discovery of
the eighth planet of our solar system. Lucid, well-researched book
by well-known historian of science. 172pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
23726-5 Pa. $3.50
THE DEVIL’S DICTIONARY. Ambrose Bierce. Barbed, bitter, brilliant
witticisms in the form of a dictionary. Best, most ferocious satire
America has produced. 145pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 20487-1 Pa. $2.25
HOLLYWOOD GLAMOUR PORTRAITS, edited by John Kobal. 145 photos
capture the stars from 1926-49, the high point in portrait
photography. Gable, Harlow, Bogart, Bacall, Hedy Lamarr, Marlene
Dietrich, Robert Montgomery, Marlon Brando, Veronica Lake; 94 stars
in all. Full background on photographers, technical aspects, much
more. Total of 160pp. 8¾ x 11¼. 23352-9 Pa. $6.00
THE NEW YORK STAGE: FAMOUS PRODUCTIONS IN PHOTOGRAPHS, edited by
Stanley Appelbaum. 148 photographs from Museum of City of New York
show 142 plays, 1883-1939. _Peter Pan_, _The Front Page_, _Dead
End_, _Our Town_, O’Neill, hundreds of actors and actresses, etc.
Full indexes. 154pp. 9½ x 10. 23241-7 Pa. $6.00
DIALOGUES CONCERNING TWO NEW SCIENCES, Galileo Galilei. Encompassing
30 years of experiment and thought, these dialogues deal with
geometric demonstrations of fracture of solid bodies, cohesion,
leverage, speed of light and sound, pendulums, falling bodies,
accelerated motion, etc. 300pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 60099-8 Pa. $4.00
THE GREAT OPERA STARS IN HISTORIC PHOTOGRAPHS, edited by James
Camner. 343 portraits from the 1850s to the 1940s: Tamburini, Mario,
Caliapin, Jeritza, Melchior, Melba, Patti, Pinza, Schipa, Caruso,
Farrar, Steber, Gobbi, and many more--270 performers in all. Index.
199pp. 8⅜ x 11¼. 23575-0 Pa. $7.50
J. S. BACH, Albert Schweitzer. Great full-length study of Bach,
life, background to music, music, by foremost modern scholar. Ernest
Newman translation. 650 musical examples. Total of 928pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
(Available in U.S. only) 21631-4, 21632-2 Pa., Two-vol. set $11.00
COMPLETE PIANO SONATAS, Ludwig van Beethoven. All sonatas in the
fine Schenker edition, with fingering, analytical material. One of
best modern editions. Total of 615pp. 9 x 12. (Available in U.S.
only) 23134-8, 23135-6 Pa., Two-vol. set $15.50
KEYBOARD MUSIC, J. S. Bach. Bach-Gesellschaft edition. For
harpsichord, piano, other keyboard instruments. English Suites,
French Suites, Six Partitas, Goldberg Variations, Two-Part
Inventions, Three-Part Sinfonias. 312pp. 8⅛ x 11. (Available in U.S.
only) 22360-4 Pa. $6.95
FOUR SYMPHONIES IN FULL SCORE, Franz Schubert. Schubert’s four most
popular symphonies: No. 4 in C Minor (“Tragic”); No. 5 in B-flat
Major; No. 8 in B Minor (“Unfinished”); No. 9 in C Major (“Great”).
Breitkopf & Hartel edition. Study score. 261pp. 9⅜ x 12¼.
23681-1 Pa. $6.50
THE AUTHENTIC GILBERT & SULLIVAN SONGBOOK, W. S. Gilbert, A. S.
Sullivan. Largest selection available; 92 songs, uncut, original
keys, in piano rendering approved by Sullivan. Favorites and
lesser-known fine numbers. Edited with plot synopses by James Spero.
