1890.] Chapman on the Winter Distribution of the Bobolink. 1Q 



common, and restricted to the cultivated valleys. It is said to be most 

 numerous about places where bees are kept. 



25. Myiarchus crinitus. Crested Flycatcher. — Of universal dis- 

 persion throughout the region; common. 



26. Sayornis phcebe. Phozbe. — About the town of Chester, I have 

 never met with the Phcebe during the month of June. In my wagon tour 

 across the country it was first encountered, June 5, at Fair Forest, five 

 miles west of Spartanburgh. On the same day its loud cries were heard 

 at the South Fork of Tiger River, also in Spartanburgh County. June 4, 

 1S8S, a pair were found established at a small mill-pond midway between 

 the villages of Easley and Pickens. At Mt. Pinnacle, it is common in the 

 vicinage of water, ranging up to about 2500 feet. Back on the heights, 

 sheltered situations in the walls of rock are frequently selected as nesting 

 places. Young birds, just ready to leave the nest, were seen as late as 

 June 23 in 1887. 



27. Contopus virens. Wood Pewee. — Conspicuously common every- 

 where in the woods. 



28. Empidonax acadicus. Acadian Flycatcher. — Most widely dis- 

 persed at the lower levels. Along the larger streams it reaches a higher 

 elevation than elsewhere in the mountains. On the north fork of the 

 Oolenoy, near the High-low Gap, it was common at 2500 feet, the highest 

 point at which the species was observed. 



( To be continued.) 



ON THE WINTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE BOBO- 

 LINK (DOLICHONTX ORYZIVORUS) WITH 

 REMARKS ON ITS ROUTES OF MIGRATION. 



BY FRANK M. CHAPMAN. 



Among our summer resident land birds the Bobolink is in its 

 migrations remarkable for two things ; first, the extent of 

 its wanderings during the winter ; second, the comparatively 

 late date at which its spring migration is completed. These 

 are both well-known facts, and I shall here simply endeavor 

 to bring forward and arrange the records on which they are 

 based, adding some new data furnished by an examination of 

 the material in the American Museum of Natural History. It is 

 to be regretted that a large proportion of the extra-limital records 

 consist merely of mention of the bird's name and the locality of its 



