May, 1921 - BIRDS AT LAKE TAHOE, CALIFORNIA 77 
June 15, washed it from its moorings and it was found the following morning at 
the foot of the tree, waterlogged. No egg shells were in evidence and I am reas- 
onably sure that it contained no eggs, so at least fourteen days were consumed in 
its construction. Nothing daunted, the bird started nest number two on June 18, 
in another aspen only a few rods from the previous site, but this time twenty 
feet from the ground. The first egg was laid June 26, and another on each of 
the two days following. On the 29th the nest, with its three eggs, was collected. 
Only eight days were thus required for its construction. Again showing its per- 
severance this bird started number three on July 2, once more in an aspen, but 
much nearer site number one than was the last. This time it was fifteen feet 
from the ground. The first egg was laid on July 9, seven days having been re- 
quired for building the nest. 
Although frequently watched at short range, with and without field glasses, 
at no time was any building material visible in this bird’s bill, nor was she ever 
discovered in the act of gathering any. At no time was the male in evidence. 
Oceasionally others of this species would appear, only to be promptly driven off 
by the nest builder. Possibly a lone bird in sole possession of a beat on the 
lake front a few rods distant may have been its mate. 
Building operations seemed to consist solely in a constant pecking-weaving 
process, and the shaping of the nest was accomplished by the bird twisting its 
body while in the nest, and by arching its neck so that its throat was over the rim 
and against the side of the nest. The head was then moved back and forth along 
the rim much as one sharpens a razor on a strop. With a similar effect the tail 
was often thrown down and compressed against the outside of the nest, but no 
lateral motion could ever be discerned. 
While numerous other nests were found, none of them was so located as tc 
permit of such intimate study as the above, so in this connection I will only men- 
tion that the Douglas fir and red cedar, as well as the aspen and yellow pine 
already mentioned, were acceptable to this interesting little flycatcher for house- 
keeping purposes. 
San Francisco, California, February 24, 1921. 
