General Notes. 
I 2 I 
In the early part of October, 1879, I paid my usual yearly visit to my old 
home, and scarcely had arrived at the house ere my father informed me, 
as a bit of news which he was well aware would both interest and surprise 
me, that the Red-headed Woodpeckers had all migrated; that for a number 
of nights preceding he had heard overhead their well-known notes as 
they winged their way to some more or less distant region ; in short, that 
the woods which had been their home “knew them now no more.” The 
following day I began collecting, and though some eight miles of wood- 
land were traversed only three specimens of this species were observed, 
these being young individuals and in all probability of one brood, since 
they were sporting together among some large black-gum trees. My stay 
was prolonged to the end of the month, and though I was in the woods 
almost every day, my excursions radiating in every direction from the 
town, these three lingering individuals seen the first day were all that were 
met with, even the same clump of gums having become entirely deserted. 
This wholesale migration of a single species, when all other members 
of the family remained in their normal abundance, is to me wholly inex- 
plicable. It has never occurred before, to my knowledge, in that particu- 
lar region ; and my father, who has lived there upwards of forty years (he 
can remember when the Parakeets flew in large flocks, and were a nuisance 
to the farmer) cannot call to mind another instance. Whether or not they 
have since returned, I do not know, but in all probability their absence 
was but temporary. 
In connection with this matter, a list of the Woodpeckers found in the 
vicinity of Mount Carmel, arranged according to their relative abun- 
dance, may not be out of place. 
1. Melanerpes erythrocephalus. “Red-head”; “Black Wood- 
pecker”. Usually most numerous in winter, when however, less gener- 
ally distributed, being mainly confined to the sheltered bottoms. 
2. Centurus carolinus. “Checkered Woodpecker”; “Wood- 
chuck”; “Chuck.” 
3. Colaptes auratus. “Flicker”; “Yellow Hammer.” [In the 
fall of 1879, I shot upwards of thirty specimens of this species in order to 
find, if possible, an individual inclining to the u hyb ridus” style, but suc- 
ceeded in securing only one which departed in the least from typical 
auratus ,* this one having merely a very slight red suffusion at the ends of 
the black cheek-patches. In addition to these thirty-odd specimens, I have 
handled probably a hundred and fifty more shot in the same localities 
* Two adult males obtained the same day (Oct. 20, are remarkable for very small 
size and certain peculiarities of coloration, which, however, do not tend in the least 
towards tnexicanus. These two specimens compared with two from Florida in my 
collection measure as follows : — 
Wing. 
Tail. 
Tarsus. 
Bill. 
cf ad.- Gilson Co. Ind. 
Oct. 20, 1879. 
Cri 
bo 
O 
4-35 
1.20 
1. 10 
c? “ 
“ “ 
6.20 
4-50 
1.25 
1. 10 
d “ Miami, Florida, 
Feb. 1 7, 1871. 
5-55 
4-45 
1.32 
1. 10 
9 “ 
11 u ,11 
5.80 
4.70 
1.30 
1.05 
