Nuttall’s Whippoorwill is oftener heard than seen. When flushed
from its retreat in the daytime, among the shrubbery or tall weeds,
it rises hurriedly with wayward flight, dashes a few yards, and
re-alights. There is something about it at such times that strongly
recalls the Woodcock, and the bird is quite as difficult to shoot
on the wing.”
_Voice._--The call of the poorwill is generally recorded as a clear
pronunciation of its name, but many observers have noted a third
syllable, audible at only a short distance, making the complete
song sound like _poor-will-low_, or _poor-will-ee_, when the bird
is near, or _poor-will_ when farther away, or even _p’-will_ when
still farther away. Mr. Simmons (1925) writes it _puih-whee-ee_.
Dr. Coues (1874) says: “This cry is very lugubrious, and in places
where the birds are numerous the wailing chorus is enough to excite
vague apprehensions on the part of the lonely traveler, as he lies
down to rest by his camp-fire, or to break his sleep with fitful
dreams, in which lost spirits appear to bemoan their fate and
implore his intercession.”
Some other writers give a less unpleasant impression of the song;
for instance, Dr. Wetmore (1932) says: “Near at hand these calls
are harsh, but with distance the first two assume a pleasant,
somewhat melancholy cadence.” And Mrs. Bailey (1928) writes: “When
we were camped on the edge of a canyon in the Guadalupe Mountains,
at dusk while the bats were flying down in the canyon, up along the
edge came the Poor-wills so near that we could hear their syllables
distinctly--_poor-will´-uck, poor-will´-uck_. Sometimes two would
call antiphonally, faster and faster till they fairly tripped over
each other. The call as it is often given is a delightfully soft,
_poor-will´, poor-will´, poor-will´-uck_, which like the delicious
aromatic smell of the sagebrush clings long to the memory of the
lover of the west.”
Henry W. Henshaw (1875) says that “their notes are most often
noticed in early evening, and again just before dawn, but not
infrequently their song is heard through the entire night. * * *
When flying, they emit a constantly repeated clucking note, which
is, I think, common to both sexes. * * * The males continue their
notes till very late in the season; for I frequently heard them
during the first part of October, and even as late as the 17th.”
_Field marks._--In superficial appearance the poorwill looks very
much like a small whippoorwill, and its behavior is similar. It
also somewhat resembles a partly grown young nighthawk, but its
behavior is different; whereas the nighthawk flies about high in
the air in pursuit of its prey, the poorwill hunts on or near the
ground, flitting about like a large moth on silent wings; the
poorwill is more strictly nocturnal in its activities than the
nighthawk; furthermore, it exhibits no white patch in the wing,
while flying, but shows white tips on the lateral tail feathers.
Its note is, of course, characteristic.
_Winter._--The poorwill retires from the northern portions of its
range late in fall and spends the winter near, or beyond, our
southern borders. Dr. Coues (1874) reports, in some notes from
Ogden, Utah, that “it lingers at its summer home till the autumn
is far advanced, as we found it at Ogden as late as October 6,
quite far up the slope of the mountains, in the midst of a driving
snow-storm--the first of the season--the snow having then already
accumulated to the depth of several inches.”
In Arizona, New Mexico, and central Texas it is usually absent from
late in October to early in April. It apparently winters more or
less regularly in southern Texas, though its main winter range is
in Mexico.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--Central and western United States, and southern British
Columbia, south to central Mexico.
_Breeding range._--The breeding range of the poorwill extends
=north= to southern British Columbia (Kamloops and Okanagan
Landing); Montana (Billings and Terry); northwestern South Dakota
(Slim Buttes); north-central Nebraska (Long Pine Canyon); and
southwestern Iowa (Pottawattamie County). =East= to southwestern
Iowa (Pottawattamie County); eastern Kansas (Blue Rapids,
Onaga, Lawrence, and Clearwater); central Texas (Kerrville, San
Antonio, and Somerset); eastern Coahuila (Sabinas and Saltillo);
and probably Morelos (Cuernavaca). =South= to probably Morelos
(Cuernavaca); southern Sonora (Alamos); and southern Baja
California (San Jose del Cabo). =West= to Baja California (San Jose
del Cabo, Miraflores, Triunfo, Pozo Grande, San Fernando, Santo
Domingo, La Joya, San Telmo, and probably Todos Santos Islands);
California (San Diego, Escondido, Ojai Valley, Santa Cruz Mountain,
San Geronimo, Covel, and probably Yreka); Oregon (Brownsboro,
Bridge Creek, and probably Netarts); eastern Washington (Crab Creek
and Cheney); and British Columbia (Summerland and Kamloops).
