hand while the birdling worked its way out of it. When I first
took it up there was a gap in the larger end, which extended about
a third of the way around the circumference. The little bird’s
short, thick bill was in this gap, and so pressed out of position
that the lower mandible overshot the upper, only a temporary
condition. At intervals the struggling prisoner drew its bill
farther into the egg, then suddenly pushed it outward, bringing
the keeled upper edge, armed with a rather insignificant egg-tooth
or ‘pip,’ against the edge of the shell at one end of the hole,
and breaking off a small fragment at the outward thrust. In its
squirmings the bird, impelling itself in some manner I could not
determine, rotated imperceptibly slowly in the shell, in such a
way that the head, turned under one wing, moved backward and the
upper edge of the bill was constantly brought to bear upon a fresh
portion of the shell, which was chipped off at the next outward
thrust. Occasionally the struggling birdling emitted a weak cry.
Thus bit by bit the ragged-margined aperture was lengthened until
it extended about two-thirds of the way around the egg, when the
struggles of the bird succeeded in cracking the remainder, and the
large end of the shell fell off as a cap. Then the naked creature
wormed its way out into my palm, where it lay exhausted by its
continued effort.”
In another nest the last egg to be laid hatched in 13 days. The
young, when first hatched, “were blind, black-skinned, and without
any trace of feathers.” When the nestlings were 6 days old they
were “both bristling with long pinfeathers. The plumes of the one
that was the older by a few hours were already beginning to peep
through the tips of these pinfeathers.” Later in the day, the
feathers had burst their sheaths with amazing rapidity, and the
young bird “was already well covered. The back and belly, save for
a naked line down the middle of the latter, bore a soft, downy
black plumage. Broad ends of the flight feathers of both wings and
tail now showed.”
From this time on, the young birds became more lively and left
the nest when approached, climbing about among the branches or
down onto the ground to hide in the grass. They were brooded by
one of the parents until they were a week old, returning to the
nest at night. But “the following two nights they remained in the
nesting tree but did not return to the nest to sleep. They could
not yet fly and had entered a half scansorial, half terrestrial
stage of existence. When they were 10 days old I tried to catch
them for a photograph, but they hopped from limb to limb with such
agility that, protected as they were by the sharp thorns, I was
unable to secure them. When they were 10 days old they could make
short flights from branch to branch of the same bush. Their bills
were smooth, without any grooves, and their cheeks were bare of
feathers.”
All through his account Mr. Skutch emphasizes the affection that is
shown by all the members of the ani family for one another. While
he was watching the second nest of the pair on which the above
observations were made, something very unusual, if not entirely
unique, happened. One of the young from the previous brood, now
nearly fully grown, “was the constant companion of his parents
during the period in which they were busy with their second brood.”
He frequently perched on the rim of the nest while one of his
parents was incubating, and twice he was seen to offer food to the
parent on the nest. After the young had hatched, “the youngster
fed the nestlings regularly, but not so often as his parents.”
During four hours and a quarter, he saw the male, always the more
attentive parent, bring food to the nestlings 29 times, the female
14, and the young assistant 8 times. “The young bird not only fed
the nestlings but was ardent in protecting them, flying up close to
me and uttering an angry _grrr-rr-rr_ whenever I came near them. In
the absence of the parents he attempted to defend them alone.”
_Plumages._--The young nestling and the development of its first
plumage are described above. In this juvenal plumage the contour
feathers are short and soft, “bone brown” below and darker above;
the wings and tail are much like those of the adult; the bill is
less specialized and not grooved.
Van Rossem (1938) says:
The postjuvenal plumage, attained by a complete body and
tail and a partial wing molt, is not different from that
of the adults except that the rectrices are noticeably
narrower. An irregular molt of the primaries takes place
at this time, although some of the juvenal quills (though
their number and location varies) are held over till the
following spring. In March and April of the next year
there is a partial body, tail, and wing molt in which an
irregular number of rectrices are renewed and such juvenile
remiges as have been held over from the previous fall are
replaced by new ones. The adult plumage with wide rectrices
follows in the second fall, that is, at the first annual
molt. The time of the annual molt extends from the middle
of July to the first of October, the younger (one-year-old)
birds molting earlier than the older ones. The spring
molt of the adults includes some of the rectrices and
secondaries.
