AMERICAN WOODCOCK. 101 



The male woodcock is ten inches and a half long, 

 and sixteen inches in extent ; bill, a brownish flesh 

 colour, black towards the tip, the upper mandible 

 ending- in a slight knob, that projects about one-tenth of 

 an inch beyond the lower,* each grooved, and, in length, 

 somewhat more than two inches and a half ; forehead, 

 line over the eye, and \vhole lower parts, reddish tawny ; 

 sides of the neck, inclining to ash ; between the eye 

 and bill, a slight streak of dark brown j crown, from 

 the forepart of the eye backwards, black, crossed by 

 three narrow bands of brownish white ; cheeks, marked 

 with a bar of black, variegated with light brown ; edges 

 of the back, and of the scapulars, pale bluish white ; 

 back and scapulars, deep black, each feather tipt or 

 marbled with light brown and bright ferruginous, with 

 numerous fine zigzag lines of black crossing the lighter 

 parts ; quills, plain dusky brown ; tail, black, each feather 

 marked along the outer edge with small spots of pale 

 brown, and ending in narrow tips, of a pale drab colour 

 above, and silvery white below ; lining of the wing, 

 bright rust ; legs and feet, a pale reddish flesh colour ; 

 eye, very full and black, seated high and very far back 

 in the head ; weight, five ounces and a half, sometimes 

 six. 



The female is twelve inches long, and eighteen in 

 extent ; weighs eight ounces ; and differs also in having 

 the bill very near three inches in length ; the black on 

 the back is not quite so intense ; and the sides under 

 the wings are slightly barred with dusky. 



The young woodcocks of a week or ten days old are 

 covered with down of a brownish white colour, and are 

 marked from the bill along the crown to the hind head, 

 with a broad stripe of deep brown ; another line of the 



* Mr Pennant, {Arctic Zoology, p. 463,) in describing the 

 American woodcock, says, that the lower mandible is much shorter 

 than the upper. From the appearance of his figure, it is evident 

 that the specimen from which that and his description were taken 

 had lost nearly half an inch from the lower mandible, probably 

 broken off by accident. Turton and others have repeated this 

 mistake. 