3 illustrations. 399pp. 9 x 12. 23482-7 Pa. $9.95
HOUSEHOLD STORIES BY THE BROTHERS GRIMM. All the great Grimm
stories: “Rumpelstiltskin,” “Snow White,” “Hansel and Gretel,” etc.,
with 114 illustrations by Walter Crane. 269pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
21080-4 Pa. $3.50
SLEEPING BEAUTY, illustrated by Arthur Rackham. Perhaps the fullest,
most delightful version ever, told by C. S. Evans. Rackham’s best
work. 49 illustrations. 110pp. 7⅞ x 10¾. 22756-1 Pa. $2.50
AMERICAN FAIRY TALES, L. Frank Baum. Young cowboy lassoes Father
Time; dummy in Mr. Floman’s department store window comes to life;
and 10 other fairy tales. 41 illustrations by N. P. Hall, Harry
Kennedy, Ike Morgan, and Ralph Gardner. 209pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
23643-9 Pa. $3.00
THE WONDERFUL WIZARD OF OZ, L. Frank Baum. Facsimile in full color
of America’s finest children’s classic. Introduction by Martin
Gardner. 143 illustrations by W. W. Denslow. 267pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
20691-2 Pa. $3.50
THE TALE OF PETER RABBIT, Beatrix Potter. The inimitable Peter’s
terrifying adventure in Mr. McGregor’s garden, with all 27
wonderful, full-color Potter illustrations. 55pp. 4¼ x 5½.
(Available in U.S. only) 22827-4 Pa. $1.25
THE STORY OF KING ARTHUR AND HIS KNIGHTS, Howard Pyle. Finest
children’s version of life of King Arthur. 48 illustrations by Pyle.
131pp. 6⅛ x 9¼. 21445-1 Pa. $4.95
CARUSO’S CARICATURES, Enrico Caruso. Great tenor’s remarkable
caricatures of self, fellow musicians, composers, others. Toscanini,
Puccini, Farrar, etc. Impish, cutting, insightful. 473
illustrations. Preface by M. Sisca. 217pp. 8⅜ x 11¼.
23528-9 Pa. $6.95
PERSONAL NARRATIVE OF A PILGRIMAGE TO ALMADINAH AND MECCAH, Richard
Burton. Great travel classic by remarkably colorful personality.
Burton, disguised as a Moroccan, visited sacred shrines of Islam,
narrowly escaping death. Wonderful observations of Islamic life,
customs, personalities. 47 illustrations. Total of 959pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
21217-3, 21218-1 Pa., Two-vol. set $12.00
INCIDENTS OF TRAVEL IN YUCATAN, John L. Stephens. Classic (1843)
exploration of jungles of Yucatan, looking for evidences of Maya
civilization. Travel adventures, Mexican and Indian culture, etc.
Total of 669pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 20926-1, 20927-X Pa., Two-vol. set $7.90
AMERICAN LITERARY AUTOGRAPHS FROM WASHINGTON IRVING TO HENRY JAMES,
Herbert Cahoon, et al. Letters, poems, manuscripts of Hawthorne,
Thoreau, Twain, Alcott, Whitman, 67 other prominent American
authors. Reproductions, full transcripts and commentary. Plus
checklist of all American Literary Autographs in The Pierpont Morgan
Library. Printed on exceptionally high-quality paper. 136
illustrations. 212pp. 9⅛ x 12¼. 23548-3 Pa. $12.50
THE EARLY WORK OF AUBREY BEARDSLEY, Aubrey Beardsley. 157 plates, 2
in color: _Manon Lescaut_, _Madame Bovary_, _Morte Darthur_,
_Salome_, other. Introduction by H. Marillier. 182pp. 8⅛ × 11.
21816-3 Pa. $4.50
THE LATER WORK OF AUBREY BEARDSLEY, Aubrey Beardsley. Exotic
masterpieces of full maturity: _Venus and Tannhauser_, _Lysistrata_,
_Rape of the Lock_, _Volpone_, Savoy material, etc. 174 plates, 2 in
color. 186pp. 8⅛ × 11. 21817-1 Pa. $5.95
THOMAS NAST’S CHRISTMAS DRAWINGS, Thomas Nast. Almost all Christmas
drawings by creator of image of Santa Claus as we know it, and one
of America’s foremost illustrators and political cartoonists. 66
illustrations. 3 illustrations in color on covers. 96pp. 8⅜ × 11¼.
