
in the amount of good woodcock habitat in the different states. . We 
have no way of correcting for this difference at present, however, 
Despite the obvious weaknesses in the data it is thought the 
number of woodcock per stop for any given state will be more meaning- 
ful when multiplied by breeding indexes for that state. It-is obvious 
from Table 1 that although Massachusetts has a higher average number 
of woodcock per stop on its routes than Pennsylvania, the latter state 
because of its size has a larger percentage of the total woodcock 
population and thus a higher breeding index than Massachusetts, Thus 
when samples from the two states are campared they should be multiplied 
by their respective breeding indexes to truly represent the total 
populations of which they are presumed to be samples. 
It should be noted that in computing-the weighting factors only 
the portions of Ontario and Quebec which are below the Canadian Zone 
(Boreal spruce-fir forest area) are included. It is assumed that the 
species does not breed in significant numbers north of the Alleghenian 
Zone (pine~hemlock-northern hardwood forest area). Furthermore, only 
the Alleghenian and Carolinean Zones of Minnesota are used, excluding 
the eastern prairie and parklands zones as non~productive areas for 
breeding woodcock. oF 
In Table 1 the woodcock population figures are grouped into 
"eastern" and "western" groups based on whether the state is primarily 
east or west of the Appalachians and thus may be involved in an 
eastern or western migration pattern. It is noted that- the western 
group has a breeding index 16% higher than the eastern. 
Snipe Wintering Ground Studies.--Chandler Robbins continued his 
investigations of a method of determining population changes in the 
Common Snipe on its wintering grounds. In his report he has summarized 
the results of such study over a period of the last 5 years and has 
presented the results in comparison with a tabulation of the data 
obtained on Christmas bird counts of the National Audubon Society 
over the same period. The combined data indicate that there has been 
no significant change in abundance of snipe during that period. Based 
on statistical analyses, recommendations are given for improving the 
coverage of the January count necessary to give more dependable in- 
formation on snipe abundance. It has also been pointed out by Walter 
Crissey that there is need for developing a weighting factor to apply 
to these winter snipe figures. This weighting factor should be based 
on relative population densities in different areas sampled and the 
size of the areas of a given density level. At present with most of 
the counts being made in Louisiana the estimated continental total may 
be unduly influenced by a local fluctuation in abundance in one state. 
Mr. Robbins is currently making studies to obtain information on the 
geographic variation in wintering snipe population density which will 
permit development of weighting factors. 
