194 
THE CONDOR 
Vol. XV 
being absent. The surface markings also do not show the same range of color, 
being chiefly chocolate-brown and brownish-black, while the patterns of the mark- 
ings from minnte specks all over the egg to great blotches are equally as variable 
as in the other two species. On many of the eggs of P. fiilicarius and P. hyper- 
horeiis, .specks and blotches of violet gray are to be found, more especially on 
those wdth the stone-colored and light-olive grounds. The bigger blotches on the 
eggs of all the three sjiecies are generally to be found on the large end and some- 
times cover the whole of it. The eggs of P. fiilicarius and P. hyperhorcus have 
little or no gloss, while the eggs of P. tricolor are distinctly glossy. I think Dr. 
Cones is mistaken in saying that the eggs of P. fiilicarius cannot be distinguished 
from those of P. hyperhorcus. It is true that small eggs of P. fiilicarius cannot be 
distinguished from large eggs of P. hyperhorcus, but in a large series such as I 
have before me ( 19 sets or 76 eggs of the former and 50 sets or 200 eggs of the 
latter) the ditTerence is easily seen. Measurements: P. tricolor, 1.3 x .9 in.; P. 
fiilicarius, 1.25 x .85; P. hyperhoreus, 1.15 x .82 in. Number of eggs, 4. Eggs 
pyriform in shape. 
Recurvirostridae. 
1 am not able to give any description of the American forms of Stilt and 
Avocet, but judging from Dr. Shufeldt’s figures they must very closely resemble 
the European forms both in size and color and markings, but w'ould hardly fit in 
with Dr. Cones’ description. The eggs of Hiinautopiis avocetta are distinctly 
larger than those of Hiinautopiis mclanoptcriis, and while tlie markings are very 
similar on the eggs of both species, and in many cases the ground color also, the 
eggs of H. az’ocetta appear in a series to have a richer, warmer appearance. 
Measurements: H. ai'ocetta, 2 x 1.5 in.; H. inclanopteriis, 1.7 x 1.25. Number 
of eggs nearly always 4 in H. az’oeetta, and 3 to 4 in H. rnelanoptenis. The eggs 
of both species have little or no gloss. They are pyriform in shape. 
Scolopax rusticola. European Woodcock. 
Very few authors seem to have paid sufficient attention to the eggs of this 
species, probably from insufficient material. Swann's description as given by Dr. 
Shufeldt, “pale buff, blotched, ’’etc., is a poor and meagre description of these 
beautiful eg'gs. The ground color ranges from the palest cream (nearly white) 
th.rough deeper cream to pale buff, yellorv-buff and the deepest browm-buff ( many 
of the eggs of this latter type having a distinct ifink tone), speckled and spotted 
and Iflotched with yellow-brown, dark bro\Vn and purplish gray. As a rule the 
eggs in the same set are fairly uniform in the pattern of the markings; but oc- 
casionally you get a set with one egg much more marked than the other three, and 
in many cases you find two distinct shades of ground color in the same set. The 
number of eggs is invariably 4. Measurements: 1.75 x 1.3 in. The eggs possess 
a fair amount of gloss, and are rounded ovate in shape. 
Scolopax (or Gallinago) gallinago. European Snipe. 
In ground color the eggs of this species show a greater variation than in any 
other of the Eimicolae, and the series I have before me now (50 sets or 200 eggs) 
certainly baflles description. Swann’s description, for a general one, is very mis- 
leading if not altogether wrong: and I have certainly never seen an egg of the 
snipe “pale yellowish with an olive tinge”. Here you have the various shades of 
stone color, pale buff and deep buff, all shades of brown, from the very palest to 
the rich red (so highly prized by collectors), a deep chocolate, a beautiful pale 
green (very fugitive), similar to some eggs of the Dunlin and Wood Sandpiper, 
pale olives and dark olives, a very dark green, and a very light dove gray. The 
markings are very variable, sjwts, blotches and irregular thin .streaks ( chiefly at 