23660-9 Pa. $3.50
THE DORÉ ILLUSTRATIONS FOR DANTE’S DIVINE COMEDY, Gustave Doré. All
135 plates from Inferno, Purgatory, Paradise; fantastic tortures,
infernal landscapes, celestial wonders. Each plate with appropriate
(translated) verses. 141pp. 9 × 12. 23231-X Pa. $4.50
DORÉ’S ILLUSTRATIONS FOR RABELAIS, Gustave Doré. 252 striking
illustrations of _Gargantua and Pantagruel_ books by foremost
19th-century illustrator. Including 60 plates, 192 delightful
smaller illustrations. 153pp. 9 × 12. 23656-0 Pa. $5.00
LONDON: A PILGRIMAGE, Gustave Doré, Blanchard Jerrold. Squalor,
riches, misery, beauty of mid-Victorian metropolis; 55 wonderful
plates, 125 other illustrations, full social, cultural text by
Jerrold. 191pp. of text. 9⅜ × 12¼. 22306-X Pa. $7.00
THE RIME OF THE ANCIENT MARINER, Gustave Doré, S. T. Coleridge.
Doré’s finest work, 34 plates capture moods, subtleties of poem.
Full text. Introduction by Millicent Rose. 77pp. 9¼ × 12.
22305-1 Pa. $3.50
THE DORÉ BIBLE ILLUSTRATIONS, Gustave Doré. All wonderful, detailed
plates: Adam and Eve, Flood, Babylon, Life of Jesus, etc. Brief King
James text with each plate. Introduction by Millicent Rose. 241
plates. 241pp. 9 × 12. 23004-X Pa. $6.00
THE COMPLETE ENGRAVINGS, ETCHINGS AND DRYPOINTS OF ALBRECHT DÜRER.
“Knight, Death and Devil”; “Melencolia,” and more--all Dürer’s known
works in all three media, including 6 works formerly attributed to
him. 120 plates. 235pp. 8⅜ × 11¼. 22851-7 Pa. $6.50
MECHANICK EXERCISES ON THE WHOLE ART OF PRINTING, Joseph Moxon.
First complete book (1683-4) ever written about typography, a
compendium of everything known about printing at the latter part of
17th century. Reprint of 2nd (1962) Oxford Univ. Press edition. 74
illustrations. Total of 550pp. 6⅛ × 9¼. 23617-X Pa. $7.95
GEOMETRY, RELATIVITY AND THE FOURTH DIMENSION, Rudolf Rucker.
Exposition of fourth dimension, means of visualization, concepts of
relativity as Flatland characters continue adventures. Popular,
easily followed yet accurate, profound. 141 illustrations. 133pp.
5⅜ x 8½. 23400-2 Pa.$2.75
THE ORIGIN OF LIFE, A. I. Oparin. Modern classic in biochemistry,
the first rigorous examination of possible evolution of life from
nitrocarbon compounds. Non-technical, easily followed. Total of
295pp. 5⅜ x 8½. 60213-3 Pa. $4.00
PLANETS, STARS AND GALAXIES, A. E. Fanning. Comprehensive
introductory survey: the sun, solar system, stars, galaxies,
universe, cosmology; quasars, radio stars, etc. 24pp. of
photographs. 189pp. 5⅜ x 8½. (Available in U.S. only)
21680-2 Pa. $3.75
THE THIRTEEN BOOKS OF EUCLID’S ELEMENTS, translated with
introduction and commentary by Sir Thomas L. Heath. Definitive
edition. Textual and linguistic notes, mathematical analysis, 2500
years of critical commentary. Do not confuse with abridged school
editions. Total of 1414pp. 5⅜ x 8½.
60088-2, 60089-0, 60090-4 Pa., Three-vol. set $18.50
_Prices subject to change without notice._
Available at your book dealer or write for free catalogue to Dept. GI,
Dover Publications, Inc., 31 East Second Street, Mineola, N.Y. 11501.
Dover publishes more than 175 books each year on science, elementary
and advanced mathematics, biology, music, art, literary history, social
sciences and other areas.
DOVER BOOKS ON BIRDS
AUDUBON’S BIRDS OF AMERICA COLORING BOOK, John James Audubon.
(23049-X) $2.00
BIRD STUDY, Andrew J. Berger. (22699-9) $5.50
BIRD SONG AND BIRD BEHAVIOR, Donald J. Borror. (22779-0) Record
and manual $4.95
COMMON BIRD SONGS, Donald J. Borror. (21829-5) Record and manual
$4.95
SONGS OF EASTERN BIRDS, Donald J. Borror. (22378-7) Record and
album $4.95
SONGS OF WESTERN BIRDS, Donald J. Borror. (22765-0) Record and
album $4.95
BIRD OF THE NEW YORK AREA, John Bull. (23222-0) $7.50
WHAT BIRD IS THIS?, Henry H. Collins, Jr. (21490-7) $2.50
HAWKS, OWLS AND WILDLIFE, John J. Craighead and Frank C.