_Food._--Mr. Skutch writes (MS.): “The food of the anis consists
largely of insects, which they secure both from the ground and
among the foliage of bushes, and to a smaller extent of fruit and
berries. Often they hunt grasshoppers and other creatures among the
long grass or tall weeds, where they are completely hidden from
view except when occasionally they leap a foot or so above the
herbage to snatch up an insect which has tried to escape by flight.
Perhaps their favorite method of foraging is beside a grazing cow
or mule. Several together remain close to the head of the beast,
moving along by awkward hops as it moves and just managing to
escape its jaws and forefeet, ever on the alert to snatch up the
insects frightened from their retreat in the grass by the passage
of the herbivore. It is frequently stated in books, and affirmed
by the residents of the countries where the anis live, that they
alight upon cattle and pluck ticks and other vermin from their
skin--hence the name _garrapatero_ (tick-eater) given them in Costa
Rica.
“While this is doubtless true in certain parts of the ani’s range,
I have watched them in the neighborhood of cattle from Panama to
Guatemala and only once in three years have I seen an ani alight
on a cow. Since the ani associates so much with cattle without
alighting upon them, and the giant cowbird, another black bird of
approximately the same size, does frequently perch upon them and
relieve them of their vermin, it seems likely that the ani may be
often credited with the acts of the cowbird, especially since the
latter is shier and less known. I have occasionally questioned one
who informed me that the ani plucks ticks from the grazing animals,
only to find that he was unaware of the existence of the giant
cowbird. At a little distance such a person might easily suppose
that the birds upon the animal’s back were the same as those about
its feet, and since his closer approach would leave only the
latter, the illusion would probably persist.”
He has also seen a group of anis excitedly following a battalion of
army ants, probably not to feed on such fiery morsels as the ants,
but to pick up “the cockroaches, spiders, and other small creatures
driven from their retreat among the dead leaves by the relentless
hordes.” Again he says: “After the first heavy rain of the season
has sent the winged brood of the termites forth from their nests in
countless millions, one can watch the anis everywhere feeding like
flycatchers, making ungraceful darts, not exceeding a few feet,
from low twigs and fences; but the insects are so numerous on these
occasions that they can catch many without quitting their perches.”
Major Bendire (1895) quotes Dr. Richmond as saying: “The food
of those examined by me on banana plantations consisted almost
entirely of small grasshoppers, the stomachs being much distended
with these insects. From the fresh earth found on the bill and feet
of these birds, I should judge they also feed on the ground.”
Prof. A. L. Herrara, of the City of Mexico, wrote to Bendire that
“it is a social bird, being usually found in small companies of
from six to fifteen individuals, absolutely monogamous, sedentary,
and of semidomesticated habits, frequenting the haciendas and the
fields and pastures in their vicinity, and as it is considered
very useful because of its habit of destroying large numbers
of parasites infesting the cattle, it is not molested by the
inhabitants, and becomes very tame. It extracts the _Ixodes_
and other _Acaridans_ with remarkable skill, without causing
ulcerations which might result from the proboscis or sucker
remaining in the fibres of the skin, and it must be regarded as one
of the most useful birds of Mexico, especially in warm regions, so
abounding in parasites of all kinds.”
_Behavior._--Dr. Richmond (Bendire, 1895) says:
At Mr. Haymond’s plantation, on the Escondido River,
above Bluefields, this species was unusually plentiful,
owing, no doubt, to a large number of cattle kept there.
The birds follow these animals as they meander over the
pastures, hopping along on each side of an animal, catching
grasshoppers and other insects which the cow disturbs as
it moves along. Frequently the cow moves too rapidly and
the birds lag behind, when they make short flights to the
front again, passing over one another after the manner of
the Grackles when feeding in a field. Only half a dozen
birds or so follow a cow usually, and not many congregate
in a flock, except when roosting. On this plantation, where
the species is more abundant than usual, the birds appear
to roost in numbers. An orange tree near the house was a
favorite place where thirty or forty birds came to pass the
night, flying in from the surrounding pasture about dusk,
and after a few short flights from one tree to another,
passed into the roost one or two at a time, hopping about
as if seeking a favorable perch, uttering their peculiar
note meanwhile. Out of this roost I shot seventeen birds
one evening, and the males greatly predominated; there
were only five females in the lot. The note of this
species reminds one somewhat of the Flicker, _Colaptes
auratus_, but may be better represented by the combination
“plee-co,” rapidly repeated, with the accent usually on
the first syllable, but sometimes on the last. I have
frequently found one of the small flocks resting on a bush
or bamboo along the water’s edge, perfectly silent, until
my near approach started them off, one or two at a time,
scolding as they went. Their flight is even, slow, as short
as possible, and consists of a few flaps of the wings,
followed by a short sail, then a few more flaps, etc.
