THE ZooLocist—Marcu, 1876. _ 4819 
silly creatures throw nearly as many to the ground as they consume 
on the tree; these become covered with snow, and are therefore lost 
to them; but the pheasants gain by it, for they have less difficulty in 
obtaining them. I have noticed the pheasants this winter feeding 
on the berries of a shrub, on the lawn, which I never before saw 
them eat; the name of the shrub, I am told, is “ Parry’s thorn.” 
Song Thrush.—Has entirely disappeared since the frost and 
snow set in. ; 
Wood Pigeon.—I have noticed for the last three months that 
there are not more than from twenty to thirty wood pigeons about 
the Dene, and they move about in one flock; nor do I meet with 
them in the fields in this neighbourhood. This appears to me 
very remarkable, considering the immense numbers usually to be 
seen here. After appearing in such vast numbers in December, 
1874, they left us all at once, almost to a bird; and it is curious 
that not more than one-fourth of the usual number have been seen 
since; but few having bred here last season, the farmers declare it 
“a good job.” 
JoHN SCLATER. 
Castle Eden, Durham. 
Note on Picus leuconotus. By Epwarp Newman. 
From a note by Mr. Gurney, jun., it appears that Mr. Gould has 
identified a specimen obtained at Halligarth by the late Dr. Saxby 
(S. S. 4695) as the whitebacked woodpecker (Picus leuconotus of 
Bechstein) ; and the Rev. S. H. Saxby has added an interesting 
note from his brother’s journal (S. S, 4723), mentioning the un- 
usual size of the cutaneous nerves in the woodpecker family, as 
well as the closeness with which the skin adheres to the body— 
a subject to which Mr. Corbin alludes in another communication. 
I have taken the liberty of offering a few more lines on the subject 
of the Halligarth woodpecker, the first record of which will be found 
at page 7932 of the first series of the ‘ Zoologist ;’ but the specimen 
was then supposed to be the greater spotted woodpecker. The 
addition I now desire to make is from a letter of my late friend 
Henry Doubleday, whose practice it was to criticise each number 
of the ‘ Zoologist’ as it appeared, for my private benefit, and who 
never had the slightest intention of hurting the feelings of his 