Craighead, Jr. (22123-7) $7.00
CRUICKSHANK’S PHOTOGRAPHS OF BIRDS OF AMERICA, Allan D.
Cruickshank. (23497-5) $7.95
1001 QUESTIONS ANSWERED ABOUT BIRDS, Allan Cruickshank and Helen
Cruickshank. (23315-4) $4.00
EXTINCT AND VANISHING BIRDS OF THE WORLD, James C. Greenway, Jr.
(21869-4) $6.95
BIRD MIGRATION, Donald R. Griffin. (20529-0) $3.50
A GUIDE TO BIRD WATCHING, Joseph J. Hickey. (21596-2) $4.95
Paperbound unless otherwise indicated. Prices subject to change without
notice. Available at your book dealer or write for free catalogues
to Dept. Nature, Dover Publications, Inc., 180 Varick Street, New
York, N.Y. 10014. Please indicate field of interest. Each year Dover
publishes over 200 books on fine art, music, crafts and needlework,
antiques, languages, literature, children’s books, chess, cookery,
nature, anthropology, science, mathematics, and other areas.
_Manufactured in the U.S.A._
LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN WOODPECKERS
ARTHUR CLEVELAND BENT
The all-encompassing series on North American birds prepared by Arthur
Cleveland Bent forms the most complete, most comprehensive, most-used
single source of information in existence on the subject. Bent was one
of America’s greatest ornithologists. His historic studies, published
originally under the auspices of the Smithsonian Institution, are now
all being reprinted by Dover Publications. These works rank as classics
of our time. No ornithologist, conservationist, amateur naturalist or
birdwatcher should be without them.
In this volume the reader will find an encyclopedic collection of
information about 64 kinds of woodpecker (hairy, downy, pileated,
red-headed, cactus, Nuttall’s, white-headed, three-toed, etc.),
sapsucker, and flicker. Not a group of generalized descriptions, but a
compilation of detailed, specific observations of individual birds and
flocks throughout the country, it describes in readable language and
copious detail the nesting habits, eggs, young, plumage, food, range,
behavior, field marks, voice, enemies, winter habits, distribution,
courtship procedures, molting information, migratory habits--whatever
you want to know about these birds.
Completely modern in approach, the study was made with the full
recognition of the difficulties inherent in the observation and
interpretation of wild life behavior. For that reason, the author
utilized not only the reports of hundreds of contemporary observers all
over the country, but also the writings of America’s great naturalists
of the past--Audubon, Burroughs, William Brewster. The complete textual
coverage is supplemented by 39 full-page black-and-white plates,
containing 74 photographs of adults and young, nesting sites, the
feeding of nestlings, eggs, woodpecker damage to trees, and the like.
Unabridged republication of 1st edition. Index. Bibliography.
39 plates, xii + 334pp of text. 5⅜ × 8½. Paperbound
=A DOVER EDITION DESIGNED FOR YEARS OF USE!=
We have made every effort to make this the best book possible. Our
paper is opaque, with minimal show-through; it will not discolor or
become brittle with age. Pages are sewn in signatures, in the method
traditionally used for the best books, and will not drop out, as often
happens with paperbacks held together with glue. Books open flat
for easy reference. The binding will not crack or split. This is a
permanent book.
ISBN 0-486-21083-9 =$7.95 in U.S.A.=
Transcriber’s Note:
Words may have multiple spelling variations or inconsistent
hyphenation in the text. These have been left unchanged, as were
obsolete and alternative spellings. Eleven misspelled words were
corrected.
Words and phrases in italics are surrounded by underscores, _like
this_. Those in bold are surrounded by equal signs, =like this=. One
footnote was moved to the end of the chapter. Obvious printing errors,
such as partially printed letters and punctuation, were corrected.
Final stops missing at the end of sentences and abbreviations were
added.
In the List of Literature Cited, entry for Burtch, Verdi, the page
number was changed from “340-241” to “340-341.”
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LIFE HISTORIES OF NORTH AMERICAN WOODPECKERS ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.
The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