Mr. Skutch writes (MS.): “Their flight is as perfectly
characteristic of the birds as any other of their peculiar habits.
A long journey, say anything much in excess of a hundred yards,
is seldom made by a continuous flight, but the bird advances with
frequent pauses in conveniently situated trees and bushes. As he
alights on one of the lower branches, the momentum of the long tail
carries it forward above the head with an abrupt jerk. Recovering
his balance, he remains here for some moments, looking around with
caution and calling in his high-pitched voice. Then, satisfied
that the path ahead is clear, with a _tuc tuc tuc, pihuy pihuy
pihuy_, he launches himself upon the next stage of his journey. A
few rapid beats of his short wings serve to impart the requisite
momentum, and he sets them for a long glide. In this manner he can
cover surprisingly long distances, on a slightly descending course,
without further muscular effort. If his ultimate destination is a
certain perch in a tree or bush, he will often arrest his flight on
another considerably below it. By a few queer, rapid, sideways hops
along the branch, and some bounds, or better bounces, from limb to
limb, he gains the desired position where, as likely as not, he
spreads his wings to the morning sun.”
Mr. van Rossem (1938) says: “They feed side by side with never
a sign of friction or argument over the choicer insects, and at
night roost in low trees or bushes, pressed shoulder to shoulder
to the limit of available space. We not infrequently found them
thus when hunting at night. During the time just preceding nesting
it was noticeable that they were inclined to roost two and two
instead of in a long line. In some cases the pair was sitting in
close contact, even though there might be plenty of room to perch
comfortably.”
_Voice._--Dr. Richmond’s impression of the note of the
groove-billed ani is mentioned above. Señor Alfaro says, in his
notes given Mr. Cherrie (1892), that, in Costa Rica, it is “known
as ‘Tijo, tijo’ (tée-ho) in imitation of its peculiar notes
which seem to repeat the word _tijo_ over and over again.” Dr.
Chapman (1896) says: “Its note is a prolonged _chee-wyyah_, easily
distinguishable from the single whining whistle of _C. ani_.” Mr.
van Rossem (1938) says: “The ordinary or ‘conversational’ notes
are a series of very liquid and what can best be described as
‘contented’ bubblings and cluckings. The louder, often repeated
‘chee-múy-o-chee-múy-o’ is the alarm note.”
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas and Baja California,
south to northern South America.
The range of the groove-billed ani extends =north= to southern Baja
California (San Pedro and Santiago); southern Sinaloa (Mazatlan);
southern Texas (Lomita and Corpus Christi); and Yucatan (Progreso
and Chichen-Itza). =East= to Yucatan (Chichen-Itza); British
Honduras (Cayo); Honduras (La Ceiba); Colombia (Santa Marta); and
Venezuela (Altagracia, Curaçao, and Caicara). =South= to Venezuela
(Caicara); and Peru (Chachapoyas and Lima). =West= to Peru (Lima
and Cutervo); Ecuador (Tumbez); Costa Rica (San Jose and La Palma);
El Salvador (Sonsonate); western Guatemala (Lake Amatitlan);
southwestern Chiapas (Tapachula); Nayarit (San Blas); and southern
Baja California (San Jose del Cabo and San Pedro).
The birds found in the cape district of Baja California have been
separated subspecifically and are known as the San Lucas ani, _C.
s. pallidula_.
_Casual records._--In Louisiana a specimen was collected near
New Orleans about 1890; another was taken at Ostrica during the
winter of 1919; a third was obtained without date of collection
near Houma; a fourth was taken at Cottonport on December 11, 1932;
while a fifth was collected on Grand Isle on April 23, 1935. A
specimen was taken at Huachucas, Ariz., 10 miles from the Mexican
border, in May 1888, and it was noted at a point 20 miles north of
Tucson on August 21, 1932. About November 1, 1904, a specimen was
taken near Emporia, Kans., and on October 12, 1913, one was killed
on an island about 9 miles north of Red Wing, Minn. A specimen
was obtained at Jupiter Inlet, Fla., during the first week in
January 1891, and there is also a somewhat indefinite record of
its occurrence in the early part of January in the vicinity of
Kingston, Jamaica.
