To clarify these points a study was initiated in 1962 
to determine the feasibility of using randomly selected 
routes to obtain representative measurements of the breed- 
ing population. In cooperation with personnel in the 
Michigan Conservation Department and Region 3 (Northcentra1) 
of the Bureau, 125 routes were randomly selected in the 
Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Both random and existing oper- 
ational routes will be covered in 1963 and 1964. It is hoped 
that the results of this study will show whether population 
index values that are comparable from area to area can be 
obtained in this manner, and whether randomly selected 
routes reflect the same annual changes in population levels 
as the operational routes. 
Recommendations to Cooperators 
Further study should improve the value of the survey, 
but the usefulness of each count will still depend upon 
its comparability with all other counts. Therefore, par- 
ticipants should read the survey instructions each year 
and should follow them as closely as possible. Several 
routes covered in 1962 were not included in the analysis 
because stops on the routes were less than 0.4 mile apart. 
In addition, a route should be run once each year unless 
factors such as wind, temperature, traffic, and other noise 
result in an atypical count. If a route is covered more 
than once, the cooperator should send only the first satis- 
factory count. This year some participants made two or 
more counts on the same route but did not indicate the 
“first satisfactory coverage. In these cases the last 
count was used in the computations to make results compa- 
rable with surveys in previous years. Cooperators able 
to conduct counts on more than one night are urged to run 
additional routes rather than cover a single route more 
than once. The statistical basis for this recommendation 
is provided by an anaylsis of data from survey counts 
made in earlier years (Kozicky, E.,T. Bancroft, and 
P. Homeyer. 1954. An anaylsis of woodcock singing 
ground counts, 1948-1952. Jour. Wildl. Memt., 18(2): 
259-266). 
