THE GUN AT HOME AND ABROAD 
much interested in the matter, sent me the first long flight -feathers taken 
from four undoubtedly young woodcocks, which he had shot in Kent in 
August and September, 1908. These equally displayed great variety in 
their markings, one having an almost entire buff margin to the outer web 
of the first flight -feather, while in the others it was partially toothed 
on the terminal half, but in no two was it alike. This clearly proved 
that woodcocks with the tooth -like markings all along the outer web 
of the first flight -feather were not necessarily young birds. To throw 
further light on the matter, I sought help from Sir Richard Graham of 
Netherby, where numbers of woodcocks are known to breed annually, 
and he very kindly sent me eleven young birds in various stages of 
plumage, the flight -feathers in all being only partially grown. These, 
like the young birds from Kent, showed every variety of marking, but 
the majority (like Gould’s very old birds) had a more or less entire buff 
border to the first flight -feather, and in one only was it toothed through- 
out. This entirely upsets Gould’s theory, as many of the birds which he 
considered to be fully adult (on account of the entire buff margin on the 
outer web of the first long flight -feathers) were no doubt birds of the year. 
My investigations have clearly proved that it is impossible to distinguish 
between the plumage of the male and female woodcock, or between old 
birds and young birds of the year, when once the latter have fully 
developed their flight -feathers. 
“ Seebohm (‘ Hist. Brit. Birds,’ iii,p. 236) distinguishes the young from 
the old bird as follows: ‘Young in first plumage very closely re- 
semble adults, but the bold pale spots on the upperparts are much less 
conspicuous, being smaller and chestnut-buff. The most striking difference 
is to be found in the tail-feathers, in which the grey tips on the upper 
surface have buff bases, and the chestnut spots on the margins of the 
outer webs are lengthened into bars reaching to the shaft. Birds of the 
year are intermediate in these respects between adults and young in first 
plumage.’ These differences are individual, and do not appear to have 
any significance whatever. 
“Lastly, the width of the barring on the underparts has been suggested 
as a distinctive character, but, like those already mentioned, it appears 
to be purely an individual one. 
“The woodcock is more or less dimorphic in plumage — ^i.e., two more 
or less distinct phases of plumage are found ; some birds have the general 
colour of the upperparts greyer, while in others it is richer and more 
226 