_Egg dates._--Central America: 4 records, May 27 to July 29.
Baja California: 6 records, April 1 to September 3.
Mexico: 40 records, March 20 to August 14; 20 records, May 16 to
June 30, indicating the height of the season.
Texas: 7 records, March 17 to July 15.
CROTOPHAGA SULCIROSTRIS PALLIDULA Bangs and Penard
SAN LUCAS ANI
HABITS
The groove-billed ani of the Cape region of Lower California,
Mexico, was described and given the above name by Bangs and Penard
(1921), based on a series of 18 specimens from San José del Cabo.
It is said to be--
similar to _Crotophaga sulcirostris sulcirostris_ Swainson
of Mexico, and of about the same size, but much paler
and with less purplish iridescence; the U-shaped iridescent
markings of the back and breast paler and duller greenish,
not so brilliant; the dull purplish bronze of the head
and neck of true _sulcirostris_ replaced by paler, more
grayish bronze; the lustreless parts of the body-feathers
grayish brownish black instead of dull black. * * *
Eighteen adults of this new form, laid out beside a series
of nearly double that number from various points in Mexico
and Central America, are strikingly different; the pale,
dull colors of the Lower California bird cannot be matched
by any specimen in our series of true _sulcirostris_. The
difference is noticeable at a glance but rather difficult
to describe. Brewster (1902), in his account of the birds
of the Cape Region of Lower California, states that the
Groove-billed Ani is not known to occur in central and
northern Lower California, and that the colonies which
have become established in the Cape region were probably
originated by birds which came from western Mexico. However
this may be, the isolated colony of Cape St. Lucas has
developed into a very distinct form, worthy of recognition.
Griffing Bancroft writes to me, on August 6, 1937, that he is “as
nearly satisfied as it is possible to be from negative evidence”
that this form of the groove-billed ani is extinct.
_Nesting._--Lyman Belding (1883) writes: “The 1st of April I
discovered four of these birds in a marsh, in which was a rank
growth of _tule_, flags, and reeds. Having shot one of them, and
the others were not molested, they remained in the marsh until May
15, or later. A nest found April 29 contained eight eggs. It was
fastened to upright reeds, and was composed of coarse weed stalks
and mesquite twigs, lined with green leaves. The female, while
incubating, was very wary, slipping quietly away from the nest and
returning to it very stealthily, below the tops of the reeds.”
William Brewster (1902) says that the nest “taken by Mr. Frazar
was in a willow about twenty feet above the ground. It is a
flat-loose, but withal rather neat structure, formed outwardly of
dead twigs and very substantially lined with cottonwood and willow
leaves, which look as if they must have been dry when gathered.
* * * This nest measures about six inches across the top, and the
cavity is nearly an inch in depth. * * * Mr. Frazar met with the
Groove-billed Ani only at San José del Cabo, where a flock of about
thirty frequented some thick brush about pools of water near the
mouth of the river.”
_Eggs._--The eggs of this race are apparently just like those of
the species elsewhere. The measurements of 9 eggs average 31.99
by 24.00 millimeters; the eggs showing the four extremes measure
=33.5= by 23, 31.8 by =24.9=, and 30.5 by =23= millimeters.
GEOCOCCYX CALIFORNIANUS (Lesson)
ROADRUNNER
PLATES 3–6
HABITS
CONTRIBUTED BY GEORGE MIKSCH SUTTON
Most ornithologists are to some extent acquainted with the
roadrunner. They have read about him. They have heard strange
stories about him. Perhaps, driving along some road in the
Southwestern United States, they have even seen him. But he who
really knows the roadrunner has risen morning after morning with
the desert sun; thrilled at the brilliance of the desert stars;
seen day turned to sudden night by the dust-storm; pulled cactus
spines from his shins. He who knows the roadrunner, he who has
measured the breadth and the depth of this unique bird personality,
has lived with him--not for an hour or so, not for a day, but week
after week after week.
