TETKAU^IIJJ 



TliK (JUUUSE. 



419 



Canace canadensis, \ai. franklini, Douglas. 



FRANKLIN'S GKOUSE. 



Titrao franklini, Douglas, Trans. Linn. Soc. XVI, 1S-2H, 139. — Rimi. F. lior. Am. 11, 

 1831, 348, pi. Ixi. — Baiui), Birds N. Am. 1858, 623. — Loud, Pr. K. A. In.st. IV, 

 1864, 123 (between Kocky Mountains and Cascades). — Gray, Cat. Brit. Mus. 1867, 

 86. — Cooper & Suckley, 261. — Coop. Orn. Cal. 1, 1870, 529. Tetrao miuuknsis, var. 

 BoNAP. Am. Orn. Ill, 1830, 47, pi. xx. ? Tdrao fusca, Oiu). Guthrie's Geog. (2d 

 Am. ed.) II, 1815, 317. (Based on smaU brown Pheasant of Lewis & Clark, II, 182, 

 which very probably is this species.) Canaci: franklim, Ei.luit, P. A. N. S. 1S64. 

 — Ib. Mouog. Tetraon. pi. 



Sp. Char. Similar to C. canadensis, but with the tail-leathers entirely black, without 

 orange-brown terminal band ; the upper tail-coverts broadly tipped with white. The tail 

 less rounded. Wing, 7.35 ; tail, 5.G2. 



Hah. Northern Rocky Mountains, near the United States boundary, and west to Coast 

 Range. 



The difference from ranadensis is very appreciable, though we cannot con- 

 sider it as of specific importance. This consists cliietly in the rather longer, 

 more even tail, with liroader feathers, wliieh are pure black instead of very 

 dark brown, and entirely without the orniige terminal band. The white streaks 

 on the scapulars are larger terminally, and much more conspicuous, and the 

 upper tail-coverts are conspicuously barred terminally with white, not seen 

 in the other. The female differs from that of canadensis in the white bars 

 at the ends of tlie tail-coverts, and in having the tail-feathers tipped with 

 whitish instead of orange-brown. 



'f- 



C. ffankliiit. 



C. canadensis. 



Habits. From the Itocky Mountains to the Pacific, and from Oregon to 

 high northern latitudes, this variety replaces tlie common Spruce Partridge 

 of the Eastern Continent. Sir John Piichardson, as well as Mr. Drummond, 

 regarded these birds as only a western variety of the cavademis. The latter, 

 who had ample opportunities for studying the manners of both, was uiialile 

 to perceive any difference between them. Mr. Douglas took a different 

 view, though he admitted that their habits were essentially the same. 

 Swainson also regarded the two birds as distinct species. This variety is 



