Page images
PDF
EPUB

In 1839 appeared Rev. W. B. O. Peabody's "Report on the Ornithology of Massachusetts" (Rep. on Fishes, Reptiles and Birds of Mass., pp. 259-404), in which were enumerated two hundred and eighty-four species as occurring or probably occurring in the state. Of these, twenty prove to have been wrongly included (more than this number were given inferentially), and thirteen others are synonyms, leaving only two hundred and fifty-one valid and properly included species.

The next enumeration is that of Mr. F. W. Putnam's "Catalogue of the Birds of Essex County" (Proc. Essex Institute, I, pp. 201-231), published in 1856, in which two hundred and forty-five species are given as found in Essex County, while the Appendix adds forty-eight others as found in the state, making two hundred and ninetythree in all. The Essex County list includes but a single nominal species and only four that have not been confirmed by subsequent capture, or that can be considered as in the least degree open to doubt, while only two can be regarded as beyond question erroneously included. The supplemental list is compiled mainly from Peabody, Nuttall, and Audubon, and contains a dozen or more species that are either merely nominal, or that still lack confirmation as birds of Massachusetts, leaving about two hundred and seventy-five as the number of satisfactorily authenticated species.

In 1864 Mr. E. A. Samuels published his "Descriptive Catalogue of the Birds of Massachusetts" (Agric. of Mass., Sec'y's Rep. for 1863, App., pp. xvii-xxix), numbering two hundred and sixty-nine species. Of these, three are now regarded as nominal, and five or six others have not been confirmed as occurring in the state, although given by Peabody and some other previous authors. Deducting these leaves about two hundred and sixty, or eighteen less

than were correctly included in Mr. Putnam's list eight years earlier.

Almost simultaneously with the appearance of Mr. Samuel's list appeared my "Catalogue of the Birds found at Springfield, Mass., with Notes on their Migrations, Habits, etc.; together with a List of those Birds found in the State not yet observed at Springfield" (Proc. Essex Institute, IV, July, 1864, pp. 48-98). In this paper I gave one hundred and ninety-five as found at Springfield, and two hundred and ninety-seven' as inhabitants of the state. The Springfield list included one species (Empidonax acadicus) given erroneously, but which has since been taken within the area covered by the list, and some others have since been added. In the supplemental list three species were given that I now regard as synonyms, and some eight or ten others were included on the authority of Nuttall, Peabody, Audubon, Cabot, Bryant, and Brewer, of which there is no recent record of their capture, but which (with perhaps two, or possibly three, exceptions) are very likely to occur. Excluding, however, all these there still remain two hundred and eightytwo thoroughly authenticated as birds of the state. Of fifteen others mentioned as likely to occur, over one-half have since been added.

In 1868 was published a "Catalogue of the Birds of New England," by Dr. Elliott Coues, in which nearly all the species previously attributed to Massachusetts were included. The Great Auk (Alca impennis) was here for the first time recognized as a former inhabitant of Massachusetts, and the Barn Owl (Strix pratincola) and the Varied Thrush (Turdus nævius) were added in the Appendix from notes furnished by the present writer.

2Squartarola helvetica was accidentally omitted from the Springfield list, though given in the classified list at the end of the paper; hence in my "summary" (p. 97) 296" should stand 297.

During the winter of 1869-70 I published additional "Notes on some of the Rarer Birds of Massachusetts" (Amer. Nat., III, Dec., 1869, Jan. and Feb., 1870), in which ninety-two species were formally referred to, and eight for the first time recorded as captured or observed within the state (exclusive of one included by error of identification, and four others perhaps not properly to be regarded as indigenous or naturally occurring species). Several species given in my previous list were now withdrawn. The number of species then stood nominally at three hundred and five, but in reality (or as judged by the standard I have adopted for my present list) two hundred and ninety-five.

Later in the same year appeared Mr. Maynard's excellent "Catalogue of the Birds of Eastern Massachusetts", (Naturalist's Guide, 1870, pp. 81-167), comprising nominally two hundred and ninety-nine species, but adding no new ones. Applying the same rules of exclusion that have been used in respect to the other before-mentioned lists the number becomes reduced to about two hundred and eighty-nine. Five or six were withdrawn as birds of Eastern Massachusetts, but otherwise the list includes all of the at that time authenticated indigenous birds of the state except four, known at that date as occurring only in the western part of the state.