First impressions almost invariably give us an inadequate concept
of this strange bird. We hear him scuttle through dry leaves ahead
of us, catch a glimpse of him as he slips back of a rock, know from
the flight of a grasshopper that he has gone a certain way, and
that is all. Or, coming upon him suddenly, we surprise him into
flight; note his short, rounded wings, long tail, and coarsely
streaked plumage; watch him sail down the arroyo; and marvel that
with the shutting of his wings and reckless plunge into the thicket
he is so instantly lost to view.
Sometimes, traveling in a motorcar, we come upon him perched on
a fence post or telegraph pole close to the highway. Now we have
opportunity to observe how slim he is, how long his legs, how
noticeable his crest. But as we pass he leaps to the ground, swings
off through the cactus clumps, and is gone. Once more only a
glimpse! Once more only the retreat of a timid desert creature that
appears to be half bird, half reptile.
But lie in wait for the roadrunner! Watch him race across the sand,
full speed, after a lizard. Watch him put out a wing, change his
course, throw up his tail, change his course again, plunge headlong
into a clump of cactus, and emerge, whacking his limp victim on the
ground. Watch him jerk a slender snake from the grass, fling it
into the air, grasp it by the head or neck, pummel it with his hard
mandibles, and gulp it head first. Watch him stalk a grasshopper,
slipping quietly forward, making a sudden rush with wings and tail
fully spread, frightening the doomed insect into flight, then
leaping 3 or 4 feet in air to snatch it flycatcherwise in his long
bill. Watch the roadrunner for an hour at his daily business of
catching food and you will deem him among the most amazing of all
the desert’s amazing creatures. Snake-killer indeed! Chaparral
cock! Not by sitting quietly on fence posts, not by slipping
shyly from the path, has the roadrunner earned for himself these
bloodstirring names!
So odd, so even _funny_ a creature is the roadrunner that it is
natural to caricature him a bit in describing him. This J. L.
Sloanaker (1913) has done when he writes:
Of all the birds on our list the Roadrunner is doubtless
the most unique; indeed, he is _queer_, and would certainly
take first prize in the freak class at the Arizona state
fair. He is about two feet in length, with a tail as long
as his body, color above brown streaked with black, bare
spaces around eyes blue and orange, feathers of head and
neck bristle-tipped, eyelids lashed, * * * his whole
plumage coarse and harsh. Could you imagine such a looking
creature? Try and think of a long striped snake on two
legs, a feather duster on his head and another trailing
behind; or a tall, slim tramp in a swallow-tailed coat, a
black and blue eye, and a head of hair standing straight on
end! There you are!
Elliott Coues (1903) describes roadrunners as “singular
birds--cuckoos compounded of a chicken and a Magpie.” Mrs. Bailey
(1902) considers them among the “most original and entertaining of
western birds.” Other writers call them “odd,” “anomalous,” and
“unique.” They are.
Throughout much of his range the roadrunner is known as the
chaparral cock, or merely the chaparral. He also is called lizard
bird, ground cuckoo, cock of the desert, and, as we have stated
above, snake killer. The Mexicans call him the _paisano_ or the
_correo del camino_. The first of these names means _compatriot_
or _fellow countryman_; according to some writers it expresses
affectionate regard, and is to be freely translated “little
friend.” The latter is almost the equivalent of our name roadrunner.
That the roadrunner has at times been known as the _churca_ we
learn from an interesting note by Elliott Coues (1900) who quotes
from an anonymous Franciscan priest the following description,
published in 1790: “The _Churca_ is a kind of pheasant which has a
long bill, dark plumage, a handsome tail and _four feet_. It has
these latter facing outward in such fashion that when it runs it
leaves the track of two feet going forward and two going backward.”
Coues himself calls attention to the fact that the word “toes”
must replace the word “feet” in the above paragraph if the
description is to fit the roadrunner. The error may well have
been the translator’s. At any rate, anyone who has observed a
roadrunner’s tracks in the sand knows how faithfully these record
the zygodactylism of the bird’s foot.
Many a fanciful tale is told of the roadrunner. According to the
best known of these, the bird builds a fence of cactus spines
about a sleeping rattler, letting the doomed reptile buffet itself
to weariness until finally, in desperation, it is impaled on the
spines or bites itself to death! According to other stories (some
of which probably have a grain of truth in them), the bird will
deliberately race the swiftest horse across the plains!