
WOODCOCK CENSUS STUDIES IN NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES - 1955 
Howard L. Mendall 
Maine Cooperative Wildlife esearch Unit, 
University of Mains 
The 1955 woodcock census data for the New England States and New York 
were compiled by the writer who again served as coordinator for the north- 
eastern region. 
The census technique was essentially the same as a year ago. Fewer 
checks were made on the individual routes this year in line with efforts 
made to increase the geographical coverage. Statistical analyses had 
indicated the need for more routes to be covered, fewer times if need be, 
rather than to have repeated checks on a limited number of arsas. Some 
cooperators were not in a position to expand their coverage and these 
people made two or three checks on their usual areas. In addition to the 
fact that increased coverage unquestionably is needed, repeat checks on 
a given route are very heipful when time permits these. Appreciable 
variation in census figures was noted on many of those routes which were 
covered more than once. 
A large number of new routes were established this year, especially 
in Maine, Vermont and New York, and the overall coverage was more than 
doubled. Game Division personnel of the Maine Department of Inland Fish- 
eries and Game deserve special commendation for their efforts in this 
respect. 
The census results for each area are shown in Table 1. The areas 
have been grouped by counties with the counties arranged in alphabetical 
order. The 195) index figures also are given for comparative purposes 
on all routes which were censused both years. 
Table 2 shows the summarized results by states of all data compiled 
in 1955. Table 3 gives comparative data for 195k and 1955 on the areas 
which were covered in both years. In this connection it should be pointed 
out that the 195); index figures are not exactly the same as were given in 
last year's report. Since some of the 195) routes were not run this year, 
while metioae were revised somewhat, the index figures have been adjuelae 
to permit direct comparisons. 
An examination of data in Table 3 indicates a slight reduction in 
woodcock populations this year throughout the region. The lone exception 
occurred in New Hampshire, but the data are too few there to be of signif- 
icance. To what extent these figures actually reflect a population 
decline is uncertain at this time. Massachusetts workers feel the reduc- 
tion on the important Prescott Peninsula route is due more to changing, 
less favorable habitat conditions than to woodcock losses. Undoubtedly 
this applies in other areas as well, m the other hand, it is to be 
expected that on some of the census routes, habitat is becoming more favor- 
able. Furthermore, the lowered population trend was general throughout 
17 