No new

Since 1870 about twenty-five species have been added, mainly through the investigations of Messrs. Brewster, Purdie, Deane, and Maynard, including three first described from birds taken within the state. separate enumeration of the birds of Massachusetts has, however, been since made, but in 1875 Dr. T. M. Brewer published a new "Catalogue of the Birds of New England" (Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., XVII, July, 1875, pp. 436–454), in which, of course, those of Massa

chusetts were included, embracing nearly all the additions
made between the years 1870 and 1875, but generally
without giving the date of capture or place of record.
Of this list of three hundred and thirty-six species twelve
are either explicitly or inferentially given as not found in
Massachusetts; fourteen others are regarded in the fol-
lowing list as either purely nominal or as merely varietal
forms of other species also occurring here; one is an
introduced species, and another ("Thaumatias linnæi”) I
regard as improperly included; leaving three hundred and
eight that may be regarded as birds of Massachusetts,
though not of course always necessarily so implied by the
phraseology of the list.

The following tabulated summary shows at a glance the
number of species attributed to the state at different
times since 1833, together with the number authentically
recorded, the number still unconfirmed, and the number
of merely nominal ones:-

HISTORICAL SUMMARY.
Whole Syno- Unconfirmed or Fully Number
number. nyms. not legitimately authenticated. added.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

included.3

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

3 Embracing, among others, varietal forms here regarded as improperly ac-
.corded full specific rank.

Inferentially, through additions to Dr. Emmons's list.

[blocks in formation]

I. Species of Authentic Occurrence within the State.

[NOTE. The asterisk (*) at the left of a name indicates that the species is known to breed within the state. For the sake of brevity, the annotations are restricted to simply indication of season of occurrence and relative abundance, except in the case of the extremely rare or accidental visitors, respecting which the record of captures is brought down from 1864 to January, 1878. Only the original notice, however, is cited. My former catalogue gives the record of rare captures down to 1864 (see also Coues's "Catalogue of the Birds of New England" in Proceedings Essex Institute, vi, pp. 253-314, for the early record), so that my former paper, and the present, form together a full record in this respect.]

*1. Turdus migratorius Linn. ROBIN. Abundant summer restdent; a few remain during winter at favorable localities.

2. Turdus nævius Gmel. VARIED THRUSHI. Accidental. As yet the only authentic record of its occurrence is its capture at Ipswich, in December, 1864 (Allen, Proc. Essex Inst., V, 1868, 312; Amer. Nat., III, Jan., 1870, 572; see further, on its supposed earlier occurrence in Massachusetts, Proc. Essex Inst., IV, 1864, 82).

*3. Turdus mustelinus Gmel. WOOD THRUSH. Common summer resident except in the higher portions of Berkshire County.

*4. Turdus pallasi Cab. HERMIT THRUSH. Spring and fall migrant, except in the mountainous portions of the state west of the Connecticut valley, where it is a common summer resident; occasionally breeds in other parts of the state.

5. Turdus swainsoní Cab. (= T. swainsoni et alicia auct.) OLIVE-BACKED THRUSH. Common spring and autumn migrant; probably breeds in portions of Berkshire County.

*6. Turdus fuscescens Steph. VEERY; WILSON'S THRUSH. Common summer resident.

*7. Mimus polyglottus Boie. MOCKING BIRD. Rare summer visitant, occasionally breeding, particularly in the Connecticut Valley. CAT BIRD. Abundant summer *8. Mimus carolinensis Gray. resident.

*9. Harporhynchus rufus Cab. summer resident.

BROWN THRUSH. Abundant

*10. Sialia sialis Hald. BLUEBIRD. Abundant summer resident. 11. Regulus calendula Licht, RUBY-CROWNED KINGLET. Abundant spring and summer visitant.

12. Regulus satrapa Licht. GOLDEN-CRESTED KINGLET. Chiefly a winter visitant, occurring in variable abundance in different years, but usually more or less common. Perhaps breeds in portions of Berkshire County, as it has been reported to do in the Catskills (Trippe, Am. Nat., VI, 47).

13. Polioptíla cærulea Scl. BLUE-GRAY GNAT-CATCHER. Acci

« EelmineJätka »