_Winter range._--The species is probably resident in the southern
part of its range and during the winter season is found =north= to
southern California (Berryessa Station, Paicines, Death Valley, and
Laguna); rarely southern Arizona (Tucson); and southern Texas (El
Paso, rarely Kerrville, Laredo, and Falfurrias).
The range as outlined is for the entire species, which has been
separated into four currently recognized geographic races.
The typical subspecies, Nuttall’s poorwill (_P. n. nuttalli_)
occupies all the United States portion of the range except that
part of California west of the Sierra Nevada. The dusky poorwill
(_P. n. californicus_) is found in western California from the
northern part of the Sacramento Valley south to northwestern Baja
California; the desert poorwill (_P. n. hueyi_) is restricted
to the lower Colorado River Valley, southwestern Arizona, and
northeastern Baja California; and the San Ignacio poorwill (_P. n.
dickeyi_) is found in Baja California south of latitude 30° N.
_Spring migration._--Early dates of spring arrival are: Texas--
Kerrville, February 4; San Antonio, February 27. Kansas--Manhattan,
April 7; Onaga, April 7. New Mexico--Chloride, March 31; State
College, April 7; Rinconada, April 10. Colorado--Beulah, April
29; Denver, May 9. Wyoming--Laramie Peak, May 2; Lingle, May 3.
Montana--Terry, May 16. Arizona--Tombstone, March 20. Utah--Kobe
Valley, May 23. California--Piedra, March 5; Daggett, March 12;
San Clemente Island, March 30; Lassen Peak, April 16. British
Columbia--Okanagan Landing, April 22.
_Fall migration._--Late dates of fall departure are: British
Columbia--Okanagan Landing, September 20. California--Daggett,
October 21; Los Angeles, October 25; La Verne, October 28;
Garnsey, November 2. Arizona--San Francisco Mountain, September
29. Montana--Big Sandy, September 4; Bighorn River, September 19.
Wyoming--Powder River, September 9; Clear Fork, September 19.
Colorado--Beulah, October 8. New Mexico--State College, October 30;
Sierra Hachita, November 24. South Dakota--White River, September
27. Kansas--Onaga, September 27. Oklahoma--Kenton, September 26.
_Egg dates._--Arizona: 5 records, May 2 to August 2.
California: 42 records, March 22 to August 8; 21 records, May 6 to
June 25, indicating the height of the season.
Colorado: 5 records, May 26 to July 27.
Texas: 11 records, April 29 to June 20.
PHALAENOPTILUS NUTTALLI CALIFORNICUS Ridgway
DUSKY POORWILL
PLATES 25–27
HABITS
The goatsuckers are now in their proper place in the A. O. U.
Check-list, showing their relationship to the owls, which they
strikingly resemble in several characters. The poorwills are
conspicuous in this respect; they are more strictly nocturnal
in their activities than some of the owls, for which they are
well adapted; the eyes are very large, suggesting those of owls;
the mouth is very broad, but some of the owls have broad mouths
also; the plumage is fully as soft as that of the owls; and their
flight is noiseless, like that of most night-flying birds. The
Caprimulgidae are not predators on vertebrate animals, although the
chuck-will’s-widow has been known to eat birds; but they all live
on animal food; and many owls live largely on insects.
The dusky poorwill does not enjoy so extensive a distribution as
its inland relative, _nuttalli_, but perhaps it is equally as well
known throughout its range in California.
_Nesting._--The steep slopes and ridges of the foothills and the
sides of canyons seem to form the favorite nesting haunts of this,
as well as other poorwills. Elmer C. Aldrich (1935) gives a very
good description of a locality in Tuolumne County, Calif., where a
nest was found on July 5, 1934:
The altitude was about 5600 feet, and the general
vegetation of the area consisted of yellow pines, incense
cedars, white firs, black oak islands, a few species of
ceanothus, and a little manzanita, with mountain misery
covering most of the open hillside. The immediate location
of the nest was in a little circular clearing about fifteen
yards in diameter, surrounded by young yellow pines closely
knit together by small, interwoven branches. The clearing
contained three manzanita bushes and one ceanothus bush.
The greater part of it was strewn with long dead pole-like
logs, which appeared to be one of the basic requirements
for the Poor-will’s protection. The entire north side
of the opening was bordered by a large decayed log of a
diameter of three feet, which, because of the common use by
the Poor-will, came to be called “the log.”
