TRINGA PECT0RALI8. 



PECTORAL SANDPIPER. 



[Plato XXIII. Fig. 2.] 



Felidna pectoralis, Say, in Long's Exp. i., p. 111.— Tringa pectoralis, Nob. Cat. 

 Birds U. S. Id. Synops. Sp. 250. Id. Speech, eomp. — Tringa campestris? Licht. 

 Cat. II., Vogel. p. 74, Sp. 764. Tringa cinclus dominicensis ? Briss. ^». T., p. 

 219, Sp. 12, pi. 24, flg. l.—Chorlito a cou hrun? Azaka, it., p. 284, Sp. 404.— 

 Alouette de met de St. Domingue, Bbiss. loe. eit. 



This humble species, well marked, though, closely allied to several 

 other Sandpipers, is, as well as I can judge, accurately described and 

 figured by Brisson ; but since then unnoticed even by compilers, his 

 description had become obsolete, when Say found the bird in the western 

 territory, and we replaced it in the records of the science. We have 

 since shot it repeatedly on the shores of New Jersey, where it is com- 

 mon. The species appears to be spread throughout the states, extending 

 farther into the interior than most of its family : beyond the Mississippi 

 it is very common; many flocks of them were seen by Major Longs 

 party both in the spring and autumn at Engineer Cantonment, and it 

 is often met with in small parties on the coasts of the Middle States in 

 the latter part of autumn. It also inhabits the West Indies, and, if we 

 are correct in our reference to Azara, is found in Brazil and Montevideo. 



Unlike other Sandpipers, this is not addicted to bare sandy places, 

 but on the contrary is fond of damp meadows, where it shows some of 

 the habits of the Snipe. Solitary individuals are often seen, starting 

 up from before the sportsman's feet much in the manner of that bird. 



The family to which this bird belongs has been admitted by all 



authors, under various names, and comprehending more or less aberrant 



genera. It was first established by lUiger, but he excluded from it 



those which by an unimportant deviation are destitute of a hind toe, 



which he placed in his artificial family of Littorales, while he included 



in it some true Charadridoe on account of the presence of a rudiment of 



this member. Vieillot took the same view, calling the two artificial 



families Helionomi, and ^gialites ; as did Eanzani and Savi under 



the names of Limicole and TaoMdrome ; and Mr. Vigors erred in like 



manner by distributing the genera between his too extensive families of 



Charadriadce and Scolopacidce. The arrangement of Cuvier and 



Latreille is in this instance much more consonant to nature: these 



authors called their better composed, though still far from perfect 



family, Longirostres. 



(345) 



