462 



SCOLOPAX. 



Differences 

 between 

 Snipe and 

 Woodcock. 



Structural 

 characters 

 more recent 

 than pattern 

 of colour. 



forms which connect them. The Common Snipe has many characters which distinguish 

 it from the Common Woodcock. 



1st. In the Snipe the tibia is bare of feathers for a considerable distance, whilst in 

 the Woodcock it is feathered to the joint. 



2nd. In the Snipe the number of tail-feathers is fourteen, whilst the Woodcock has 

 only twelve. 



3rd. The Snipe has long primaries and short secondaries, the tip of the outermost 

 secondary and that of the longest primary-covert being about equidistant from the carpal 

 joint. The Woodcock has short primaries and long secondaries, the tip of the outermost 

 secondary extending an inch beyond the longest primary-covert. 



So much for what are called structural characters ; but by bringing in characters 

 founded upon colour to the rescue, we find other differences obviously, as we shall see in 

 the sequel, of greater generic value. 



4th. The bold black markings on the head of the Snipe begin at the base of the 

 bill and are longitudinal, whereas in the Woodcock they are confined to the hind head and 

 are transverse. 



5th. The tail-feathers of the Woodcock have curious silvery-white tips on the under 

 surface, of which no trace is to be found in the Snipe. 



6th. The primaries of the Snipe are uniform in colour, whilst those of the Woodcock 

 are barred. 



7th. The eggs of the Snipe differ widely from those of the Woodcock, the latter 

 being much paler in ground-colour. 



Other minor points might be mentioned, but enough has been said to show that 

 Nature has drawn many lines between the Snipe and the Woodcock, but unfortunately 

 she has not drawn them in the same place. If the Snipes were separated from the 

 Woodcocks on any of the seven characters enumerated, the only lines which would be 

 coincident would be those formed by the 4th and 5th, both of which are founded upon 

 colour and not structure. Two conclusions may be arrived at from the foregoing facts. 

 One of these is that the characters of the Woodcocks and the Snipes are so closely 

 interlaced that no ornithologist attempting classification on scientific principles would be 

 likely to advise the subdivision of such a natural group as the genus Scolojpax. The 

 other conclusion requires consideration at greater length. 



Some ornithologists, whom it can scarcely be regarded as discourteous to style the 

 pedantic school, not only separate the Woodcocks generically from the Snipes, but further 

 subdivide each of these groups. These writers have adopted a theory that what they call 

 structural characters are of generic value, whilst they regard difference of colour as only 

 of specific value. In accordance with this notion, which I venture to call ante-Darwinian 

 and ante-Huxleyan, they have placed the American Woodcock and the Jack Snipe in 

 distinct genera, because in the former some of the primaries are remarkably attenuated, 

 and in the latter the bill and the sternum are slightly exceptional, regardless of the facts 



