10 THE NIDOLOGIST 
Notes from Ohio. 
N JUNE 2, 1895, while hunting for a 
nest of the Indigo Bunting, I flushed 
a Woodcock from her nest contain- 
ing two eggs. As the nest was near a 
path I was afraid to leave the set to be 
completed, so I took the eggs and substi- 
tuted two stones as near Jike the eggs as I 
could find. I then continued my trip up 
the small creek I was following. Returning 
in about two hours I thought I would take 
a look at the nest to see if the stones had 
fooled my bird. 
Walking cautiously, so as not to scare 
the bird if she should be on, I approached 
the nest. She was on but flew up before I 
was within a yard of her. Imagine my 
surprise when looking down I saw she had 
laid the third egg in my absence! 
The next day I again visited the nest to 
take the fourth egg; but in this I was dis- 
appointed, although the bird was still 
sitting on the stones. Two days after- 
wards I weut to the nest again but she had 
left, so I cnly secured a set of three. 
While fishing on June ro of this year, a 
boy across the river from me ran across a 
young Spotted Sandpiper and immediately 
gave chase. ‘The bird made at once for the 
river, ran in and swam out about ten feet. 
The boy tried to hit it with a pole, but 
every time he struck the bird would dive. 
It was about half grown and was as yet 
unable to fly. 
On the 29th of June a friend and I were 
standing knee deep in water fishing for 
bass. Bank Swallows were numerous and 
kept flying around very close to us. One 
made a dash at an insect, caught it, and 
then settled on my friend’s fish pole. * 
It devoured the insect and then commenced 
to view its surroundings, looking first in 
one direction and then in the other. 
My friend kept perfectly quiet, but all 
the time moving his pole in nearer to him. 
At last the bird was in reach—he waited 
till the Swallow looked in the other direc- 
tion and then picked him off the pole. 
After examining him we sat him back on 
the pole but he did not stay there long. 
Perhaps he was not surprised when my 
friend grabbed him, but the ‘‘squak” he 
gave seemed to confirm that idea. 
The Red-headed Woodpeckers have been 
making use of the poles of the local 
[* Mr. A. H. Wheatley has described in THE 
NIpoLocisT a similar action of a Water Ouzel.—Eb. ] 
telephone company to build their nests. 
The poles have not been here more than a 
year, yet many of them contain excava- 
tions, in spite of the fact that there are 
many dead trees in the vicinity. On July 
8 I climbed one of the poles, from an exca- 
vation in which a Woodpecker had flown. 
The nest contained threeeggs. I left them 
until the rrth and then visited the locality 
again, expecting to take a set of four or 
six. No more eggs had been deposited 
and so I took the three. They were very 
slightly incubated. On July 29 I again 
saw the bird fly from the hole. Ascending 
I was soon in possession of five more eggs. 
The excavation had been made several 
inches deeper. What I want to know is 
whether to call ita set of eight, or two sets, 
one of three and one of five? 
E. A. DooLirrLe. 
Painesville, Ohio. 
* 
* * 
Infested Nests of Swifts. 
Noticing an article about the Chimney 
Swift in the last issue of THE NIDOLOGIST, 
I would add to that a little of my own ex- 
perience. In every case where I have 
taken the nest of the Chimney Swift I have 
always found it infested with ‘‘bed-bugs;’’ 
so much so, that they were difficult to clean 
for preservation. My experience was in 
and about Rockville, Conn. The birds 
also, when caught, have bed-bugs on them, 
and I came to the conclusion that in this 
way bugs were often taken from one dwell- 
ing to another. 
Jos. M. WADE. 
Boston, Mass. 
Pas 
Phalaropes in the Park. 
I noticed 22 Wilson’s (?) Phalaropes on 
the lake at the Park yesterday, they were 
very tame, and szwzming about with 
greatest ease. They were wild birds, as 
they flew short distances, but didn't care a 
snap for the crowds. 
H. B. KAEDING. 
San Francisco, Aug. 22, ’96. 
+o 
That the conscientious work accomplished by 
the numerous representative Oologists who com- 
piled ‘“‘Taylor’s Standard American Egg Cata- 
logue”’ has been recognized is demonstrated by its 
very general adoption by exchangers of nests and 
eggs, who find it nearer a true ‘‘standard” than 
any list previously attempted. 
