296 CONURUS CAROLINENSIS, CAROLINA PARROQUET. 



Family ARIDJ5 : Parroquets. 



CONURUS CAROLINENSIS, (Limi.) Kubl. 

 CiU'olina Piirroquet. 



Psittacus caroUnensis, Linn., Syst. Nat. i, 1766, 141 (Gates., i, 11 ; Biuss., iv, 350). — 

 WiLS., Am. Orn. iii, 1811, 89, pi. 26, f. 1.— Bp., Sj-n. 1828, 41.— Nuxr., Muu. i, 

 1832, 545.— AiTi)., Orn. Biog. i, 1832, 135, pi. 26. 



Conurus caroJinensis, " KuiiL, Nov. Act. Acad. Ores. Leop.-Car. 1830." — Bp., List, 1838, 38 ; 

 Consp. i, 1850, p. 1. — Woodii., Sitgr. Rep. 18.53, 89 (Texas and Indian Terri- 

 tory.— Maxim., J. f. 0. V, 1857, 97.— Bd., B. N. A. 1858, 67.— Hayd., Rep. 1862, 

 154 (Missouri River below Platte).— CoUES, Pr. Bost. .Soc. 1868, 119 (8!)utli 

 Carolina, formerly). — Allen, Mem. Bost. Soc, i, 1868, 525 (Indiana, formerly). — 

 TuRNB., B. E. Pa. 1869, 41 (at rare intervals).— Allen, Bu 1. M. C. Z ii, 1871, 

 308 (Florida, still abundant); iii, 1872, 130 (Kansas, formerly). -Tiuppe, Pr. 

 Bost. Soc. XV, 1872, 233 (Iowa). — Sxow, B. Ivans. 1873, 2 (Kansas, now occa- 

 sional).— Coues, Key, 1872, 199, tig. 133.— B. B. & R., N. A. B. li, 1874, 587, pi. 

 56, f. 1, 2. — FiNSCii, Die Papageien, i, 1867, 475. 



" Centitrns" (err.) caroHuenfiis, Au»., Syn. 1839, 189; B. Am. iv, 1842,306, pi, 278. 



Fsittacns ludovicianus, Gm., Syst. Nat. i, 1788, 347. 



Conurus ludovicianus, Gkay, Cat. B. M. Fsit. 1859, 36 (North America). 



Psittacus luteicapillns, ViEiix., Eucj'. Metb. p. 1402. 



Psittacus thalassinus, Vieill., Eucy. Metb. 1377. 



Sab. — Southernmost Atlantic and Gulf Srates; up the Mississippi Valley to Mis- 

 souri ; up the Missouri River to the Platte. 



Lieutenant Warren^s Expedition. — Nos. 4606-18, B-ild Island, Missouri River, Nebraska. 



According to Gray (Hand-list, ii, 147, No. 8113), tbe Conurus caroJinensis of Kubl is 

 not this but a Brazilian species, C. chrjisotjenys of autbois, jterb^ips refeiable to the P. 

 a;ru(]lnosuH of LinnsBiis; and be quotes '^ perlinax p. Finsch " as synonymous. 



Among tbe more interesting ornithological results of Dr. Hayd n's investigations 

 may be mentioned bis discovery that this species is abundant at a higher point than 

 usually recognized — "along the thickly-wooded bottoms as far up tbe Missonri as Fort 

 Leavenworth, possibly as high as tbe mouth of tbe Platte, bat uever seen above that 

 point." Dr. Woodhouse, in 1853, recorded it as ([uite numerous in the timber-lands of 

 tbe large streams of tbe Indian Territory and Eastern Tex;is. I never Ibund it along 

 the Mis ouri, or anywhere in Kansas, and neither did Mr. Allen, who merely mentions, 

 on tbe authority of Dr. C. A. Logan, tbat it ^svas formerly coumiou in Eastern Kansas, 

 but had not recently been observed. Prof. Snow, however, remarking upon its former 

 abundance in the woods of Eastern Kansas, states that it is still seen in thinly-settled 

 districts. In Iowa, according to Mr. Trip^ie, the Parrot still occnrs. "A resident of 

 Decatur County told me that he had several times seen a flock of Parrots in tbe south- 

 ern part of the county, on a tall, dead cottonwood-tree, known to tbe neighboring 

 people as tbe ' parrot-tree,' from its having been frequented at intervals hy the same 

 flock for several years." 



A comparison of the earlier with the more recent accounts of the general distribu- 

 tion of the Carolina Parroquet, shows that it has been steadily contracting year by 

 year. About a century ago, we are informed by Prof. Bartou, writing in 1790, a flock 

 apiieared in January in the neighborhood of All)any, New York, and excited great con- 

 sternation, being regarded as of ev'l portent. We have various records of occurrences 

 in Pennsylvania, so that, even in 1869, Prof. Tnrnbull allowed it to bold a place in his 

 list of casnals. I retained it in my South Carolina list, with tbe remark tliat it seemed 

 hardly entitled to remain there, although it was abundant in tbat State not many 

 years siuce. Audubon (1832) has an interesting paragraph upon this subject: 



"Our Parrakeets are very rapidly dinunisbing in numljcr, and in some districts, 

 where twenty-five years ago they were plentiful, scarcely any are now to be seen. At 

 that period they could be procured as far up the tributary waters of the Ohio as the 

 Great Kanawha, the Scioto, the heads of Miami, the month of the Manimee at its Junc- 

 tion with Lake Erie, on tbe Illinois River, and sometimes as far northeast as Lake 

 Ontario, and along the Eastern districts as far as the boundary-line betwei^n Virginia 

 and Maryland. At the present day very few are to be ibund higher than Cincinnati, 

 nor is it until you reach the mouth of tbe Ohio that Parrakeets are met with in con- 

 siderable numbers. I should think that along the Mississippi there is not now half the 

 uumVter that existed iifteen years ago." 



In 1838, Dr. J. P. Kirtland stated, tbat "tbe Parrakeets do not usually extend tbeir 

 visits north of the Scioto, tbougli I am informed, perhaps on doubtful authority, tbat 

 thirty years since flocks of tluun were seiiu on tire Ohio at the moutli of Big Braver, 

 thirty miles below Pittsburgh." Mr. J. M. Wheatou admits it iu his Ohio list, but with 



