curlew moves off its breeding grounds as soon as the young are able
to shift for themselves, and begins its summer wanderings, or starts
on its southward migration early in July. There are two main lines of
flight, down the east and west coasts of the continent, as well as a
more scattering flight through the central valleys and plains. The
eastward flight is from the west coast of Hudson Bay, where many birds
linger through August, to the coasts of New England and southward. A
few Hudsonian curlews migrate as far east as Labrador; the species has
never been common there, but since the disappearance of the Eskimo
curlew it has been more in evidence; Lucien M. Turner recorded it only
twice in northern Ungava; a few specimens have been taken on the east
coast of Labrador.
Adults appear on the coast of Massachusetts about the middle of July
and the young birds about a month later; the heaviest flights come in
August and September, but young birds often linger well into October;
my latest date is October 20. They reach the Carolinas in July; Mr.
Wayne (1910) says that he has seen them as early as July 5 and not
later than October 2. They are reported as migrating over the Bermudas
in August and September, but the last of the birds do not leave the
West Indies until November.
Pacific coast flights occur on corresponding dates. Early in August,
when the blueberries and crowberries are ripening, large flocks of
this and bristle-thighed curlews come down to the Bering Sea coast
of Alaska, where large numbers are brought into the markets at Nome
all through August and early September. From there the migration is
southward along the Pacific coast. D. E. Brown’s dates for Pierce
County, Wash., run from August 6 to October 2, but probably there are
earlier dates. The earliest birds reach southern California about
the first week in July and the latest birds linger through October.
Meantime some of the birds have appeared in Peru early in August and in
Chile by the middle of that month.
_Game._--The Hudsonian, or “jack,” curlew is a gamey bird, which will
test the skill and try the patience of the most experienced sportsman.
It is so shy and vigilant that it is difficult to outwit. It is almost
impossible to stalk an old bird, but I have, on rare occasions, been
able to creep up on a young bird. Most of my chances have been at
single birds flying over, when several gunners have been spread over
ground where scattered birds were feeding. Once a flock of 15 birds
swung by my blind within range, but they did not alight to my decoys.
Referring to the “good old days,” Mr. Mackay (1892_b_) writes:
They were apparently as shy then as now, for even then it
was considered essential in order to take them to mortise
a hole in the ground for concealment in the locality
which they frequented or passed over, care being taken
to remove the soil taken out to some distance in a wagon
in order that the place might appear perfectly natural.
Stands were dug in the center of a clump of bushes, as
being less noticeable. In times past, on Cape Cod, I have
used a hogshead, sunken level with the marsh, from which
to shoot them, but even under such conditions I never
secured more than nine in one day, and that only once. The
Hudsonian curlew is a very observing bird and perceives at
once anything strange and out of harmony with the natural
surroundings of any locality which it has been in the
habit of frequenting, and in order to get a flock up to
the decoys considerable care must be exercised. Single
birds or pairs will, however, decoy fairly well if they
have not been harassed. These birds have a way of setting
their wings stationary and sailing, when headed for the
decoys, at a distance of 100 yards or more, the flock
separating out so that there are scarcely any two birds
together, and then hanging, as it were, in the air. During
this time they are most carefully listening and scanning
the decoys and surroundings. A movement causes them to
spring up in the air several feet, and as this is generally
when aim is being taken they are apt to be missed by being
undershot. In order to get them as near as possible I have
frequently set my decoys only a few feet to windward of
my stand, as it is customary for them, when heading for
the decoys, to keep falling off to leeward of them. They
are not an easy bird to kill, being strong and powerful,
and as the distance is usually great at which they are
shot at, owing to their vigilance, many go off wounded and
are not recovered. Should one or more be wing-broken they
frequently commence falling, which causes the remainder of
the flock to hover around for a short time, apparently to
give encouragement to the wounded ones, and while their
attention is thus absorbed they will often afford the
sportsman a second shot, if he keeps concealed. Were it
not for the satisfaction of getting so shy a bird, for, as
a rule, they are but indifferent eating, there would be
little inducement to waste the time necessary to obtain an
occasional one. I take a few every year by getting out of
my wagon into some place of concealment, when I observe
a flock in the distance on the ground, and letting my
companion drive around the other side and start them toward
me. Long familiarity with the ground enables me to form
some idea as to what course they are likely to pursue, and
I have obtained more or less in this manner.
DISTRIBUTION
_Range._--North and South America; accidental in Europe.