The nest was found when we were coming from the north and
upon advancing four yards after stepping over this log.
When the adult flushed from the nest the observer’s foot
was but eighteen inches from the site. The bird flew across
the clearing into the edge of the dense forest, where it
lit on a small log and watched without movement for fifteen
minutes while pictures of the two light buff eggs were
obtained.
Dr. William L. Holt writes to me that he found a nest near Banning,
Calif., on June 13, 1909, on the bare ground on the north side of
a sandy hill, nearly bare of vegetation. J. E. Patterson has sent
me two excellent photographs (pls. 25, 26) of poorwills’ nests.
The one taken in Stanislaus County, Calif., on June 23, 1934, was
on the ground in open timber; the other, taken in Mariposa County,
Calif., on June 21, 1933, was on the ground in a fire deadening on
a hillside; both were in the Transition Zone.
A. J. van Rossem (1920) found a nest on April 18, 1919, a very
early date, on the side of a canyon, where there was a heavy growth
of wild lilac and white sage; “no attempt whatever seemed to have
been made at constructing a nest, the eggs lying on the bare ground
among pebbles, etc., in the shade of some dense brush that bordered
upon a small open space.” The nest has also been found on bare
rock, but is usually, at least partially, shaded by some bush,
loose brush, brakes, or weeds. The birds are very apt to return to
the exact spot to nest each year.
_Eggs._--As a rule the eggs of the dusky poorwill, two in number,
are similar to the eggs of other poorwills, but van Rossem and
Bowles (1920) write:
In a majority of the descriptions that are given for eggs
of the various forms of the Poor-will, the color is stated
as white, without markings, sometimes with a pinkish tinge.
However, such was by no means the case with the set of
eggs under discussion. Before blowing, the ground color
was a strong salmon pink; but this, after blowing, turned
to a clear, glossy, pinkish white, strongly suggesting
eggs of the Merrill Pauraque (_Nyctidromus albicollis
merrilli_), although the pink of the Poor-will eggs showed
a closer approach to salmon. Around the larger ends was a
rather dense wreath of lavender and dusky spots and dots,
making the eggs look exceedingly like the marked eggs of
some small petrel. * * * In the course of time many of the
smaller dots have faded out, leaving only a comparatively
few spots and dots to show where the heavy wreath was
once located. The strong pinkish tinge has also very
largely gone, in spite of the fact that the eggs have been
carefully kept from exposure to the light.
The measurements of 40 eggs average 26.3 by 19.4 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =28.4= by 20.0, 27.7 by
=21.1=, =24.2= by 18.2, and 24.9 by =17.0= millimeters.
_Behavior._--Poorwills are notoriously close sitters, but the
pair studied by Mr. Aldrich (1935) were unusually tame. He was
repeatedly able to approach cautiously to within 3 or 4 feet of
the incubating bird; once, at night, eight observers managed to
approach within 2 feet, while the bird sat tight all the time.
The next morning, “when we were but three feet from the nest, the
bird’s large clear white spots on the tail identified it to be the
male that was doing the incubating. Many pictures were taken, some
as close as ten inches, without the slightest sign of fear on the
part of the sitting bird. * * * Experiments were made to find the
extent of his ‘bravery’ by touching him. While touching the head
the first time he flattened out his wings and spread the fan-like
tail over the tips of them showing all the tail spots. The large
head was then brought far back on the shoulders, the cavernous
mouth opened extremely wide showing the pink interior, and a low
guttural hiss was emitted at short intervals.”
Later in the same day, at 2 p. m., he flushed the female from the
nest and sat down 5 yards away to watch her return; “exactly ten
and one-half minutes marked the reappearance of the same bird. She
had flown from behind the log nearly to the top where she could
barely look over and observe the surroundings. Immediately she
started swaying from side to side very slowly and rhythmically for
about five seconds before walking to the top of the log, each step
in synchronization with the swaying. Here she paused for about
twenty seconds, and then flew a few yards, within two and one-half
feet of the nest, where she began swaying again. The rest of the
distance to the nest was accomplished by this slow walking-swaying
process, and she did not seem to get anxious and speed up as she
came closer. Two short stops were made on the way.”
The dusky poorwill is tame and unsuspicious at other times also.
