
WILSON'S SNIPE WINTERING GROUND STUDIES, 1955-56 
Chandler S. Robbins 
U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Laurel, Maryland 
Field work during the winter of 1955-56 included: (1) The fifth 
annual mid-winter Abundance Index of the Wilson's Snipe in the southern 
states; (2) Further testing of random ground transects in southern 
Louisiana; (3) Further testing of aerial transects; (l) Continuation 
of banding snipe in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas; (5) 
Appraisal of habitat conditions in the Tampico marshes. Results of the 
mid-winter counts and the snipe figures from the National Audubon 
Society's Christmas Bird Count have been tabulated and tested for sta- 
tistical significance. And a plan for future coverage has been devel- 
oped. 
Wilson's Snipe Abundance Index 
During the five-day period, Jan. 25-29, 132 counts of wintering 
snipe were conducted in 15 southern states. As usual, many areas 
that had been visited in the previous January were not covered this 
year, and a number of new areas were initiated. Furthermore, some 
observers continue to make observations entirely from their vehicles 
and these counts cannot be directly compared with the vast majority 
which are taken on foot and which specify the amount of foot coverage. 
Seventy-one percent of the 1956 counts (9) areas) are suitable for 
use in a comparison of 1955 and 1956 populations. Some of the re- 
maining 29 percent can also be put to use if they are revisited next 
year. 
The left half of Table I gives a summary by states and adminis- 
trative regions of the number of snipe recorded per hour of foot 
coverage in areas that were checked in both 1955 and 1956, The right 
half of the table is based on the areas in the left half plus those 
that were covered only one of the two years. Although the figures in 
the last two columns at the right are based on about half as many more 
areas each year as are those in the left half of the table, the inclu- 
Sion of areas covered one year but not the other has drastically 
affected the more comparable data and very greatly lowered the sta- 
tistical accuracy. The important figures in this table, therefore, are 
those in the second and third columns of figures. The total percentage 
change indicated by this table is an increase of 35 percent, which 
nearly compensates for last year's drop. 
Knowing that these indicated percentage changes cannot be taken 
at their face value (because of the vast area concerned, the relative- 
ly small size of the sample that was covered, and the many variable 
factors involved), the data obtained were subjected to the null 
hypothesis to determine whether a significant change in abundance had 
57 