_Breeding range._--The Hudsonian curlew is known to breed only on
the Arctic coast of North America from Alaska (Norton Sound, Kobuk
River, Cape Blossom, and probably Camden Bay) to Mackenzie (Anderson
River region). It has, however, been noted in summer in Keewatin
(Fort Churchill and near York Factory) and may possibly breed in that
vicinity.
In common with several other shore birds, some individuals remain in
summer far south of their breeding grounds. At this season they have
been detected from New Jersey (Great Bay), south along the Atlantic
coast--Virginia (Wreck Island, Bone Island, and Wallops Island); South
Carolina (Mount Pleasant); to Costa Rica (Coronado de Terraba); and the
West Indies (Barbuda).
_Winter range._--The winter range extends north probably to southern
California (Santa Cruz Island, Santa Barbara, and Ventura County);
probably rarely Louisiana; and rarely (formerly more commonly) South
Carolina (Bullyard Sound and probably Charleston). East to formerly
South Carolina (probably Charleston, Sea Islands, and Frogmore);
probably rarely Florida (Pine Island); probably Cuba; probably rarely
Porto Rico (Gundlach); the Lesser Antilles (Barbuda); Guiana (Berbice
River and Cayenne); Brazil (Praia de Cajetuba); and Chile (Island of
Chiloe). South to Chile (Island of Chiloe). West to Chile (Island of
Chiloe, Valdivia, Valparaiso, and Tarapaca); Peru (Lima, Trujillo, and
Tumbez); Ecuador (Bay of Santa Elena); Galapagos Islands (Charles and
Narborough Islands); Venezuela (Isla de Aves); Costa Rica; Honduras
(Gulf of Fonseca); Guatemala (Chiapam); Clipperton Island; Chiapas (San
Benito); Jalisco (La Barca); Sinaloa (Mazatlan); Lower California (La
Paz, San Jose Island, San Francisco Island, and Colorado River Delta);
and probably southern California (Santa Cruz Island). A specimen
obtained at Rockaway Beach, New York, on December 24, 1912, probably
was either a crippled bird or otherwise physically deficient.
_Spring migration._--Early dates of spring arrival are: North Carolina,
Corolla, April 15, and Churchs Island, April 19; Virginia, Hog Island,
April 1, and Cape Charles, April 13; Pennsylvania, Renovo, May 7; New
Jersey, Cape May, April 12; New York, Montauk, April 28, and Shelter
Island, May 9; Connecticut, Fairfield, May 6; Rhode Island, Newport,
April 27, and Block Island, May 3; Massachusetts, Nantucket, April
10, and Muskeget Island, April 20; Ontario, Brighton, May 7, and
Toronto, May 17; Mackenzie, Fort Anderson, May 29; northern California,
Alameda, March 27, and Palo Alto, March 28; Oregon, Newport, March 14;
Washington, Hoquiam, April 19, and Everett, April 26; British Columbia,
Comox, May 3, and Courtenay, May 11; and Alaska, Craig, May 12, Nulato
River, May 12, Hooper Bay, May 17, Kobuk River, May 17, and Fort Kenai,
May 18.
Late dates of spring departure are: Chile, Concon, April 25; Oaxaca,
San Mateo, May 13; Florida, Palma Sola, May 11, and St. Marks, May
19; Georgia, Savannah, May 13; South Carolina, Port Royal, May 22,
and Charleston, May 23; North Carolina, Pea and Bodie Islands, May 8;
Virginia, Locustville, May 27, and Alexandria, May 30; Pennsylvania,
Lancaster, May 27; New Jersey, Cape May, May 23; New York, Long Beach,
May 31, Canandaigua, June 1, and Branchport, June 2; Connecticut, East
Haven, June 4; Massachusetts, Cape Cod, June 23, and Nantucket, June
25; Ohio, Youngstown, May 24; Ontario, Point Pelee, May 30, Beaumaris,
June 4, and Brighton, June 10; Tepic, Las Penas Island, May 5; Lower
California, Colima Point, April 25, and San Jose del Cabo, May 1;
California, Santa Barbara, June 2; Oregon, Mercer, May 14, and Yaquina
Bay, May 18; Washington, Quillayute Needles, May 30, and Dungeness
Spit, June 3; and British Columbia, Courtenay, May 23.