Rollo H. Beck (1897) watched one at short range while it was
catching insects on a road and finally succeeded in putting his hat
over it, though it escaped; he says: “After watching it a while I
crawled up within four feet and had a chance to watch it in the
bright moonlight. It would fly perhaps twenty or thirty feet into
the air after insects and return again within four or five feet
of me. One time it flew up and evidently picked an insect off the
leaf of a wild cherry tree, fluttering for several seconds in its
endeavor to do so. It several times flew by me after food and
returning would fly within a foot or so of my head and alight just
in front of me.”
_Voice._--H. Gordon Heggeness writes to me of the song of the dusky
poorwill as he heard it in the Sequoia National Park: “Sometimes
early in the morning the poorwill would be heard--the calm, liquid
notes carrying far on the cool air. On August 12, 1935, a poorwill
began singing back of my cabin at 2:30 a. m. His most pleasing
notes were heard continuously for the next half hour.”
Grinnell and Storer (1924) write: “It is heard most persistently at
dusk of evening or in the early morning; but near Pleasant Valley
on the morning of May 23, 1915, one of these birds suddenly broke
out at 10 o’clock and uttered its _poor-will-o_ 85 times (by count,
within 2 or 3) at intervals of two or three seconds.”
R. H. Lawrence wrote to Major Bendire (1895) that, according to
his hearing, “the words ‘Pearl-rab-it’ give a fair idea of its
call”; and that “when startled it gave quickly, two or three times
in succession, a low, soft note, like ‘pweek, pweek, pweek,’ which
could only be heard a few yards away.”
PHALAENOPTILUS NUTTALLI HUEYI Dickey
DESERT POORWILL
HABITS
Donald R. Dickey (1928) described and named this pale race of the
poorwill from a fine series of specimens collected in the valley of
the Colorado River by Mrs. May Canfield and Laurence M. Huey. As to
its subspecific characters, he says that it is “nearest in color
to the light type of _Phalaenoptilus nuttalli nuttalli_ (Audubon),
which Brewster named _nitidus_ and to which he gave the eminently
fitting vernacular of the Frosted Poor-will, but averaging very
much lighter. The backs of _hueyi_ are pinkish tan, almost devoid
of the silver frosting characteristic of more eastern birds, and
with the size of the dark dorsal ‘owl’s eye’ marking greatly
reduced, in many cases practically obsolete; under parts lighter
throughout, with the dark band below the white collar narrower and
of lighter tone, and with narrower barring of sides and flanks.
Tail lighter and less contrastingly barred above and below.”
The 1931 Check-list gives the range of this race as the valley of
the lower Colorado River, in southeastern California, southwestern
Arizona, and extreme northeastern Baja California.
A. J. van Rossem (1936) took four poorwills near Bates Well, in
south-central Arizona, that were somewhat intermediate between
_hueyi_ and _nuttalli_, though nearer the latter; this locality
probably indicates the approximate area of intergradation between
the two races. “All were collected in an arrowweed-mesquite
association along the borders of the dry stream bed. Conditions,
both as to habitat and temperatures, closely approximated those
found along the Lower Colorado River Valley, beyond the confines of
which _hueyi_ has not been detected.”
This poorwill probably does not differ materially in its habits
from neighboring races of the species.
PHALAENOPTILUS NUTTALLI DICKEYI Grinnell
SAN IGNATIO POORWILL
HABITS
Three races of the poorwill are found on the peninsula of Baja
California. The present form ranges from about latitude 30°
southward to the Cape region; the dusky poorwill (_californicus_)
extends its range southward in the northwestern portion to about
latitude 30°, chiefly on the Pacific slope; and the desert poorwill
(_hueyi_) is found in the extreme northeastern portion.
The San Ignatio poorwill is a small, dark race. Dr. Joseph
Grinnell, who described and named it, says (1928) that it is
“similar to _Ph. n. californicus_ in degree of general darkness but
decidedly smaller, and with black areas on the individual feathers
of scapulars, top of head and chest greatly reduced, in this
respect resembling _hueyi_; terminal white of lateral rectrices
greater in amount than in _californicus_; light portions of general
color scheme much darker than in _hueyi_ or _nuttallii_, tinged
with clay color rather than ‘frosted’--in this respect darker
even than in average _californicus_; dark barring on posterior
lower surface much more extensive and heavier than in _hueyi_ or
_nuttalli_.”
William Brewster (1902) referred the poorwills of the Cape region
to the race he named the frosted poorwill (_Ph. n. nitidus_),
based on a pair collected by M. A. Frazar in the Sierra de la
Laguna. Mr. Frazar said that on the mountains the poorwills did
not begin singing until about the middle of May. “Their note is
a _pow-wè-hoo_, the first syllable given long, the accent on the
second, and the last little more than a retraction of the breath.
