Notes from Field and Study 



217 



It was built just in front d" a tlii. k . lunii) 

 <jf tall grass, sonu- nl" whi. h was hi'nt 

 over and niixfil with olluT grass and 

 wi-ods to form tin- top. Almost dirf.lly 

 in front of tlu' nost was a thick hush 

 which had to \,c held aside while my 

 brother look the piiture. It will always 

 be one of great interest to us both. — • 

 Emma van Gii.i.uwk, Ocean Grove, X . J. 



Notes on the Rose -breasted Grosbeak 



In looking over some of my earlier notes 

 on the Rose-breasted Grosbeak I found 

 the following entries wdiirh seem, at the 

 present tiiTie of writing, to he rather 

 unique and worthy of permanent record- 

 ing. 



The vear 1891 witnessed some of my 

 first attempts at field-work in ornithology. 

 My home was at that time in Jackson, 

 Mich., and my field of observation a 

 tract of semi-swampy ground on the 

 southwestern extremities of the city, known 

 locally as the ' Willows,' a term which 

 has clung to the district ever since. 



Here it was that, in the fore-part of 

 May, 1891, in company with a friend, 

 I met with a flock of about twelve male 

 Grosbeaks in such a state of exhaustion 

 that we were enabled to remove one or 

 two from their perches in a low tree and 

 hold them in our hands without further 

 demonstration of displeasure from the 

 birds than that of receiving a sharp nip 

 on the fingers. We watched them for all 

 of a half-hour and thought at the time 

 that they were suffering from some sort 

 of illness because of their apparent lack 

 of strength. When first noted, the birds 

 were clambering over the limbs of the 

 poplars, in a languid and clumsy manner, 

 but soon appeared to regain their strength. 

 The time of observation was about 8 a. m. 

 and the morning a mild one, with some 

 traces of mist in the air, as the result of 

 previous rains. Moreover, this was the 

 first record of the species for that spring. 

 Looking back upon the occurrence now, 

 the only explanation at all satisfactory 

 is that the Grosbeaks were recovering 



iih. 



the fact that the birds were still in a body, 

 not having had time to disperse over the 

 surrounding territory in quest of food. 

 The morning being a mild one, the birds 

 could not have been sutTering from cold 

 nor from lack of food sui)ply, as the leaf 

 and flower buds were well advanced on 

 the majority of the shrubs for the season 

 of the year and must also have supported 

 some insect life. 



If any of the readers of Bird-Lore 

 have met with a similar experience re- 

 garding this or any other species of bird, 

 the writer would be glad to receive com- 

 munications from such observers regard- 

 ing this point. — .\. D. Tinker, Ann Arbor, 

 Mich. 



Notes on the Wood Thrush 



About the beginning of May, iyo8, a 

 nest of the Wood Thrush was found in a 

 pine woods not far from home. It was 

 built in a sapling, and, when found, con- 

 tained four eggs. Several days later I 

 visited the nest, but the eggs were gone, 

 probably destroyed by a Blue Jay or 

 other enemy. I found another nest on 

 May 14, in the same locality, and this one 

 also contained eggs. I visited it several 

 times after this, and on every occasion the 

 bird was on the nest. On May 27 there 

 was no sign of eggs or bird. A little later 

 on I found another nest. It was not far 

 from the other two, and was built in a tall 

 sapling. When found, the nest contained 

 young birds. These were raised success- 

 fully. On June 2 I found another nest of 

 the same bird. It was also built in a sap- 

 ling. On June 6 a Thrush was on the nest. 

 For several days after this I did not see 

 the bird and secured the nest. It was a 

 usual Wood Thrush nest, being built of 

 pine needles, rootlets, leaves and a little 

 moss. Strange to say, a large piece of 

 snake-skin was also used. This is the only 

 nest of the Wood Thrush I have seen that 

 contained snake-skin. — Edward S. Din 

 GLE, Summerton, S. C. 