_Fall migration._--Early dates of fall arrival are: British Columbia,
Courtenay, June 27; Washington, Lake Ozette, July 12, and Destruction
Island, July 15; Oregon, Newport, July 10; California, Alameda, July 7,
Los Angeles, July 12, and Farallon Islands, July 16; Lower California,
Los Coronados Islands, August 7, and Santa Rosalia, August 15; Peru,
Chimbote, August 2; Ontario, Point Pelee, July 24; Ohio, Lake County,
July 14; Massachusetts, Muskeget Island, July 12, Monomoy Island, July
14, Marthas Vineyard, July 16, and Boston, July 18; Rhode Island, Block
Island, July 10, and South Auburn, July 23; Connecticut, Milford,
July 20, and North Haven, July 26; New York, Rockaway, July 10, East
Hampton, July 11, and Orient, July 11; New Jersey, Tuckerton Bay, July
2, Long Beach, July 9, and Cape May, July 15; Pennsylvania, Erie,
August 1; Bermuda, August 14; Virginia, Chincoteague, August 1; North
Carolina, Pea and Bodie Islands, July 22; South Carolina, Charleston,
July 19; Georgia, Savannah, July 27; Alabama, Dauphin Island, July 27;
Florida, Bradenton, July 31, and Tarpon Springs, August 3; and West
Indies, Barbuda, August 12.
Late dates of fall departure are: Alaska, Craig, September 24, and St.
Lazaria Island, September 30; Mackenzie, Great Bear Lake, September
30; British Columbia, Courtenay, October 5; Washington, Clallam Bay,
October 9, and Point Chehalis, October 19; Ontario, Brighton, September
1; Quebec, Montreal, September 9; Nova Scotia, Wolfville, September
13; Maine, Northeast Harbor, September 5; Portland, September 9,
and Dover, October 12; Massachusetts, Monomoy Island, September 28,
Harvard, October 2, and Dennis, October 27; Rhode Island, Sakonnet
Point, September 25, Rock Island, September 28, and Newport, October
2; Connecticut, New Haven, September 19, and North Haven, September
20; New York, Montauk Light Station, September 28, and Orient Point,
September 30; New Jersey, Sandy Hook, September 13; and Virginia,
Wallops Island, September 23, and Hog Island, November 10.
_Casual records._--The Hudsonian curlew is of hardly more than
accidental occurrence in the interior but has been noted on a few
occasions. In addition to notes given under migration, mention may be
made of the following records: Colorado, a specimen at Colorado Springs
on September 23, 1900; New Mexico, a specimen at Fort Thorn in the
spring of 1854; Texas, Brownsville, several records in spring between
March 31 and May 24; Nebraska, Lincoln, October 8, 1898; Wisconsin,
Milwaukee, September 9, 1903, and Cedar Grove, September 23, 1922;
Iowa, Crystal Lake, Hancock County, May 25, 1895; Michigan, St. Clair
Flats, May 25, 1902, Saginaw City, fall of 1896, and Forestville, April
23, 1906; and Indiana, Calumet Heights, August 3, 1902. Reports exist
for other interior States but usually without satisfactory evidence.
Both Macoun and Hagerup list it as occurring in Newfoundland, but
without any presentation of the evidence. In Porto Rico, Gundlach
reported collecting it at Punta Arenas, and also refers to a specimen
in a collection at San Juan, Stahl secured two others which were
preserved in his collection, F. A. Potts obtained one May 21, 1921,
near Las Mareas, and observed others from July 31 to September 24,
1921, near Central Aguirre. According to Reinhardt (1861), it has
been taken on four occasions in Greenland (Godthaab, Julianehaab,
Fiskenaesset, and Jacobshavn). A specimen was recorded in 1854 by
Kjärbölling from Iceland and one was taken near Seville, Spain, May 3,
1872.
_Egg dates._--Alaska and Mackenzie: 11 records, May 31 to July 10; 6
records, June 14 to July 1.
NUMENIUS BOREALIS (J. R. Forster)
ESKIMO CURLEW
HABITS
The story of the Eskimo curlew is just one more pitiful tale of the
slaughter of the innocents. It is a sad fact that the countless swarms
of this fine bird and the passenger pigeon, which once swept across
our land on migrations, are gone forever, sacrificed to the insatiable
greed of man. “The Eskimo Curlew and its Disappearance,” by Prof. Myron
H. Swenk (1915), tells the story; it is well worth reading, but space
will permit only a few quotations from it. Edward H. Forbush (1912 and
1925) also gives a very good account of the tragedy. In some of the
following paragraphs the reader will find many references to its former
abundance and the extent of the slaughter which exterminated it. So we
shall consider here only the period of its rapid decline and some of
the causes which produced it.