They were almost invariably in large oaks and very seldom on the
ground. A female shot June 6 was undoubtedly mated and would have
laid soon.”
Nothing seems to be known about the nesting or other habits of this
poorwill.
NYCTIDROMUS ALBICOLLIS MERRILLI Sennett
MERRILL’S PAURAQUE
PLATE 28
HABITS
Merrill’s pauraque is the largest subspecies of a widely
distributed species of goatsucker that ranges throughout Mexico,
Central America, and northern South America, and that has been
divided into six subspecies. Our pauraque extends its range from
northern Mexico into the valley of the Rio Grande and northward
through the Gulf coast of Texas to Nueces, Aransas, and Refugio
Counties. The vernacular name, pauraque, pronounced “pou-rä´-kā,”
is derived from a fancied resemblance to one of its notes. The
Mexican name, cuiejo, pronounced “coo-ya-ho,” has a similar origin.
This bird was first introduced to our fauna by Dr. J. C. Merrill,
who took the first specimen at Fort Brown, Tex., on April 1, 1876.
The subspecies was first described and named by George B. Sennett
(1888), who gives a full account of its plumages at different ages
and says of its relation to other races of the species: “This form,
when compared with others of the species from Southern Mexico,
Costa Rica, Panama, Guiana, and Brazil, can be distinguished, first
by the prevailing gray color on upper parts, where the others have
brown, rufous or cinnamon; second, by its large size, exceeding the
large southern Brazilian form in length of wing and equalling it in
length of tail; third, by the males having the outer tailfeather
generally without white, and the white when it does occur being
much restricted, while in more tropical and South American forms
the rule is that males have much white on inner web of outer
tailfeather.” This third point seems open to question, as this
character seems to be very variable, possibly owing to age.
D. B. Burrows, in some notes sent to Major Bendire (1895) says:
“During the winter the birds may be flushed from the dense thickets
in the bottom lands, but as the nesting season approaches they
leave these close retreats and seek more open ground.”
Mr. Sennett (1878) says of their haunts: “I saw them occasionally,
singly and in pairs, about the thickets and open chaparral, and
once in the canebrakes close to the woods.” Again (1879) he says:
“They breed in the more open places among the cactus and scattered
bushes along with _O. texensis_--Texas Nighthawk. On dark days I
flushed them from thickets in the chaparral, or from copses near
the bottom lands on the edges of the woods.”
_Nesting._--Mr. Sennett’s nests “were found in open brush, on the
bare ground. One of them was partly concealed by the branches of a
low bush 6 or 8 inches from the ground.”
Mr. Burrows wrote to Major Bendire (1895): “I have never found the
Pauraque nesting in the dense thickets, where they hide during the
winter. They seek the more open ground, the high, level spots near
the river, or up some arroya, among scattering bushes and pear
cactus, but never on the rocky hills, where the Texan Nighthawk is
frequently found. In one instance a nest was found at the edge of
a cultivated field. The eggs are placed on the bare ground, with
no attempt at nest building, and usually at the foot of a clump of
bushes. The bird, when flushed from the nest, quietly darts off and
drops to the ground but a short distance away.”
Dr. James C. Merrill (1878) writes: “On the 15th of May, 1876, I
found a set of eggs near camp at Hidalgo, and on returning in about
fifteen minutes to secure the parent, who had disappeared among the
thickets, I found that she had removed the eggs, although they had
not been touched.”
_Eggs._--The pauraque lays two very handsome eggs, quite unlike
the eggs of any other species in the family. They vary in shape
between oval and elliptical-oval, with a decided tendency toward
ovate or elliptical-ovate, one end often being slightly more
pointed than the other. The shell is smooth, with little or no
gloss. The ground color varies from “light ochraceous-salmon” to
“pinkish buff”. Some eggs appear to be nearly immaculate, but in
most cases they are more or less evenly covered, some sparingly
and some profusely, with small blotches, spots, or dots of pale
“clay color,” pale “cinnamon,” or, more rarely, with deeper shades
of “cinnamon-rufous”; often there are underlying blotches or spots
of “ecru-drab” or “light cinnamon-drab.” Occasionally the markings
are concentrated around the larger end, but usually they are quite
evenly distributed.
The measurements of 50 eggs average 29.80 by 22.36 millimeters; the
eggs showing the four extremes measure =35.10= by 23.10, 31.50 by
=24.64=, =27.18= by 20.57, and 28.96 by =20.32= millimeters.