38 
BULLETIN OF THE NVTTALL 
Allen, having only his rifle with him at the time, was unable to secure the 
female, but as she sat closely and was distinctly seen by him, there seems 
little reason to doubt the correctness of the identification, especially as in 
position of nest, color and size of eggs, etc., we find nothing incompatible 
with the corresponding breeding characteristics of the other and better- 
known species of this genus. 
Mr. Allen has since informed me, by letter, that a nest satisfactorily 
determined as belonging to this species, and which agrees closely with the 
one just described, was discovered by Captain Charles Bendire in Ore- 
gon (?). 
A CONTEIBUTION TO THE BIOGKAPHY OF WILSON’S 
PHALAKOPE. 
BY E. W. NELSON. 
Although this species {Steganopus wilson% Coues) is more or 
less common in portions of the country frequently visited by 
Ornithologists, it is remarkable that its life-history should be so 
little known. The account of nearly every author who has men- 
tioned the species contains more or less error, and none give any- 
thing like a complete history of it. To remedy this to some 
extent is the object of the present paper, since I have had abundant 
opportunity for observing the bird in the field. 
But first I wish to make a few quotations from and remarks upon 
the principal accounts of the species. Ord, in his edition of “ Wilson’s 
Ornithology (Vol. Ill, p. 205), states as follows : “ Our figure of this 
species \Phalaropus lobatus, Ord] bears all the marks of haste ; it is 
inaccurately drawn, and imperfectly colored ; notwithstanding, by 
a diligent study of it, I have been enabled to ascertain that it is the 
Coot-footed Tringa [Phalarope] of Edwards, pis. 46 and 143, to which 
bird Linnaeus gave the specific denomination of lohatus” Thus far 
Ord is undoubtedly correct, as is evident by a comparison of the 
plates in question. As Dr. Coues has already stated (Birds of the 
Northwest, p. 467), Tringa lohata^ Linn, is Lohipes hyperhoreus, (L.) 
Cuv., and I perfectly agree with Ord in referring Wilson’s plate to 
the same species ; but farther on Ord describes an undoubted speci- 
men of Steganopus wilson% taken near Philadelphia, as being identi- 
cal with Wilson’s plate of lohatus, which is certainly a bad case of 
mal-identification. From references I have been enabled to make, I 