Professor Swenk (1915) says of its disappearance in the West:
In Texas the Eskimo curlew came in immense flocks on the
prairies from 1856 to 1875, after which year the large
flocks disappeared. Small flocks were seen in 1886 and
1890. The last records of the species for Texas were 1902
and 1905, one and three individuals, respectively. The
species were first definitely recorded for Kansas from
Russell County in 1874. In that State these curlews were
abundant as late as 1878, but in 1879 their numbers were
much reduced and the birds decreased rapidly. There were
still a few in the Kansas markets in the early nineties.
The last record is for 1902. Eastwardly in the interior
the birds were always uncommon and disappeared early. The
last Michigan record is in 1883. The last Ohio record is in
1878. The last Wisconsin records are April 27, 1899, and
September 10, 1912, the latter specimen a male taken at Fox
Lake, Dodge County, Wis. The last Indiana record is, with
some doubt, April 19, 1890.
The last records of collected birds for Nebraska were made
in the spring of 1911 and of 1915. On March 22, 1911,
while Mr. Fred Geiger was shooting ducks near Waco, York
County, two of these birds came flying by within gun range,
and both were shot by him. The birds were identified by
an old-time hunter, and were then brought to Lincoln, and
mounted by Mr. August Eiche, in whose collection they
are at present. Although no Eskimo curlews were noted in
1914, a single bird was killed about 10 miles due south of
Norfolk, Nebr., on the morning of April 17, 1915. The bird
was alone when taken. It came into the possession of Mr.
Hoagland, who had it mounted by Allabaugh, a taxidermist of
Omaha, in whose shop I saw it in May.
But this was not the last word from Nebraska, for 11 years later
Professor Swenk (1926) published the following encouraging note of a
sight record:
In further substantiation of the undoubtable fact that the
Eskimo curlew is not yet extinct, I am now able to cite
a positive instance of its occurrence in Nebraska during
the present spring. On the morning of April 8, 1926,
Mr. A. M. Brooking, of Hastings, an ornithologist and
taxidermist who is very familiar with this species through
having spent much effort in assembling several specimens
of it for his extensive collection, while driving from the
village of Inland to Hastings along what is known as the
“north road,” saw a flock of eight birds alight in a newly
plowed field about 4 miles east of Hastings. He drove his
car up close to the birds, and when within 40 yards of
them was able to his astonishment to positively identify
them as unquestionably Eskimo curlews. Mr. Brooking knows
the species so well, and saw the birds so clearly, that
in my opinion this sight record can be accepted without
hesitation.
On the Labrador coast Eskimo curlews diminished rapidly in numbers
between 1870 and 1880. Hon. F. C. Berteau, a government official in
Labrador, in some notes published by W. J. Carroll (1910) says:
Up to 1889 dough-birds or Eskimo curlew were very numerous
in Labrador from late in August to the end of September.
They frequented the southern part of the coast only, never
appearing north of Indian Harbor at the northern entrance
to Hamilton Inlet. During the first 4 or 5 of the 10 years
during which I was collector of customs on Labrador, they
were very numerous, indeed, flying from the hills to the
shore and vice versa in flocks numbering from fifty to two
or three hundred. During the last years of my collectorship
they gradually diminished in numbers, until in 1890 or
thereabouts they entirely disappeared, and save for a few
seen on one or two occasions have never returned to the
coast.
The Hudson’s Bay Co. people at Cartwright annually put up
large numbers of hermetically sealed tins for the use of
the company’s officials in London and Montreal. I have seen
as many as 2,000 birds hung up in their store as the result
of one day’s shooting by some 25 or 30 guns. A fairly
accurate idea of the plentifulness of these birds will be
obtained from an account of my own experience. During the
season I used to leave the cruiser at 6 a. m. and return
at 9 for breakfast. I do not remember ever getting less
than 30 to 40 brace during the two hours or so that I was
shooting.
Dr. Henry B. Bigelow (1902), who visited the northeast coast of
Labrador in 1900, heard of only about a dozen which were seen on the
coast that fall, of which he saw five. Dr. Charles W. Townsend (1913)
reported that seven were “shot and one other seen on the beach at West
Bay, north of Cartwright, in August and September, 1912. The skins
of five were saved, and sent to Cambridge, where they were seen and
identified by Mr. William Brewster.”
Excessive shooting of this curlew on its migrations and in its winter
home in South America was doubtless one of the chief causes of its
destruction. Ernest Gibson (1920) saw “some 20 or 30 * * * in the
vicinity of Linconia,” near Buenos Aires, on February 13, 1899; and
a small flock was reported in the same locality on April 8, 1901. He
evidently has seen none since then. Mr. Forbush (1925) has recently
given us the latest news from Argentina in a letter from Dr. Roberto
Dabbene, in which he writes that five or six were seen in the Province
of Buenos Aires on February 7, 1924; one of these was captured and
another solitary individual was taken at the same place on January 11,
1925; both of these specimens are in the Museo National de Historia
Natural, at Buenos Aires. These and the other recent records may
indicate that there are a few Eskimo curlews still living; but the
species is reduced to such a low ebb that it is doomed to speedy
extinction, if not already gone.
One need not look far to find the cause which led to its destruction.
On its breeding grounds in the far north it was undisturbed by man. And
I can not believe that it was overtaken by any great catastrophe at
sea which could annihilate it; it was strong of wing and could escape
from or avoid severe storms; it could, like all shore birds, swim if
necessary; and its migration period was so extended that no one storm
could wipe it out. Several other species of shore birds make similar,
long ocean flights without apparent disaster. There is no evidence
of disease or failure of food supply. No, there was only one cause,
slaughter by human beings, slaughter in Labrador and New England in
summer and fall, slaughter in South America in winter and slaughter,
worst of all, from Texas to Canada in the spring. The gentle birds ran
the gauntlet all along the line and no one lifted a finger to protect
them until it was too late. They were so gentle, so confiding, so full
of sympathy for their fallen companions, that in closely packed ranks
they fell, easy victims of the carnage.
_Spring._--It was as a migrant only that we knew the Eskimo curlew.
As to how it reached the United States from southern South America we
know very little; but it probably followed the same route taken by its
companion the golden plover. It arrived in Texas early in March and
migrated northward through the prairie regions, mainly west of the
Mississippi River, through central Canada and the Mackenzie region to
the barren grounds on the Arctic coast. It was rare in spring east
of this narrow belt, and practically unknown west of it. The flight
through the United States was mainly accomplished during April and
through Canada in May, arriving on its breeding grounds before the end
of May.
Professor Swenk (1915) writes:
As to the abundance of these birds in Nebraska during the
early years of its statehood the observations of Prof.
Lawrence Bruner, who distinctly remembers the flights
which occurred in the vicinity of Omaha during the years
1866–1868, when he was a boy 10 or 12 years old, are
indicative. The birds would arrive about the time the
later willows began to bloom (latter April), being present
in force for a week or 10 days only, for by the time all
of the wild plum blossoms had fallen (middle May) the
birds were gone. Usually the heaviest flights occurred
coincident with the beginning of corn-planting time, and
enormous flocks of these birds would settle on the newly
plowed fields and on the dry burnt-off prairies, where they
searched industriously for insects. These flocks reminded
the settlers of the flights of passenger pigeons and the
curlews were given the name of “prairie pigeons.” They
contained thousands of individuals and would often form
dense masses of birds extending for a quarter to a half
mile in length and a hundred yards or more in width. When
the flock would alight the birds would cover 40 or 50 acres
of ground.
Dr. E. W. Nelson (1887) called this “the most abundant curlew in
northern Alaska, especially along the coasts of Bering Sea and Kotzebue
Sound.” At Saint Michael a number were seen passing north on May 12,
1878. He says that they were “always more numerous than _hudsonicus_,
and sometimes flocks of 150 or more” were seen. But Dr. Joseph Grinnell
(1900) looked for it in vain about Kotzebue Sound.
_Nesting._--For all that we know about the nesting habits of the
Eskimo curlew, we are indebted to Roderick MacFarlane, who found this
species breeding abundantly on the barren grounds east of Fort Anderson
and up to the Arctic coast. He collected some 30 sets of eggs there
between 1862 and 1866. He says in his notes that “this curlew never,
in this quarter at least, breeds in wooded tracts, the barren grounds
proper being the real habitat of the species during the season of
nidification.” It is “very difficult to find the nests” as the birds
“get off long before our approach, while the eggs nearly resemble the
grass in color.” Some birds were seen to leave the nests. The nests
are described as mere hollows in the ground, “lined with a few decayed
leaves” and sometimes having “a thin sprinkling of hay.” The birds
“generally ascend in the air in a straight line after getting off the
nest.”